3 ms·
No. That is what ISPs are without networks like Level3. The internet, on a B2B level, would work fine without these ISPs. The problem is these ISPs + natural m
by opendais 12y ago
No. That is what ISPs are without networks like Level3.
The internet, on a B2B level, would work fine without these ISPs. The problem is these ISPs + natural monopolies on spectrum + governments + barriers to entry create national networks are abusing that power in the B2C space.
Please don't claim "The Internet" is purely a B2C entity.
EDIT:
I'm amused by the downvote. Given I know this is true [e.g. My day job B2B work purely transits non-B2C ISPs like Sprint or Verizon]. ;)
- rayiner 12y agoBuilding the consumer facing networks is a lot harder and more expensive than building the core network. Level 3's capex is a fraction of that of companies like VZN or ATT.
- opendais 12y ago1) That is what you said originally. You can change the argument if you like, that's cool. 2) Smaller companies are able to provider better service in rural areas or towns than VZN/ATT. It is the effects of capex on their stock price, not the fundamental economics. http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/07/a-city-with-two-gigabit-internet-isps-and-neither-one-is-google-fiber/ http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/07/a-city... Ya, they may not run it to single residential homes. That doesn't change the fact they can do it to something like an apartment complex or buisness park cheaper than VZN or ATT just fine. And it isn't just them, there are dozens of these companies that are profitable and do this. You are fundamentally wrong.