|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, June 20 2013 @ 04:37 PM EDT |
Anytime a company is in any type of monopoly/duopoly position they milk it dry
until they are forced to upgrade/update their infrastructure by true competition
or government fiat.
If the original AT&T monopoly was still intact we wouldn't have cell phones.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- Similar here UK - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, June 20 2013 @ 04:57 PM EDT
|
Authored by: JamesK on Friday, June 21 2013 @ 08:25 AM EDT |
While there certainly is some hold back in what the cable companies are
offering, the fact remains that they are currently limited by the existing cable
plant. They'd need fibre to the home to offer Gb service. Currently, in many
areas, they now have fibre to the neighbourhood, which is a considerable
improvement over the old coax cable only network they used to have. As it is, I
don't use all the bandwidth I have, but Internet and TV are two completely
different services that are carried over the same cable. As they move to IP for
TV, then they'll have to provide much greater IP bandwidth to homes. The phone
company is doing something similar, where they have fibre to the neighbourhood
and copper pair for the "last mile". However, they have some
bandwidth limitations when delivering video & Internet at the same time over
the same pair. Ideally, we'll all get fibre to the home, though that may be
some time off.
---
The following program contains immature subject matter.
Viewer discretion is advised.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|