Zoder
join:2002-04-16
Miami, FL
| Re: Let's hear it for "walled gardens" The major difference is that wireless broadband is being touted by the CTIA, FCC, and members of Congress as a clear competitive alternative for cable and DSL broadband. Until the walls come down however, that comparison is a lie and cable/dsl will remain a duopoly. | |
|
 
SRFireside
join:2001-01-19
Houston, TX
| Re: Let's hear it for "walled gardens" But we're talking about mobile video here. Not Internet services for the home of office. I see no issue here. If somebody wants to pay the fees to see a show on their phone let them. I'm sure another provider will offer the service cheaper anyway. As for me I use my phone to call people and my television (and sometimes computer) to watch shows. It's not like there is no competition in the cellular telephone market. | |
|
 | Zoder
join:2002-04-16
Miami, FL
| Re: Let's hear it for "walled gardens" You are aware that Verizon sells wireless cards for your notebook computer right? The TOS limits what you can download if you sign up for that service. One of the prohibitions is that you can't use it as a substitute for a dedicated wired data line. | |
|
| |
SRFireside
join:2001-01-19
Houston, TX | Re: Let's hear it for "walled gardens" I am aware of that. We're still dealing with a scenario where if you can't get what you want from Verizon there are many other competitors out there who will oblige. Sprint makes wireless cards too, you know. | |
|
| | | Zoder
join:2002-04-16
Miami, FL
1 edit | Re: Let's hear it for "walled gardens" I agree. My main point was in response to ricep5 who said restrictions were fine. But if wireless broadband is going to become a real competitor to dsl and cable those restrictions are going to have to fall across the industry. Not just with one company since a companies coverage area isn't universal. | |
|
|
|
|
