 | | 768kbps downstream and 200kbps upstream? And there ya go....
It's sad really... Defining broadband in 1991 terms.
We're going to throw $7.2 billion at 768/200? | |
|
 | | | Re: 768kbps downstream and 200kbps upstream? Better than dial up. | |
|
| | | | Re: 768kbps downstream and 200kbps upstream? That's not my point. If we're going to throw $7.62 BILLION at something, it should offer something better than 768/200.
How does the US plan on having a good broadband plan if they start off by defining broadband using such a dated measuring stick.
As Patcat88 points out below... you're just going to see ATT put up cell towers and rake in money for a 3G deployment. | |
|
| | |  knightmbEverybody Lies
join:2003-12-01
Franklin, TN | Re: 768kbps downstream and 200kbps upstream? said by Uncle Paul:That's not my point. If we're going to throw $7.62 BILLION at something, it should offer something better than 768/200. How does the US plan on having a good broadband plan if they start off by defining broadband using such a dated measuring stick. As Patcat88 points out below... you're just going to see ATT put up cell towers and rake in money for a 3G deployment. I agree, more is better, but it's better than nothing. At least now I can finally get a chip in on this game. I only need a million to cover my entire county in broadband, so I guess I better ask for 100 million just in case 
--
Fight Insight Ready (Was NebuAD) and the like:
Click Here to pollute their data | |
|
| | |
2 edits | The problem is really that the choice at hand is how much can you do for $7.62BB. Say they went for the new technology for this same price tag...they wouldn't be able to reach nearly as many people. Better to have more people up on something good than fewer people up on something better. Of course, you could argue which one is the "better" solution but you're talking about the Dems. They're going to want to get penetration (ha ha in my best Bevis laugh) to as many homes as possible and this is the best solution for that.
The other issue here is that this speed is probably fine for 90% of people. Keep in mind the people on these boards, myself included, are not the average users.
--
People who don't get good service on average tell 10 others while people who do get good service on average tell 1. | |
|
| | | | | | Re: 768kbps downstream and 200kbps upstream? said by fishacura:The problem is really that the choice at hand is how much can you do for $7.62BB. Say they went for the new technology for this same price tag...they wouldn't be able to reach nearly as many people. Better to have more people up on something good than fewer people up on something better. Of course, you could argue which one is the "better" solution but you're talking about the Dems. They're going to want to get penetration (ha ha in my best Bevis laugh) to as many homes as possible and this is the best solution for that. The other issue here is that this speed is probably fine for 90% of people. Keep in mind the people on these boards, myself included, are not the average users. actually the ones who use the internet all the time are not the average users of the internet. | |
|
| | |  Matt3All noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | said by Uncle Paul:That's not my point. If we're going to throw $7.62 BILLION at something, it should offer something better than 768/200. How does the US plan on having a good broadband plan if they start off by defining broadband using such a dated measuring stick. As Patcat88 points out below... you're just going to see ATT put up cell towers and rake in money for a 3G deployment. This is just the first part of the stimulus plan. This is not the official broadband policy. The article addresses this. | |
|
| | |  KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK | said by Uncle Paul:That's not my point. If we're going to throw $7.62 BILLION at something, it should offer something better than 768/200. That's the great thing about over Government--- it's the best money can buy.
In the United States we pay the most and get the least back for our dollar everytime, as most of it goes in profits to companies and little return to the public for THEIR money.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
| |
|
| | | | Matt3All noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | Re: 768kbps downstream and 200kbps upstream? said by KrK:said by Uncle Paul:That's not my point. If we're going to throw $7.62 BILLION at something, it should offer something better than 768/200. That's the great thing about over Government--- it's the best money can buy. $7.62 billion is nothing folks. Verizon's rollout is running upwards of $28 billion to cover a select few densely populated state with a 65% or so coverage goal. This is rural American we're talking about with vast areas where the population density is as low as 1 person per square mile.
