Comments

That's how you feel about BT after a few hours. Imagine what it's like for those of us in the UK who live our whole lives with BT.

Posted by Mark Nunney at March 8, 2006 9:37 AM

I have had similar problems at CDG Paris where the service kept sending me emails and dropping me off (even though I was supposedly roaming on on my US WIFI acocunt) and then got charged about $ 100...

The US is only slightly better. Most large airports expect $ 10 a day (I guess they are really pessimistic about flights and expect you to hang around that long - so it usually works out to $ 10 for an hour!)

Florida airports seem most progressive - Ft Lauderdale, Orlando, Tampa are free WIFI access

Wish the industry (and the airports which franchise the access) would just charge $ 1 an hour...demand would skyrocket and it would be fair all the way around...

Posted by vinnie mirchandani at March 8, 2006 10:06 AM

Or, (and I realize this is a far-out idea) what if the airlines could get their collective act together so we could travel, connect, schedule, and etc. without having to spend so much time in airports. Then, we wouldn't need to worry about how much the wireless costs or how well the sign-up works. C'mon, get to the root cause of the problem--which is that you are stuck in the airport long enough that you need to connect to the internet.

Posted by Mike at March 8, 2006 10:37 AM

Yes Tom I agree the ATT merger is a potential pain - like Comcast Cable and others and how they dictate Internet and Cable TV high prices.

Posted by Sean at March 8, 2006 10:44 AM

What about EVDO? Is it usable overseas? I would think that with your schedule it would pay for itself quickly.

Posted by Fred Beiderbecke at March 8, 2006 11:07 AM

ATT - SBC - Bell South - Cingular

Not Ma Bell, say hello to Gramma Bell. She made a good living for herself early on, but now she's fighting to keep what she made, while leaving the plastic over the couch (antiquated copper lines, antiquated customer service, antiquated business models).

The combination of these mergers, the belly-aching of losing land lines to mobile lines (of which they have the Lion's Share as well - Cingular), and Ed Whitacre's appeal for a tiered Internet... this is unnerving to say the least.

Send Michael Powell the thank you note. Yanking the carpet out from under unmotivated CLECs (Competitive Local Exchange Carriers) who were too dependent (lazy) on the Telecommunications Act of 1996 has eliminated nearly all of Gramma Bell's traditional competition.

Posted by DUST!N at March 8, 2006 11:14 AM

It's getting a bit much. Why can't Airlines, Hotels and other trasient hosts understand the value of providing FREE WIFI access to their customers? We're about to move over to the States. Also on BA out of Heathrow to Vancouver. Our cheap seat bill will be well over $2,500. You'd certainly think that they could provide even a free hour of connectivity with my ticket number as a user ID - or even my name on the ticket, with an account created during processing at check-in.

"Mr. O'Leary, now that you're checked in, you can log in to our FREE wifi network. The information is on your boarding pass. Have a very pleasant trip, and think of us the next time you're traveling our way big smile."

Sorry, I fell asleeep there for a moment. Was I dreaming?

Posted by Tom O'Leary at March 8, 2006 11:44 AM

It seems like only yesterday ... early 1980's ... Tons of mail detailing how the handful of shares of ATT stock I had (childhood gift from grandma) were being converted into all of the "Baby Bell" stocks because the government was breaking up the ATT monopoly. (Time stamp: Organizing this was one of the first math calculations I did on my first PC, an amber-screened Zenith)

Now, just a few short years later the pieces are being reasssembled. Despite all of the evidence about mergers that haven't worked!!!!

Posted by Steve Yastrow at March 8, 2006 11:48 AM

BIG MERGERS = big profit for CEOs and related greed ilk = dino fossil world continues.

Posted by Sean at March 8, 2006 12:03 PM

Monopolies can only exist where either a government enforces the monopoly or it is enforced by violence.

Patents, Copyrights, Trademarks, Municipal exclusivity and other Government regulations are what permits a monopoly to exist. The extending of the Copyright time periods and the Patent time periods to longer and longer time periods only exacerbates the problem.

Now, while I do believe that Patents and Copyrights do encourage innovation, I also believe that when a governmental enforced exclusivity may last longer than the average lifetime while technology obsoletes pre-existing tech in less than three years, you have a recipe for an indefinite corporate monoploy.

And as Tom points out, such exclusivity leads to the corporation turning a deaf ear to the average customer.

So, while Patents and Copyrights have fueled the tech growth of the last 100 years, they have also fueled the growing public dissatisfaction with large corporations and with Mergers and Acquisitions.

The case against Microsoft in the USA was only possible because Government gave Microsoft the power to do the very things that the government later said were "unfair." Well, if it is unfair then quit creating laws which only encourage a monopolistic mindset and corporate deafness.

Posted by James Shewmaker at March 8, 2006 1:13 PM

If you look at the history of the telecom industry, you'll see that today's 'players' were established not only through innovation, but through dogged determination to quash the innovation of others... as evidenced in their litiguous nature.

Alexander Graham Bell's patent on the invention of the telephone was submitted only 2 hours ahead of Elisha Gray's patent on telephone technology produced independently.

Posted by DUST!N at March 8, 2006 1:44 PM

This in the London Times...

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2103-2047034,00.html

Posted by vinnie mirchandani at March 8, 2006 9:54 PM

Interesting that you've taken BT to task (though gawd knows their interface deserves it), instead of BA (British Airways). The better question might be: Why doesn't BA provide free wireless for its Executive Club members?

Add that to the fact that you only accrue 25% of the miles flown unless you pay full fare (who pays full fare???), and you have to wonder where the culture at BA puts the customer.

Personally we never fly BA anymore: http://cornwall.backtalk.com/articles/why-we-wont-fly-british-airways-any-more/

Posted by Frank Leahy at March 9, 2006 1:20 AM

What makes them a monopoly? Cell service and VOIP make them almost irrelevant.

Frankly, I greet that merger with all the same enthusiasm of the two leading typewriter manufacturers merging.

Posted by Marc Shiman at March 9, 2006 2:05 AM

where to order viagra

Surely BA et al. would be wiser to provide the service free to the lounge users and capitalise on the fact that you have a captive user Logon Screen prompting "Fly BA" or "Eat at Joes!"

Customer service...Hmmm.

Posted by Bob Hail at March 9, 2006 6:00 AM

Easy to foresake USA business when customer service goes insane and costs increase - bring on the "Toyotas" of the IT World!

Posted by Sean at March 9, 2006 10:41 AM

Marc,

Ever try to surf the web via cell phone? US is way behind there.

I wouldn't trust my business communications to VoIP. I use it at home, so I know the flakiness. To make it as secure as standard POTS lines, you'd spend a bundle on equipment... offsetting the only reason to go to VoIP - $$.

GramMa Bell owns the pipes over which the Internet (including VoIP) runs, and they know it.

That's what makes them a monopoly.

Posted by DUST!N at March 13, 2006 5:35 PM