  winsyrstrifeRiver City Bounce
Premium Member
join:2002-04-30
Brooklyn, NY |
Careful what you wish forSpeaking a language your customers don't understand may be part of the reason your business has been so successful.
Careful Maggie. Educating your customers may be the last thing you want... | |
|
 |  jmn1207
Premium Member
join:2000-07-19
Sterling, VA
3 recommendations |
jmn1207
Premium Member
2014-Jul-30 4:43 pm
Re: Careful what you wish forThey wouldn't educate the consumer, they want to indoctrinate the consumer. | |
|
| | | |
Re: Careful what you wish forShe says, "Google is pitching something that's beyond the capacity of many devices."
There are many devices that can't do over 30Mbps yet many ISPs offer much more. And many hardwired can do near a Gbit, basically any new computer. She apparently doesn't understand there can be many users in a household that can bottleneck a connection - likely won't happen with a Gbit. Who is the one confused.
Google wants to influence ISPs to keep ahead of bandwidth demand, no caps and reasonable rates. They have already influenced the $70 Gbit baseline. Many ISPs are now bumping speeds w/out bumping prices. Can't prove Google influenced that but if they 'think' they did, may be worth it to them to keep up the 'hype'. | |
|
| | | | |
Re: Careful what you wish forWhat Frontier CEO Maggie Wilderotter said sounds awfully similar to what a regional president for SBC said 10 years ago about a proposed municipal fiber-optic broadband system: From: Comcast Used This 'Spooky' Propaganda to Kill Off a Local Internet CompetitorBy Jason Koebler, MotherBoard - July 28, 2014 » motherboard.vice.com/rea ··· mpetitorquote:
Meanwhile, Kirk Brannock, midwest networking president for SBC at the time, told city council members in the area that "fiber is an unproven technology."
“What are you going to do with 20 Mbps? It’s like having an Indy race car and you don’t have the racetrack to drive it on. We are going to be offering 3 Mbps. Most users won’t use that,” he said.
Translate that to today: "What are you going to do with 1 Gbps? It’s like having an Indy race car and you don’t have the racetrack to drive it on. We are going to be offering 100 Mbps. Most users won’t use that." In fact, from » CenturyLink: Trust Us, You Don't Need Google Fiber : quote:
Meanwhile, according to CenturyLink, Google Fiber is irrelevant and CenturyLink is not worried at all about them:quote:
"It's like having a fancy sports car," Schmitt says. "It might go 200 miles per hour, but what good does that do if the speed limit is 60?"
| |
|
| | dra6o0n
join:2011-08-15
Mississauga, ON |
to jmn1207
When I went to a staff meeting for Tim Horton's they said to not order your customers, but you can influence them.
These lobbiest does the opposite. Apparently thinks people are naturally stupid.
If people are stupid, there wouldn't be any crimes, and businesses wouldn't be exploiting others. Because stupidity simplifies the issue at hand to the lowest level. You'd have farmers selling to storekeepers to the customers at the same price.
If people were stupid, we'd be in a fantasy RPG where nothing bad ever happens because none of us are smart enough to take advantage of each other. | |
|
| | | | |
catchingup
Anon
2014-Jul-31 2:25 am
Re: Careful what you wish forsaid by dra6o0n:When I went to a staff meeting for Tim Horton's they said to not order your customers, but you can influence them.
These lobbiest does the opposite. Apparently thinks people are naturally stupid.
If people are stupid, there wouldn't be any crimes, and businesses wouldn't be exploiting others. Because stupidity simplifies the issue at hand to the lowest level. You'd have farmers selling to storekeepers to the customers at the same price.
