I think that Nokia is betting on Wimax. As a device manufacturer, they're concerned with selling hardware, not monthly subscriptions.

I doubt that the large North American telcos are eager to support this technology. As I understand it, Wimax is more 'open' than other types of networks; there can be more players involved. If this is the case then it opens the door for competition, which mean prices, and eventually revenues drop.

In other words, the idea of wireless internet access is great, but the incentive for the large players that would roll it out quickly is not. I anticipate that local businesses that have the ability to flood an area, would be much more likely to push this tech forcing the hand of the major telcos to respond competitively. Certainly there are some examples peppered about North America that have already done this.

IIRC, this pattern of behaviour is evident even with iPhone, as although there's an unlimited data plan, there has been collusion to prevent that data from being voice. While this would be a boon to the consumer, it certainly isn't marketed as one of the systems cost-saving advantages as it would likely mean losses of revenue for AT&T.

The constituents that advocate Wimax need to provide adequate incentive to those that would roll-out of the service for accelerated deployment. Perhaps that means advertising to local telcos specific ways that they can compete with their own Wimax deployment. Perhaps it means investing in the infrastructure beyond the radio (software, voip chipsets, etc).

Otherwise, this is looking more and more like a 'who killed the electric car' scenario.


}:^)~
YARR!

Corrupt.11g