Hi FTTH! A few comments on your reply:
--------------
<<Yeah, but then again, growth always sounds huge when starting from zero base.>>
Elmat: But one have to start somewhere.
<<It is also growth that is locally sheltered from outside constraints and influences at the moment.>>
Elmat: Meaning ILECs haven't yet trailed their guns on the technology. But you don't need floor space to make it happen.
<<Metcalfe's law says this "wireless archipelago" must grow and interconnect, or its value is very limited.>>
Elmat: Agreed. But if I would be doing this stuff I would VoIP over wireless. But here it has a chance to achieve critical mass. The lot that are the potential users are people already used to mobile telephony.
<<The CLECs/DLECs also created an entirely new market that led to mass euphoria of expected new freedoms and new markets,>>
Elmat: Rhythms and Northpoint built it during bubble times, not in the worse recession since the depresson. Besides it used the dead on arrival ADSL
<<...only to be squashed by the monopoly bottleneck owner that still held all the controls, and they could tighten them any time they saw fit.>>
Elmat: First DLECDs used DOA ADSL, second the people managing those companies didn't understand the nature of the ILECs that kill to live and live to kill.
Seocnd they believed in the Telecom ACt of 1996 and underestimated the power of the ILECs.
<<WiFi seems a lot like a remote, rather than co-located, version of the same thing, in many respects. It solves a piece of the troubles the DLECs encountered, but doesn't solve all the troubles.>>
Elmat: I mentioned Wi-FI but I have in mind the companies that are pinching only parts of the UMTS standard and developing products. They also pushed through during the recession time.
<<Those WiFi bitstreams still must ultimately pass through all those same control handles, unless someone deploys an open-access bypass network. The access points that are put in place by the monopoly bottleneck owner (as a veiled strategy that has a public face of furthering growth of new technology, but has the likely covert intent of preventing bypass of their network from outside the CO) are probably responding to that threat.>>
Elmat: That's the kill to live live to kill strategy I alluded above. Yes, they have perfected it over the last 100 years to a point that seems flawless and unbeateable. But look closely, now they are not fighting entrnats trying to get a piece of the action. Now is fight for survival. Technical obsolescence will deal away with them. In 1998/1999, the fixed network had some 12 years of economic live. Today, 2003, they have only about 8 years of economic life.
<<At the end of the day this may well end up with no net gain in market development...just another way to do the same things we already do, with all the same constraints.
Yes, it re-arranges the deck chairs...but they are on the deck of the Titanic.>>
Elmat: That may be a dangerous way of appraising these things. Tomorrow as a repetition of yesterday is a dangerous way of thinking. You seem to be very much in synch with the ILECs' way of life. Perhaps because you professionally are engaged with business with them. Which I don't thing is wrong or bad, at all, but at the first bump in the boat, one should run to the life boats.
Go up in the deck, look to a nice boat, gather a few usefull things, trace a route to the deck and get ready, it was said to be unthinkeable. It sunk in five hours!!! |