If people were stupid, we'd be in a fantasy RPG where nothing bad ever happens because none of us are smart enough to take advantage of each other. This is so illogical and crazy it is sad. | |
|
| | | |
to jmn1207
No u guys don't understand it's horribly unfair for google to come in and offer a superior product. Besides who wants internet that is more then fast enough when u can have slow over priced internet. Besides like frontier implies most customers are to dumb to use 1 gig they might blow themselves up or something. | |
|
| |
So its hype?But your going to lower your prices to combat the hype? | |
|
| ITGeeks
join:2014-04-20
Cleveland, OH |
Re: So its hype?Why should they? They know the chance of GF moving in right away is slim to nothing. It will take GF years to move in at the speed they are moving. | |
|
| | | |
Re: So its hype?"Wilderotter suggests that Frontier will combat Google Fiber via lower prices". Thats not me saying they will lower prices that's the CEO. I was simply stating that its comical that she calls it hype and then says they will lower prices to combat it.
PS. The KCMO and KCKS areas will be completed by the end of the year (it was first announced in march of 2011.) | |
|
ITGeeks
join:2014-04-20
Cleveland, OH |
CEO is rightThe CEO is right. The GF is all hype. Especially with how long they are taking to really do anything and all of their demands. It's been over a year since they signed a deal with Austin and still aren't doing much for them. KC isn't even completed, but yet GF is out signing more and more contracts or going to cities and are saying they'd consider to come if you do what we want.
If they go to Portland it will be at least 4 years before they move in. | |
|
| AVonGauss
Premium Member
join:2007-11-01
Boynton Beach, FL |
Re: CEO is rightThe irony being if one of the more established providers tried "cherry picking" the way Google Fiber has been doing, they would have been hauled off to court by now by the appropriate state agencies. That said, many are desperate for competition and are willing to overlook things. | |
|
| |  Jim Kirk
Premium Member
join:2005-12-09
49985 |
Jim Kirk
Premium Member
2014-Jul-30 5:20 pm
Re: CEO is rightDo you two get together and burn effigies of Larry Page? | |
|
| | | AVonGauss
Premium Member
join:2007-11-01
Boynton Beach, FL
1 recommendation |
Re: CEO is rightNope, I don't even burn effigies of you and your generally pointless posts. | |
|
| | | |
-2 recommendations |
PlusOne
Anon
2014-Jul-30 9:47 pm
Re: CEO is rightsaid by AVonGauss:Nope, I don't even burn effigies of you and your generally pointless posts. +1 | |
|
| | | |
1 recommendation |
catchingup to AVonGauss
Anon
2014-Jul-30 9:54 pm
to AVonGauss
said by AVonGauss:Nope, I don't even burn effigies of you and your generally pointless posts. Because your generally useless comments are any better. | |
|
| | | | | AVonGauss
Premium Member
join:2007-11-01
Boynton Beach, FL |
Re: CEO is rightThey're no worse than yours.  | |
|
| | | | | |
1 recommendation |
catchingup
Anon
2014-Jul-31 3:13 am
Re: CEO is rightsaid by AVonGauss:They're no worse than yours. Deluded I see. | |
|
| |
1 edit
1 recommendation |
to AVonGauss
Google is offering GFiber to 95% of KC, MO and will give future opportunity to the 5% who didn't qualify while ATT isn't even available to much of KCMO. TWC is dominant but also doesn't offer in many areas of KCMO.
Don't bother trying to play the cherry picking card, it's actually the opposite. Google is approaching the rollout a different way but the end result is they will cover more customers than the others - at least in KC, MO.
ATT Uverse is in my zip but not on my street - I have Gfiber. A friend in KC, MO can't get TWC but will be able to get GFiber soon. | |
|
| | | AVonGauss
Premium Member
join:2007-11-01
Boynton Beach, FL |
Re: CEO is rightGoogle Fiber has excellent adoption rates in neighborhoods served (duh, no surprise), but the number of neighborhoods served per area is not that impressive yet and won't be for some time at this rate. | |
|
| | | | | |
Re: CEO is rightNow you are confusing the term 'cherry picking' with rate of rollout, two completely different things and not a good attempt at spinning yourself out of that. They are starting from scratch, the incumbents have had decades of existing infrastructure/right of ways.
