> > However, given the amount of freedom that AOL/TW/ATT 
> Broadband current 
> > gives their customers, it would likely be very easy to 
> compete against 
> > them.  Just don't modify people's traffic, don't block 
> anything, let 
> > them run servers, provide static IP's, and provide tiered service 
> > levels.  All of these things are an improvement over ATT 
> Broadband's 
> > shitty network, and if ATT came in and offered wireless, 
> it's probably 
> > safe to say it's going to suck just as much as their cable modem 
> > service does.
> Uhm, the cable companies have announced plans to cap bandwidth.
> Unless you pay the fees, running servers is a no-no, period, 
> on the networks you talk about above.

I was making the point that a *non*-ATT/AOL/TW network would likely be able
to offer more since all of the cable modem companies are clamping down on
bandwidth and servers.  Right there is a reason for people to choose the
local wireless provider over the 800lb gorillas.