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:USA-2···sity.gif | |
|
| | | | |  tschmidtPremium,MVM
join:2000-11-12
Milford, NH
kudos:8
 ·G4 Communications
·Fairpoint Commun..
 ·Hollis Hosting
| Re: 768kbps downstream and 200kbps upstream? said by Matt3: $7.62 billion is nothing folks. Verizon's rollout is running upwards of $28 billion to cover a select few densely populated state with a 65% or so coverage goal. To put these numbers into perspective there are about 110 million households in the US. Cost to deploy fiber to the premise (FTTP) is about $2000 per household or about $225 billion to provide fiber to everyone.
The goal of the stimulus is to invest in under-served areas and quickly deliver some form of broadband. As others have posted 768 kbps is significantly better then dialup.
/tom | |
|
| | | | | | | | Re: 768kbps downstream and 200kbps upstream? Where'd you get $2000 per household??? Verizon's cost to deliver FTTH has thus far dropped to significantly below $1000 per household. I guess if you're factoring in the higher cost of delivering to rural areas that would make sense. | |
|
| | | | | | | tschmidtPremium,MVM
join:2000-11-12
Milford, NH
kudos:8 Reviews:
·G4 Communications
·Fairpoint Commun..
·Hollis Hosting
| Re: 768kbps downstream and 200kbps upstream? said by sonicmerlin: Verizon's cost to deliver FTTH has thus far dropped to significantly below $1000 per household. Cost to pass + cost to connect is about $1500. Since rural areas are more costly, fewer homes per mile, I arbitrarily increased it to $2000 as an national average.
/tom | |
|
| me1212
join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO | In areas where it is dial-up or sat, 768/200 with be VERY welcomed. | |
|
| | | | Re: 768kbps downstream and 200kbps upstream? said by me1212:In areas where it is dial-up or sat, 768/200 with be VERY welcomed. Exactly. After reading about the issues in the satellite broadband forums, I'm positive that this will be very much welcomed. | |
|
| | |
approval from:
Core0000 
| Re: 768kbps downstream and 200kbps upstream? said by tdouglas22:said by me1212:In areas where it is dial-up or sat, 768/200 with be VERY welcomed. Exactly. After reading about the issues in the satellite broadband forums, I'm positive that this will be very much welcomed. When all the country has known is a 2-cylinder putt-putt Yugo, a Ford Pinto is very much welcome.
That still doesn't excuse the fact its a waaay overpriced Pinto. And a used one at that. | |
|
| patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1 | said by Uncle Paul:And there ya go.... It's sad really... Defining broadband in 1991 terms. We're going to throw $7.2 billion at 768/200? So how much money will AT&T and Verizon get for their already existing 3G "broadband"? | |
|
| | me1212
join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO | Re: 768kbps downstream and 200kbps upstream? I hope none, a 5GB cap is useless. | |
|
| | | | said by patcat88:said by Uncle Paul:And there ya go.... It's sad really... Defining broadband in 1991 terms. We're going to throw $7.2 billion at 768/200? So how much money will AT&T and Verizon get for their already existing 3G "broadband"? Start sending those letters and let the lawmakers know why they don't deserve one red cent of that money. | |
|
| | | I would take 768 over 56K any day of the week. Right now my only options are dial-up, satellite, or EVDO (which has a 5gb a month data cap). I have to wonder just how long it will take for people to start seeing this bills impact, and how many rural and sub-rural areas will still be left without broadband once this is all over. I just hope that there is legislation that prevents the Telcos from taking the $7.2 billion and throwing it into already established markets. | |
|
| | me1212
join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO | Re: 768kbps downstream and 200kbps upstream? "I just hope that there is legislation that prevents the Telcos from taking the $7.2 billion and throwing it into already established markets."
Me too. I would not bet on it though. I think they will spend more on areas that have high speed already and pocket more, combined, than they will spend on rural areas. They have made it fairly clear that they do not find these areas profitable enough, why would that change now?
"I have to wonder just how long it will take for people to start seeing this bills impact, and how many rural and sub-rural areas will still be left without broadband once this is all over."