Google will have slower rollout but cherry picking is clearly happening with others not really Google, at least in KC. | |
|
| | | | | AVonGauss
Premium Member
join:2007-11-01
Boynton Beach, FL
1 edit
1 recommendation |
Re: CEO is rightNo, I'm not confusing terms or spinning anything. They appear to be picking areas where they believe they will have good adoption rates. To the heart of the matter is how long before you declare the deployment complete - which is kind of humorous to ask of Google as they are well known for keeping things in "beta" for extended periods.
Anyway, I'm not attacking Google Fiber as a company and definitely the not the actual product. What I am trying to point out is they are still the "new kid on the block" and as such are having an easier time than more established providers. At some point that will change and they will be more regarded as an established provider.
-- Edit
To give a somewhat comparable example; T-Mobile essentially already does what Verizon just got yelled at for only planning to do, throttle "unlimited" data plan users. Due to overall market share and general consensus (we like T-Mobile more than Verizon), they have flown under the radar - at least until now. | |
|
| | | | | |
1 recommendation |
Re: CEO is rightsaid by AVonGauss:No, I'm not confusing terms or spinning anything. They appear to be picking areas where they believe they will have good adoption rates. You're spinning your 'cherry picking' propaganda into a deeper hole. Google chose the lowest income city of KC metro first (City of KC, KS) and then selected Central KC, MO, of which the E side of that is among lowest income areas of metro. The higher income areas did register faster but in the end, overall 95% of neighborhoods qualified and the other 5% will get another chance. Most of the wealthier burbs are happening later. So much for cherry picking. Meanwhile, the other ISPs are clearly cherry picking in KC. | |
|
| | | | | | | AVonGauss
Premium Member
join:2007-11-01
Boynton Beach, FL |
Re: CEO is rightNo, but now I understand why you think so. I never said it was driven by money or profit, and to be clear, I never said what their internal criteria was. Just that they are being very selective about what areas they deploy, which is not something that every provider has the luxury of doing. There is also a gigantic difference between a neighborhood being "qualified" and a customer being able to place an order for service and in a reasonable amount of time receive service. Qualified isn't "fiber to the press" as Karl likes to put it, but its also not a serviced area either. Based on the recent news articles from both this site and local KS papers, I'm not sure the numbers are quite as rosy as you're portraying them here. » www.kansascity.com/news/ ··· 673.html» 95% of Kansas City Qualified for Google Fiber [18] comments | |
|
| | | | | | | |
2 edits |
Re: CEO is rightActually those are the sources I was referring to. Not following your logic at all. They cant deploy entire city at once so have a system of signups, which you call cherry pick but isn't at all. The opportunity is for 95% of area and the 5% had several chances. Meanwhile ATT is in my zip but they say they have no plans for my street. edit: They have reopened signups for qualified areas again this month. Is just the way they do it, not cherry picking... » www.bizjournals.com/kans ··· nty.html | |
|
| | | | | | | | | AVonGauss
Premium Member
join:2007-11-01
Boynton Beach, FL
2 edits |
Re: CEO is rightMy point is they've been very selective in the limited deployment they have done to date and before we declare victory for competition we want to see how things actually shake out. While I don't subscribe to the PR stunt theory, we also don't know exactly what Google is trying to achieve with Google Fiber. Based on the "future" possible metro areas, it looks like they're following the major transit routes, but who knows...
Unless Google changes their mind (which is possible), there will be people in Kansas City that feel the same way about Google Fiber as you do about AT&T.
... to reply to your edit, the very act of having "qualified" neighborhoods denotes cherry picking of deployment. Its also not like Google has said this is a way to prioritize areas, they have said on multiple occasions fiberhoods (as defined by Google) that do not qualify will not be reconsidered at a later date. Obviously, that will probably change, but its still cherry picking. In the case of qualified fiberhoods, there is a financial aspect - for areas that don't get the fiberhood designation, they're just out of luck based on whatever criteria Google used. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
catchingup
Anon
2014-Jul-30 10:39 pm
Re: CEO is rightsaid by AVonGauss:My point is they've been very selective in the limited deployment they have done to date and before we declare victory for competition we want to see how things actually shake out. While I don't subscribe to the PR stunt theory, we also don't know exactly what Google is trying to achieve with Google Fiber. Based on the "future" possible metro areas, it looks like they're following the major transit routes, but who knows...
