Right, but AT&T is doing LTE, just as VZW is, on different bands. Their "4G" HSPA+ rollout is much larger than their HSPA+ network, but eventually you'll probably see two pretty strong LTE networks. VZW just has a headstart.

Having the two biggest networks on the same technology is nice - someday, if they both do LTE only (and get rid of their legacy networks) then you could have a multi-band NA handset that you really could take between carriers.

AT&T not having bought any of the new spectrum makes them even harder to swallow now. They can be as anti-consumer as they want. I wonder if VZW being forced to be pro-consumer will make AT&T start to relax a bit?

Yes it is property. They call it "intellectual property law" for a reason.

There are a few things that the users who want company (email/data/whatever) on their personal (iCrap/PC/whatever) don't think about.

1) Is the remote wipe functionality such that if I have to zap your device it will only nuke the company data? Are you willing to lose ALL the data on your phone? I've heard about folks suing their employers over this.

2) If I suspect you're up to no good and you're using a company device I can take that device and conduct forensic analysis on it. If it's your personal device I can't force you to surrender it.

3) Are you willing to pay for whatever security software IT mandates?

I know there are some Mobile Device Management packages out there working on this, and hopefully the best practices will all be sorted out soon. However coming up with these best practices (and buying the software/etc to support them) is not free. So to the employee they think "Hey, this doesn't cost you anything! I bought the phone!" But they don't see the TCO at all.

You misquoted me, so you fail at trolling. I said Bing was losing money which it is. It's losing crazy amount of cash.

I'm sure Office and Win7 can subsidize it for a long time, but facts are facts. Y! Is profitable, Bing is not.

Uhm, no. The submitted said in his submission that Yahoo! is losing money. It is not. As much fun as it may be to kick Y! I think one should at least use the facts. MICROSOFT is losing money fast, but Y! is profitable.

Say what you want about Yahoo! but it is not "money-losing". Yahoo! is profitable. Yes, top-line growth has been a problem but management of the bottom line has driven profits UP not DOWN. Bing may be losing money hand over fist but Yahoo! is still bringing in the cash.

I bet the folks who love to keep beating on Yahoo! also kick puppies for fun...

Amateur Radio has a secondary allocation on 900-928Mhz. The ordinance doesn't say anything about HF.

Also, there are first responder radio systems in 900Mhz, and these smart meters don't play nice.

I think the idea isn't to block just YouTube from Italy...block Italy from accessing ANY Google content. I bet the people of Italy need Google more than Google needs them.

Well, when I RTFA it said that no the cost of living wasn't that much cheaper. And you're talking almost a 50% paycut. So maybe you're making 50 to 60k, in a place with nothing to do, and a lower standard of living. I suppose it's better than being homeless...

Taking less pay for lower cost of living makes sense. But it sounds like other than housing the cost of living isn't much lower. Plus, interviewing for a job once the economy turns around will be hard and you'd have to relocate again. Where's the win in this?

1. You have a choice in first-mile providers? Must be nice. I live in the middle of Mtn. View, home to Google. The heart of Silicon Valley. I can get nothing more than 1.5Mbps from AT&T. If I want something faster (which I do) Comcast is the only game in town. So no, changing carriers doesn't solve any problems.
2. Neither broadband carrier here currently offers native v6.

Kinda sad, isn't it?

This I agree with. I think CGN is not a solution and is a stupid and lame attempt by carriers to avoid switching to v6. However, you were the one who seemed to think it was fine. Just put your ad servers in their address realm you said.

The fact is that v6 is not going smoothly. I'm involved from the CP side and it's a bitch. However, it's a necessary evil. Trying to postpone things with CGN will not only just drag out the inevitable but it will jack things up for a lot of people It is pure fail.

You may not care about them, but the CPs do since that's where their money comes from. Or are you gonna tell you grandma to get a tunnel to HE because Comcast, one of the biggest residential providers out there, doesn't have v6 yet? Well, *you* probably would. Normal people wouldn't.

Well, if by "production" you mean that their load balancers are proxying v6 connections, yeah. The content providers are deploying v6 and not CGN.

The ISPs are way slower. I've been signed up for a Comcast trial forever and not heard anything.

Oh well...I'm sure Google's price-per-search will be pretty low. They'll probably offer discount packages like cell phone carriers...

That would be the motherfuckers that make the free services you enjoy (like, oh I don't know, Web Search) possible.

So yeah, what you're suggesting won't happen. I guess you'll enjoy google micropayments, paying them by the query....

How exactly is the CP supposed to get their ad server inside of a carrier's address realm without being inside their routing domain? Multiple private peering sessions with each carrier in some sort of MPLS VPN setup to keep the conflicting RFC1918 blocks separate?