Another aspect of "the breakup" I've heard is that it was actually DESIRED
by AT&T [well, maybe not entirely, but some aspects were...] This is because
they wanted to be in the then-booming "PC" business, but since they were a
"monopoly", the government prohibited them from "branching out" into other
business areas -- after all, they existed for a single purpose: provide
phone service nationwide, not phone service and
oh-by-the-way-we-sell-computers-too...

I also remember from years-ago in school that things like utilities, of
which phone service certainly qualifies, were best served by "monopolies"
simply because the mechanism for delivery is rather fixed.  Take as a "for
instance" deciding to change who supplies your household water: this would
imply digging up the street to change which pipe runs into your house...
Likewise, power & phones come in over a physical "infrastructure" that
cannot be easily modified on a per-user basis.  These "monopolies" have
traditionally been "government" run [even if just local city government]
which as someone else pointed out means "run by the people" -- nothing
(other than apathy) prevents the "people" from demanding change (or lower
prices, or...)

Tom Emerson
Sr. Systems Analyst
NDC | e COMMERCE
[log in to unmask]
626-258-4309
626-350-3832 FAX