Intel attempts to break Cable Model?

[Sasqui]

Originally Posted by Frick

ISPs do TV too there? Can't you switch ISP's if that is the case? I can probably choose from at least 5 ISP's with at least 100/25 here. Or is this another example of how inferior the US is?

EDIT: They do TV here too, but you usually have tons of choices.

Where I am, and I'm not alone, it's a monopoly. Broadband cable is the only game in town, by one company - here it's Comcast. The only other choice is DSL (which sucks) and dial-up. FIOS is supposed to be here sometime, but doesn't seem to be moving our way in any hurry. My guess is that Comcast has something to do with NOT having any competition.

And yes, the ISP provides TV, phone, and a bunch of other things. The only other choice for TV is OTA (over the air), Dish Network or Dish DirectTV (which also sucks balls).

And yes, it's embarrassing!

[brandonwh64]

Same here, Were I am located we have one provider for fast internet and thats charter cable. They provide TV, Internet, and Phone with their "BUNDLE" thing. You can get just internet from them but its more expensive without the "BUNDLE".

[Sasqui]

Originally Posted by brandonwh64

You can get just internet from them but its more expensive without the "BUNDLE".

It comes with a puppy too! (inside joke)

[TheMailMan78]

Originally Posted by Sasqui

It comes with a puppy too! (inside joke)

EVERYONE BUNDLES. WE ALL BUNDLE. I hate that commercial.

[brandonwh64]

Originally Posted by TheMailMan78

EVERYONE BUNDLES. WE ALL BUNDLE. I hate that commercial.

The woman's face when she says puppy is priceless!

[ALMOSTunseen]

Well what some ISP's in Aus are doing, don't know if this is happening in the USA, but they are doing IPTV bundles with your internet, and it doesn't count for your monthly cap. Hopefully my ISP will do this when they release it, it will be so much better then anything else.

[TheMailMan78]

Originally Posted by brandonwh64

The woman's face when she says puppy is priceless!

I just wanna molest that blonde.

[cadaveca]

Originally Posted by TheMailMan78

This is all fine and dandy if you have high speed Internet......sadly a lot of the US doesn't. Also most cable companies maintain the lines. Not Intel. Good luck Intel.

720p needs only 3 Mb/s.


I can run 6 TVs@ 720p off of my 25Mb/s line, no problem, and still be able to surf the web and watch Youtube @ 1080p.


I've had similar service for near 5 years now, all major TV shows are available via Video On Demand, commercials included for prime-time catch-up, but shows older than 2 weeks are commercial-free. The second something airs live, I can watch, pause, rewind, fast-forward...the service is great.


This is hardly new, really, just the fact that Intel is going to provide similar service is.


BTW, the platform used locally is Microsoft's MediaRoom. This means that it works well with all Microsoft-OS devices, I can stream to my PC or laptop, and I could use an XBOX360 as both a cable box and PVR.


All that said, since I don't have to sit my ass on the couch at specific times to watch anything, I watch TV even less than I did before having this service. As long as Intel provides the ability to stream content to mobile devices, they will do well, but if they do not, I do not see this being successful.

[TheMailMan78]

Originally Posted by cadaveca

720p needs only 3 Mb/s.


I can run 6 TVs@ 720p off of my 25Mb/s line, no problem, and still be able to surf the web and watch Youtube @ 1080p.


I've had similar service for near 5 years now, all major TV shows are available via Video On Demand, commercials included for prime-time catch-up, but shows older than 2 weeks are commercial-free.


This is hardly new, really, just the fact that Intel is going to provide similar service is.


BTW, the platform used locally is Microsoft's MediaRoom. This means that it works well wit hall Microsoft devices, I can stream to my PC or laptop, and a could use an XBO360 as both a cable box and PVR.

In the US cable companies lease the lines. Intel will have to lease them also and I doubt the iron grip cable companies have that will change anytime soon. Also 3 Mb/s is way higher then some people can get. My father just this past month was able to upgrade to 1.5 Mb over 56k due to his local. However people "down the road" from him cannot even get 56k. Hes 15 miles from the closest paved road and "down the road" is almost 30 miles. MILLIONS of people live in remote parts of the US. Cell phones don't even work where he lives.

