So, it seems you're okay with the way things are, I get it, ya' apologist. ;-)
Who's talking about another company undercutting anyone? I understand the investment that went into laying those cables (you do understand who actually did the physical digging, right?), and I'm sure when we find Mr. Burns we'll have figured out a way to reimburse him appropriately. But until that time, why keep coming up with reasons to justify the past decisions, unless you agree that we should never revisit them or change our minds?
*****
Stop coming up with reasons to stay the same, unless you're happy with censorship. If you're happy with the way things are, and would suffer no harm in changing things, why stand in the way, unless *you* are the problem...
I'm a realist not an apologist, big difference. We can sit here and wax poetic on how things should be but I look at the realities of things. I'm not a baker, I don't sugarcoat things. I don't have the answers but I'll tell that the telcos and cable companies aren't going away anytime soon. I'm one of the lucky ones, I have a choice between FiOS, and Cablevision whereas many don't have a choice. Verizon has stopped expanding FiOS to new areas. They should either be forced to build it out in their entire footprint or allow someone else to do it.
You know if Google, Apple and Microsoft formed an new cooperative effort to provide free WiFi on every city street with a unified log in so that it could be managed they could convince cities to adopt that protocol and then all Internet would be free and ubiquitous in the cities. In rural areas they would have to pay. For the rural population it would be no different than what they have now but the city dwellers would enjoy hassle free connections to the Internet no matter where they are. In the car, at home or at work, all free, paid by the Internet companies who will sell you ads and devices to make it worth it for them.
They took the expense to run those cables and spend X amount of dollars a year to maintain it. The pipes may be dumb but they're damn expensive. I don't know about you but I'd be dammed to allow another company that's going to undercut me onto the network I've spent billions to build.
Not your network - alternative networks. Especially in this day and age of fiber based systems do we permit only one company to supply a service like net access? In most locals the cable companies are a huge rip off due in part to the monopolies they maintain in tandem with the local governments. I have more choices when it comes to garbage collection than I do network access, so where is the rational there?
The only other real alternative to competition is to set up public utilities but those come with their own issues.
Not your network - alternative networks. Especially in this day and age of fiber based systems do we permit only one company to supply a service like net access? In most locals the cable companies are a huge rip off due in part to the monopolies they maintain in tandem with the local governments. I have more choices when it comes to garbage collection than I do network access, so where is the rational there?
The only other real alternative to competition is to set up public utilities but those come with their own issues.
One thread it's less government and in another it's more government.
I think what scares traditional, cable providers the most is LTE evolving to bandwidth levels coupled with multicasting to virtually level the laying field. Verizon, Sprint, AT&T (U.S. examples on a .com forum) are the future.
Why would LTE scare them if in the next few years the majority of people will have capped data plans? LTE is only wireless to the cell site then it goes over telco wires to the backbone which are run by AT&T, Verizon, Sprint and others. How can dinosaurs be the future?
I watched an episode of deadwood last night. Never seen it before. HBO go is incredible- and now that its in a great interactive set-top box format- it's even better.
My AppleTV is no more than an adjunct to my cable/TiVo combination that is the workhorse of my home entertainment. Since I already get HBO and much more directly, HBO2Go is only a minor convenience. We already have programmed what we want to see on TiVo so it's always there when we want it. Also, the ATV remote is a joke. It is way too easy to hit the select button in the middle when trying to hit the ring around it. Hard to believe Steve ever used that thing on a regular basis. He'd have thrown it against the wall.
Two things:
1- you don't need to use HBO Go. But if you want to watch the sopranos, the wire, or a plethora of phenomenal documentaries- HBO Go is substantially better than on demand with whatever provider you have.
2- You actually use the remote? Why? You can't control volume on it.
Why people don't use universal remotes is beyond me...
I'm a realist not an apologist, big difference. We can sit here and wax poetic on how things should be but I look at the realities of things. I'm not a baker, I don't sugarcoat things. I don't have the answers but I'll tell that the telcos and cable companies aren't going away anytime soon. I'm one of the lucky ones, I have a choice between FiOS, and Cablevision whereas many don't have a choice. Verizon has stopped expanding FiOS to new areas. They should either be forced to build it out in their entire footprint or allow someone else to do it.
If you don't have the answers, then why are you commenting or better yet, why are you answering the questions? What I see is a series of historical explanations for the way things are.
The topics in this thread are real problems, and I'm not attacking you here please don't see it that way, but there are two issues: 1) you don't agree there is a problem, or 2) you agree there is a problem. Which are you?
If someone agrees there is a problem yet has no solutions, I say to them, "shut up." That's not to you, and I'd be sorry to be so blunt (I'm making a point here), but as my best managers in my career told me (which they learned from the experts), "stop bringing me problems, bring me solutions."
