On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 10:35:36 -0500, Michael Halcrow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 28, 2004 at 10:27:44AM -0600, Andrew Jorgensen wrote: > > But you also claimed that the fiber would be obsolete, which can > > never be true. > > No, I didn't say anything about fiber technology. I instead claimed > that whatever Provo implements will be obsolete and overpriced.
I fail to see the distinction since what Provo is implementing is, in fact, fiber. Honestly if Joe Provoan could get even 10Mb (reliable) at a comparable price he'd scramble to get it. It's also important to note that we're not talking about just Internet here. The network they roll out will carry high-definition TV, on-demand video, phone, and Internet services without breaking a sweat and it won't get spotty in a bad storm. Overpriced is, of course, another story entirely, but you've indicated in past posts that you believe in "market forces" so why don't we just let the market work that out? Nobody's making a law that says there won't be competing services (even if they aren't on the same network), so Provo will have to compete just like everyone else. Being deployed by the government doesn't mean anyone has to use it. Now before I spur another rant from you I'd like to say that after some research I understand that iProvo is similar to, but entirely separate from, Utopia. iProvo appears to be a service, not an infrastructure, though it's likely that it will be used as an infrastructure anyway. This is wrong I think. Utopia good, iProvo not-so-good. So sad. ____________________ BYU Unix Users Group http://uug.byu.edu/ ___________________________________________________________________ List Info: http://uug.byu.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uug-list
