Derch
Premium
join:2004-10-16
Tulsa, OK | Sats are DEAD
Sorry, but I prefer something tied to the ground. Sounds like this "project" was faulty in the beginning. |
|
PDXPLT
join:2003-12-04
Banks, OR
| said by Derch  :Sorry, but I prefer something tied to the ground. Yea, so would I, but for tens of millions of us (those who live outside the cable-internet footprint), landline isn't an option.
DSL isn't being deployed in areas where the telco doesn't fear competition from cable. Satellite internet is the only technology that costs the same to deploy to all customers, no matter where they are located.
And yes, this story has it wrong. Wildblue-1 is their 2nd bird. There first bird is already in the sky, |
|
flushls
join:2004-11-02
Joyce, WA | Sat BB is a complete waste of funds I have had it.
2 words "it sucks!". I now have dial-up which at least sucks less.
The only thing uglier than Sat BB is QWEST's hairy backside. |
|
truebut still
@optonline.net
| reply to PDXPLT
Re: Sats are DEAD--True,but still
Meaningful competition from a FIBER based system of triple play services, Video,Voice,Data for many is still years away, after that's in place, satellite will really have to compete on price... it's just a matter of time.. it's like copper trying to compete with fiber, hands down.. it simply isn't possible, unless you want 200 copper strands being run to your home... I imagine that cereal commerical
TOTAL, you need more and more bowls of cereal to equal the nutrition in one bowl of TOTAL (brand) cereal.. well, my friends, the holy grain here is fiber... so unless satellite can improve ping times and bandwisth limitations by about 5000%, its a dying breed, but on the good side- we can stop risking lives sending up faulty space shuttles to service a couple of satellites needlessly.. and get some real work done that benefits us all, not those who just watch tv |
|
