Nightfall
My Goal Is To Deny Yours
Premium,MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI
 ·Site5.com
 ·AT&T Midwest
 ·Comcast
| Makes sense
I know a lot of people who moved to broadband not only because of the speed, but to get rid of the extra phone line. It is simple math.
Basic phone line = $20-$30 per month depending on location and services.
ISP = $10-$20 a month depending on who you go with.
DSL providers Verizon and SBC charge $30 a month now. Comcast charges $45. Just ditch the line and the ISP and go broadband. It comes out to the same but you get the always on fast connection.
I have never been turned on by video on the web. The small viewer box just doesn't cut it for me for starters. Then you get the packet loss on their end or mine that causes the video to lose packets. Since most people moving to broadband really don't care about services like that, I have another option. I want all ISPs to STOP offering video and audio content. Lower broadband prices instead. Bringing cable internet down to under $40 a month might just bring in more business. Just my .02 cents.
--
My Domain
Nightfall's Hockey and Life Journal |
|
shuubz
A Good Kind Of Pain
join:2001-02-12
Dexter, MI
|  fast and reliable: is it possible?
one would think it's obvious by now.
fast, reliable service delivered in a timely fashion, with good service and support.
it doesn't have to be dirt-cheap if it's truly good, because people would pay a premium for quality; however, an unreasonably high price will price such an offering out of the mainstream market.
this is simple. it isn't easy (otherwise everyone would do it, and we wouldn't need this forum).
a truly great business would provide such a product, make a reasonable profit (as opposed to the gouging presently endured by most), and get unstoppable goodwill word-of-mouth marketing, the kind that no amount of money can buy.
if this business focused on execution, maintained the quality of service, and expanded only when able to provide same quality of service to the new areas, it would rule the "information service" industry without trying.
with all the content available worldwide (and it's really quite startling what's out there if you have the pipe to pull it down), branded content is the unneeded, expensive icing on an already iced cake.
what we're missing is service, not flash and dazzle. |
|
grouchy951
join:2000-09-23
Chicago, IL
| Those numbers work unless...
If you don't already have cable tv you are looking at $60/month not 45. If you decided to bundle and get cable, it is $90/month.
Back when I had ISDN, my decision to switch to cable modem was caused by the city adding taxes per each phone line and counting ISDN as two. I would have ended up paying for three lines by their thinking. |
|
bmn
? ? ?
Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus
| Content is nice...
But its a real pain in the ass when you have to limit the amount of content, news, research and information you can see because providers slap unrealistic caps on their users... Broadband will never take off if caps become more and more prevalent because then people will be afraid to use it because they will fear the ire of the nazi-esque abuse departments watching you byte count like hawks. 
Of course practices like that reek of content provider manipulation, where the content provider will allow unlimited on network consumption of their content (cable companies, AOL, etc.) and limit off network consumption.
--
Stop the aggression now
[text was edited by author 2003-06-24 17:42:36] |
|
bmn
? ? ?
Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus
| reply to Nightfall
Re: Makes sense
said by Nightfall  :
Since most people moving to broadband really don't care about services like that, I have another option. I want all ISPs to STOP offering video and audio content.
Just because it hasn't caught on and provider networks aren't designed for bandwidth intensive content (*cough* Cox *cough*), doesn't mean it won't catch on in the future. If the lame-brain idiots that run major ISPs and backbones started pricing bandwidth reasonably (justify $400/Mbps), we'd have the networks and bandwidth to handle it.
There have been two companies, WideOpenWest (I think) and another (Winfirst ?!) that have shown Video Over IP can work... Of course they are using 100Mbps fibre, not slow poke coax or four pair copper.
--
Stop the aggression now |
|
g0nepostal
I Am The One Her Mom Warned Her About
join:2001-03-23
Concord, CA
clubs:
·DSL EXTREME
·Astound Broadband
 ·magicjack.com
|  Interestingly enough, gaming isn't mentioned
I would think that one of the biggest reasons why people get broadband is gaming. I'm not thinking of gaming in the sense of subscribing to services like The Sims Online or XBox Live, but rather to simply have the bandwidth and (in theory) low latency to play against others on servers hosted by enthusiasts and ISPs online.
