🚀 go-pugleaf

--------------637A6761D3B4B79AF565F47D
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit



Andrys D Basten wrote:

> This will be real competition for cablemodem here in California.  The
> cheaper $39/mo. package (which doesn't use PacBell as ISP, but $10
> more if it does) offers up to 1.5Mbps downloads (384 kbps guaranteed)
> and 128kbps uploads.  The $39/mo. price is for those who commit to a
> year or more.
>
>   It's ready in more areas than I had thought.  But still isn't
> available in about 2/3rds of the places planned.  Here's the
> announcement.  Go to:
>
>  http://www.sbc.com/PB/News/Article.html?query_type=article&query=19990112-04
>
> to use the links involved, which take you to Pac Bell's special pages
> (where you can check availability for your prefix), and to view the
> tables.
>

     I think you are right. I once heard an industry insider say that DSL, ISDN,
and Cable Modem Technology would battle to bring high speed low cost Internet
access to the masses. The insider said Cable would probably win out because it is
almost everywhere and can handle a lot of bandwidth. I just read about @Home and
AT&T building a huge high speed network nationwide to support the expansion of
the @Home service. They have the announcement at http://www.home.net. People say
that @Home isn't as fast as @Home boasts and that there are service problems. I
bet it gets a lot better now that DSL is going to be more wide spread and cheap.
DSL is dedicated and PAC Bell lets you run severs on it. @Home just has to get
their act together and stop pussyfooting around if they want to compete.

    John


--------------637A6761D3B4B79AF565F47D
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
&nbsp;
<p>Andrys D Basten wrote:
<blockquote TYPE=CITE>This will be real competition for cablemodem here
in California.&nbsp; The
<br>cheaper $39/mo. package (which doesn't use PacBell as ISP, but $10
<br>more if it does) offers up to 1.5Mbps downloads (384 kbps guaranteed)
<br>and 128kbps uploads.&nbsp; The $39/mo. price is for those who commit
to a
<br>year or more.
<p>&nbsp; It's ready in more areas than I had thought.&nbsp; But still
isn't
<br>available in about 2/3rds of the places planned.&nbsp; Here's the
<br>announcement.&nbsp; Go to:
<p>&nbsp;<a href="http://www.sbc.com/PB/News/Article.html?query_type=article&query=19990112-04">http://www.sbc.com/PB/News/Article.html?query_type=article&amp;query=19990112-04</a>
<p>to use the links involved, which take you to Pac Bell's special pages
<br>(where you can check availability for your prefix), and to view the
<br>tables.
<br>&nbsp;</blockquote>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I think you are right. I once heard an industry
insider say that DSL, ISDN, and Cable Modem Technology would battle to
bring high speed low cost Internet access to the masses. The insider said
Cable would probably win out because it is almost everywhere and can handle
a lot of bandwidth. I just read about @Home and AT&amp;T building a huge
high speed network nationwide to support the expansion of the @Home service.
They have the announcement at <A HREF="http://www.home.net">http://www.home.net</A>. People say that @Home
isn't as fast as @Home boasts and that there are service problems. I bet
it gets a lot better now that DSL is going to be more wide spread and cheap.
DSL is dedicated and PAC Bell lets you run severs on it. @Home just has
to get their act together and stop pussyfooting around if they want to
compete.
<p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; John
<br>&nbsp;</html>

--------------637A6761D3B4B79AF565F47D--