In pushing for Time Warner merger, Comcast cites Apple's development of new set-top box

13»

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 50
    andysolandysol Posts: 2,506member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post





    I'm pretty sure Apple ][ is the guy Arya killed at the end. image

    Nah- he's an unsullied.  He has no feelings. :smokey:

  • Reply 42 of 50
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 12,985member
    andysol wrote: »
    Nah- he's an unsullied.  He has no feelings. :smokey:

    Really? I swore I saw him hanging from the Kingslayer's neck last season.
  • Reply 43 of 50
    phone-ui-guyphone-ui-guy Posts: 1,018member
    dasanman69 wrote: »
    I want to be able to get a tv package from some internet based service of my choosing. If Apple offered a service I liked I would go with them and time warner would just get my data business like they do now. I don't have tv service. We stream stuff when we want it, but I would prefer to stream a service instead of dozens of sites and Apple TV. They best example is voice service. I use a cable modem and have vonage. No need to get voice service from the last mile losers. I get good rates, compelling services, and even took my service to Europe for a couple years. This is what I want for tv content. If it were not for these content agreements, the last mile guys would be in trouble as innovators would eat their lunch. Even the disorganized mess I have is in a sense competing as it is good enough to keep me off of cable/sat/fiber providers content.

    That's called biting the hand that feeds you. The last mile guys getting in trouble would mean you're in trouble as well, because you're service would eventually decline.

    Nope. They certainly want you to believe that, but again look at voice. The Telcos have not gone belly up loosing voice to the likes of vonage and cable companies. Hell, most expanded into wireless and other services and are doing just fine.
  • Reply 44 of 50
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 12,985member
    Nope. They certainly want you to believe that, but again look at voice. The Telcos have not gone belly up loosing voice to the likes of vonage and cable companies. Hell, most expanded into wireless and other services and are doing just fine.

    Voice is one thing, but taking TV away from the cable companies is another. That’s their bread and butter, and they don't have other sources of revenue like wireless.
  • Reply 45 of 50
    phone-ui-guyphone-ui-guy Posts: 1,018member
    dasanman69 wrote: »
    Nope. They certainly want you to believe that, but again look at voice. The Telcos have not gone belly up loosing voice to the likes of vonage and cable companies. Hell, most expanded into wireless and other services and are doing just fine.

    Voice is one thing, but taking TV away from the cable companies is another. That’s their bread and butter, and they don't have other sources of revenue like wireless.

    Not sure how taking the primary offering away from telcos is different than taking tv always from cable. They both end up as last mile pipes. Also given the number of satellite dishes I see, it is already happening in a significant volume already. I fine taking away their bread and butter and making them earn what they get.
  • Reply 46 of 50
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 12,985member
    Not sure how taking the primary offering away from telcos is different than taking tv always from cable. They both end up as last mile pipes. Also given the number of satellite dishes I see, it is already happening in a significant volume already. I fine taking away their bread and butter and making them earn what they get.

    Because for telcos the landline voice side has not been a big money earner for years. If it wasn't for wireless both VZ and AT&T would go bankrupt. Cable companies don't have that luxury.
  • Reply 47 of 50
    dasanman69 wrote: »
    Not sure how taking the primary offering away from telcos is different than taking tv always from cable. They both end up as last mile pipes. Also given the number of satellite dishes I see, it is already happening in a significant volume already. I fine taking away their bread and butter and making them earn what they get.

    Because for telcos the landline voice side has not been a big money earner for years. If it wasn't for wireless both VZ and AT&T would go bankrupt. Cable companies don't have that luxury.

    I will go on record that I am ok with them adapting or going bankrupt. It is not my goal in life to fund a cable monopoly.
  • Reply 48 of 50
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 12,985member
    I will go on record that I am ok with them adapting or going bankrupt. It is not my goal in life to fund a cable monopoly.

    That's ridiculous. It's like saying "I only need my fingers so cut off my arm". Regardless if you like it or not if you want internet and everything that comes with it then you have to pay your way.
  • Reply 49 of 50
    dasanman69 wrote: »
    I will go on record that I am ok with them adapting or going bankrupt. It is not my goal in life to fund a cable monopoly.

    That's ridiculous. It's like saying "I only need my fingers so cut off my arm". Regardless if you like it or not if you want internet and everything that comes with it then you have to pay your way.

    I'm guessing you work for cable. I have other options available for high speed Internet. If Time Warner went away, someone else would also pickup the infrastructure. In Europe, there are places transitioning to this model already.
  • Reply 50 of 50
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 12,985member
    I'm guessing you work for cable. I have other options available for high speed Internet. If Time Warner went away, someone else would also pickup the infrastructure. In Europe, there are places transitioning to this model already.

    This isn't a store front in which someone can just come in and set up whatever business they want. The next company (which last I checked aren't very many) will continue doing what the previous company did.
Sign In or Register to comment.