Friday fun: The Informa Tech 5G 100 influencers lists needs an update. Let us know who should stay, who should go and who you think we're missing.
Our unscientific reader poll shows that nearly 7 in 10 folks who attended #MWC19 will not likely turn up for #MWC21.
We're still getting mixed messages about #MWC2021. The pandemic's grip is loosening in several places, but is it enough to bring the telecom world to Barcelona? Take our survey and let us know.
Our entry page is live and we're now accepting your nominations for outstanding achievements in communications across 26 categories, including the Light Reading Hall of Fame.
Light Reading's flagship awards program has more categories and more chances to celebrate – online and in person. We're accepting entries beginning May 3.
You've got to give Verizon credit for one thing -- calling the bluff of those who would say they're not open. The reality is -- how many people or companies are actually in a position to manufacture a device to take advantage of Verizon's new openness in a way that could compete with the subsidized models?
If you're a major phone manufacturer, chances are you already have some kind of deal with Verizon so the argument is moot. If you're some device startup, given the costs (and time) to bring a new device to market, why would you even consider launching something new without some guaranteed buy-in from one major service provider? How could you price it without a subsidy to compete with a $49 BlackBerry?
And even if a new device or application made it past the Verizon testing, there is the whole question of pricing and service plans to consider, like data caps that might effectively "block" the use of say, streaming video, by making it too expensive to be competitive. I would say any measurement of open has to look at the plans, pricing and data limits and not just whether the device or app is allowed on the network. Because the latter part is easy, and it's what Verizon will tout as "open" until someone calls their bluff.