Me too. | |
|
| |
| | | | Re: 768kbps downstream and 200kbps upstream? How much you wanna bet we'll see instant rollout of new 200 Mbps upstream by all of those providers | |
|
| | | | | Re: 768kbps downstream and 200kbps upstream? My mental typo-filter must've been off; I tried to figure out what could possibly be done to get instant rollout of 200 Mbps upstream  | |
|
| | | | patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1 | Re: 768kbps downstream and 200kbps upstream? said by heatsker151:My mental typo-filter must've been off; I tried to figure out what could possibly be done to get instant rollout of 200 Mbps upstream Set up a tent in a colocation hosting building. | |
|
| | | | |
| | | | | patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1 | Re: 768kbps downstream and 200kbps upstream? Their internet off their incumbent ISP is only 20/5. They 100 or 1000mbit you hear about is only for on-network/same-country hosted websites. You really think they reserve 100mbitps across the Pacific for you to talk to the USA hosted websites? | |
|
| | me1212
join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO | It won't be 768/200 100% of the time. It will be up to 768/200. | |
|
|  BelinrahsI have an ego the size of a small planetPremium
join:2007-09-07
Nashville, MI
1 edit | said by Uncle Paul:And there ya go.... It's sad really... Defining broadband in 1991 terms. We're going to throw $7.2 billion at 768/200? Keep in mind that's a bare minimum to be considered broadband for this stimulus. Obviously they'll offer higher tiers if any good customers are to be satisfied. I get something reasonable with Sprint (even though it's still not too good, like 1150/20. yeah, 20.) I wouldn't switch out for 768/200 even if it was hard-wired (i mean NOT wireless) and a very constant rate of speed. And I even get a crappy signal with Sprint. Let's hope Sprint gets a chunk of that, maybe they'll improve our crap tower out here in the sticks, add a few T1's, increase range...something to think about. I LOVE thinking about the possibility of competition out here!! | |
|
| | | said by Uncle Paul:It's sad really... Defining broadband in 1991 terms. considering v.34 dial-up modems weren't even out yet in '91, this is an insane exaggeration.
heck, even in the late 90's, you were lucky if you have 256k.
My thoughts on this whole program =   | |
|
| CorydonCultivant son jardinPremium
join:2008-02-18
Denver, CO | said by Uncle Paul:And there ya go.... It's sad really... Defining broadband in 1991 terms. We're going to throw $7.2 billion at 768/200? "1991 terms" isn't really fair. In 1991, I had a 2400 bps dial up modem (that's a connection at a whopping 2.4 kpbs, but at least it was symmetrical ) and the really exciting new connectivity product on the horizon was ISDN.
2001 terms maybe.
--
"Religion allows people who would otherwise be arguing about whether the Death Star could beat a Borg Cube to have a place of respect within society." | |
|
| | | | Re: 768kbps downstream and 200kbps upstream? He's saying the definition of "broadband" in '91 was 768/200. No one considered ISDN to be broadband even as far back as '91.
Heck, the first fiber install occurred in the '70s with a 6mbit connection. | |
|
Stumbles
join:2002-12-17
Port Saint Lucie, FL | Oh good. That's what I like to see... my tax dollars keeping the bottomless pork barrel full. | |
|
|  BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | Re: Oh good. said by Stumbles:That's what I like to see... my tax dollars keeping the bottomless pork barrel full. Whatever what tax $$ of yours? Post your 1040s. I'm so tired of peole that CLAIM they pay so much in taxes and offer ZERO proof they pay ANY taxes. I could say I paid $1 million in atxes this year. Doesn't make it true. by the way assuming you're making under $250K in taxable income your share is about $5. | |
|
| | bn1221
join:2009-04-29
Cortland, NY | Re: Oh good. All my deadbeat welfare neighbors complain about taxes....except they don't pay any taxes.
