Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : The *NEW* Frank Coluccio Technology Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Peter Ecclesine who wrote (21116)	4/27/2007 8:51:42 AM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 46821

Hi Peter. re: "who controls 'an open networking architecture' - one operator or many? What exactly is open in such an architecture?" No single entity controls an open architecture. It is, rather, an operating environment under which multiple purveyors bound by standards and rules that are acceptable to the plurality freely exchange traffic. Like Ethernet, which is at the roots of both WiFi and WiMAX. Your aversions to spectrum ownership and senseless transmitting of unnecessary power are understandable, but I'm left wanting for what recommendations you'd make to fill the gap. Which classifications are you referring to (or are you referring to all license holders), and which would you exempt? Where you state: "Looking at OC-3 (LMDS) or GigE (60 GHz) wirelessly, these rates and services can be provided by either FDD or TDD..." ...I'm left hanging for the other shoe to drop, expecting you to state which forms are 'not' conducive to both FDD and TDD, but more to the point, which are more conducive to FDD than TDD, and why. I'm not trying to give you a hard time as much as I'm trying to get a better understanding of your viewpoint. TIA. FAC