<wishful thinking>
FCC realizes areas are underserved.
They also realize independent broadband providers -- read wireless
ISPs -- are an excellent, if not better, solution as a competitive
solution in many areas, rural and otherwise.
FCC makes sub-700Mhz available for unlicensed broadband, or
reasonably licensed broadband which independent WISPs can access.
Then, small business innovators -- read WISPs -- win and users win.
</wishful thinking>
Is that sooo wishful?
Mario
Matt wrote:
"For years, plenty of folks (including the Government Accountability
Office)
have been pointing out that the way the FCC
<http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070205/165735.shtml> measures
broadband
competition is very flawed. It simply assumes that if a single
household in
a zip code is offered broadband by provider A, then every household
in that
zip code can get broadband from provider A. See the problem? For some
reason
<soapbox>
This gets old. They say the US is way behind. Really? I think they
are comparing apples to oranges. Do all they rural farms in Australia
have broadband? All the rural areas in China? Even S. Korea, one of
the most wired countries, do they have broadband in all there rural
areas? Sure its great in there metro areas but so is it here in the
US.
The only reason this upsets me is we are investing a great deal of our
own money building out to these underserved areas. I can just see
some report coming out then the government giving some grants to
telcos or whoever to bury fiber or whatever at huge expense to every
rural house in the country side. What I find really irritating is
I/we pay taxes too and will be getting the shaft. Its difficult to
compete with fiber with a 900 Canopy SM.
</soapbox>
Matt
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
