From owner-freebsd-questions  Fri Feb  9 15:31:17 1996
Return-Path: owner-questions
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id PAA25621
          for questions-outgoing; Fri, 9 Feb 1996 15:31:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ns3.noc.netcom.net (ns3.noc.netcom.net [204.31.1.3])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id PAA25614
          for <questions@FreeBSD.ORG>; Fri, 9 Feb 1996 15:31:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from tera.com (tera.tera.com [206.215.142.10]) by ns3.noc.netcom.net (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id PAA01979; Fri, 9 Feb 1996 15:30:42 -0800
Received: from athena.tera.com by tera.com (4.1/SMI-4.0-206)
	id AA24292; Fri, 9 Feb 96 15:30:18 PST
From: kline@tera.com (Gary Kline)
Message-Id: <9602092330.AA24292@tera.com>
Subject: Re: ISDN devices supported?
To: caj@tower.stc.housing.washington.edu (Craig Johnston)
Date: Fri, 9 Feb 1996 15:30:31 -0800 (PST)
Cc: questions@FreeBSD.ORG
In-Reply-To: <199602092034.MAA04298@tower.stc.housing.washington.edu> from "Craig Johnston" at Feb 9, 96 12:34:26 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23]
Content-Type: text
Sender: owner-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk

According to Craig Johnston:
> 
> > 
> > 	[[ ISDN flames ... ]]

> 
> Possible.  Not necessary.  Some areas in the US have fixed-rate ISDN.

	Maybe Austin, TX.  (?) 
> 
> We recently got this in Seattle, if my source is correct.  Every so often
> I find myself almost thinking government meddling with the "free market"
> isn't always a bad thing. ;)  (I think it got rammed down their throats.)
> 
> Of course I think at this point in time ISDN is too little too late.
> The bandwidth is kinda pathetic by today's standards.  Oh well, that's
> what comes from things taking 10 years to get to market and the constant
> failure of people to do things 10x as big/fast/whatever as you think you'll
> need.  Is ISDN gonna make the next upgrade in bandwidth easier than this
> one?  I think an increase of less than an order of magnitude over the
> bandwidth available via POTS is pretty pathetic.  128kbits/sec?  Feh.  With
> the cost of 28.8 modems and regular phone service, it's practically in
> "why bother" territory.  Is there something I am missing about ISDN?


	I think you're right on the money.  Fifteen or so years`
	ago I would've given an arm and a leg for today's ISDN 
	bandwidth.  Now, I can get close to 30Kbps by modem over
	a cheap POTS line.  Good enough for most things.  

> 
> It would seem the cable companies should be jumping all over the opportunity
> to provide real bandwidth... they could cream phone companies here, no?
> 

	I'm waiting for TCI (cable firm) to bundle local phone with 
	cable and a multi-megabit net link.  Throat-cutting has its
	price, though.  Hundreds or thousands of layoffs... .

	gary kline