Yes, it is possible to have two internet services in one house.
Yes, it is possible to have two internet services in one house.
These sources illustrate various methods for allocating funding to ISPs. Payment conditions can be established at different levels—national, state, county, or even local. In certain areas, neighborhoods or homeowners' associations have also contributed funds for infrastructure projects. The level1linux community may discuss this topic in greater detail. I hadn't encountered the merger clause before, but it appears to be a point they won't accept without strong reasons.
The merger went wrong. ATT needed the US government's approval to grow its fiber network to 12.5 million customers so they could acquire Directv. https://arstechnica.com/information-tech...-customers This was the key condition for their fiber rollout. Now they're moving toward 5G.
AT&t had responsibilities before concerning broadband access. Sources highlight the need for clarity on infrastructure development. Misinformation about connectivity solutions should be avoided. 5G isn't a universal fix for low-speed internet issues, especially in rural regions. Its limited range makes it less viable for widespread use, and it doesn’t significantly improve costs compared to fiber. Fiber remains more reliable during disasters like hurricanes or earthquakes. The comparison between 5G and fiber often overlooks these practical constraints. Some states face challenges with 5G deployment, but this doesn't diminish the value of fiber in critical areas.
We’re discussing State and Local accords along with HOA matters. ATT ignores these issues completely. Governments at the state and local levels have minimal influence over ATT’s actions, especially when it comes to HOAs. Personally, I believe HOAs should not exist and they lack any real power over large corporations. Verizon has made numerous commitments to expand FIOS coverage, but now they’re pressuring regions to accept these demands. The only authority capable of making real changes is the federal government. As mentioned in the article, the Feds informed ATT they needed 12.5 million more Fiber customers for merger approval, and ATT fulfilled that requirement. I clarified earlier that a 5G network wasn’t their original promise—I meant their current focus. Now major cellular providers are aligning with this objective. Understanding this process isn’t straightforward. Let me simplify: Wireless solutions are more cost-effective and easier to implement for them. This is why 5G matters to them. If real-world performance meets or exceeds expectations, they can compete with traditional broadband services. These telecom companies prioritize their investors over customers. Wireless offers higher returns with relatively low investment compared to laying fiber everywhere. This explains why Sprint is struggling—lacking both infrastructure and customer satisfaction. Their network quality is poor, and their service is disappointing. T Mobile is acquiring them for the spectrum, which is why Sprint is in a tough spot. I used to be a Sprint user; their network was terrible, and so was their support. Now I’m with team Magenta.