 BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
2 edits | Is the author stupid? "However, it's notable that HughesNet offers a nominal maximum download speed of 1 Mbps which is significantly faster than the speeds offered by WildBlue so people seeking faster service may still lean in favor of HughesNet."
Um Wild Blue has 512 Kbps, 1 Mbps and 1.5 Mbps packages. Also Wild Blue's caps while ridiculously low are better than Hughesnet.
In either case they aren't going to get more customers until the start giving out the dish for free and free installation like directTv does. And lower thier prices. My area just got EVDO service by Verison. So my friend that lvies out of town and whose only choice for broadband up until now was sateltie now has a choice. Sure the caps are low and it costs as much as satelite, but the speed is about the same, connection charge is only $35 instead of $400-$600 and no one has to come out and install a dish.
Satelite blew this and should have tried to get customers years ago. One of the main axioms of business "It's easier to keep a customer than to get a new one to replace him"
Here's map of Verizon in my state. The blue is where broadband available. A month ago at least 85% of that blue didn't exist. Considering most of the state is rual the satelite lost a monopoloy on potentially hundreds of thousands of customers. Too bad they didn't try seriously to get them.
»vzwmap.verizonwireless.com/outpu···PG?pelee |
|
PDXPLT
join:2003-12-04
Banks, OR | Well maybe not stupid, just seriously mistaken. And maybe a shill for Hughes
I routinely get download speeds of 1.5 Meg. It's just the latency that kills you and renders their service "not broadband". But Highes has the same issue. |
|