Unless Google changes their mind (which is possible), there will be people in Kansas City that feel the same way about Google Fiber as you do about AT&T.
... to reply to your edit, the very act of having "qualified" neighborhoods denotes cherry picking of deployment. Its also not like Google has said this is a way to prioritize areas, they have said on multiple occasions fiberhoods (as defined by Google) that do not qualify will not be reconsidered at a later date. Obviously, that will probably change, but its still cherry picking. In the case of qualified fiberhoods, there is a financial aspect - for areas that don't get the fiberhood designation, they're just out of luck based on whatever criteria Google used. But more or less every other provider doing selective deployments is any better? And yet people with other providers in "select" areas are somehow supposed to be delighted to not receive service. Complete double standards just to attack Google. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | AVonGauss
Premium Member
join:2007-11-01
Boynton Beach, FL |
AVonGauss
Premium Member
2014-Jul-30 10:44 pm
Re: CEO is rightNope, I think the point of mentioning it is to remind us they're not as different from other providers as some might like to think. Not that I think Google Fiber will entirely go this route, but if you remember back to when AT&T U-Verse first came out it seemed they were going to be ambitious with deployment and at the time were very competitive on price, even on the video front. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
catchingup
Anon
2014-Jul-30 10:48 pm
Re: CEO is rightsaid by AVonGauss:but if you remember back to when AT&T U-Verse first came out it seemed they were going to be ambitious with deployment and at the time were very competitive on price, even on the video front. It was pretty obvious that was NOT going to be the case. But I guess you were being overly optimistic. | |
|
| | | | | | | | |  spewakR.I.P Dadkins
Premium Member
join:2001-08-07
Elk Grove, CA |
to AVonGauss
You spun so hard you wound up back to att! Google Fiber clearly has the incumbents scared, period. Frontier is week, GF will decimate them given time. | |
|
| | | | | | | | |  KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium Member
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK |
to AVonGauss
Well I guess it's a new definition of cherry picking, then. They are cherry picking the low income areas. That's a new one. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
to AVonGauss
what about Verizon? Telling places like buffalo to shove off and they won't upgrade them. Then selling off west Virginia to frontier and probably un upgraded areas they serve just keeping the fios areas?
what about att cherry picking which areas they offer uverse and probably selling off rural areas to another provider (maybe frontier also)? Isn't that cherry picking on a larger scale?
Telling people in one area they aren't worth as much as another and selling them off. | |
|
| | | | | | | KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium Member
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK |
to existenz
GF is cherry picking is a common, failed accusation leveled by detractors. It's false. | |
|
| | | |
to AVonGauss
Really? The established providers can refuse to fix a system they have been paid to take care of for years and they barely cause those same agencies to raise an eyebrow. In other cases, an established providers can get paid to build out and then get let off the hook when they didn't feel like actually fullfulling their promise. Yet you suggest state agencies would re-act if a provider actually started doing anything beneficial? More likely they will just never react period. | |
|
| | | AVonGauss
Premium Member
join:2007-11-01
Boynton Beach, FL
1 edit |
Re: CEO is rightsaid by masterbinky:Really? The established providers can refuse to fix a system they have been paid to take care of for years and they barely cause those same agencies to raise an eyebrow. Maintenance is an entirely different matter. We don't know how Google Fiber will "keep up" with the times, they haven't been around long enough but I imagine being fiber based they'll do a fairly good job connectivity wise. said by masterbinky:Really? The established providers can refuse to fix a system they have been paid to take care of for years and they barely cause those same agencies to raise an eyebrow. In other cases, an established providers can get paid to build out and then get let off the hook when they didn't feel like actually fullfulling their promise. Yet you suggest state agencies would re-act if a provider actually started doing anything beneficial? More likely they will just never react period. Providers don't often get paid to deploy infrastructure, they receive incentives and/or rights as incentives generally. Neither here nor there, you're right they don't always follow through on the terms yet receive the benefit. States and municipalities do react, New York City and Verizon being one of the more popular ones to watch at the moment. It involves the law and politics, in other words, it goes on for years....... My point is, there have been no special stipulations such as percentage of area covered placed on Google Fiber to date that I am aware of. People and municipalities are desperate for competition and hope Google Fiber will provide it. Will they directly? That's still a big question. | |
|
| | | |
to AVonGauss
AT&T told the legislature of Georgia many years ago that if local control of cable systems was eliminated they were going to deploy U-Verse to all the existing AT&T ADSL service areas. The legislature did what they wanted. AT&T has done very little U-Verse deployment in Georgia. They have advertisements, but no service when you put in addresses to the service qualification checker. I consider what Google Fiber does to be more ethical than what AT&T has done. | |
|
| | |
••• |
| | | |
to AVonGauss
Please back up your cherry picking libel with some facts. | |
|
| | |
to ITGeeks
it takes years to build out an infrastructure. Look at Sprint. They have been dragging on LTE for years. Sure if google didn't have regs to worry about or contracts. These are complex things here.