How can you annoy a liberal? Make them actually pay taxes  | |
|
 LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5
1 edit |  Commerce Dept waives the "Buy American" part of pkg
The waiver published in the Federal Register today(July 1):
»broadbandusa.sc.egov.usda.gov/fi···1-09.pdf
What was waived:
• Broadband Switching Equipment
• Broadband Routing Equipment
• Broadband Transport Equipment
• Broadband Access Equipment
• Broadband Customer Premises Equipment and End-User Devices
• Billing/Operations Systems
Note that this list does not include fiber optic cables, coaxial cables, cell towers, and other facilities that are produced in the United States in sufficient quantities to be reasonably available as end products.
To the extent that an applicant wishes to use equipment that is not covered by this waiver, it may seek a waiver on a case by-case basis as part of its application for BTOP funds Not only did they waive a ton of stuff upfront. They will waive "Buy American" even more if asked.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page | |
|
| Matt3All noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | Re: Commerce Dept waives the "Buy American" part of pkg said by Linklist:The Commerce Dept waived practically every component needed for a broadband system. So much for the "creating American Jobs" part of the act. Not only did they waive a ton of stuff upfront. They will waive "Buy American" even more if asked. If you do a bit of un-biased research on this, it's because every single equipment manufacturer said it was impossible to deliver a product at a reasonable price point that met the requirements. The requirements don't just say "Buy from an American company like Cisco," they required that the components were 100% manufactured, assembled, and tested here. It was an impossible goal and completely unrealistic. Of course, that doesn't stop the partisan hacks from jumping on it.
As far as not creating American jobs, you do realize that someone has to install, configure, and support all that equipment that will be installed don't you? And that's only the first level of jobs that it will create. | |
|
| | patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1
1 edit | Re: Commerce Dept waives the "Buy American" part of pkg said by Matt3:As far as not creating American jobs, you do realize that someone has to install, configure, and support all that equipment that will be installed don't you? And that's only the first level of jobs that it will create. And ATT has 4 POTS splicer techs for an entire sub/urban county (fairfield county CT), down from 5, a field tech told me. All they do is Uverse installs nowadays. POTS trunk lines are months overdue for replacement due to dead pairs.
Your so called "jobs" will be done by mexicans hired through shell contractors, or H1-B Visas from India for IT. The equipment is configured and set up remotely by the manufacturer on support contracts using salleried labor anyways from a remote NOC. Screw in the racks, plug it in, and walk out. $10-$20 an hour. No skills needed.
How will this make jobs? For mexicans pouring concrete and digging a new pad for an RT? | |
|
| KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
1 edit | They found out our companies have outsourced/offshored so much we can't buy American anymore because nobody makes it all American anymore.
Most those electronics are going to be from China, you betcha!
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
| |
|
| | Matt3All noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | Re: Commerce Dept waives the "Buy American" part of pkg said by KrK:Most those electronics are going to be from China, you bet! I think you meant, "You betcha!" | |
|
| | | KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK | Re: Commerce Dept waives the "Buy American" part of pkg said by Matt3:said by KrK:Most those electronics are going to be from China, you bet! I think you meant, "You betcha!" :D Fixed it
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
| |
|
| | broadband stimulus 768/200 is an amazing speed for folks who are forced to use dial-up because of lack of infrastructure. comcast today told me cable is a mile away and i'm SOL. hopefully this stimulus package will help me out. | |
|
|
See 6 replies to this post |
|
me1212
join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO | I hope..... The big ISPs do not get much of this, they have already made it fairly clear they do not find these rural areas profitable enough. I say give it to smaller ISPs that don't mind serving rural areas and DO find them profitable enough, that way they can expand, build better networks, or maybe even offer faster speed or lower their prices. | |
|
|
See 15 replies to this post |
|
| | I'll take it The people snickering at a 768/200 connection obviously live in areas that already have decent broadband options. I live in the country and I have the option of getting dial-up or satellite. A relatively cheap 768 kbps connection would be a godsend. | |
|
|
See 29 replies to this post |
|
| | who needs this plan? whitespace broadband will solve everything in a year or 2...
this money for universal broadband plan will just get robbed by greedy politicians.... | |
|
| LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5 | Re: who needs this plan? said by anjorusso :
whitespace broadband will solve everything in a year or 2...
this money for universal broadband plan will just get robbed by greedy politicians....