Take Unreal Tournament for instance. At any given time, someone can use UT's built-in browser to find hundreds of servers hosting UT games. Often players have to download the map and mod files before they can play, and these files easily hit several megabytes each. Can you imagine trying to download all of that data using 56K?
I for one love having a cable modem when downloading game maps/mods. Granted, a connection is only as fast as its slowest link, but I haven't yet encountered a game server that wasn't at least a fractional T-1 or better.
Let's not forget all of the software updates we Windows users have to constantly download. The most recent service pack network install file for Windows 2000 (SP3) is over 100MB in size. To download it takes 9 hours at 56K, less than 20 minutes at 1.5Mbps. No comparison.
I don't think content is the killer broadband app; after all, if I wanted to watch videos I'd watch television or rent them at Blockbuster. ISPs should instead focus on delivering a steady, reliable pipe and let the rest fall into place. Content providers will be there, but they will be based on the subscriber model. All the ISP has to do is get the user there.
g0nepostal |
|
lazarus_
join:2002-08-31
Resolute, NU
| reply to Nightfall
Re: Makes sense
The article is flawed.. If they did it just to free up the phone they could easily buy a new dialup modem that supports the new standard.. Either way dialup is still cheaper than broadband if you only have the one phone line that can still accept calls.. |
|
nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
·Comcast
| reply to shuubz
Re: fast and reliable: is it possible?
said by shuubz :
...a truly great business would provide such a product, make a reasonable profit (as opposed to the gouging presently endured by most), and get unstoppable goodwill word-of-mouth marketing, the kind that no amount of money can buy.
if this business focused on execution, maintained the quality of service, and expanded only when able to provide same quality of service to the new areas, it would rule the "information service" industry without trying.
We could maybe get that kind of company if there was competition. The reason the existing companies can gouge is because they are monopolies or duopolies. Until there is competition, it is much easier to charge high prices and provide half-@ss service.
[text was edited by author 2003-06-24 19:10:05] |
|
markopoleo
join:2003-04-02
Bonne Terre, MO
·Charter Pipeline
| reply to g0nepostal
Re: Interestingly enough, gaming isn't mentioned
Well gaming is the only reason I would get broadband (if i COULD get it I mean). I predict in the next 3 years no games will allow online play with nothing less than broadband. Its already happening, there is quite a few games slated for just broadband only. I think MMORG will be only ones that let 56k users in.
bleh. I just got depressed. lol
--
If PLC goes mainstream, every other broadband provider will be considered what dialup is today...not broadband. |
|
jrobcet
join:2003-02-16
Moscow, ID
| reply to g0nepostal
"I don't think content is the killer broadband app; after all, if I wanted to watch videos I'd watch television or rent them at Blockbuster. ISPs should instead focus on delivering a steady, reliable pipe and let the rest fall into place. Content providers will be there, but they will be based on the subscriber model. All the ISP has to do is get the user there."
Gonepostal has hit the nail on the head! We, as broadband subscribers, are mainly concerned with fast, reliable connections. Not bells and whistles!
However, I disagree that one of the biggest reasons for having broadband is for gaming. I honestly think that most people have broadband because of its convenience. No tied up phone lines (or the expense of an extra phone line), an always on connection, and a more enjoyable browsing experience. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that online gaming isn't popular. I just think that for every gamer there is also another person who has broadband just so they can surf their favorite pages faster. |
|
Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02
Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
| reply to g0nepostal
I agree. Gaming is one of the top catalysts for adoption that analysts ignore constantly.
But in essence it's the low pings (something simple) that attracts the dial-up gamer to broadband, not anything amazingly rich or interesting that sucks down bandwidth (though patches, maps and updates do chew through it).