If you identify a problem yet have no solution, find one. There's nothing worse than someone who either complains about, without a solution, or ignores a problem entirely - that's not how to make them go away.
Or you agree there is a problem and you don't believe there are any solutions better than those that are currently in existence. This is the apologist, and the cloak that apologists love to wear is that of 'the realist'. There is no realist, that is merely a euphemism for an apologist.
The past is the past, and there are reasons things happened in the past. I'm not interested in that at all, but what I am interested in is fixing today's problems. If in my (and our, who are interested in) fixing them you don't suffer in any way personally, why would you stand in our way?
Ask the oil companies. Seems to work for them. They even get government subsidies to help curb the adoption of electric vehicles. Now big oil wants to get into natural gas as that is the trend for electric power plats. Same deal with the cable TV companies. They got into the Internet at the first sign that it wasn't going to be another fad like CB radio and that is what brought us to the situation we have now where they control how we access the Internet.
Exactly! One connection to the house, just one, public owned and let's figure out a way to ensure it's the fastest possible connection and it covers everyone everywhere regardless. This isn't technologically impossible, and what I find weird is the thought that it isn't impossible technologically speaking (that should be the barrier to making it happen, not that we can't "afford" it) - the fact we can do this blows my mind, it's that we can't figure out a way to make it happen even though we have everything we need, we have the resources (human and natural), the knowledge...
The answer could come in the form or wireless, over the power lines, or something we don't even know about yet. Unfortunately most cities and states don't have the freedom to do what Chattanooga was able to do and offer the fastest internet in the country while also keeping the prices very affordable to the end user. They also are able to restore power to homes in outages in seconds instead of hours or days thanks to their smart grid. I would love for my city to copy this model.
Why would LTE scare them if in the next few years the majority of people will have capped data plans? LTE is only wireless to the cell site then it goes over telco wires to the backbone which are run by AT&T, Verizon, Sprint and others. How can dinosaurs be the future?
Because the obstacle to providing more competition in existing markets is trenching cable to each home.
Because LTE will be 500Mbps per band.
Because nothing says the home media gateway won't be an LTE endpoint.
Because multicast IPv6 over a wireless packet network is a great way to prevent millions of independant and buffered streams of the same content.
Because LTE is an efficient and less expensive means to provide service to rural areas.
People clamoring for wifi everywhere- what if LTE is the new Wifi?
I don't see the coax providers being nimble enough to move to that space.
Just my thoughts.
Edit: And capped LTE data plans are for mobile devices with any/any internet access. Capacity planning is much different for essential fixed service in a home.
If you don't have the answers, then why are you commenting or better yet, why are you answering the questions? What I see is a series of historical explanations for the way things are.
The topics in this thread are real problems, and I'm not attacking you here please don't see it that way, but there are two issues: 1) you don't agree there is a problem, or 2) you agree there is a problem. Which are you?
If someone agrees there is a problem yet has no solutions, I say to them, "shut up." That's not to you, and I'd be sorry to be so blunt (I'm making a point here), but as my best managers in my career told me (which they learned from the experts), "stop bringing me problems, bring me solutions."
If you identify a problem yet have no solution, find one. There's nothing worse than someone who either complains about, without a solution, or ignores a problem entirely - that's not how to make them go away.
Or you agree there is a problem and you don't believe there are any solutions better than those that are currently in existence. This is the apologist, and the cloak that apologists love to wear is that of 'the realist'. There is no realist, that is merely a euphemism for an apologist.
The past is the past, and there are reasons things happened in the past. I'm not interested in that at all, but what I am interested in is fixing today's problems. If in my (and our, who are interested in) fixing them you don't suffer in any way personally, why would you stand in our way?
I agree that there's a problem but picking up pitchforks and torches and yelling "death to the cable companies" isn't the solution. Unfortunately today's problems won't get fixed today, tomorrow nor anytime soon, there's a lot of players making a lot of money for things to change plus it took the telcos and cable companies decades to get where they are and they're not going to change overnight but the change has begun.
Comments
I'm a realist not an apologist, big difference. We can sit here and wax poetic on how things should be but I look at the realities of things. I'm not a baker, I don't sugarcoat things. I don't have the answers but I'll tell that the telcos and cable companies aren't going away anytime soon. I'm one of the lucky ones, I have a choice between FiOS, and Cablevision whereas many don't have a choice. Verizon has stopped expanding FiOS to new areas. They should either be forced to build it out in their entire footprint or allow someone else to do it.
You know if Google, Apple and Microsoft formed an new cooperative effort to provide free WiFi on every city street with a unified log in so that it could be managed they could convince cities to adopt that protocol and then all Internet would be free and ubiquitous in the cities. In rural areas they would have to pay. For the rural population it would be no different than what they have now but the city dwellers would enjoy hassle free connections to the Internet no matter where they are. In the car, at home or at work, all free, paid by the Internet companies who will sell you ads and devices to make it worth it for them.