You think so? And who will pay for all the equipment to blanket the US with the signals? And will they be able to use existing towers? Or will they have to build their own?
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page | |
|
| | openbox9Premium
join:2004-01-26
japan
kudos:2 | Re: who needs this plan? And is the technology really going to work? | |
|
| patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1 | said by anjorusso :
whitespace broadband will solve everything in a year or 2...
this money for universal broadband plan will just get robbed by greedy politicians....
We all know whitespace broadband is trolling. How many bazillion frequency uses sitting on paper in FCC CFR have never been used?
Anyone remember LMDS or MMDS?
I'm still waiting for a single consumer purchasable 802.11Y adapter to come out. | |
|
 DaveDudeNo Fear
join:1999-09-01
New Jersey
kudos:1
1 edit | Biden just cant get anything right. Biden isn't a person to be talking about anything technical ,already there is a list of all the bidenisms.
NJ governor Tim Keane- he said currently
New car tunnel to NYC- its for trains.
Dont go in the subway because of swine flu. etc | |
|
| LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5 | Re: Biden just cant get anything right. said by DaveDude:Biden isn't a person to be talking about anything technical ,already there is a list of all the bidenisms. NJ governor Tim Keane- he said currently New car tunnel to NYC- its for trains. Dont go in the subway because of swine flu. etc LOL. Yes he is even worse that Dan Quayle was as VP. I still think that the brain tumor Biden had left permanent damage to his critical thinking skills.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page | |
|
| | BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | Re: Biden just cant get anything right. said by Linklist:said by DaveDude:Biden isn't a person to be talking about anything technical ,already there is a list of all the bidenisms. NJ governor Tim Keane- he said currently New car tunnel to NYC- its for trains. Dont go in the subway because of swine flu. etc LOL. Yes he is even worse that Dan Quayle was as VP. I still think that the brain tumor Biden had left permanent damage to his critical thinking skills. Could be worse we could have Palin as VP. | |
|
DaveDudeNo Fear
join:1999-09-01
New Jersey
kudos:1
1 edit | Wireless 4G etc Couldnt wireless companies do this in no time, beating the low speed? ATT wants to be 7.2 M, could they just put towers up in these locations, and not need for any government waste. | |
|
|
See 8 replies to this post |
|
| | Just another... This is just another government blackhole boondoggle in the making. | |
|
KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK | Total, total waste. Shoot the lobbyists, please.
Do it right or don't do it at all.
768k/200k? What's the friggin' point? Sure, then can surf a little faster, but good luck with FUTURE uses like streaming video or IPTV. Hell unless you have "perfect" conditions even VOIP will struggle.
This is why I hate lobbyists. They are always in a big hurry to put their hands out for cash but they rig the game so you get little or nothing back.
I was for this, now I'm opposed. Why is there never time (or money) to do it right the first time but there's ALWAYS time and money to do it over.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
| |
|
|
See 11 replies to this post |
|
Reviews:
 ·ooma
 ·Optimum Online
 ·Verizon FiOS
| how do you get to washington dc? a. from the lobby, lobby no doubt the big 3 have staked out a cool billion each... those being Verizon, At&t and Comcast (although they shouldn't get a rusty cent or even a rusty broken bottle to scratch their ass with). most of this money should be going to the likes of fairpoint, qwest and other telecoms after they file for bankruptcy FIRST... then take the free money. that's the only way the playing field begins to get level (after wiping all bad debts clean).
