I really meant to be "done" with this thread, but I have to thank you for your post. I have not participated in Network World blogs in the past, and when I decided to comment on a couple articles, I assumed that the people who read NW would have a certain level of intellectualism and professionalism, because historically this industry has generated high caliber people. Clearly the responses I've seen here indicate why there has been no "next great thing" in the industry in an extended period of time.

While I don't agree with everything said, I also applaud the post from R10000 (Truth in Advertising). It's a well reasoned and professional argument rather than a rant, whine or personal attack.

I've ridden the wave of data communications and networking since the early 80s. Even earlier if you count the first FAX machines. Always there has been some exciting "next new thing" coming down the pike: Ethernet, Token Ring, IP, FDDI, ISDN, SMDS, ATM, switched Ethernet, SONET, MPLS, and on and on. Sadly I don't see that any more. It's one reason I switched to the satellite market as it lagged a decade behind and I got to ride the wave once again as dramatic technological improvements have taken place in the last few years.

Since I'm writing I may as well respond to some earlier comments.

When I mentioned a shared 1024 x 512 service, I was referring to a typical small WISP (wireless ISP) provider. Apparently many of the participants on this blog do not understand that there are still vast reaches of this country, and certainly around the world, where 6Mbps Comcast services are not available. The issue is simply one of scale. It's easier to make the point that a couple bandwidth hogging applications can chew up a small ISP putting his or her bank account, home mortgage and livelihood on the line to bring Internet access to their rural community. The same concept applies on a larger scale with Comcast or Verizon or anyone else in this business. Bandwidth is still a limited resource despite the fact that it has grown amazingly in recent years. In my entire career, I've always seen that the bandwidth can not keep up with what the applications want to use. Application developers have become sloppy assuming a limitless supply. So it's a question of managing that valuable resource.

To the poster who laughed at me because I have experience and knowledge dating back to the days when 56Kbps DDS circuits were state of the art; you clearly missed my point. I have been one of the people actively involved in marketing and delivering the capacity that you are able to enjoy today. I helped manage the sale and delivery of over $70M worth of switches in the 3rd generation Internet backbone of the largest global ISP in the world back in the late 90s. The point is that I can see where we came from and I can see where we are going (if our industry isn't taken over by dolts).

The question is whether the free market should provide that management or whether the government should. If the government is going to step in and mandate that ISPs must carry everything, then they will also have to step in and aggressively prosecute those who use P2P applications to violate licensing laws. So think carefully about how much you want the government to get involved.

For the record - to "Correct you are done" - I have not discussed my business in this blog. However I am far from done. After being laid off as a result of the telecom meltdown in the early 2000s, I started my own company that has experienced steady 20% growth per year. I consider myself a very successful small businessman and at present I see no end to continued success. Experience and knowledge are wonderful tools to have when you risk everything to start a new business. I deliver broadband satellite services primarily to third world countries and have many sites supporting our wonderful men and women in uniform in Iraq. LOL. Some of them have to be re-educated when they come from a Cable or DSL environment and move into the middle of the desert where fiber backbones are quite scarce! Satellite services are not a substitute for DSL or Cable. They can't compete, although they are excellent disaster recovery mechanisms for businesses. But there are vast regions of the world and our country where terrestrial high speed services simply aren't available. My whole point with posts in this thread were to try and make readers understand that forcing providers to carry everything with no controls slows the spread of broadband to the underserved regions of our country and the rest of the world. Clearly there are many selfish, self-centered children participating in this thread who don't care about anyone but themselves and who don't understand the inner workings of this industry. I hope I have helped to provide at least a little education. You don't have to agree with me, but common courtesy demands that you make a reasonable, rational and well considered argument, rather than simply flaming out like a spoiled child.

Now I'm done.

Patrick Gannon
Business Satellite Solutions, LLC
www.bsatellite.com