To: RTev who wrote (8126 ) 4/17/1999 9:09:00 PM From: Frank A. Coluccio Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 29970
RT, you've pointed to some imminent Pandora Box issues which we've touched upon upstream in this thread. Conflicts of interest, and crossovers between service capabilities will proliferate, not just for video but for all forms of data and voice as well. Whereas the ATHM consortium may be able to mandate a certain level of compliance to divvying up the marketplace on its own facilities, and among its own members (which is doubtful to me as I think about it) they will surely meet with contrasting service profiles and mixes from other, nonaffiliated MSOs / cable modem service providers. One of the things that is sacrificed in this scenario is the uniformity of look and feel between providers, which tends to cause disruption throughout the entire industry where technical standards and user expectations are concerned. I think that the situation will become more pronounced when spectrum that is now bound up for analog delivery becomes freed up when digital delivery begins to proliferate. Digital TV program delivery requires less bandwidth, being the reason, which will free up some lower spectrum for other purposes down the road. Or, possibly when new Calbe Labs initiated enhancements are put in place to alleviate some of the congestion, such as bringing fiber nodes closer to smaller clusters of users. At that point, what will the cable modem allocation of bandwidth become? Will there be enough, perhaps, to support streaming video there as a normal matter of course? And how will this exacerbate the conflict situation? Will the service provider's use policies be strong enough (will they have the necessary teeth) to dissuade users from downloading entertainment content at that point? Of course, this all assumes that additional bandwidth will go towards cable modem use, but there is no assurance of that at this time. Let's hear what others have to say. Regards, Frank Coluccio