re: You don't seem to mind the FED playing god with the economy.
Do not put words in my mouth! I hate them playing with it. I look at the economy as if it is a natural system, where the ideas of natural selection and evolution should be applied to it. I would like the fed to disappear.
re: One line for three different MSOs is more absurd than any of the positions yet considered.
1)Whose truck rolls? There own.
2) How are headends provisioned? Separate own my the individual companies.
3) What does this achieve? You still have the problem of ISPs and you still have the bandwidth problem plus a complex switching problem.
I'm talking separate lines to the curb whole unique systems, so bandwidth sharing is not an issue. You pick your cable/broadband provider from three unique MSO,s you keep one line to your house the truck drives disconnects you from one the connects to another, better yet a mini network switch at each house. (just joking with you on that one) Heck if they put mini network/routers switches in the field we could route calls directly next door or with-in the subdivision with out going to the headend or CO. This is what T is going to do all most with their 50 home limit. ramble ramble not the car just my post <gg>
Look ah, I don't see 3 MSOs happening, but it should of been set up this way in the beginning. When the electric company digs a trench, the phone company puts a cable right in the same trench, they have a an agreement, just like on poles, at least that's how they do it in Illinois. In the beginning there would of been three cables laid. In the future there would be more then one laid. I would love to see some company come along and lay glass to everyone's home, but it's too costly.
If you saw my post to Frank I'm looking for technical reason why T shouldn't be forced to offer bandwidth for sale, if there are none, it becomes an issue of reasonable rates that can be charged.
The bottom line ATHM is either dead money or going down till this issue is clearer.
Greg |
