Search:  

 
 
   News
newer
story category SBC & Microsoft TV
SBC pays out $400 million for video services
(old news - 12:20PM Wednesday Nov 17 2004)
tags: business · TVIP
SBC made massive strides in offering video over DSL, by striking a $400 million deal with Microsoft, who'll supply the software for all SBC subscribers. It's a massive win for Microsoft, who up until now hadn't had much luck breaking into your living room, despite spending billions.

Once SBC was given the kind of "regulatory environment" they wanted (namely they don't have to share next-gen services with competitors), they quickly became bullish on next generation broadband, taking the wraps off of "Project Lightspeed", the sequel to the now defunct "Project Pronto".

As part of Project Lightspeed, SBC says they'll be deploying 20-25Mbps worth of connectivity to half of their subscribers (18 million users) within three years. They'll be doing this by running fiber to the neighborhood node, then running ADSL2+ (or perhaps VDSL or VDSL2) to your front door. This is in contrast to Verizon, who is pushing for fiber straight to the home.

From there, Microsoft's TV Internet Protocol Television (IPTV) Edition software platform will manage user video content via a set-top box. SBC and Microsoft will have to fend off critics who suggest the 20-25Mbps provided won't be enough to offer full HDTV service, voice service, and broadband as effectively as FTTH or cable carriers - something the companies say they've solved via compression techniques.

According to SBC's press release, the companies will begin field trials for the service in the middle of 2005, with commercial deployment in late 2005.

About a million Comcast customers in Washington State will see a similar service in a trial starting this month. Microsoft has spent an estimated $20 billion in recent years in the hopes their software would be the centerpiece of American living rooms; a dream that until now had been looking rather shaky.

Related:
  1. U-Verse Whole Home DVR Hits 7 New Areas
  2. Friday Evening Links
  3. AT&T Completes Whole Home DVR Upgrade
  4. Fairpoint To Test IPTV In New Hampshire
  5. Should Cable Operators Offer Wireless?
  6. U-Verse Hits Raleigh, Orlando
  7. SES AMERICOM Pulls Plug On IP Prime
  8. U-Verse TV Gets More Expensive February 1
Forums » SBC & Microsoft TV
view: topics flat text 
Post a:

MarkyD
Premium
join:2002-08-20
Oklahoma City, OK
clubs:
·Cox HSI
·AT&T FTTP
·AT&T DSL Service

Wow.

SBC and M$ in bed together. Scary.

quote:
From there, Microsoft's TV Internet Protocol Television (IPTV) Edition software platform will manage user video content via a set-top box. SBC and Microsoft will have to fend off critics who suggest the 20-25Mbps provided won't be enough to offer full HDTV service, voice service, and broadband as effectively as FTTH or cable carriers - something the companies say they've solved via compression techniques.
I think it's hard to disagree with the fact that SBC is doing this job the half-asked way. Verizon has got it right. In the big picture, eventually, FTTH will be standard practice. SBC's method, allowing only 25mbps TOPS, will just not cut it for more than one HDTV stream + decent internet speeds.

DaSneaky1D
one wall to block them all
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-29
The Lou
·Charter Pipeline

Re: Wow.

What's more, what will be the point of having a highspeed connection if it will be completely used just for TV?

"Yeah, I have a 25mbps connection, but I can only use 384k of it because my kids are watching Spongebob."

"Honey, turn off Oxygen, I'm lagging in CS!"
--
] :: my trivial ramblings :: [
garcia

join:2001-10-07
Mystic, CT

Re: Wow.

So if project lightspeed is anything that project slowpoke was maybe in 10 years we might see something.... I wonder when SBC finally gets their way what excuse will they use when their new project comes crashing down around their ears? I know it is the cable peoples fault yea thats the ticket...

DSL12steps

join:2001-12-24

Re: Wow.

How much bandwith does HDTV really need at this time? I remember when we started installing 1.5 circuits and at that time it was considered fast enough. Listen to us complaining now! I can't believe 20-25 mbps isn't enough for all that we need in 90 percent of the homes.

scooby
Premium
join:2001-05-01
Schaumburg, IL

Re: Wow.

1 HDTV stream is about 20mbps.

djrobx

join:2000-05-31
Valencia, CA
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T CallVantage
·Time Warner VOIP
·RoadRunner Cable
·DSL EXTREME


edit:
November 17th, @12:08PM

True HDTV is 19.2mbps for a single channel.

quote:
"Yeah, I have a 25mbps connection, but I can only use 384k of it because my kids are watching Spongebob."

"Honey, turn off Oxygen, I'm lagging in CS!"
Exactly. Even if we stick with boring old 6mbps DSL speeds, that leaves only 19mbps for all the TV streams in the house. By recompressing HDTV you can get it down to 10mbps. So even with compression, at 25mbps you're limited to just two channels. If they want to do TV they're probably going to have to dedicate a pair just for TV, and use another pair for voice/broadband.

-- Rob
--
\\ROB - a part of the SCB local network

zno

join:2002-01-08
Atlanta, GA

Re: Wow.

quote:
True HDTV is 19.2mbps for a single channel.
that's if they use mpeg2.

but if they use MS WMV9 HD codec, it's gonna be about 6Mbps per channel... so you should be able to watch up to 4 channels at a time.

sbc signed w/ microsoft not mpeg... so we'll see.

»www.microsoft.com/windows/window···CIP.aspx
--
got anti-virus and firewall?
griff1013

join:2002-01-10
Virginia Beach, VA

Re: Wow.

I have read reviews from folks who have seen side by side comparisons of the pictures of the MSFT codec and the HDTV stream from Comcast and they indicated that they could clearly see the difference with the MSFT codec and it was significantly worse. I can't see how you are going to get a HDTV customer from a cable company with a worse picture. Folks spend lots of cash on those nice new tvs.

I agree that SBC is just pusing out press releases and lots of vapor ware. As I recall Project Pronto was supposed to be what Project Lightspeed is, but done some 10 years ago. So not holding my breath. FTTH is only way to go now. Cable guys can easiily move to 30mb on the downstream. Comcast should have 95% of their systems up to DOCSIS 1.1 and a good deal to 2.0 for the huge VoIP rollout coming in 2005. That would support up to 100mb downstream. AND they are broadcasting all the video content all at the same time. Changing channles on IPTV is said to be very slow as it has to go to the server change the stream.

I can't wait to reboot my new SBC/MSFT set-top box when I get the BSD!!!!

AthlGrond
Premium,MVM
join:2002-04-25
Aurora, CO
·Comcast

Re: Wow.

Do you have a link for that review all I could find with MS and Comcast in it was a press release saying that Comcast and MS would be working together on TV software (including HD).

»www.microsoft.com/tv/content/Pre···4PR.mspx

I'd be interested in seeing yours though for a more complete picture.
--
"I drank what?" -Socrates
griff1013

join:2002-01-10
Virginia Beach, VA

Re: Wow.

The "review" was an observation by Dave who writes for dslprime.com. I believe it was at some tech show or something. MSFT and CMCSA were not cooperating with the demonstration at all. They were just using a CMCSA HDTV feed as a comparison to the MSFT codec. One of the other posters mentioned later in the thread the exact specifics of the compression and that it is indeed lower in quality. The compression will require a significant amount of horsepower in top of your TV. It will clearly not be an Intel chip, but a MIPS processor from Broadcam probably designed specifically for compression. Will be able to run much slower MHz to keep the heat down and MTBF up.

MSFT is the King of Vaporware and I will have to see it to believe it. I am not sure that something as poorly coded and bloated as Windows will translate well to the set-top experience. In order to make it work like they have talked about, the "computer" would have to be very powerful. That would drive up the cost of the set-top for the cable cos far about the $200 or so they pay MOT and SFA for them. But MSFT has billions to burn and will probably so an X-box type deal with the cable cos - sell the hardware at a significant loss just to make the sale and hope to make it back on the software side. Cable cos also hate service calls as the cost so much. I can't imagine them wanting to get into the service business of a massive MSFT settop box that will allow folks to add additional programs to it. Billions of service calls on that.
yabos

join:2003-02-16
Ingersoll, ON
I think the MS HD codec requires a 3GHz CPU to decompress that 6Mbit stream. I don't see how their going to cram a 3GHz cpu in a set top box without making it sound like a jet engine.

AthlGrond
Premium,MVM
join:2002-04-25
Aurora, CO
·Comcast

Re: Wow.

They wouldn't they would use a slower single purpose processor which would be much more efficient. (Rather than strapping a PC to the top of your TV)

Not that it matters but my PC is a 3GHz and its whisper quiet since I used quiet components.
--
"I drank what?" -Socrates
flushls

join:2004-11-02
Joyce, WA

Re: Wow. /Ether over copper

There are some ethernet techs in the pipe that that should push between 50-100mbs up too 10k feet over 22g copper which would help in the burbs at least.

Now whether the Telco's can find their azzes with both hands a long neck funnel that remains to be seen.
rick1991

join:2003-01-22
East Fultonham, OH

Re: Wow.

I can just see it now. With 5 seconds left in the game its all tied up and it all comes down to a 45 yard field goal attempt. There's the snap. The ball's up. It's looking good. Going going...... ABC HAS CAUSED A FATAL EXCEPTION ERROR IN MEMORY AREA xxx00095475765. WOULD YOU LIKE TO REBOOT, POWER OFF, OR KICK MICROSOFT'S ASS FOR SCREWING AROUND WITH AN APPLIANCE THEY HAVE NO BUSINESS SCREWING AROUND WITH? Superbowl Sunday will never be the same again. LOL

en102
Canadian, eh?

join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
Seeing that this is a IP TV, will there be tracking 'cookies' for Microsoft/Marketers/SBC to determine what I'm watching? Lets see if I get pop-ups on my TV now
electric_dsl

join:2004-07-20
Pickering, ON

Re: Wow.

they already know what you are watching and probably for how long as well. How do you think they compile those viewer stats and rankings for TV shows?

zno

join:2002-01-08
Atlanta, GA

Re: Wow.

unless you have a tivo/stb that's connected to a phone line, they don't know what you're watching. they get the stats/ratings from surveys.
--
got anti-virus and firewall?

mustang03282

join:2003-01-10
Bridgeton, NJ
clubs:

Re: Wow.

they have people that they pay a small fee each month to wear a recorder that looks just like a old pager. every tv show and radio station puts out a ultra high signal that humans cant hear the meter that these choosen people wear hears that signal and logs it down. I was a arbitron pannelist for about 6 months
lol my wife called up comcast often because lifetime didnt work on our tv's for that 6 months

en102
Canadian, eh?

join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA

Re: Wow.

Comcast = yuck
I guess they did do one thing correct - they killed hallmark/lifetime/wtn/oxygen channel for you.
johram

join:2004-01-06
Colton, CA
Does this mean that SBC will install an RT closer to my home?
I'd love to have faster dsl...

zno

join:2002-01-08
Atlanta, GA

edit:
November 17th, @03:55PM

Re: Wow.

nm
johram

join:2004-01-06
Colton, CA


edit:
November 17th, @04:04PM

It seems that in the coming years a big question home buyers will be asking is "what kind of high speed internet is availible at this home?".

i totally would prefer a verzion with fiber than an SBC-serviced area.

It will play into my home purchase thats for sure...

ape

join:2002-05-10
Chicago, IL

25mbps

I cant take 25mbps internet connection but TV over the phone line, no thanx. I prefer my dish to watch TV.

zno

join:2002-01-08
Atlanta, GA

Re: 25mbps

there's a difference between TV and Internet. they can "broadcast" IPTV all over the place w/ a limited bandwidth, 25mbps. so, to provide IPTV to a 100 house neighborhood, all they need to bring is a 25mbps pipe to the neighborhood and broadcast the same packet to each house.

but in order to provide 25mbps worth of internet to every house they serve, they'll need to bring much bigger pipe in to the neighborhood.

i'm not saying this is exactly how it'll work but you get the picture...

i hate latency in my satellite tv.
--
got anti-virus and firewall?
Cod

join:2000-07-05
Greensboro, NC

Re: 25mbps

said by zno See Profile:

there's a difference between TV and Internet. they can "broadcast" IPTV all over the place w/ a limited bandwidth, 25mbps. so, to provide IPTV to a 100 house neighborhood, all they need to bring is a 25mbps pipe to the neighborhood and broadcast the same packet to each house.
Where did this information come from? Not disputing what you have said, but how can you fit 100 channels on a 25mb 'pipe' for 100 houses with each one of those houses theoretically watching different channels?

zno

join:2002-01-08
Atlanta, GA

Re: 25mbps

let me correct myself. (again, i'm not saying this is how it works. only my theory.)

i should have said they would have to bring about 155mbps(oc3 speed) into a neighborhood. this should be plenty to carry about 10 HDs(6mbps) and 60 SDs.(1.5mbps). all channels are broadcasted to the neighborhood hub from the main(?) location(co).

from the neighborhood hub, they run a 25mbps pipe to each house in the neighborhood. this allows each person to watch up to 4 HDs at a time... channel tunning is done at the hub hence the provider doesn't have to lay a bigger fiber to deliver all channels to every house. you can only watch so many channels at a time.

i'm just saying 25mbps is plenty to deliever up to 4 HDs.
--
got anti-virus and firewall?

calvoiper

join:2003-03-31
Belvedere Tiburon, CA

Re: 25mbps

Interesting discussion for BROADCAST.

However, I saw a press report that said all SBC/MS offerings would be PPV or a similar "request" basis--meaning the bandwidth economies of scale you get with broadcasting won't apply....

calvoiper
--
VoIP--the death knell of remaining voice monopolies!

FIBERISTHEWAY

@centurytel.net
You are correct, unlike cable with dsl you don't share bandwidth with your neighbors. Each dsl customer will have 25 MEG "pipe" for there use. Voip, internet, tv, or whatever you they wish to do with it.

FIBERISTHEWAY

@centurytel.net

Re: 25mbps

SBC Im sure will have a solid backbone set up for the traffic im sure. If there spending that kind of money im sure they've done there research.

MarkyD
Premium
join:2002-08-20
Oklahoma City, OK
clubs:
·Cox HSI
·AT&T FTTP
·AT&T DSL Service

Cable still has the upper hand!

Cable still has the upper hand here. SBC is going IPTV, and that's going to eat so much bandwidth it's not even funny. As for cable, the HFC network has TV and IP seperated. You can have TV on in 4 rooms and you won't notice a difference in your bandwidth. Not to mention, DOCSIS 2.0 will make a notable difference in the bandwidth that Cable modems can dish out.

Plus, no one has mentioned what kind of upload SBC is planning on offering. IIRC, upload is still extremely limited even on ADSL2.

DSLuser912

@mindspring.com

Re: Cable still has the upper hand!


"Our service will change the way people experience TV. Finally, customers will watch what they want, when they want - from a virtually unlimited and interactive content selection," said Edward E. Whitacre Jr., SBC Communications Inc. chairman and CEO. "We will deliver integrated communications and entertainment services to enhance the digital lifestyle of our customers."


Little Eddie is talking out it's butt again. Before it was 100% DSL availability, and now this.
Maybe just delivering basic connectivity would be more desirable. Countless users even in hi tech areas still have no RT's and are pitched defective lines as the only option.

calvoiper

join:2003-03-31
Belvedere Tiburon, CA

Re: Cable still has the upper hand!

I think we're still seeing the results of corporate leadership that fails to grasp things like the fundamental limits of bandwidth and capacity overflow.

After a few more of these "huge" offering deals crumble, maybe they'll hire a few guys from the cellular world where they understand what happens when you run out of room and your customers start to notice the degradation in service.

calvoiper
--
VoIP--the death knell of remaining voice monopolies!

juilinsandar
Texas Gooner
Premium
join:2000-07-17
San Benito, TX
·AT&T DSL Service

I know I'm not switching from Time Warner cable to SBC's tv service. I really like their DSL product, and i'll be happy to get that 25mbps but I only wanna use that for internet traffic not share it with video services.

Also, I prefer Verizons FTTH over SBC's half-a**ed model. If you're gonna go out of the way to get fiber to a node you might as well take it the rest of the way to the home. I know I would be willing to pay for FTTH service.
--
"I'm about 10 minutes from, if I lived here, I'd blow my brains out..." - Luke (Gilmore Girls)
ParanoiaInc

join:2002-08-28
Tucker, GA

Still cheaping their way through it.

Dropping fiber hubs into neighborhoods and then relying on next generation DSL to bond pairs for a 20-25Mbps pipe for IPTV is silly, IMO. I'd much rather see them plan for the future by following Verizon's Fios quest.

Say no to copper!

b_zen
Premium
join:2002-07-24
Saint Louis, MO
clubs:
·TTNet

Windows TV?

I guess SBC's looking to get as many lines in your houses at a fraction of real FTTH's cost. And that's good on the Financial side of it. What it can do can be both positive or negative... Shorten the "early adoption" frame, and lengthen the real FTTP-like roll-out.
On another note, once most SBC customers are ac-customized to yet another Microsoft platform, I am not convinced they'll want to change after that to another competitor with maybe a more open-source oriented mindset.
Especially when you converge the computers OS and content delivery like IPTV does. It eventually will in my opinion.
--

UWB over Wire is the future!
3Plink.com |Voice|Video|Data|

garagerock
Premium
join:2002-06-14
Louisville, KY

what's the need again?

wow, wonder how much the power grid will suffer as a result of all this. there's broadcast, satellite, cable...and now another offering for receiving television in the home. i'm just at a loss as to how this is better than either satellite or cable, and why it's worth billions in investments so that we can go "cool"...

when you build it, they MAY come...
radougherty

join:1999-07-23
Austin, TX
·RoadRunner Cable
·AT&T Southwest

HDTV users will NOT be happy

SBC and Microsoft will have to fend off critics who suggest the 20-25Mbps provided won't be enough to offer full HDTV service, voice service, and broadband as effectively as FTTH or cable carriers - something the companies say they've solved via compression techniques.

I can't wait until the folks that visit AVSForum start to respond to this. Right now many of them are up in arms about DirecTV compressing the HD channels to fit the NFL Sunday Ticket HD games into their existing bandwidth.

PhoenixDown
-- Ron Paul 2008 --
Premium
join:2003-06-08
Fresh Meadows, NY
clubs:

2 things

1. Whats the point of compressing a high deffinition signal? Yes, I understand that it makes it possible but if your lossing quality through the compression - it defeats the purpose of HDTV to begin with!

2. How can cable theoretically be offering multiple HDTV channels and 3+ meg internet? Wouldn't they run into the same capacity issues?
--
www.pulsetoday.com -- marketing forums!

Blasterbator
Sent By Grocery Clerks

join:2001-02-20
Jackson, MS
·Cox HSI


edit:
November 17th, @02:04PM

Re: 2 things

re: 1.

If you reduce the bit-rate, then you either reduce the quality (subjective of course) or you need a better encoding algorithm.

19.2 Mbps MPEG-2 is the spec, I have heard 12 Mbps MPEG-2 referred to as being subjectively "good enough" for the average consumer (excuse me while I chuckle).

re: 2.

Cable is broadband, current systems typically support 100+ "channels" of shared capacity where each 6 MHz channel can be used for either a single analog video channel, 8~12 digital cable channels, 2-4 HD channels or 30 Mbps of data. all over coaxial cable that was designed from inception to handle multiple frequencies on a single wire. This design is why 1st generation cable modems slowed to a crawl during peak usage, they were using shared bandwidth, not allocating enough frequencies to data or at least not managing the data traffic well (if at all).

Telco copper has traditionally been a single frequency switched to the home (i.e. pick up the phone and you have a dedicated connection to the CO). Nothing is shared, that is why when you dial-up at 56k or connect via DSL, you have a dedicated link to the CO, there is no sharing.

However, there is only so much "frequency" that you can push over a pair of copper wires, so you have to upgrade the link (e.g. upgrade DSL tech, IDSL->ADSL->HDSL, etc.), shorten the copper in the last mile (e.g. FTTC, FTTH) or add copper pairs (e.g. DSL link bonding ala ADSL2).

But what you can't do so easily is run multiple DSL lines, such as two 10 Mbps ADSL links over a single copper pair due to the inherit bandwidth limitations of those little copper wires.
--
"If PCs are hard, then Macs are flaccid" -bb
alchav

join:2002-05-17
Palm Desert, CA

This might work with the Average Person!

All you guys have some good points this time, but I can see where SBC is coming from. SBC, and before PacBell, has tried to go into the Video Market and failed. I was there and saw the mistakes, one of the biggest is that they take too long to roll it out. This time they have teamed up with a strong partner, and seem to have a workable plan. You say the video quality for HDTV is not as good as with cable, but better than regular TV. For the Average Person, this is good enough, and SBC can still use their copper. Hopefully, they have future plans for FTTH, but this can be a good start.

XBL2009
------

join:2001-01-03
Chicago, IL
·AT&T Midwest

What's the point ?

With 200 channels on satellite and digital cable I really doubt this is going to go far.

Cable tried to push phone service and it hasn't made much of a dent in the big telco's.

I want phone service from somebody who has done it for years and knows what they are doing, and I want TV from somebody who has done it for years and knows how to do it right.

Cable and telco's will be around for a while longer I figure until fiber is running to everyone's home.

Cable and telco's will probably both run fiber to the home and will compete agianst each other.
jstack

join:2001-12-09
Los Angeles, CA

Fiber in my area

SBC is deploying fiber everywhere in my city. It's a nice surprise.
Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

This could be Phase I

Personally I think what SBC is doing is just Phase 1 of rolling fiber to the home. This is just my personal projection as to what is going to happen.

Obviously at one time or another SBC is going to need FTTH to provide the services and speed customers are going to demand. However, they are saving BILLIONS of $$$ over what Verizons is spending and will begin recouping their cost and start making money off this much quicker.

In theory it will take Verizon longer to deploy a single house and cost them about 5x's more ($1500 compared to $300 per home). In doing so they are probably going to be offering "about the same" service as SBC and will probably be charging more for it to help recover that cost. SBC on the other hand will recoup that cost quicker and can then begin deploying fiber the rest of the way to the home at a lower cost (prices will fall) and will again recoup that cost quicker. OR they could deploy it the rest of the way as user's request services. No reason to run fiber to my 70+ year old neighbor's house if he is only going to use POTS.

In other words, I believe they are getting the fiber closer and will then deploy as needed at a greatly reduced cost. That is what I am hoping for at least.

aztecnology
The Autumn wind is a Raider

join:2003-02-12
Murrieta, CA

Re: This could be Phase I

said by Skippy25 See Profile:

Personally I think what SBC is doing is just Phase 1 of rolling fiber to the home. This is just my personal projection as to what is going to happen.

Obviously at one time or another SBC is going to need FTTH to provide the services and speed customers are going to demand. However, they are saving BILLIONS of $$$ over what Verizons is spending and will begin recouping their cost and start making money off this much quicker.

In theory it will take Verizon longer to deploy a single house and cost them about 5x's more ($1500 compared to $300 per home). In doing so they are probably going to be offering "about the same" service as SBC and will probably be charging more for it to help recover that cost. SBC on the other hand will recoup that cost quicker and can then begin deploying fiber the rest of the way to the home at a lower cost (prices will fall) and will again recoup that cost quicker. OR they could deploy it the rest of the way as user's request services. No reason to run fiber to my 70+ year old neighbor's house if he is only going to use POTS.

In other words, I believe they are getting the fiber closer and will then deploy as needed at a greatly reduced cost. That is what I am hoping for at least.
I would pretty much agree with your assessment of how SBC is attacking fiber. But you have to think about exactly what costs are they going to be saving on. The price of labor will be more expensive in the future as will the cost of construction once they finally decide to go all the way with FTTP.

And in actuality for the most part, the bells don't compete against each other, because they operate in different service areas. They will be competing head on with cable, especially when they roll out video.

I still think that Verizon has the upper hand. Verizon is going to be live with FIOS in about a million homes come January, SBC isn't even starting until 1Q '05.

$40 - phone
$40 - internet
$40+ - video
$40+ - cellular
Verizon will be making their money back a lot sooner I bet.
--
.:|:.Tell a man there are 300 billion stars in the universe and he'll believe you. Tell him a bench has wet paint on it and he'll have to touch it to be sure. .:|:.

ATTek
Got Sand?

join:2000-12-13
Pinon Hills, CA

This is what I think they are doing, with a few exceptions...On new housing tracts, the fiber is going all the way to the MPOE. I have actually seen a sample of the network interface to be used in this case. Existing areas will be hybrid, at least for now. It may not be so much of a money thing as it is a time and logistics thing. If they can get 18 million homes upgraded in the time it takes VZ to upgrade 2 million isn't that better on some level? And what about the older homes, like 20 years or more old? Is VZ deploying FIOS anywhere like that? They only places they're building around here is the newer areas. I see many problems in running fiber to some of the older houses in my area. Like the ones where our current cable is behind the homes and fed with a drop from the pole: What will be involved in replacing/repairing this fiber drop when the idiot tree trimmer saws it in half? Put it under ground you say Now who pays to dig up gardens and pool decks to do this? So we'll switch the feed to the front then. Now we have sidewalk and street trenching for every single house since we have no conduits to the street and there may very well be easement problems now. So many questions on how to upgrade older areas.....makes my tiny brain hurt:)
--
What does THIS button do.....

A Noni Mouse

@snet.n

S Blind C

Never notices that Microsoft steals it's strategic allies blind, then the allies die, huh?

Goodbye, SBC!
cyborg2029

join:2004-06-15
San Francisco, CA

SBC & Microsoft - flush once, then repeat

SBC, yes. They do a good job with both my phone and Yahoo internet bundle.

Microsoft, no. I will lay down $1,000,000 now that the idea and final product will be so full of bugs, patches, security faults, crashes, legal battles, and cost over runs that it will take the industry 5 years to reach the consumer.

The article suggests trials in mid 2005 with consumer delivery by late 2005.

I'll give two to one odds we see nothing before 2010 that can be had by middle income consumers.
Forums » SBC & Microsoft TV


Friday, 09-Jan 06:34:29 Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Hosting by www.nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo | feedback | contact
over 9 years online! © 1999-2009 dslreports.com.