3 ms·

I was under the impression wireless bandwidth is always one generation behind cable bandwidth. Are they doing this because they are too lazy to upgrade their ne

I was under the impression wireless bandwidth is always one generation behind cable bandwidth. Are they doing this because they are too lazy to upgrade their network and maintain their competitive edge over wireless? I can't imagine a state of the art cable internet connection could ever be seriously threatened by a wireless connection that offers what, 6Mbps under the best conditions? With the rise of internet video it seems like physical line internet providers are here to stay.

vetinari 16y ago
With HSDPA/HSUPA you can get 14.4 Mbps down and 5.76 Mbps up (under best conditions, of course). Yes, it is slower than state of art wired connection, but is the state of art wired connection available? Do you have 1.25 Gbps FTTH or 300 Mbps DSL available? Wired providers became complacent, but wireless didn't. They caught up with wired and offer extra convenience, usable everywhere, not just at home. Wired providers should be afraid, very afraid and do something to change the situation, fast.
jsz0 16y ago
It's just a value-add thing. I work for one of the smaller MSOs that hasn't yet deployed wifi large scale but all the vendor material I get on focuses heavily on the value-add angle. I'm not super convinced it works but let's say you're considering a switch to telco video or satellite you might think twice about it because you use Cablevision wifi at the coffee shop. Telcos pioneered most of the bundled wireless deployments so there's some pressure for cable to offer it just to say they have it. It's cheap to deploy and maintain too so why not? For the bigger MSOs it's a tiny expense.