This article in the San Jose Mercury News described a misunderstanding between the city of Livermore, CA and AT&T around permits it applied for to do upgrades. It seems the upgrades included cabinetry to support AT&Ts Project Lightspeed upgrade project to support IPTV. The city had not understood that at all. And for that matter was not at all sure it wanted any such. AT&T plans to spend upwards of $4.5 Billion to upgrade its systems to support IPTV. Other towns have been more welcoming. Most are considering offering a second cable franchise. Likely I think that will be more likely the trend than not. Lots more opportunities for the cities. The cablecos are screaming about this of course declaring it must be regulated. I say to them, fair is fair, your VoIP services are heavily cannibalizing Telco voice service everywhere. (I just added a line myself). IPTV is different from simple downstream or even digital cable in that customers can choose programming on a more pro-active basis (although nothing like what is potentially possible as yet). So what does this mean for broadband wireless? I recall a recent discussion with Tim Downs of Shorecliff and the Broadband Wireless World show where we both agreed it was not quite ready for IPTV. But could it be for some more limited versions of download video content? Heck yes. Tim Sanders  tim@thefinalmile.net  www.thefinalmile.net  www.wimaxglobalnews.com