|reply to Zenit |
Re: This goal
It's not a technology issue. We have the technology, it's just a matter of deploying it. HFC or fiber would do 20/20, heck, either would do 100/20, and fiber will do 1gbps symmetrical.
$20 is not realistic for the US though, you just can't build a network and expect to get paid back for it at that price. Maybe 1mbps for $20 and 100mbps for $60 is more realistic... Sort of a freemium model in a way, since the 100mbps customers would be subsidizing the 1mbps customers...
We need some sort of do-it-or-lose-it for the incumbent telcos who refuse to do the necessary upgrades.
Nope, firstly, 1Mbps is the pure minimum and either way, I don't see people willing to get that unless it's 1/1 for $10 a month.
In Canada, the pure minimal level a single person can handle with internet speeds is 5/1, seeing how 5Mbps is average speeds for streaming technologies.
For that 5/1, incumbent ISPs would charge $25~40/month.
Second Party ISP like Teksavvy, would have it for $20~30/month.
Of course, there is also the issue with caps or unlimited.
With caps the price will remain standard. With unlimited, you see the base price more than doubled!
Ok, maybe they get 3/1 for $20 or something. My point is to have something affordable that's still functional for basic internet usage without undermining the real plans.
Yeah, caps needs to be eliminated. Even HFC doesn't need them, and Comcast is proving that with their upgraded plans and no caps (currently). Of course, there has never been an even plausible explanation for caps on DSL, as it's not a shared line.