Reviews:
 ·ProLog
 ·DIRECTV
1 edit | reply to Who Cares
Well if Comcast tried this you would have shareholders crying "WAAA WAAA look how much money they are spending!!! WAAA WAAA!"
What Shareholders don't realize is that upgrading to 1 GHz is far less expensive than running fiber to the home, and a 1 GHz two way RF network is much more robust in terms of bandwidth compared to say AT&T Project Lightspeed style solutions.
You have to spend the money now to make the money later.
Cable companies cannot just sit still and do nothing when the satellite companies are raining down fierce competition. |
Ulmo
join:2005-09-22
San Jose, CA Reviews:
 ·SONIC.NET
| After reading about Comcast's future plans (their shareholder slide show, should I call it their SSS?), doing this 1GHz upgrade is really good: it gives them the room to temporarily double-carry that analog stuff while they transition to high quality (H264) codecs for the best quality video, including, as they say, HD, and as they say, for more channels, more Internet bandwidth, and just generally more, without having to heavily juggle what they already have (although they can juggle it if they want anyway), allowing the transition to happen cleaner, better, faster, and less expensively. It makes it a lot easier for them to breath all around, I think. What a great thing to do ... I wonder what the costs of the upgrade are.
Does Cox have a Comcast-like fiber infrastructure? |
