I agree. For a single user, the streaming services are fine, but not so good in multi-tv households.
Dish releases numbers for the quarter tommorow morning
- Thread starter bluegras
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 62
- Views 5K
For OTT streaming to totally overtake satellite, one of two things will have to happen. They'll have to come out with compression that can deal with multiple streams on slow DSL in rural areas, or somebody somewhere will have to get off their ass and get real broadband available to rural areas.
Sent from my iPad using the SatelliteGuys app!
True. I do not live in a rural area. There are upsides and downsides to that, but I have access to decent broadband.
Some rural areas have one advantage. they may not have the speed the cities have (We have 60-65 here), but there are also not the number of subs to slow it down either. Like here, Clatsop County with 37.5K in the whole county. Charter offers 60 and 100.
This is true in my experience as well. I don't see the typical slowdowns around 8:00, 8:30 PM like I used to see in the City. Same with my cell service. Fewer people to bog down the tower so my speeds remain high most of the time.
I don't forsee more fiber or copper build-out's in rural areas; I think we'll see an increase in broadband via wireless. It's cheaper to deploy and potentially faster.
If I could get decent broadband, cell service, and a job, I'd much rather live in the country.
I still work in the suburbs but I got tired of the traffic snarls, backups, rude drivers, smog, etc. that came from living in the City. So I drive 45 minutes back and forth every day. All mostly rural. It's not for everyone, but it has it's advantages. If you need 1gbps internet, it's not the place to live by any means!
Around here Wisper offers the fastest wireless internet @20Mbps, haven't seen anywhere else offering anything faster and most often, slower. They also don't have data caps. Cost for the 20 with them is a little higher than I'm now paying for 100Mbps from Mediacom. Reviews of their service are very mixed and very dependent on where it is offered. IOW, some places report very positive experiences, others not so good.
Personally, I also wouldn't use broadband via wireless at this moment; DSL is available to me where I live, but if it weren't, I would look into it before I'd consider Dishnet (aka Fraudnet). I'm basing my hypothesis about wireless broadband build-out on the information in the news lately about Google Fiber halting it's roll-out to focus on wireless. If I could get some kind of unlimited broadband service through Verizon, I'd jump on it in a heartbeat. I get upwards of 90mbps on my cell phone, inside my house, from my local Verizon tower.
Hi guys i was watching cord cutter news last night on youtube and google fiber is talking about getting rid of fiber and going wireless. I wonder if verizon or frontier do the same thing too.we have frontier for internet here in our town and they still use the copper lines compaired to mediacom who uses fiber.The guy on cord cutter news said that all google fiber would have to work on putting two towers togehter.Verizon most people in our area have them for cell service and they are taking about 5G in 11 cities.
Could you imagine Google buying Dish and The spectrum?
They're halting further fiber roll-out but will (supposedly) continue to support the service in existing markets
Anyone know what frontier will do will their internet services are they switching to fiber or going all wireless?Is fiber alot slower than copper or alot faster?
Depends on where you are. Frontier does not have a consistent strategy across all markets. Where I live, they are slowly rolling out fiber, and obviously the Fios markets they bought will have fiber, but, in general, they seem more interested in G.fast and other copper technologies. I am unaware of any wireless plans from Frontier. Fiber is capable of faster speeds in general.
I tend to agree and it's something I thought long and hard about. However I stuck with Flex because I'm liking the $56 price point and didn't want the sticker shock after two years of a $85 bill. You may save in the short term, not so much long term.
Not as long as that is included in the purchase of Dish (by Verizon?
). At least that is the way Charlie probably sees it,. HA, ha.Well, any potential buyers will see the numbers, and even then they will probably still buy because the specifics of SlingTV vs. Dish numbers aren't relevant: the buyers want an in place large MVPD with relatively lower costs for retransmission rights, and the considerable critical mass that 13+ million subs offer. In other words, Verizon really has no choice.
