Call Now 1-866-848-5848
Drama, Drama, Teledrama…
The mobile space is facing some growing pains. Sprint and Clearwire are trying to move into a new market. AT&T is opposed. Wait, maybe AT&T is confused?
In a recent interview with USA Today’s Leslie Cauley, AT&T’s new CTO, John Donovan, says the company is on the look out for a technology to bring AT&T’s network into the future. A likely candidate, from the CTO himself, is WiMAX:
WiMax is also cheap to install and maintain. Donovan says WiMax could come in handy in some U.S. markets, particularly rural areas where it’s becoming prohibitively expensive to maintain copper.
But isn’t AT&T opposed to WiMAX? Isn’t AT&T petitioning the FCC to deny the pending WiMAX merger of Sprint’s XOHM and Clearwire? This RCR Wireless article by Jeffrey Silva has more background on the company’s statement to the FCC, if you’re not already familiar with the situation, but the long and short of it is that AT&T doesn’t want the deal to go through.
Let’s review why AT&T would be opposed to the Sprint/Clearwire merger and why they want a piece of the action themselves:
- “AT&T has a substantial portfolio of 2.3 GHz spectrum in the U.S. and must cover 25 percent of the population by July 2010.” - Fierce Wireless
- WiMAX would be a good way to utilize this spectrum and take the company’s legacy network into the future.
This whole situation reminds me of the other recent fearful responses to new technology. When a company has a vested interest in an old technology and tries to maintain control – even in spite of technological advancements.
Take Verizon’s continued assault on Wi-Fi: Does Verizon really think notebooks and every other internet device will stop coming with Wi-Fi? And will Linux disappear because other Operating System providers say it’s not good?
When a new, better, faster, cheaper technology comes to market there will always be fear. Telecommunication companies have billions invested in antiquated technologies. The public should not have to suffer because these companies have locked themselves into closed technology paths. I don’t want their version of the Internet on my phone, I want the Internet!! The good news is that once a large company is fearful of a technology there is a reason for it. Back to “Better, Faster, Cheaper.”
What do you think is motivating AT&T? As Sprint begins to fight back, and debunk some of the reasons for opposing the merger, where does this leave us? AT&T: Friend or Foe?
3 Comments
You asked the question…friend of foe? would it not be benificial to have them in the WiMax business? Correct me if I am wrong but having them out there gives you more visibility in the marketplace and easier to sell your product or do you think it would make it harder to sell it…still being new to this area of business maybe I’m not seeing it correctly…but competition is good…makes you stand out in your areas of strength…which would probably be customer service to there weakness’s which would probably be…customer service…just a thought…
You’re confusing two very different uses of Wimax. AT&T seems to refer to fixed Wimax, as a an alternative för copper in rural areas. That’s point to point, just new way of doing fixed wireless. A niche solution for thousands of users That is a whole other business than Clearwire’s massive investment mobile wimax for a mass market of millions. Very few established operators believe in mobile wimax, very few oppose fixed wimax.
Thirty-eight years in IT and data communications have taught me over and over that AT&T wants what is good for AT&T and bad for me and you. They continue after deregulation to strangle me with their control of the local loop and the same weak customer service and “attitude” I heard in 1971 — “It sounds like a software problem and if we send someone out and it turns out to be your problem we will bill you.” Anybody else ever heard that? Not to mention their use of the FCC to create an overwhelming bureaucracy to help them kill competitors for the last couple decades. But I don’t have an opinion on the subject.;-)