Slashdot Mirror
AT&T Offering Merger Concessions
TheFarmerInTheDell writes that AT&T is offering concessions to make their merger with SBC happen as fast as possible. From the article:
"AT&T filed a letter of commitment with the [Federal Communications Commission] Thursday night that adds a number of new conditions to the deal, including a promise to observe 'network neutrality' principles, an offer of affordable stand-alone digital subscriber line service and divestment of some wireless spectrum."
I can hardly attribute the recent merger and conglomeration of AT&T as a bad thing. I see it like this: 60 years ago as our country was coming out of a war that pushed technology to advance at the rate it is currently moving at today, AT&T stepped up with Bell Labs to convert that push into a very large, very succesful invention push that brought this country far ahead of our overseas brethren in terms of accomplishment and overall technological capability. If not for AT&T and its Bell Labs, we would not have the transistor, C (programming), UNIX... in reality, AT&T is the creator of the modern programmable computer. TDMA and CDMA, Fiber Optics, LEDs, CCDs. Bell Labs is pretty much the forefront of the technological community. The antitrust suit, although directed in a manner to allow AT&T to step into the computer arena and step slightly out of the phone arena, made bell labs cripple. In the past 10 years, the US has fallen behind in telecommunications. Things that we are just getting into our infrastructure, countries overseas have had for years. Our average broadband speed is less than 1/10th than the majority of other places in the world. We will not advance, if we do not embrace what advanced us in the first place. The exploration and implementation of new and powerful technologies country-wide to advance our infrastructure to handle and drive a more powerful nation, is expensive. How can you expect a bunch of small local companies with less capital than a fast food restaraunt to accomplish such a large task? If we are to meet broadband capabilities and the HDTV forecast, we need to accept that only a large, rich, powerful company can accomplish it. AT&T's antitrust suit was primarily due to their advancement into the computer industry. After the suit, their worth dropped SIGNIFICANTLY. The baby bells were nearly worthless, with the exception of SBC and BellSouth. The only others, were in too small of areas to really compete. Although there are a few others, the AT&T breakup is probably the biggest disagreement I have with some of the antitrust decisions of the last 100 years.
Everything else aside, the old Bell Telephone network was the best in the world. Because the old AT&T was a monopoly, they could afford to engineer things right. They didn't have to worry about pesky things like cost-cutting or meeting next quarter's financial goals. Today's land-line service is still the best in the world, but it's due to the old AT&T legacy. When older equipment starts getting replaced, expect the quality of land-line service to decline.
If AT&T were never broken up, we'd probably have the best wireless service in the world today. Short of accident or disaster, you'd never get a dropped call. And we'd have one, unified technology, not the incompatible technologies of CDMA, TDMA, GSM, and iDEN.
If you reply, do so only to what I explicitly wrote. If I didn't write it, don't assume or infer it.
Well, that does make sense. And the 5ESS does predate the end of the breakup of ATT by two years, so I guess that works. I sit corrected.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"