Not your network - alternative networks. Especially in this day and age of fiber based systems do we permit only one company to supply a service like net access? In most locals the cable companies are a huge rip off due in part to the monopolies they maintain in tandem with the local governments. I have more choices when it comes to garbage collection than I do network access, so where is the rational there?
The only other real alternative to competition is to set up public utilities but those come with their own issues.
One thread it's less government and in another it's more government.
Why would LTE scare them if in the next few years the majority of people will have capped data plans? LTE is only wireless to the cell site then it goes over telco wires to the backbone which are run by AT&T, Verizon, Sprint and others. How can dinosaurs be the future?
1- you don't need to use HBO Go. But if you want to watch the sopranos, the wire, or a plethora of phenomenal documentaries- HBO Go is substantially better than on demand with whatever provider you have.
2- You actually use the remote? Why? You can't control volume on it.
Why people don't use universal remotes is beyond me...
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
I'm a realist not an apologist, big difference. We can sit here and wax poetic on how things should be but I look at the realities of things. I'm not a baker, I don't sugarcoat things. I don't have the answers but I'll tell that the telcos and cable companies aren't going away anytime soon. I'm one of the lucky ones, I have a choice between FiOS, and Cablevision whereas many don't have a choice. Verizon has stopped expanding FiOS to new areas. They should either be forced to build it out in their entire footprint or allow someone else to do it.
If you don't have the answers, then why are you commenting or better yet, why are you answering the questions? What I see is a series of historical explanations for the way things are.
The topics in this thread are real problems, and I'm not attacking you here please don't see it that way, but there are two issues: 1) you don't agree there is a problem, or 2) you agree there is a problem. Which are you?
If someone agrees there is a problem yet has no solutions, I say to them, "shut up." That's not to you, and I'd be sorry to be so blunt (I'm making a point here), but as my best managers in my career told me (which they learned from the experts), "stop bringing me problems, bring me solutions."
If you identify a problem yet have no solution, find one. There's nothing worse than someone who either complains about, without a solution, or ignores a problem entirely - that's not how to make them go away.
Or you agree there is a problem and you don't believe there are any solutions better than those that are currently in existence. This is the apologist, and the cloak that apologists love to wear is that of 'the realist'. There is no realist, that is merely a euphemism for an apologist.
The past is the past, and there are reasons things happened in the past. I'm not interested in that at all, but what I am interested in is fixing today's problems. If in my (and our, who are interested in) fixing them you don't suffer in any way personally, why would you stand in our way?
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
How can dinosaurs be the future?
Ask the oil companies. Seems to work for them. They even get government subsidies to help curb the adoption of electric vehicles. Now big oil wants to get into natural gas as that is the trend for electric power plats. Same deal with the cable TV companies. They got into the Internet at the first sign that it wasn't going to be another fad like CB radio and that is what brought us to the situation we have now where they control how we access the Internet.
One reason- Hollywood hasn't supported it yet.
The answer could come in the form or wireless, over the power lines, or something we don't even know about yet. Unfortunately most cities and states don't have the freedom to do what Chattanooga was able to do and offer the fastest internet in the country while also keeping the prices very affordable to the end user. They also are able to restore power to homes in outages in seconds instead of hours or days thanks to their smart grid. I would love for my city to copy this model.
http://chattanoogagig.com
Because the obstacle to providing more competition in existing markets is trenching cable to each home.
Because LTE will be 500Mbps per band.
Because nothing says the home media gateway won't be an LTE endpoint.
Because multicast IPv6 over a wireless packet network is a great way to prevent millions of independant and buffered streams of the same content.
Because LTE is an efficient and less expensive means to provide service to rural areas.
People clamoring for wifi everywhere- what if LTE is the new Wifi?
I don't see the coax providers being nimble enough to move to that space.
Just my thoughts.
Edit: And capped LTE data plans are for mobile devices with any/any internet access. Capacity planning is much different for essential fixed service in a home.
I agree that there's a problem but picking up pitchforks and torches and yelling "death to the cable companies" isn't the solution. Unfortunately today's problems won't get fixed today, tomorrow nor anytime soon, there's a lot of players making a lot of money for things to change plus it took the telcos and cable companies decades to get where they are and they're not going to change overnight but the change has begun.
You beat Trollest Shill to it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
So you want to go back to this?
What do you mean 'go back to this'? Last time I was on the east coast, that is exactly what it looked like!
Lol I couldn't find one of the really old pics with about 5 times the amount of wires on it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleSauce007
Keep cutting the STBs, the cable companies we will get the message sooner or later.
What message would that be? To allow customers to get and app and cut the cord?