<story><title>Why AT&amp;T Killed Google Voice</title><url>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204683204574358552882901262.html?mod=rss_opinion_main</url><text></text></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>andreyf</author><text>Well written opinion, but misleading title - I was expecting WSJ to have found out that it &lt;i&gt;was&lt;/i&gt; AT&amp;#38;T who killed Google Voice, although we don&apos;t seem to know that yet. One can hope that this is high-profile enough reporting to let out some info about what happened, exactly.&lt;p&gt;Also, some of the advice is questionable:&lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;Transition away from &quot;owning&quot; airwaves. As we&apos;ve seen with license-free bandwidth via Wi-Fi networking, we can share the airwaves without interfering with each other. Let new carriers emerge based on quality of service rather than spectrum owned. Cellphone coverage from huge cell towers will naturally migrate seamlessly into offices and even homes via Wi-Fi networking. No more dropped calls in the bathroom.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;But cell phone coverage reaches a lot farther than wifi. I&apos;m not a radio physicist, but I think 802.11 allows communication over 14 channels, each of which can be crowded, and some of which can cause interference for others. It was designed with overlapping WAP and a (relatively) small number of people connecting to each. Now, I&apos;m rather clueless about the implementations of cell phone protocols, but I know enough to think twice before saying &quot;open her yup, baby! no dropped calls in the bathroom!&quot; - it doesn&apos;t sound as if the author does. Can we keep GSM/GPRS/EDGE if we allow many overlapping connections? If not, are backwards compatible replacements feasible, or will we need to replace every cell phone in the country?&lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;Encourage faster and faster data connections to our homes and phones. It should more than double every two years. To homes, five megabits today should be 10 megabits in 2011, 25 megabits in 2013 and 100 megabits in 2017.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;Also, virgins should rain from the sky. The number should double every year. Five virgins today should be 10 virgins in 2011, etc.&lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;These data-connection speeds are technically doable today, with obsolete voice and video policy holding it back.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;What policy is he talking about? Is there a reason for this policy aside from holding back data speeds and virgins?</text></comment>
<story><title>Why AT&amp;T Killed Google Voice</title><url>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204683204574358552882901262.html?mod=rss_opinion_main</url><text></text></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>ghshephard</author><text>It&apos;s an opinion piece that covers no ground we haven&apos;t already read a hundred times over  - I didn&apos;t see any reporting in the article.  Sad - in order to compete with the Tech Crunches of the world, even the WSJ is throwing out flashy LinkBait with little substance.</text></comment>