| the real issue The root of the issue here is that the Cable Companys want to provide phone service . And that the RBOC's want to provide TV service.
If the Fed/State/Local govts want to make it a fair playing field. VOIP will have to have the same stipulations as POTS and IP TV will have to have the same stipulations as CATV.
Im sure that the educated members of this forum can plainly see the argument from both sides. Each has there points to make but the Govt decision makers must do something to allow us to keep up with the rest of the world. And allow the consumers of the US to have a choice for the services that we require. Since we are now a country of services and thinkers. |
|
Cod
join:2000-07-05
Kernersville, NC Reviews:
 ·RoadRunner Cable
1 edit | said by atowncrazy:The root of the issue here is that the Cable Companys want to provide phone service . And that the RBOC's want to provide TV service. If the Fed/State/Local govts want to make it a fair playing field. VOIP will have to have the same stipulations as POTS and IP TV will have to have the same stipulations as CATV. Im sure that the educated members of this forum can plainly see the argument from both sides. Each has there points to make but the Govt decision makers must do something to allow us to keep up with the rest of the world. And allow the consumers of the US to have a choice for the services that we require. Since we are now a country of services and thinkers. Well said. The problem is Telco's are heavily regulated by the government, cable is not. Cable for the most part is already offering digital/VOIP without 'franchise' fees or being regulated for that particular service.
I agree, level the playing field and let them duke it out by seeing who offers the best service at the best price. The bottom line is that us, the consumer, will win by having more choices and more competition & hopefully lower bills from this competition. |
|
| For most of it's existence DSL was heavily regulated while cable internet had nothing as far as regulation. For some reason a lot of posters here and a lot of people in the gov't are suprised that DSL lagged cable in availability. |
|
|
|
 DaveDudeNo Fear
join:1999-09-01
New Jersey
kudos:1
 ·Vonage
·ViaTalk
| said by bogey780:For most of it's existence DSL was heavily regulated while cable internet had nothing as far as regulation. For some reason a lot of posters here and a lot of people in the gov't are suprised that DSL lagged cable in availability. Is that reason why they never installed remote terminals, or when cable started offering internet access magicly dsl came available ? Over and over Cable can, telco needs help, and the only way to do it, is to remove legislation , and to tax customers with fees. |
|
| Why install a remote when you'd have to end up sharing the customers with no or little profit? Cable had guaranteed customers with little oversite from the PUC. |
|
