<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<rss version="2.0" xmlns:blogChannel="http://backend.userland.com/blogChannelModule">

<channel>
<title>Topic &#x27;They can&#x27;t do TV&#x27; in forum &#x27;&#x27; - dslreports.com</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/They-cant-do-TV-21741475</link>
<description></description>
<language>en</language>
<pubDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 17:34:15 EDT</pubDate>
<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 17:34:15 EDT</lastBuildDate>

<item>
<title>They can&#x27;t do TV</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/They-cant-do-TV-21741475</link>
<description><![CDATA[anon posted : Over ADSL and provide anything close to decent quality. In reality, they only have 17ish Mbps of bandwidth to work with close to the node on their new FTTN system. Farther away, they only have 10, or less.<br><br>I gess this is smart. By not trying to offer TV over their own infrastructure, they don't have to upgrade said infrastructure, especially in less profitable areas. They don't have to condition their copper, and they can provide TV service to the vast majority of their customers without any customer service headaches.<br><br>I mean, they have enough on their hands trying to stay alive, right? No money to innovate.<br><br>175 per customer in upgrade costs for FTTN. That's nothing. They can pay that off, and then some, over the course of a "price for life" 12 Mbps (erm...more like 10.2 Mbps) contract.<br><br>If Qwest actually had FastPath on all possible lines, and overprovisioned to deliver what they say they are, I wouldn't bash them so much. In reality...meh.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/They-cant-do-TV-21741475</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 16:50:07 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>

