> This is certainly not authoritative but I've heard
> that, despite the ruling that ordered the telcos to
> allow their competitors (CLECs ?) access to their
> COs, many DSL providers routinely found that access
> denied or impeded such that they were obliged to
> waste time and money on hiring l
> The cable-modem service however is similar to
> AT&T broadband at 1.5 mbs down/368 kbs up. The big difference though is that
> the cable-modem people said "We install it and after that it's yours. We
> don't care what you do inside your place of business (number of computers
> etc..).
That will
On Thu, 2003-01-23 at 09:37, Jason Stephenson wrote:
> Yeah, I agree with Ben. The market is correcting itself. I'm paying $99
> a month for SDSL, and I don't even get that high a speed: 144kbps up and
> down. However, I don't have the onerous restrictions that Verizon and
> other providers slap
Derek Martin said:
>Bleah... As technology improves and becomes more readily available,
>the prices should be going DOWN, not up. As of my last bill, my
>broadband connection now costs almost double what it did a year ago
>($60.99 vs. $35/mo). That's absurd. Inflation is currently about 0%,
>a
>> ... There's no "correction" here ...
>
> Then please explain to me why almost every single
> DSL company has gone out of business.
This is certainly not authoritative but I've heard
that, despite the ruling that ordered the telcos to
allow their competitors (CLECs ?) access to their
COs, man
On Wed, 22 Jan 2003, [EMAIL PROTECTED] stated in their Email:
bscott> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
bscott> To: Greater NH Linux User Group <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
bscott> Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 20:51:14 -0500 (EST)
bscott> Subject: Re: Email hosting (was: ATTBI/Comcast rant)
bscott>
On Wed, 22 Jan 2003, Hewitt Tech stated in their Email:
hewitt> From: Hewitt Tech <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
hewitt> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
hewitt> Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 19:26:40 -0500
hewitt> Subject: Re: Email hosting (was: ATTBI/Comcast rant)
hewitt>
hewitt> Ah yes,
- Original Message -
From: "Jason Stephenson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2003 9:37 AM
Subject: Re: Email hosting (was: ATTBI/Comcast rant)
Yeah, I agree with Ben. The market is correcting itself. I'm paying $99
a month for SDSL
Yeah, I agree with Ben. The market is correcting itself. I'm paying $99
a month for SDSL, and I don't even get that high a speed: 144kbps up and
down. However, I don't have the onerous restrictions that Verizon and
other providers slap on their customers and I have a static IP, great
for hostin
In a message dated: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 08:58:11 EST
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> Hopefully, this will be my last message in this thread.
>
> :-)
I hope so too :)
--
Seeya,
Paul
--
Key fingerprint = 1660 FECC 5D21 D286 F853 E808 BB07 9239 53F1 28EE
It may look like I'm just sitting here
On Thu, 23 Jan 2003, at 8:38am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I think we would all appreciate *some* form of competition in the
> high-speed ISP market.
Just for the record, let me reiterate that (1) I'm no fan of any monopoly,
(2) I hate Verizon (nee Bell Atlantic nee NYNEX nee New England Telepho
On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 07:00:47PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Jan 2003, at 5:18pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > I'm not willing to pay increasingly large monthly fees for progressively
> > poor service.
>
> It continues to amaze me how short people's memories are. It was not l
> Look, Verizon may be a bunch of incompetent morons (they
> are), but the fact that it takes them a month to provision a
> line doesn't mean everyone goes out of business. It's take
> years for DSL to reach general availability; an additional
> month isn't going to make a difference.
That
On Wed, 22 Jan 2003, at 9:36pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Then please explain to me why almost every single DSL company has gone
>> out of business.
>
> Because they're still need Verizon to set up the line for them..
Look, Verizon may be a bunch of incompetent morons (they are), but the
fact
> > Providing two-way packet-switched unicast data services is a
> > *completely
> > different* scenario.
>
> It isn't. Or, it is... but the same head end does both, over
> the same coax. So it doesn't matter.
Exactly! They needed to redo the cable plant to offer just one of the
three servi
> > I never said it was cheap ...
> [ then, later on in the same paragraph ]
> > ... Cable Internet should be dirt cheap for them to provide ...
>
> Which is it?
Cheap to get started from SCRATCH.. AT&T already has a HUGE setup
already in place reselling T's and having peers so they didn't ev
> On Wed, 22 Jan 2003, at 9:04pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > ... There's no "correction" here ...
>
> Then please explain to me why almost every single DSL
> company has gone out of business.
Because they're still need Verizon to set up the line for them.. They
were very smart to do the foll
On Wed, 22 Jan 2003, at 9:03pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Because I don't have the billions of dollars in liquid assets that AT&T
> has in order to build the infrastructure necessary.
Billions of dollars? Why, that sounds like money! Gee...
> I never said it was cheap ...
[ then, later on
On Wed, 22 Jan 2003, at 9:04pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> ... There's no "correction" here ...
Then please explain to me why almost every single DSL company has gone out
of business.
--
Ben Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do |
|
> An associate of mine had their electric meter, an old
> mechanical model, seize up. The power company saw their
> usage as zero for several months, resulting in some very low
> power bills. Of course, the power company eventually
> realized what was going on, replaced the meter, and now t
On Wed, 22 Jan 2003, at 8:42pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> As of my last bill, my broadband connection now costs almost double what
> it did a year ago ($60.99 vs. $35/mo). That's absurd. There's no
> incentive to keep them low. It's that simple.
If it's so simple, why don't you go start
On Wed, 22 Jan 2003, at 7:36pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Actually Ben, at first glance I thought you were going to launch into a
> "When I was a boy we had to walk two miles to school up hill both ways!"
> ;^)
I actually had some commentary to that effect in there at the end, for
comic relief,
> Ah yes, but why, after a pile of telecommunications companies
> went bankrupt laying thousands of miles of buried
> fibre-optics cables are we still talking about dial-up
> connections? What *does* it cost to deliver high speed? For
> that matter, I think copper/fibre is passé. It should be
> It continues to amaze me how short people's memories are.
> It was not long ago at all that an Internet feed of the speed
> you get from a cable ISP would cost you thousands of dollars
> per month. Not that I am in any way defending the
> AT&T/Comcast monopoly; I just don't understand ho
>
Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 7:00 PM
Subject: Re: Email hosting (was: ATTBI/Comcast rant)
On Wed, 22 Jan 2003, at 5:18pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I'm not willing to pay increasingly large monthly fees for progressively
> poor service.
It continues to amaze me how short peo
ntly where some Canadians were
relating the cost of DSL and cable-modem in their areas. They were paying
about 1/3 of what we pay.
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Greater NH Linux User Group" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003
On Wed, 22 Jan 2003, at 5:18pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I'm not willing to pay increasingly large monthly fees for progressively
> poor service.
It continues to amaze me how short people's memories are. It was not long
ago at all that an Internet feed of the speed you get from a cable ISP wo
Actually, I do both. I have registered a couple of domain names and one is
hosted. I also decided that the bigfoot service for $9.95/quarter was
reasonable and I've already asked our online friends to use my bigfoot
address. I was just curious about who was using what and for how much. As
much as I
28 matches
Mail list logo
