| Graph says it all As bad as the US broadband policy is at least (in some areas) you do have competition going on. Up here one of our most populous provinces (Ontario) has a very stagnant market. The only competition between the major players is which one can charge the most while offering the least service.
Further more your FCC is somewhat proactive in setting policy (though heavily influenced by lobbing), our equivalent, the CRTC would rather not make policy at all and "let the market decide"; a market which basically consists of two players with different technology (cable vs. DSL). This is not surprising because the CRTC is a retirement home for former Telecom executives, several of which have worked for both companies in the past.
The US carriers would love the CRTC, caps, force wholesalers slower speeds, throttling, deceitful up to access speeds, double billing for bandwidth usage are all fine so long as the carriers claim they need it, proof is not required. |
|
Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
| As bad as the US broadband policy is at least (in some areas) you do have competition going on. We have some competition, in some markets. Many, many people have the choice of one carrier.your FCC is somewhat proactive in setting policy Actually, they're very skilled in pretending that the policy they set is of a high quality and pro-consumer. That's not the same thing as setting good policy. They're just better at PR (no matter which party controls it).The US carriers would love the CRTC, caps, force wholesalers slower speeds, throttling, deceitful up to access speeds, double billing for bandwidth usage are all fine so long as the carriers claim they need it, proof is not required. And we're headed that direction anyway. |
|
| said by Karl Bode:And we're headed that direction anyway. Better brace for dial-up speeds, higher prices and abusive customer support. Stock up on vaseline while you can, you are in for one hell of a dry hump.  |
|
| reply to Thane_Bitter
said by Thane_Bitter:As bad as the US broadband policy is at least (in some areas) you do have competition going on. And with wireless systems moving seriously in to broadband speeds over the next 2 years, competition will be increasing and also spreading in to currently under-served areas. |
|
 elios
join:2005-11-15
Springfield, MO | reply to Thane_Bitter
brace for? were there already in some areas of the USA |
|
 tubbynetreminds me of the danse russePremium,MVM
join:2008-01-16
Chandler, AZ | reply to fAcEtIOUs
said by fAcEtIOUs:And with wireless systems moving seriously in to broadband speeds over the next 2 years, competition will be increasing and also spreading in to currently under-served areas. with the migration to lte, yes. however, one would *hope* that the carriers who are deploying said gear anticipate the use of this for the home (as fixed-point broadband) rather than mobile type use. i would assume that the two could be delineated through channel/frequency differences, but the spectrum and the tower backhaul would need to be there as well.
given past experiences with "rural" hspa/evdo rev0/evdo reva, i'm not exactly optimistic.
q.
--
"...if I in my north room dance naked, grotesquely before my mirror waving my shirt round my head and singing softly to myself..." |
|
 ReformCRTCSupport Your Independent ISP
join:2004-03-07
Canada | reply to Karl Bode
the "choice" of one carrier. zing! |
|
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1 | reply to Thane_Bitter
said by Thane_Bitter:As bad as the US broadband policy is at least (in some areas) you do have competition going on. Up here one of our most populous provinces (Ontario) has a very stagnant market. The only competition between the major players is which one can charge the most while offering the least service. Further more your FCC is somewhat proactive in setting policy (though heavily influenced by lobbing), our equivalent, the CRTC would rather not make policy at all and "let the market decide"; a market which basically consists of two players with different technology (cable vs. DSL). This is not surprising because the CRTC is a retirement home for former Telecom executives, several of which have worked for both companies in the past. The US carriers would love the CRTC, caps, force wholesalers slower speeds, throttling, deceitful up to access speeds, double billing for bandwidth usage are all fine so long as the carriers claim they need it, proof is not required. CRTC is much better than the FCC. Canada has GAS, which means anywhere you can get ILEC DSL you can get CLEC DSL, since the ILEC's DSLAMs are unbundled. In the USA, CLECs are forced to colocate equipment at the CO, which means only a small portion of the USA can get CLEC DSL since they must be within range of the CO, and have copper available all the way back to the CO (not Fiber in the loop). |
|
|
|