In the end gamers want broadband to do what they already do.....faster.
They aren't lured to broadband because of promises from content kings of new RealOne video game news channels, exclusive high speed content, or anything else....though we're certainly on that path.... |
|
Lion7
join:2003-05-08
Here
| ! I AGREE !
I think everyone has summed up my feelings on dialup verses broadband. I for one would NEVER go back to dialup.
This article is a subjective article - what you don't know you won't miss.
The real truth is that people don't buy into broadband
because either they can't afford it or #1 reason
they can't get it because it's not available in there area.
Dialup will be a thing of the past eventually and unlike that article it's not BULLSH#T.
[text was edited by author 2003-06-25 00:17:12] |
|
jca2050
Premium
join:2002-02-04
Lewisville, TX
 ·Verizon FIOS
| Well nowadays like mentioned above, DSL is as cheap as $30/month now so it can't be THAT much more then dial-up if you only have 1 phone line, so I think you can kind of rule out the budget costs reason. I would say the #1 reason is because of availability, like you say. I would say another is laziness and/or they don't use the internet enough to care about a broadband connection. |
|
dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ | plain and simple. . .
How about just giving us a decent pipe and screw all this content crapola (because byte caps will kill any sort of content you want to offer).
--
You can never be too rich, too thin or have too much Bandwidth |
|
Smokey
Even drunk on a bet ya make it to Canada
Premium
join:2003-05-20
Va Beach
clubs: | reply to bmn
Re: Makes sense
this may be a dumb question, but you dont like cox do you?? |
|
bmn
? ? ?
Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus
| said by Smokey :
this may be a dumb question, but you dont like cox do you??
Let's just say I've had my fair share of problem with them and those problems had never been this numerous with my old provider before they tanked.
--
Stop the aggression now |
|
Smokey
Even drunk on a bet ya make it to Canada
Premium
join:2003-05-20
Va Beach
clubs: |  lol i get ya bro! |
|
NetEffects
join:2002-03-05
michigan
| 135 Calls / 105 to Dialup - Not anymore
Looked at my $24 phone bill again ($14 plan for some reason is $24 in the end, but that's another post). 135 calls made last month 105 of those to AT&T dialup.
Not anymore, the flat panel antenna is in and going up on my house today. After waiting 3 years for SBC or Cable, I found a wireless provider.
But Why Am I Going BroadBand?
1. Usable Speeds (35 minutes @ 26.4K for a virus update)
2. Always On
3. Get rid of my $24/month Telemarketer access point
Usable Speeds is the most important. I know I will do more with broadband sites, but simply surfing and updating software is almost worthless. Some update sites have booted me off because the minimum speed is 28.8K and my phone lines will barely support 26.4 sometimes 24.
So, I for one, agree with the article.
--
Im not an electrical engineer, but I play one on TV. |
|
MrMaster
What If
Premium
join:2000-12-16
Austin, TX
clubs:
·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to Nightfall
Re: Makes sense
Simple math doesn't work with most people. Yes, for an extra $10 bucks a month many people could get cable instead of their stupid dialup.
Yet, they don't comprehend it cause they are STUPID!!!!!
One friend has a cable modem on one side of the wall. On the very opposite side of the wall his roommate is paying full price for AOL dialup. How stupid is that!
There should be taxes on people with dialup...when you have other options. $70 satellite internet access is overpriced so my family and extended family is exempt from this tax.
--
Do you want to feel smart? Ask George Bush a question. |
|
Meeble
join:2002-09-19
Champaign, IL
| no catchy title here
i can tell you I went to broadband as soon as it came out in my area 3 yrs ago for several reasons:
- impatience to sit through the whole dialup thing
- gaming
- speed
equate in the fact most cable companies offer you a pkg for cable + internet and right now I have digital cable + hbo + reg cable + cable modem for less a month than my neighbor pays for digital cable + cable + AOL .... |
|
