TAG | The non-sniffable OPEL smell of WiMAX |
|
| by Alex Zaharov-Reutt | |
| Tuesday, 08 April 2008 | |
|
Page 2 of 3 I’m of the school of thought that says offer your products at a lower price, get more people using it, and make more money from volume – rather than trying to eke out higher profits from a smaller user base. Broadband should be for the masses, not the chosen, wealthy few, if we really want our clever country to stay clever through connectivity. ATUG then points out that: “There are very few wireless options available to regional end users because of backhaul prices and changes to the ABG (on premise of OPEL), reduced service areas and subsidies meant providers who could have helped have now left the industry.” And in relation to the Federal Government’s proposed fibre network, ATUG says they support it, but do not “believe it will reach 98% of Australian end users for a considerable time.” Apparently, the Australian Federal Government’s fibre network is up to 5 years away. OPEL was committed to delivering wireless within two years. I also remember reading, somewhere in the past week, that there was criticism of OPEL because it was duplicating existing networks. But duplication can be a good thing – ever heard of a backup? It’s also good for competition. Now, duplication can be bad too. Remember when Foxtel and Optus were cabling the same streets, while other streets were left with no cable access at all? Or, if memory serves – and it’s been a while now – one side of the street had access, while the other didn’t! Sigh.... there really is no simple answer, is there? If there was, we wouldn’t be in this mess. Agendas, agendas... and other OPELs... and a global WiMAX network Australians won't be part of... please read onto page 3. |
| < Next story in category | Previous story in the category > |
|---|