I'm sure not one city (save for say HQ of operators) would not want Google to grace them with their presence. And its not because it is google, because what they are offering is competitive, fast, and cheap. 180 degrees from everyone else. However cable and FTTH are catching up. DSL is a dead man walking... | |
|
| | AVonGauss
Premium Member
join:2007-11-01
Boynton Beach, FL |
Re: CEO is rightThat's my point, the cities are very eager for competition, to the point they're not presenting all the usual "red tape". Google also seems to be selecting areas that are willing to offer favorable terms to them for deployment, you can get a feel for that by reading the questionnaire they require municipalities to fill out to be considered. | |
|
| | |
bobby c to ITGeeks
Anon
2014-Aug-3 11:41 am
to ITGeeks
said by ITGeeks:The CEO is right. The GF is all hype. Especially with how long they are taking to really do anything and all of their demands. It's been over a year since they signed a deal with Austin and still aren't doing much for them. KC isn't even completed, but yet GF is out signing more and more contracts or going to cities and are saying they'd consider to come if you do what we want.
If they go to Portland it will be at least 4 years before they move in. so you're saying they move a lot faster then the telecos cool | |
|
| |
Maggie WilderotterInsulting words. Insulting Google Fiber workers and Google Fiber customers. A perfect way to get unhappy Frontier subscribers to work that much more to get Google Fiber to deploy in the area is to imply that they are simpletons.
Of course there is the possibility that she is trapped by a stupid board of directors, elected by short sighted stockholders, and the money needed for upgrades is always diverted to something else, to satisfy the short sighted. So, she is making these statements in the hope of creating a calamity of Google Fiber deploying, thus perhaps awakening the stockholders and the board to the need to upgrade. | |
|
| clone (banned)
join:2000-12-11
Portage, IN |
clone (banned)
Member
2014-Jul-30 5:35 pm
Re: Maggie WilderotterUpgrades? Ha!
Have you ever been to a Frontier service area? They don't even seem to have the money to repair and maintain existing infrastructure, let alone upgrade any.
I hear in some areas they at least get trash bags over the pedestals after the snow plow demolishes one, or if a tree falls on one...around here they just lie there and rot. I assume either those customers don't have DSL or there are simply no customers left being served by them.
No one wants 3M DSL (that runs at 1.2) or 1.5M DSL (that runs at 768) when you can get 50M from Comcast. | |
|
| | | |
Re: Maggie WilderotterExactly the type of entrenched incumbent Google Fiber supposedly want to compete with. Let us hope it, or something similar, happens. | |
|
4 recommendations |
hmmmmFrontier: we offer three speed tiers sir... fast, faster, and fastest.
customer: how fast are they?
Frontier: fast!
customer: how many Mb/s is fast?
Frontier: we don't want to confuse you sir.
customer: I'm going to comcast...
/
.
