re WORTH READING This Is Why People Hate the Phone Company, AT&T - Tested

[Dave Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Andrew C Burnette <acb () acb net>
> Date: March 27, 2010 8:55:21 AM EDT
> To: dave () farber net
> Subject: Re: [IP] WORTH READING  This Is Why People Hate the Phone  
> Company, AT&T - Tested

> Dave,
>
> For IP if you wish.
>
> Yes, interestingly, in the US it seems consumers are willing to cut  
> a deal with whichever part of the duopoly they find least  
> distasteful. A sad state of affairs.
>
> AT&T (note: I'm a VZ customer) has suffered from the success of the  
> iPhone and given long cycles of network planning, deployment and  
> dealing with thousands of (I'll be kind here) municipalities,  
> capacity is not an easy add on as much as we'd like to think.
>
> The obstacles are numerous, but two in particular...:
>
> 1- poor planning on the carrier's part. Yes, we've had cost  
> effective tech to get FTTH/FTTC & fiber to the tower for nearly two  
> decades. The economics were born out early in the 1990's as being  
> better in the long term for fiber deployment. AT&T, et al, were busy  
> selling callerID and call waiting instead. No sympathy here.
>
> 2- despite each generation of wireless actually *lowering* effective  
> power radiated, the same "uninformed" citizens/consumers go a bit  
> nutso about putting a tower "in their back yard" (very annoying in  
> my own town; same people don't vaccinate their kids from horrific  
> and completely avoidable diseases that devastated generations past).
>
> My own experience was to see a group of (yes, even former bell labs  
> folks) kill putting an 10 watt tower on the far corner of school  
> grounds near my home. Note that the typical GSM or CDMA handset can  
> peak at nearly 1W of radiated power in the pocket of the kids these  
> parents were trying to protect. 500-1000 tech savvy kids, at even  
> 100mW walking around with lousy coverage instead of an overall  
> reduction in power by giving them good coverage. The irony is lost  
> on the parents, and the wireless carrier is unable to articulate the  
> greater good.
>
> At the local town meeting where VZ wireless came to answer questions  
> was a travesty. VZ wireless rep was unarmed and not able (or aware)  
> of how to articulate the fact that good coverage results in lower  
> personal exposure to RF for everyone involved. It was a sad moment  
> indeed. So, we lost $35k in annual revenue for the school, better  
> coverage for our area, and effectively are exposing our kids to more  
> RF radiation out of ignorance.
>
> I believe AT&T's own studies show approximately 40% usage "in the  
> consumer's home" so I understand the femto cell strategy. Not that I  
> agree with the exact implementation, but something has to be done to  
> extend coverage.
>
> As to answers. Not sure.
>
> Best regards,
> Andy Burnette
>
> On 03/26/2010 10:40 PM, David Farber wrote:
> > As usual I invite other opinions djf
> >
> >
> > http://www.tested.com/news/this-is-why-people-hate-the-phone-company-att/60/
> >
> > Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now>
> > <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/>    [Powered by  
> > Listbox]
> > <http://www.listbox.com>



-------------------------------------------
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com