Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Canadian ISP Co-Op Shows Upside of Line Sharing

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the grass-roots-muni-wifi dept.

Golden Gael writes "The FCC got rid of mandatory line sharing in the US a few years ago, but it's alive and kicking in Canada, and an interesting article at Ars Technica looks at what can happen when there's vibrant broadband competition. 'Wireless Nomad does things a little differently. The company is subscriber-owned, volunteer-run, and open-source friendly. It offers a neutral Internet connection with no bandwidth caps or throttling, and it makes a point of creating wireless access points at the end of each DSL connection that can be used, for free, by the public. Bell Canada this is not.' The ISP has some ambitious plans for the future, including getting involved in WiMAX."

8 of 85 comments (clear)

  1. Re:free lunch by Arivia · · Score: 2, Informative

    There is a difference between arguments and aphorisms.

    --
    The role of the writer is not to say what we can all say, but what we are unable to say. -Anais Nin
  2. Re:Frustrated with options in the US by timeOday · · Score: 2, Informative
    Again, some services listed there look interesting, but there is no way to tell what the service will end up costing or how fast they will be. The DSL services are all "up to XXX kbps," meaning I could end up with who knows what depending on the quality and length of wiring to my home. And the prices quoted don't include "taxes and governmental surcharges, if any." Well, are there any? Oh, and "ISP service required." So what are my options and the prices for that? You can't find out without putting in detailed personal information including SSN!

    It's all a pack of lies! So I bend over for the only other option, cable.

  3. Re:Getting results by Denis+Troller · · Score: 2, Informative

    Yep, apparently it does work.

    We've had about the same thing in France. State owned telco monopoly. Opened up to competition a few year ago.
    Today ? An ISP named free pioneered the "triple play" offers with a 30 EUR DSL offer (up to 25 Mb/s if you actually happen to dwell in the DSLAM), and all others are following.
    The same ISP is now beginning to roll out fiber in some cities for the same exact price.
    It's not all perfect (hot lines have been less than stellar, to stay the least), but it's pretty nice.

    That IS one thing I miss now I'm here in the US.

    --
    That's not a nick, that's my NAME.
  4. Re:Frustrated with options in the US by zzatz · · Score: 2, Informative

    White Fence shows the options that they were paid to show. For my address, they did not show the cable company that covers half the county, or any third party DSL provider. Including the one I am using right now. There are at least a half dozen other DSL providers, several wireless companies, and as previously mentioned, the cable company that has covered this area for more than a decade. None are shown. Only $GIANT_TELCO and satellite TV are shown. I'm sure that the fact that only competitors to cable are shown is purely coincidence ;-)

    Broadbandreports.com does a much better job listing Internet access providers.

  5. Re:Bell/Rogers doing WiMax by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Lies.

    They worked together on a joint venture to bring a 'WiMAX'-like wireless technology to their cell towers, but it is not WiMAX, not by far, not even in the same family of radio technologies. Sorry.

    Go to rogers.com, or bell, lookup wireless internet offering, read... ;)

  6. I'm afraid not. by The+Master+Control+P · · Score: 2, Informative

    In the US (and I believe in most countries), the physical layer of telephone and cable tv is by definition not a free market because the government grants the phone and cable companies monopolies. It does this because fiber, coax, and phone cabling are natural monopolies: It's in the general interest not to have every entrepeneur trying to duplicate everyone else's run of wire/fiber, and the government enforces that interest.

    The free market only applies when the barriers to entry are assumed zero, or at least low; The barrier for becoming a telco that owns it's own physical transport layer is so high that it would be disastrous if more than one or two players tried.

    1. Re:I'm afraid not. by tjstork · · Score: 2, Informative

      n the US (and I believe in most countries), the physical layer of telephone and cable tv is by definition not a free market because the government grants the phone and cable companies monopolies. It does this because fiber, coax, and phone cabling are natural monopolies:

      That's actually not really true. Fiber, coax and phone cabling are all communications services, and they do compete against each other. The local governments provide a spot where these cables can go, but its up to the carrier to actually make use of each spot. For example, if you see a bunch of guys underground in the city of Philadelphia, they will be either driving a Comcast truck, a Verizon truck, or some other truck (usually a non-union third party contractor). I think cities actually charge for this in some way, or they have a tax on the service.

      --
      This is my sig.
  7. Re:You are more than welcome to run your own cable by poopdeville · · Score: 2, Informative

    Comcast was founded in 1963. It doubled in size after an acquisition in 1986, and then again in 2001, when they bought AT&T's cable service division.

    Verizon was founded in 1983 as the Bell Atlantic Corporation. An AT&T spinoff.

    Yes, there are lots of competitive newcomers in the market.

    --
    After all, I am strangely colored.