Frontier management talking to a new manager/director: we changed our packages and now offer three price ranges.... but they are all the same speed HA HA HA stupid customers.... | |
|
| |
1 recommendation |
anonomeX
Anon
2014-Jul-30 5:28 pm
What Google is really doing...with Google Fiber: (1) catching up to the long-typical home/internal networking equipment speeds (meaning: standard h/w is cheap), and (2) charging something much closer to what it typically costs an ISP to provide connectivity (meaning: it's not outrageously overpriced).
Fiber to the 'hood -- full speed ahead! | |
|
 WHT
join:2010-03-26
Rosston, TX |
WHT
Member
2014-Jul-30 5:32 pm
Confusing and Disrespect ???said by Maggie Wilderotter :"confusing customers in the process [...] We have to take the mystery and the technology out of the experience for the user because it's a bit disrespectful to speak a language our customers don't understand," said Wilderotter Wow Maggie. The only confusing and disrespect I see is your harsh words insulting your customers. | |
|
|
•••• |
| |
Maggie needs to worry more about increasing Frontier's DSL(or fiber) speedlike in my neighborhood. Frontier really needs to start acting like it's the year 2014, not the year 2004.
Local CLEC from nearby town has spent last 1 year+ installing fiber in parts of my town(of 15K population). They will finish the town in about 3 years.
We left Frontier's 3M/768K DSL(that I've had since 2007 with VZ) to go with the CLEC's fiber lowest speed of 20Mbps/5Mbps. We can go up to 200M down. I hope to write a review in the next month.
So far, my dead-end block has converted well over 60% of all homes to this new fiber outlier, from either Comcast or Frontier. All I had to do, was watch the digging and talk to the fiber service people, or look for the new ONTs.
Funny that we never ever heard from any Comcast sales people for years, until the fiber had been installed in the easement by the street. However, the CLEC had signed people up last fall of 2013, while Comcast was 6-9 months late talking to everyone. | |
|
| | |
Re: Maggie needs to worry more about increasing Frontier's DSL(or fiber) speedsaid by Bob61571:Local CLEC from nearby town has spent last 1 year+ installing fiber in parts of my town(of 15K population). They will finish the town in about 3 years. Who IS this CLEC??? Is it MTCO per chance??? | |
|
| |
1 edit |
Re: Maggie needs to worry more about increasing Frontier's DSL(or fiber) speedYes, it is. Also, ITV-3 is making major moves in the Peoria area in Morton, Pekin, and East Peoria. Also, moving into Dunlap, Tremont, and Bartonville. Wonder when ITV-3 will take on Peoria? Major announcement a few weeks ago for ITV-3 in Champaign-Urbana. Also, B-N is talking to ITV-3, on future expansion.
Check the map of MTCO's fiber line to Marseilles, to figure out what towns are in their future plans. MTCO promised Washington IL that they would finish Washington IL before moving on, to the next town. Don't want to make it too easy for you.
All the above are current/future problems for Frontier, AT&T, and Comcast. | |
|
| |
shmerl
Member
2014-Jul-30 5:43 pm
Speaking of disrespectquote:
We have to take the mystery and the technology out of the experience for the user because it's a bit disrespectful to speak a language our customers don't understand
It's disrespectful to assume that customers can't understand technical language, and even more disrespectful is to use that as a cover up for providing poor quality service for a high price. | |
|
| |
Follow the Yellow Brick Road. | |
|
BiggA
Premium Member
join:2005-11-23
Central CT  ·Frontier FiberOp..
Asus RT-AC68
|
BiggA
Premium Member
2014-Jul-30 7:49 pm
Oh dearThis idiot is what CT has to look forward to...
There is some point in there somewhere about most devices not being able to use the bandwidth, but at that aggressive a price point, more bandwidth for multiple users can only be a good thing, and she just comes across as arrogant.
Unfortunately, a price-based strategy is actually likely to compete with GF. I know people who have Cox and not FIOS because they got a really cheap deal. | |
|
| | |
Re: Oh dearsaid by BiggA:This idiot is what CT has to look forward to... I just got through telling a co-worker(here in CT) that same thing. It scares me to death to think this is what "competition" will be for us here in my area. Either soon to be Frontier or Charter(who is actually doing a good job for my internet and phone, BUT will soon turn into Comcr@p). I've had Comcr@p before, when I lived one town over and they were horrible and my in-laws currently have Frontier in Ohio and I hear their horror stories almost daily. Yea, competition is great, isn't it? Where's Google when you need them. | |
|
| | BiggA
Premium Member
join:2005-11-23
Central CT ·Frontier FiberOp..