Intel has a very uphill battle in front of it I think.

[cadaveca]

Originally Posted by TheMailMan78

In the US cable companies lease the lines. Intel will have to lease them also and I doubt the iron grip cable companies have that will change anytime soon. Also 3 Mb/s is way higher then some people can get. My father just this past month was able to upgrade to 1.5 Mb over 56k due to his local. However people "down the road" from him cannot even get 56k. Hes 15 miles from the closest paved road and "down the road" is almost 30 miles. MILLIONS of people live in remote parts of the US.

Intel has a very uphill battle in front of it I think.

I used to work for Comcast. I know the American cable system better than you might guess. There is NOTHING preventing this from being a success when it comes to line quality. They can even use the cell network(4G/LTE), and none of that is of any concern.

4G/LTE was designed with video content streaming in mind, FYI. The number of 4G users that have faster internet on their phone than at home with actual physical wires is astounding.

[Frick]

Originally Posted by Sasqui

Where I am, and I'm not alone, it's a monopoly. Broadband cable is the only game in town, by one company - here it's Comcast. The only other choice is DSL (which sucks) and dial-up. FIOS is supposed to be here sometime, but doesn't seem to be moving our way in any hurry. My guess is that Comcast has something to do with NOT having any competition.

And yes, the ISP provides TV, phone, and a bunch of other things. The only other choice for TV is OTA (over the air), Dish Network or Dish DirectTV (which also sucks balls).

Originally Posted by brandonwh64

Same here, Were I am located we have one provider for fast internet and thats charter cable. They provide TV, Internet, and Phone with their "BUNDLE" thing. You can get just internet from them but its more expensive without the "BUNDLE".

I Googled your locations and at least Manchester looks pretty big so I'd imagine you'd have some choices. DSL here is up to 30mbps, and it often works quite well. Some ISP's have 60mbit/s DSL (actual speed 30-60mbps), don't know what kind of coverage that has.

Originally Posted by cadaveca

720p needs only 3 Mb/s.

Which still is more than a lot of people have. My parents have 250kb/s DSL.

[Frick]

Originally Posted by cadaveca

4G/LTE was designed with video content streaming in mind, FYI. The number of 4G users that have faster internet on their phone than at home with actual physical wires is astounding.

IF they are in a 4G area that is.. Even 3G coverege is dodgy (read: nonexistent) outside the cities. At least here, I imagine it's the same in Canada and the US.

[cadaveca]

Originally Posted by Frick

IF they are in a 4G area that is.. Even 3G coverege is dodgy (read: nonexistent) outside the cities. At least here, I imagine it's the same in Canada and the US.

Naturally. But Intel has more cash than any cable provider, IMHO, so constructing towers to provide service should be of no consequence.

It's only money that that really limits this, and I understand why most people think lightly of this being possible, but to me, that is EXACTLY why Intel is exploring this in the first place. They can pony up the cash now to set up equipment, and then run the service for many years to pay off that cost. Cable providers just don't have the financials possible for that.

4G is capable, at the top, of 1 Gb/s. Most people use 15 Mb/s service in Canada. There is TONNES of room for growth on the 4G network.

[brandonwh64]

Originally Posted by Frick

I Googled your locations and at least Manchester looks pretty big so I'd imagine you'd have some choices. DSL here is up to 30mbps, and it often works quite well. Some ISP's have 60mbit/s DSL (actual speed 30-60mbps), don't know what kind of coverage that has.



Which still is more than a lot of people have. My parents have 250kb/s DSL.

True there is some DSL providers but again they offer TV, Internet, and Phone bundles (This would be ATT).

[Sasqui]

Originally Posted by TheMailMan78

In the US cable companies lease the lines.

As far as I know, here in Manchester, NH, Comcast OWNS the cables that are strung on the poles.

