Vendit, I read that link. I am not arguing the technology because
I like new technology.
I have two cellular phones, but they are only provide me 15 minutes
free air time each and charge me $21.99 /month/each.
To enable the cellular phone 'plug & play' you need a laptop (why using it if I am using
a desktop at work or at home) or palm-held PC and you need a lot of free time to
hang in there. Plus all
current desktop and laptop model must be able to adopt that. Yes,
eventually, it will become part of life but not until the cost comes
down.
Picture this: how many regular income family can afford to pay
$10 - $20 for regular phone access of internet plus $40 high-speed
modem via cable or DSL plus $40(?) for cellular access plus
both desktop and laptop? Not if you are (1) single (2) or married with 1 child
(3) income of $150,000/year (4) crazy about internet
The key word is cost, and I know there are a lots of countries
whose people makes a lot less than us here.
Yes, it is a long-term target, AOL needs them but not urgent, it is
like the report in ML's Henry B. said.
I want AOL's connection to be ready for that type connection but
I am not crazy about AOL to own a cellular company or a telephone company, once it
owns one, you need a lots of R&D money to
keep it in top shape, why not let the industry to evolve? I think
it is why AOL 'does not want' to be merged or to buy a telephone
company or it 'does not want' to buy ATHM or TimerWarner but want
an open market in that area.
I don't think AOL will have the same problem of getting access
in the wireless area as it has in the cable because the same
regulation guards the telephone guards the cellular. (???)
Yes, AOL should focus on the mass market and add the high-end access
methods along the ways but not go out buying an outfit, the R&D will
dry out its finance. |
