how-to block ads
|
|
Uniqs:
273 |
Share Topic
 |
 |
|
|
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 Reviews:
 ·Comcast
| Quick Notes Yes, the broadband penetration deal is weak assuming Embarq has the same broadband penetration figures as CenturyTel (a valid assumption since the companies are somewhat similar).
However CenTel is selling 512/256 "extended reach" DSL right now so theoretically they could upgrade people to 768/256 and still not roll out DSL to anyone else...and it would be an upgrade. I'd like 768 over 512 for the same price 
Though not having a "you must sell this DSL at this price point" term in there is rather lousy. Extended reach DSL appears to be $40 per month for CenturyTel and Embarq, a far cry from $20 768k like you can get in town.
At least these terms are very specific as to what they mean, so there are no weasel clauses for CenLink to get out of.
Personally though there should have been an upload speed requirement in there. 384k for 768k, 512k for 1.5M, 768k for 3M. Sat internet can do 300k up right now, so it's only logical, right?
Now if the FCC had had real balls, they would have required 100% 1.5/512 penetration within 3 years with 150ms or less latency to fcc.gov 99.9% of the time. The medium for this service could be CenLink's choice (DSL, fiber, wireless, two tin cans and a wet string) as long as the speed criteria would be met. Then in five years the 100% would need to be upgraded to 3/768. Pricing ould have to be $50 per month or less. Now I know that sounds high for people used to $20 DSL, but when you're comparing 1.5/256 sat internet for $80 to 1.5/512 for $50 or 3/300 for $200 or so vs. 3/768 for $50 (sat internet) guess who wins?
To look at the bright side of things, at least Embarq and CenTel haven't capped data transfers thusfar and probably won't anytime soon. | |
me1212
join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO | It is nice that they have no cap. And Embarq is the local telco here so I do hope my house is one of the house that get DSL from the must have service in 3 years. | |
| reply to iansltx
said by iansltx:Now if the FCC had had real balls, they would have required 100% 1.5/512 penetration within 3 years with 150ms or less latency to fcc.gov 99.9% of the time. The FCC would have to fix their internal systems so that fcc.gov was accessible at least 99.9% of the time, first.
My dealings with Embarq have been pleasant enough, especially compared to my dealings with Comcast in the same markets. Let's hope the new and improved combined company follows through on customer service and doesn't drown in combined chaos. | | |
|
|
