 alchav
join:2002-05-17
Palm Desert, CA | reply to bicker
Re: High Quality versus Low Quality said by bicker:The problem is that folks want low cost and high quality. They're not willing to pay top dollar for DSL & landline, yet they expect an extraordinary amount of resources to be directed towards supporting those services. That lack of reasonableness on the part of consumers and regulators is why Verizon has been abandoning offering such services. It cost money to use and maintain old Copper Infrastructures. This Copper goes back to the Central Office and ties into old obsolete equipment. Now the FiOS that Verizon has been deploying, goes back to new Digital Equipment. So if you were running a Company, would you spend money on replacing and maintaining old Copper that goes back to obsolete equipment? The answer is simple, Fiber is the Future I want it! |
|
|
|
bicker
join:2007-05-10
Burlington, MA | said by alchav:It cost money to use and maintain old Copper Infrastructures. This Copper goes back to the Central Office and ties into old obsolete equipment. Now the FiOS that Verizon has been deploying, goes back to new Digital Equipment. So if you were running a Company, would you spend money on replacing and maintaining old Copper that goes back to obsolete equipment? The answer is simple, Fiber is the Future I want it! Absolutely, and it is an offering that customers are actually willing to pay the price for the level of service that they want, unlike with copper where customers are unwilling to pay for the level of service they want. |
|
| reply to alchav
Well then Verizon needs to more rapidly deploy the new technology so that these problems go away. Instead they're doing it too slowly and this whole situation is the result. I LOVED Fios when I had it, but it now seems too expensive and I see that Verizon is doing some very "interesting" things overall. It makes me wonder if I want to do business with them again. |
|
