Slashdot Mirror
FCC May Push Bells to Unbundle DSL
Carl Bialik writes "The FCC is nearing approval of two big phone deals -- Verizon-MCI and SBC-AT&T -- according to people familiar with the situation cited by the Wall Street Journal. But regulators are considering requiring asset sales and other moves, including the offering of unbundled DSL, 'without requiring consumers -- mostly home users -- to subscribe to phone service. Verizon already allows some customers to do that, but SBC doesn't. ... Patrick Mahoney, an analyst at Yankee Group, said that traditional phone lines are cash cows, so allowing customers to buy Internet access without traditional phone service would be costly to telecom providers.'"
Oh crap, you're right-- they are a .net.
The way they do business is they use SBC or someone else in your area to go from your house to the central office (usually within a couple tens of thousands of feet). There, it plugs into their rack and goes into their network. Converted a former employer (small business) from SBC DSL to a Speakeasy package, and the speeds shot up like crazy since SBC oversells their network and maintains it like crap (at least in the Orange County CA area). They're more expensive as a result than SBC, but their network is top notch. They bill themselves as having been designed for cross country gamers.
They also go no more than three or four hops from backbone (so they claim).
I just wasn't willing to pay the $90 a month they wanted here...
Nobody will, so they'll lower the rate to be competitive with cable ISPs.
Hail Eris, full of mischief...
E pluribus sanguinem
Yea... but you can get a cheapy line from broadvoice.com for $5.95 per month... (Total with Fees & Taxes - $7.67)
Broadvoice supplies VOIP service, which you must use over a broadband connection, which you could get over your DSL, for which you have to pay for a bundled voice ... never mind.
... wanders off mumbling something about RTFA.