5 Comments

Summary:

Houston Chronicle: For SBC, offering naked DSL goes against the grain of its triple play “bundling” strategy, which is to sell packages of voice, video and data services at discounted prices. But competitive pressures from Qwest, the first to announce naked DSL service, and Verizon, which […]

Houston Chronicle: For SBC, offering naked DSL goes against the grain of its triple play “bundling” strategy, which is to sell packages of voice, video and data services at discounted prices. But competitive pressures from Qwest, the first to announce naked DSL service, and Verizon, which announced recently it would eventually provide it, are forcing SBC to grudgingly test the waters. The company says not many of its customers are interested in naked DSL, but will still conduct trials. I see subtle pressure from FCC at work here.

  1. Awesome, the only thing that could be better would be barebones naked DSL. By barebones I mean something like;

    http://www.flex.com/adsl/index2.html

  2. I came out of DSL for the same reason. Actually they are lying, there will be people like me who will move back to DSL from cable if they provide naked DSL.

    I am using just roadrunner now for my broadband connection without any cable.

  3. sorry.. I mean without any TV channels coming in the cable.

  4. I switched to cable from DSL for this reason (and the fact that my DSL speed varied from good to barely better than dial-up). Charter, my cable provider, has “naked” service… and it’s cheaper and faster than SBCs.

  5. i think it just might be too premature to expect this to happen on a large scale. i think both DSL and cable are a bit inexact at this point, given the number of times we get outages on both networks.

Comments have been disabled for this post