how-to block ads
|
Uniqs:
359 |
Share Topic
 |
 |
|
|
 visio
join:2001-08-29
Pompano Beach, FL | Competition Dont get me wrong, im all for competition, but i dont believe that if a company has invested so much of their own time and money into a technology, I dont see why they should be forced to share it. As well, the company DOES have a right as to who can and can't use their services. | |
|  | | Re: Competition said by visio:
Dont get me wrong, im all for competition, but i dont believe that if a company has invested so much of their own time and money into a technology, I dont see why they should be forced to share it. As well, the company DOES have a right as to who can and can't use their services.
I have to agree, but I also wonder if the cost/benefit ratio is such that the ILECs wouldn't make money off the DSL contracts even if a CLEC was providing the local phone service. At least that's better than having the CLEC offer everything and leave you high and dry without a customer at all.
Again, I am also interested in knowing if DSL can be provided on a "dry wire" or whatever it's called -- where neither an ILEC nor a CLEC have local service on the line. ONLY DSL. THAT would be a neat provision to get from the GA PSC. Assuming it were technically feasible.
IronChefMorimoto
--
Desktop: Abit NF7-S 2.0 | AMD AthlonXP 2500+ | 512MB PC2100 DDR | 128MB ATI Radeon 9500 Pro
Laptop: Dell Latitude C810 | Intel PIII-M | 512MB PC133 SDRAM | 32MB Nvidia GeForce2 Go | |
| | | | | | said by IronChefMoto:
Again, I am also interested in knowing if DSL can be provided on a "dry wire" or whatever it's called -- where neither an ILEC nor a CLEC have local service on the line. ONLY DSL. THAT would be a neat provision to get from the GA PSC. Assuming it were technically feasible.
It's definitely feasible.. in fact, many of the ILECS provided CLECs like Covad and the (RIP) Northpoint with such lines at as an alternative to mandated "line sharing" with POTS service.
Right now my Vonage VoIP service (all four lines) rides on SBC DSL. To get that DSL, I have to buy a measured service local POTS line ($4.95/mo plus another $10 in taxes!). I'd drop that line in a heartbeat if I could... but I expect that SBC would just add the cost of the POTS line to the cost for the DSL.
Dan | |
| | |  elbm
join:2000-08-03
Reisterstown, MD | Re: Competition It's definitely feasible..
Yes it is feasible to provide only DSL-- but in all the systems deployed at 'remote terminals' to do so would still tie-up a pots channel through the carrier, whether or not the telco was providing pots to the customer. | |
| | | Reviews:
 ·AT&T U-Verse
 ·Comcast
| Even moreso, when I first got my ADSL 4 years ago, they were requiring a "dry" line be installed for the DSL. The day of my install, they decided to start allowing line sharing. Seems now they require line sharing and do not allow dry lines anymore. WTF? Oh well, don't have DSL anymore anyway, switched to cellular and, as above, they would not install a dry line for me. | |
|
| | said by visio:
Dont get me wrong, im all for competition, but i dont believe that if a company has invested so much of their own time and money into a technology, I dont see why they should be forced to share it. As well, the company DOES have a right as to who can and can't use their services.
Because those companies ASKED for this arrangement, they were not forced into this at all. They traded access into LD for access to their lines. Not to mention that they are PAID for those lines as well. | |
|
| |
|
Re: Competition
