Comments about ‘Unload iProvo, critic urges’

Return to article »

Published: Thursday, April 17 2008 12:53 a.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Instereo

Of course privitazation would work for......Quest or any other provider but would it work for the people of Provo. The expenditures for iProvo are public information but would they be for any private provider, NO. So while Provo is trying to provide a service to its citizens, private providers would be ultimately working to make a profit with a service. With iProvo we'd know what citizens would pay but with private providers we may not know. I'm sure some citizens who are smart would get better services for less but others would pay for more profitable services (in the eyes of the service providers) and maybe not even know about the less expensive services. In other words it wouldn't be in the best interest of the private company let people know about alternative solutions. So I don't believe in a report by someone who has interests in Quest saying iProvo isn't doing its job. Privitazation is good for many things, it's not good for all things.

Jesse Harris

Steven Titch has serious honesty problems and depending on his opinion is a serious blunder. He regularly distorted events in committee hearings that I attended last year and often fails to disclose that he counted Qwest as a client for over two years. His distortions and outright lies give him zero credibility as a serious source on telecommunications policy.

Andrew Wilson

The simple fact: Cities evaporate when unable to provide the fundamental infrastructure for business. We live in an information society. Telecommunications bandwidth is the fundamental infrastructure. Qwest and Comcast Would Not provide what we needed because they couldn't justify the expense. (Maybe because they pay the Qwest CEO Seventeen Million a year.)

iProvo and UTOPIA are having start up difficulties - due to obstructive legislation foisted on Utah by Qwest and Comcast. But without the competition of iProvo, I would still be waiting for broadband capacity here in Northeast Provo.

Few Utahns are aware that a second generation internet is being launched this summer. It's called "the Grid" and it's TEN THOUSAND TIMES FASTER than the world wide web. The Grid is a pure data network that runs exclusively on dedicated Fiber Optic Cables; not on a hodge podge of copper wires, cables, and switches designed decades ago to carry phone calls.

iProvo and Utopia are pre-wired to connect our homes and businesses to the coming Ultra-Net. How long will Comcast and Qwest subscribers have to wait for ultra bandwidth? FOR-EV-ER. God bless Provo'S foresight! Give iProvo and UTOPIA time. Do not be penny wise and pound foolish.

Andrew Wilson

maryt

Sounds like we need to wait before selling out. Lets see how the grid affects us. I hate to see the comcast monopoly continue. IProvo is sometimes infuriating but they are getting better. comcast is infuriating al the time.

I'm with Andrew. We have already waited a good while. No need to give our investment to some private group when we may be close to the Grid. That would be a fabulous technological advance for the city and us taxpayers not to mention the economic possibilities.

case study in bad management

Business schools will be able to use iProvo as a case study in bad management. Cities should not invest tax payer dollars in risky projects.

How many more years of deficits are Provo taxpayers going to endure? Someone is getting rich out of this investment and it is not citizens.

I hope they spell the names of the leaders that are supporting this boondoggle (for the case study).

Doug J

I fully support iProvo for the reasons stated above. It is a good investment and will pay off over time. I like it.

The major problem, IMHO, is not with the infrastructure of iProvo but with the service providers. They have the appearance of being immature startup businesses with an almost 'mom and pop' style. I have seen very little marketing being done by either provider. If the service providers were more established and mature, then Provo would have no problem with the costs of the infrastructure.

Nvnospin

Throw out option 2 as a cure for the ailing iProvo. Requiring City Departments to pay for usage is nothing more that robbing the taxpayers to subsidize the iProvo system.

It Starts at the TOP

I agree with Andrew. iProvo was a great idea from the very beginning that was almost foiled by some State Legislators that are owned (cash already in pockets) by Qwest and Comcast.

iProvo's problem is not the idea or even the implementation it is in the management. There has not been any change in course or directions since problems starting surfacing a long time ago. We keep hitting our head against the wall and still wonder why it is bleeding.

The only way to save iProvo is to get rid of the management depend on the staff (i.e. - not the management) that got this thing up and running on the ground level and start righting this ship.

Garlick has done enough damage. How many "staffers" has he fired, forced to leave or re-assigned and not one of them has been replaced? Some of them were integral to the startup and success of iProvo but because of more management decisions were let go. Others have already left or are trying to abandon ship as soon as possible because they know that current management is searching for an iceberg. The only thing that can change this is new management!

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments