EPTOn May 10 2011 07:28 travis wrote:
I've never understood exactly how cable based ISPs operate as far as who owns the actual cables in comparison to who is managing the traffic. I tried to figure it out but couldn't.
Can any business that wants to lay new cable?
If so, then this isn't a problem right? A new business should just come in and lay higher bandwidth cable and take customers?
I've never understood exactly how cable based ISPs operate as far as who owns the actual cables in comparison to who is managing the traffic. I tried to figure it out but couldn't.
Can any business that wants to lay new cable?
If so, then this isn't a problem right? A new business should just come in and lay higher bandwidth cable and take customers?
just for reference of the UK model. BT (british telecom) used to be owned by the government, so it was incharge of not only building infrastructure but also being the telephone company. with both phone services and internet it is now forced to allow other companies to buy up usage of the infrastructure, but BT still has to maintain it, but it still receives some money from the government for this.
about 5 years ago virgin entered the scene with a bucketload of money, dug up the streets and laid their own cabling. so now they can offer internet/phone without going through BT. a bigger initial investment for more profit long term
since we have geniune choice in the UK, noone could realistically complain that youtube is too hard to deal with, because people would switch provider.
i imagine france only has 1 company in charge of infrastructure and that is why they are able to roadblock improvements?
