We use cookies and other similar technologies (Cookies) to enhance your experience and to provide you with relevant content and ads. By using our website, you are agreeing to the use of Cookies. You can change your settings at any time. Cookie Policy.

Blog: John Myers Subscribe to this blog's RSS feed!

John Myers

Hey all-

Welcome to my blog. The fine folks at the BeyeNETWORK™ have provided me with this forum to offer opinion and insight into the worlds of telcommunications (telecom) and business activity monitoring (BAM). But as with any blog, I am sure that we (yes we... since blogging is a "team sport"...) will explore other tangents that intersect the concepts of telecom and BAM.

In this world of "Crossfire" intellectual engagement (i.e. I yell louder therefore I win the argument), I will try to offer my opinion in a constructive manner. If I truly dislike a concept, I will do my best to offer an alternative as opposed to simply attempting to prove my point by disproving someone else's. I ask that people who post to this blog follow in my lead.

Let the games begin....

About the author >

John Myers, a senior analyst in the business intelligence (BI) practice at  Enterprise Management Associates (EMA). In this role, John delivers comprehensive coverage of the business intelligence and data warehouse industry with a focus on database management, data integration, data visualization, and process management solutions. Prior to joining EMA, John spent over ten years working with business analytics implementations associated with the telecommunications industry.

John may be contacted by email at JMyers@enterprisemanagement.com.

Editor's note: More telecom articles, resources, news and events are available in the BeyeNETWORK's Telecom Channel. Be sure to visit today!

Recently in Regulation Category

Interesting note at today’s keynotes at the Telematics Update 2011 Show in Detroit…

David Strickland, Administrator for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, made it very clear to the telematics/auto industry conference that technology curbs will be explored to prevent distracted driving.  This comes despite a March 2011 move for additional study on the problem of distracted driving before government action.

Perhaps his most clear statement in regards to the NHTSA’s focus on safety relating to distracted driving was:

“A car is not a mobile device. A car is a car."

This reminded me a story that I heard from an active US observer with the German auto industry.  The story goes that many German automotive engineers refused to put cup holders in their luxury cars.  “Cars are for driving and not for drinking” was the stance from those German engineers.  The US observer asked those same engineers “Do you want to sell cars in the US or stand by your position on cup holders?”  Today, my German car has very nice cup holders…

SadpirateAdministrator Strickland… you might want to tell your boss, Secretary LaHood, this story about markets…. Also, it might help to toss in a couple of stories about iPhone “jail breaking” and estimate exactly how long any hardware/software regulation would last in the face of a determined hacker community.

Would you risk “jail breaking” your wireless device to use if there was a regulation against it? Would you accept the regulation?

Post your comments below or email (John.Myers@BlueBuffaloGroup.com) / twitter (@BlueBuffaloGrp) me directly.

Posted June 9, 2011 10:35 AM
Permalink | No Comments |

General-smart-phoneLast November, Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood started making noises about a “hardware” solution to the issue of distracted driving as it relates to wireless devices.  Secretary LaHood was advocating ‘disabling’ wireless devices in moving vehicles.

Now in March, LaHood is leaning more toward NHTSA a study before making any ‘harsh decisions as it relates to wireless devices.  This study would look to determine if devices cause "cognitive distractions" to drivers and contributes to accidents and deaths.

I applaud Secretary LaHood taking the step to perform a study and base any regulatory decisions on hard numbers rather than ‘gut feel’.  But I am concerned that LaHood and the Department of Transportation are focusing too much on consumer devices rather than other causes of distracted drivers.  Some that I can think of off the top of my head are:

  • Pets
  • Food
  • Beverages
  • Shaving
  • Applying makeup
  • Children

I would advocate a simple solution to the problem… Move toward a nationwide standard to “double the points and double the fine” for any and all distracted drivers during moving violations.  This would similar to the recent campaigns focusing not just on the fact that drunk driving is a bad decision, but a REALLY bad financial decision.

For those using wireless devices during a moving violation, the ‘detection method’ is to simply use the existing lawful intercept laws to utilize the voice, SMS or data records associated with a suspect’s wireless device.

Are you ready to have hardware in your phone or in your car to prevent the usage of wireless device while it is moving?

Post your comments below or email (John.Myers@BlueBuffaloGroup.com) / twitter (@BlueBuffaloGrp) me directly.

Posted April 5, 2011 10:04 AM
Permalink | No Comments |

I have to say that I always appreciated the concept of “leaving sleeping dogs lie” or its rough equivalent in the western states… “if you mess with the bull, you will get the horns…”. FCC

In its case against the FCC, I fear that Comcast may awaken the legislative process and/or get an unwanted dose of the “horns” of the FCC.

In a very good piece by Jolelle Tessler, Comcast appears to have a bent on getting a ruling that states the FCC does not have the ability to enforce Net Neutrality rules.  My favorite part of Tessler’s piece is the following:

“An appeals court ruling that rejects this argument could draw Congress into the matter to give the FCC the power to regulate broadband as an information service. Several key lawmakers have already drafted legislation to mandate network neutrality. Or it could force the agency to consider reclassifying broadband as a more heavily regulated telecommunications service that would be subject to non-discrimination rules.”

By putting this case into the legal process, Comcast could very well close out any wiggle room associated with the FCC on the definitions of Net Neutrality and even make the world of Internet access even more regulated rather than less…

How do you view the wisdom of the Comcast legal strategy?

Post your comments below or email (John.Myers@BlueBuffaloGroup.com) / twitter (@JohnLMyers44) me directly.


Posted January 12, 2010 8:31 AM
Permalink | No Comments |

I found this article from Joshua Rhett Miller recently on President Obama’s “broadband plan” and I thought that the follow quote was interesting:

“Just 57 percent of Americans use broadband services, although 91 percent of American homes have access to them, according to a report released last month by the Pew Internet & American Life Project.”

While I am not in a position to argue about the specifics relating to the penetration of broadband in the US, I am perfectly willing to argue against the concept that if people access to broadband and do not use it then they are not interested.

Those users might not be interested in that particular price point ( … particularly in these economic times… ) or may not have the “PC literacy” to take advantage of broadband access.  But I can definitely say that a lack of participation cannot be equated to a lack of interest.

The Insight Research Corporation has a recent study that says:

“Even amidst so much economic uncertainty, the fact remains that telecommunications is a key input factor in economic growth. Telecommunications is a facilitator of socio-economic advancement and is a critical utility for economic development, much like water and energy.”

So in this particular case, I agree with President Obama position on broadband access to encourage economic growth.  However, I’m probably at odds with the administration on exactly how that broadband access should be provided…. Simply “berating” the telecoms into providing cheaper access isn’t the answer.  Nor is probably simply subsidizing broadband access.

Posted March 4, 2009 8:00 AM
Permalink | No Comments |

Telecom executives hearing that wireless spectrum taxes have been “tucked” deep inside the US Federal Budget cannot be excited.

Here are the projected ‘receipts’ (read taxes passed straight to wireless consumers…) from the OMB based on those ideas:


However, it seems odd to me to be taxing a portion of the US economy that doesn’t appear to be doing that poorly in relation to the rest of the economy… Here’s a look at two ‘randomly’ selected telecoms vs the DOW for the past five months:


Seems odd that we can boost the economy by taxing organizations that appear to be doing better than most… But then again, I’m not an economist nor do I play one on TV… :)

Posted March 2, 2009 8:00 AM
Permalink | No Comments |
PREV 1 2 3

Search this blog
Categories ›
Archives ›
Recent Entries ›