Cable Without Cables

dfinney writes "'Wireless cable, which uses a network of land-based antennas to carry signals to and from a small dish at a user's home, is supposed to be cheap -- or at least cheaper than wired cable or wireless satellite service.'" Another possible alternative for high-speed internet is always a good thing.

Comments

Cheap technology won't make this cheap...

[Mannerism]

...competition will. If the winner of the spectrum auction in your area happens to also own the local cable company or satellite provider, then there'll be little incentive for them to pass the savings realized from the cheap infrastructure along to the customer. Blindly handing the spectrum over to Northpoint sounds stupid, but hopefully the spectrum will wind up in the hands of a company that will compete with other providers. If that happens, then consumers might actually see better prices, better service, and better product offerings.

Cheaper, not Cheap Enough

[stoolpigeon]

I tell you I am not paying a dime to watch T.V. or have broadband.

I wan't them to pay me. It's kind of like how I am buying a football stadium for a local multi-millionaire to bring money into our county.

The same logic should apply to the businees I bring to the web and cable t.v. I expect to be paid a minimum of $50.00 a month to participate in these activities.

Until then - now way.

.