** let me give you a prime example: safelink wireless gives cellphones and pre-paid minutes to low income people/families. then tracfone (the partner company) contracts with primarily At&t and Verizon, (sometimes tmobile in markets) to buy airtime and activate phones. In the end, that money goes to the big carriers. Crippled phones and poor customer service, and feature sets make these phones barely usable for anything other than making a call with UNGUARANTEED service-- the network is prioritized for it's direct customer base. Since there's no competition for serving the customer with landlines, the big carriers make the apperance of competition in the wireless business to get the gravy of the USF program (basically an end-run).
lobbying is as strong as ever. republican, or democrat nothing changes.. just public perception-- sometimes. eventually, won't just printing money (paper) undermine the faith in the us $dollar'$ VALUE? doesn't matter if it's spent on an unwanted war, or freebies for stupid mega companies. very little actually gets to poor people in need and makes them self sufficient.
DSL technology is not a cost effective investment for telecom anymore, be it rural or not. Taxpayer monies should only be going towards buildout of next generation technologies, especially fiber or docsis 3 cmts. Certainly, telcos could change their dsl/copper infrastructure to coax, just as easily to fiber. | |
|
Test99Premium
join:2003-04-24
San Jose, CA
kudos:1 | FTB - Fiber to the Barn Great choice of image for this article. | |
|
| patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1 | Re: FTB - Fiber to the Barn said by Test99:Great choice of image for this article. Why not give the cows HD quality streaming videos of aroused bulls in the barn? | |
|
 Simba7I Void Warranties
join:2003-03-24
Billings, MT | Who can get these funds? I'm interested in helping out the small town I grew up in (Broadus, MT).
How can I get funds to help put out wireless broadband for Broadus and around a 30mi (or higher) radius around it? | |
|
Core0000Premium
join:2008-05-04
Somerset, KY | Upload speed... @article/news above
..Personally I would like to see Broadband defined as
1 mbps down/1mbps up.
That's my personal opinion. | |
|
| | How about FTTH (right up to the wall of my house)? Forget worrying about 768/200 speeds? How about if any ISP takes the money, they provide FTTH straight to our house/apartment. Then no need to worry about such slow speeds (upgrades should be easy at that point).
Oh, and no bandwidth caps. and please update the definition of broadband. | |
|
| | I'm Against This Why do I have to pay so some country bumpkin in the middle of nowhere can finally get Youtube videos? Living in rural areas is a choice, and part of that choice is knowing they will not have easy access to some products and services. It's not economical to spend $10,000 laying down some line to serve two homes. Besides satellite broadband is already here and while it's not the best it's a start in the right direction. Plus it's privately funded which is the way business in America is supposed to be.
--
Farming the Tard | |
|
|
See 12 replies to this post |
|
 heat84Bit Torrent Apologist
join:2004-03-11
Fort Lauderdale, FL
1 edit | AT&T upload is barely legal broadboand. What happens to AT&T if the upload definition of broadband is increased? They're not very much above the current definition.LOL! | |
|
| |
| | I take the bait if they provide me less latency (lag)
I been dieing to play online gaming and unlimited internet. | |
|
bcreek
join:2009-07-01
Little Rock, AR | We are still quite a ways off For everyone (including myself) that lives in a rural area who rejoiced when they heard this news, take note that it is going to be awhile before we start to see some of the effects of this program begin to take place. According to an article I read today, applicants will not start receiving any grant money until this September. Assuming that it would take at least two months to get things ready for companies to start installing equipment into new areas, I imagine that we will not see any actual results of this plan until January or February of 2010. Lets hope that I'm wrong though.
Another thing that concerns me is the complete disinterest the larger Telcos are showing towards this plan. While I hate the larger Telcos (AT&T and Verizon) just as much as anyone else, the truth of the matter is that these companies have the largest stake in broadband expansion. So unless we start seeing several mom n' pop service providers start cropping up around the country to compete with these giants, there's a chance that the expansion won't get very far. My hope is that companies such as Sprint/Clearwire will see this as an opportunity to further their reach, and use the money to push WiMax into rural locations. All I can say is that we wait to see what happens. | |
|
|
|
