The MoPR Blog

AT&T and Verizon recently announced their worst quarter ever for DSL subscriber additions, with a combined total loss of 87,000 DSL customers.

So where did they all go?  They went to the cable operators and their high-speed Internet. Former DSL customers think DSL is simply too slow.

DSL is what telecom companies use to offer high-speed Internet access, and though it’s considerably faster than a regular phone connection (remember the good ol’ days of listening to AOL dialup?), it is generally outpaced by cable operator’s DSL killer, the cable modem.  Or so says Comcast’s COO Stephen Burke.

In a recent article appearing in Cable Digital News, Burke said that the results of this past quarter “continue to suggest, as some have said, that DSL may be the new dialup. This quarter, approximately two thirds of our net adds came from DSL customers.”

While many thought the slump was due to the struggling economy, Comcast and Cablevision proved them wrong and showed that cable operators are indeed the cause of AT&T and Verizon’s poor quarter due to their superior Internet service. Comcast and Cablevision have announced remarkable customer numbers (Comcast added over 278,000 broadband Internet customers), thanks in large part to the higher speeds they offer their customers.

Burke added that “I think we have a platform advantage in that we are offering much higher data speeds – and we plan to continue that advantage.”

But some say DSL isn’t entirely dead just yet.  Doug Williams, an analyst with Jupiter Research, sees things a little differently stating:

“Cable has historically offered faster speeds -both uploading and downloading speeds — but I think DSL is going to be around for a long, long time…Telcos are rolling out DSL in unserved communities, and that supports the idea that DSL is not going to be obsolete. It’s going to be one of the few technologies available for some people.”

DSL is the perfect option for low-power users relying on the service for simple tasks like email or basic surfing but not wanting blazingly fast downloads. But, if time is money, then the more than 87,000 DSL customers jumping ship is further proof of this statement.  While DSL may be less expensive than cable modem service, people are still choosing to pay a little bit more for faster broadband, especially if they are downloading movies, involved in serious online gaming or taking advantage of the other bandwidth-intensive applications that cable can easily support.

So what technology is coming next to knock the cable guys off their podium?  We’ll keep an eye out for what’s coming next.

Photo courtesy of PhotoCats: http://flickr.com/photos/orangecat.

Most of us have been watching the Time Warner “consumption-based” billing Internet trial closely taking place in Beaumont, Texas.  The ruling on this trial will have long-reaching effects on deciding the next steps for Time Warner to move to a “price locked” Internet usage system.

Currently the monthly limit in Beaumont – which applies to new customers – is 5 gigabytes on the low end, 20 gigabytes for the mid-level speed, and up to 40 gigabytes for the 15 Mbit/s modem service. Time Warner is charging $1 per gigabyte if a customer exceeds those prescribed levels.

The kicker is the $1 per gig over the allotted amount.  Think back to when cell phone minutes were meager and running over your plan meant skipping that month’s electric bill.  Now take that and apply it to something that has never been restricted before, and you’ve got the controversial consumption-based billing.

From the initial look of it, Time Warner’s consumption cap is much lower than its competitors. Cable Digital News wrote an article stating that the initial Time Warner levels are:

Dwarfed when compared to what some other operators are considering or about to implement. Comcast Corp. is believed to be mulling a threshold in the neighborhood of 250 gigabytes. Meanwhile, BendBroadband of Oregon is elevating its cap to 100 gigabytes per month.

But I’m still concerned and think the idea of a metered Internet system is doomed.  Here is why:

1. People will be watching the clock.  No one wants to pay overage fees, and guess what that means:  less people browsing the Net at night.  Internet usage WILL GO DOWN.
2. “Metered prices may chill innovation in cutting-edge applications because consumers will have a disincentive to use them,” explains Ben Scott of Free Press. “Viewed in the context of our long-term national goals for a world-class broadband infrastructure, telling consumers they must choose between blocking and metered pricing is a worrying development.”
3. The gap will once again increase between those who can afford the Internet and those who cannot.  Especially in light of the market slump, people will be forced to opt for the lowest price option, giving them poor bandwidth.
4. It opens up doors for the operators to abuse their already longstanding monopoly.  Essentially, we will be forced to comply with their rules.  And in the end, we will be paying and unbelievable amount while they make record profits.

As for the trial in the Lone Star State, all eyes will be on the ruling. I’m afraid most Web surfers aren’t going to be very happy with it.