Originally Posted by Frick

I Googled your locations and at least Manchester looks pretty big so I'd imagine you'd have some choices. DSL here is up to 30mbps, and it often works quite well. Some ISP's have 60mbit/s DSL (actual speed 30-60mbps), don't know what kind of coverage that has.

DSL here is notoriously sucky, though they way claim up to 60mb/s, it's usually like 0.5. There really are no other choices, and satellite is a joke with useage caps that make dial-up look attractive.

[brandonwh64]

Originally Posted by Sasqui

ADSL here is notoriously sucky, though they way claim up to 60mb/s, it's usually like 0.5. There really are no other choices, and satellite is a joke with useage caps that make dial-up look attractive.

Same here. My wifes mom has 10MB DSL (I don't know why cause she doesn't even know how to turn a PC on much less use the internet but AGAIN it was cheaper to BUNDLE) and its so SLOW getting around 200-600KB sec download speeds max and ping times 100+MS

[Sasqui]

Originally Posted by brandonwh64

Same here. My wifes mom has 10MB DSL (I don't know why cause she doesn't even know how to turn a PC on much less use the internet but AGAIN it was cheaper to BUNDLE) and its so SLOW getting around 200-600KB sec download speeds max and ping times 100+MS

LOL... I think they measure the speeds at the building right next to the DSL hub.

I personally know two people who've tried it right here in town and not only was it slow, it was also terribly unreliable.

[TheMailMan78]

Originally Posted by Sasqui

As far as I know, here in Manchester, NH, Comcast OWNS the cables that are strung on the poles.

Depends on the area really. Even if Comcast owns the lines they are leased through the power company unless they are dedicated polls which most areas do not have.

[Jizzler]

Of course it will leave some people out. If we had to wait on everyone for everything, we'd still be using {insert old-timey technology here}.

I think Intel's plan is to just shift the costs. You'll pay $30 less for TV but $30 more for Internet. The "more" part has already happened here in Orlando as 40Mb is $30 over the 20Mb price. Hard to justify for many when they pay so much for TV, but not so much if TV service was ala carte.

- People will believe they have a choice and be happy.

- Industry will continue to bring in the revenue they have been getting.

- Intel will benefit, but not from their TV service. It's obviously just phase 1 of a much larger scheme which relies an improved network infrastructure.

[Sasqui]

Originally Posted by TheMailMan78

Depends on the area really. Even if Comcast owns the lines they are leased through the power company unless they are dedicated polls which most areas do not have.

It probably depends on the state and municipality. Most places, the util poles are owned by the power company and communication/data lines are owned by the respective companies, but they pay a lease fee to the power company to use the poles.

Did we get off topic?

[TheMailMan78]

Originally Posted by Jizzler

Of course it will leave some people out. If we had to wait on everyone for everything, we'd still be using {insert old-timey technology here}.

I think Intel's plan is to just shift the costs. You'll pay $30 less for TV but $30 more for Internet. The "more" part has already happened here in Orlando as 40Mb is $30 over the 20Mb price. Hard to justify for many when they pay so much for TV, but not so much if TV service was ala carte.

- People will believe they have a choice and be happy.

- Industry will continue to bring in the revenue they have been getting.

- Intel will benefit, but not from their TV service. It's obviously just phase 1 of a much larger scheme which relies an improved network infrastructure.

You are in Orlando? Get Brigthouse man. I pay $119 for Cable w/ two DVR, 60 MB/s Internet (no cap) and Phone with unlimited long distance.

Originally Posted by Sasqui

It probably depends on the state and municipality. Most places, the util poles are owned by the power company and communication/data lines are owned by the respective companies, but they pay a lease fee to the power company to use the poles.

Did we get off topic?

Not really. Those who control the lease control the service. I doubt Intel will be able to shake those grips.

[Jizzler]

Originally Posted by TheMailMan78

You are in Orlando? Get Brigthouse man. I pay $119 for Cable w/ two DVR, 60 MB/s Internet (no cap) and Phone with unlimited long distance.

I do have Brighthouse, just Internet though, for $65/month (business line). Was just speculating on how Intel is going to make this attractive to customers while keeping the industry from freaking out.