Home
| Calendar
| Mail Lists
| List Archives
| Desktop SIG
| Hardware Hacking SIG
Wiki | Flickr | PicasaWeb | Video | Maps & Directions | Installfests | Keysignings Linux Cafe | Meeting Notes | Linux Links | Bling | About BLU |
Anthony Gabrielson <agabriel at home.tzo.org> wrote: > It gives companies more incentive to develop there infrastructure. In area > like Boston it will take away a few options; however in other areas of the > country in the long run it will increase the options as companies will have > more incentive to spend the money on there infrastructure. It won't work like that. Locally, a company called RCN went out and raised $2 billion to do what you suggest. It's had some amount of success but I doubt it's enough to encourage entrepreneurs to toss a few more $billion into infrastructure development. The "incentive to invest" argument is always trotted out by PR departments trying to convince regulators to back off. It's virtually always a bald-faced lie. Jerry again: > The bottom line on this is that we will need to wait and see how things > start to fall out. As I mentioned, the states and local communities have > some jurisdiction over the carriers. Could you shed some light on what you're thinking of? Taxation, regulatory carrots and sticks, what? Tom Metro <blu at vl.com> wrote: > It seems we've come full circle. I wonder what the resurgence of > dedicated line service is due to? Was it in anticipation of this FCC > ruling, or is it being motivated by changing economics elsewhere in the > equation? It costs less to buy a dedicated line, I think. But I don't know current wholesale pricing levels. > RCN now offers > cable modem service for business (though the terms are a joke), but I > don't think Comcast ever did.) >... > Either [FIOS service operators are] afraid businesses will take > advantage of the bandwidth > too much, or they are too excited about being able to sell video > services to consumers (see above URL for a link to "Fios TV"). I think these are two halves of the same argument, which boils down to this: heavy bandwidth applications of the future will be consumer-oriented, not business-focused. Look at the PC market. Today's highest margins are made on souped-up gamer PCs, and right behind those are "media center" PCs designed to handle HDTV video. At some point we will all have wireless LANs delivering a separate 40-megabit HDTV video feed to each room of our house. Is there any equivalent for the average non-content-distribution business? Not really--few businesses have any reason to install a TV, except maybe a bar or a bowling alley, so why would they need high-bandwidth Internet? Is there any surprise that Dell's small-biz deal-of-the-week is a free 15" flat-panel display bundled with its $329 Celeron-D desktop? -rich
BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups | |
We also thank MIT for the use of their facilities. |