Asus RT-AC68
|
BiggA
Premium Member
2014-Jul-31 5:47 pm
Re: Oh dearIs that an area that they're going to try and do a swaparoo for in the TWC/CC merger? What I don't understand is why they are going to spin off parts of TWC/CC to Charter, since those areas would still only have one provider...
We have Thames Valley (TVC) here in Groton, and they're pretty bad. Worse channel lineup than our non-rebuild Comcast system, no WatchESPN or HBOGo, still have analog. At least they provide competition for the people who will get anything that's not Comcast. I have Comcast because it's less bad than TVC.
CT is weird since we have a ton of different cable providers depending on the area. Most states pretty much have one or the other...
GF is great, but I'm not convinced that it would scale in CT, as we don't have any major metro areas with high population density, and while we have moderate to high population density throughout the state, there's still a lot of exurban areas that are expensive to build out to.
I'm not sure what the answer is, as muni-broadband sounds enticing, but I don't think anybody really wants any of our local government involved in broadband, and who could fund an HFC overbuilder after the TVC disaster? | |
|
jimmyd87
join:2014-01-12
North Highlands, CA |
It makes no sense...While I somewhat agree that GF has been and most likely will continue to be just hype with the exception of a few small areas, I cannot understand why anyone thinks the lack of actual need for this speed based on current day applications is a valid argument. People are so short minded, how many years ago was it that 25-50 MBPS were deemed excessive? I get so pissed off when I read things like this. Quit trying to stifle innovation... You cannot keep up then move aside... | |
|
| |
hypeI love u dslreports, with your split personality, first u bash isp and their gigabit rollout hype and then u bash other ISP for bashing ISP and their hype gigabit rollout | |
|
|  ev
@74.140.91.x |
ev
Anon
2014-Jul-30 8:55 pm
Re: hypewut? | |
|
| | |
| |
Slomo
Anon
2014-Jul-30 10:40 pm
Of course the Frontier CEO would say thisBecause they still have a lot of customers who can't even get any wired Internet connectivity at all. All they have to offer to us is the sick joke of broadband satellite service.. And this is true in areas where they basically have no other competition either.. And they have shown absolutely zero effort to ever provide it either. If I had better options I would have dumped them completely long ago.
They really are just a bad joke and incompetent company.. | |
|
| | |
catchingup
Anon
2014-Jul-30 10:46 pm
Re: Of course the Frontier CEO would say thissaid by Slomo :Because they still have a lot of customers who can't even get any wired Internet connectivity at all. All they have to offer to us is the sick joke of broadband satellite service.. And this is true in areas where they basically have no other competition either.. And they have shown absolutely zero effort to ever provide it either. If I had better options I would have dumped them completely long ago.
They really are just a bad joke and incompetent company.. Don't you know you're supposed to praise them for their shitty service and not doing their job. That's the new American way. | |
|
Kommie2 (banned)
join:2003-05-13
united state |
Kommie2 (banned)
Member
2014-Jul-31 4:44 am
Google come to Wallingford, CTGoogle come to Wallingford, CT. The city ownes the poles and has its own electricity. Easy to compete in Frontiers own territory(CT). | |
|
| |
Corehhi
Member
2014-Jul-31 12:16 pm
CEO does have a pointI have a friend in Orlando FL who got fiber from AT+T as soon as it was on his street so I asked him how fast his connection was and he had no idea. All he knew was he had fiber. ????? Most people are clueless as to bandwidth.
I'm the opposite, at any given time I have multiple Netflix streams going on along with other stuff so I'll take all the bandwidth I can get for a reasonable price. I'm paying with modem rental etc. $55 a month for 15 megs down, 1 up. I'd sign up for 1 gig for $70 in a heart beat. | |
|
|
|
·
