frankenfeet
Premium
join:2001-10-14
Smiths Grove, KY
 ·Insight VOIP
 ·Insight Communicat..
1 edit | Love competition;Hate taxes.
I, for one, would love to see the cable networks opened up for competition, but I'd hate to see the taxes that go along with telecommunication services. Maybe they could lower the cost enough to offset any taxes levied. Of course, I'm sure the FCC will keep this case locked up for a few more years though.
--
"Sometimes your ahead, sometimes your behind. The race is long and in the end it's only with yourself." |
|
mrchris
We don't miss you Bush
Premium
join:2002-10-01
North Babylon, NY | Go go go...
More competition is good, kill the monolopization! |
|
solarified
Premium
join:2002-11-02
Delafield, WI
clubs: |  Why not
Great idea, let them have to deal with the b.s. that the telcos have to deal with. While were at it lets go after the gas and electric utilities. |
|
SoilFlames
Premium
join:2002-03-17
Andover, MN
clubs: | Uhmm
I believe it already is open for competition....they are trying to keep it that way. You can get earthlink Cable internet through another cable provider. |
|
rikmill
join:2002-02-26
Fort Myers, FL | Try getting earthlink thru Comcast..... it isnt going to happen unless you "PAY FOR BOTH" |
|
inteller
@cox.net | yes I would LOVE to seperate the ISP from the cable co. Cox's ISP services suck ass. |
|
oliphant5
Got Identity?
Premium
join:2003-05-24
Corona, CA
| reply to rikmill
If you can do it at all. There is no content competition in my local Comcast franchise.
--
Don't get it, demand it! The Anime Network »www.theanimenetwork.com/index.html |
|
dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
| m00t point
The point of opening the networks is moot. the network owner STILL controls the speeds. opening the networks is just going to add another layer of finger pointing. e.g. you have earthlink over time warner lines, you call earthlink and they say its a TW issue, so you call TW and they say its a earthlink issue(either way YOU the customer have to deal with this frustration) on the upside is like if you buy earthlink over TW lines and dont want TW video you arent charged the 'no video penalty'
--
You can never be too rich, too thin or have too much Bandwidth |
|
J D McDorce
Premium
join:2001-12-29
Westland, MI
| reply to rikmill
Re: Uhmm
There are some areas where one can get EarthLink Cable over Comcast, however, this is a very small portion of Comcast's overall footprint. »www.earthlink.net/home/broadband···ability/ |
|
oliphant5
Got Identity?
Premium
join:2003-05-24
Corona, CA
| Open the lines to content competition
Cable operators have plainly shown their inability to resist gouging customers with yearly double digit increases and market manipulating bundling requirements (eg Comcast). If cable operators were willing to compete on their merits I'd say no...but when companies like Comcast charge a 30% penalty if you don't want their CATV...that's abuse of their market position and complete crap.
--
Don't get it, demand it! The Anime Network »www.theanimenetwork.com/index.html |
|
oliphant5
Got Identity?
Premium
join:2003-05-24
Corona, CA
| reply to dvd536
Re: m00t point
Speeds are just one aspect of a provider of course. We see routine bitching about mail issues, news servers, etc that are content provider specific, not infrastructure specific.
--
Don't get it, demand it! The Anime Network »www.theanimenetwork.com/index.html |
|
J D McDorce
Premium
join:2001-12-29
Westland, MI
| reply to dvd536
While I largely agree with what you are saying, I do not agree that it is entirely moot. There is, effectively, the connection side and the feature side. The connection, as you indicate, is controlled by the cable company regardless of the "ISP". Features, on the other hand, are an area that can differ and offer an area of competition that could potentially benefit all subscribers. Customers in Time Warner Cable (as well as the Bright House Networks systems spun off of TWC) systems have a choice of AOL, EarthLink, and RoadRunner available. Different features for different needs. |
|
newview
Ex .. Ex .. Exactly
Premium
join:2001-10-01
Parsonsburg, MD
| The amazing disappearing promises
When Comcast was courting the FCC prior to their purchase of ATTBI, there was PLENTY of talk (and even some movement towards) allowing other ISPs access to their networks. Now that the "honeymoon merger" is a done deal, where's the talk now? Comcast continues to want to have their cake and eat it, too.
I would love to have the ability to purchase broadband access via competing ISPs who use Comcast's network. Maybe then I won't have to pay a ridiculous $15.00 "second-class non-cableTV" rate and can also get realistic newsgroup access.
--
The Rules of Spam | Maryland's New Anti-Spam Law
Where are we going? And what's with the hand basket? |
|
Shrapnel64
Premium
join:2001-01-24
Hayes, VA
 ·Verizon Online DSL
·Cox HSI
| I agree with all of the above posts. I would love to have the cable networks that aren't yet available to us here and probably a few would like it the other way around. One of my ISP's I'd like would be OOL, or that who has at least a half a meg of upload bandwidth and no transfer caps...no more port blocking would be an advantage too 
--
Jason Brousseau
Rampage Services, Inc
www.RampageHosting.com
jason@rampagehosting.com |
|
Matisaro
join:2003-11-20
Troutdale, OR
| reply to J D McDorce
Re: m00t point
As a consumer I feel that competition on the lines is a good thing.
As a realist I look at dsls crappy roll out and slow deployment and realize that a company is much less likely to spend money to upgrade a network it has to lease out to competition at firesale prices.
I would prefer to have a good fast network and pay a bit more than have dialup waiting for hsi access to come to my area because the cable company(JUST like the phone companies) dosent see an acceptable profit/risk margin to spend x million upgrading the network.
PS: anyone who thinks it would be any different is living in a fantasy world, regulation is not the end all be all of consumer issues, look to the telco fee bonanza for evidence. |
|
mr_slick
join:2003-05-22
Lynnwood, WA |  reply to J D McDorce
Re: Uhmm
Does Earthlink cable service penalize you for not having TV service like "regular" Comcast does?? I might switch to this if they don't (once they try to up my rates-- my year contract is almost up) |
|
jammmin
join:2000-12-14
Upper Marlboro, MD
| reply to Shrapnel64
Re: The amazing disappearing promises
Opening up cable lines should be required. In New York, Earthlink charges $42 for cable internet access regardless whether the person subscribes to cable TV. Time warner on the other hand charges $60 to Roadrunner subscribers who don't subscribe to cable TV. |
|
number3fan
Number3fan
join:2003-10-15 | reply to dvd536
Re: m00t point
I have SBC DSL with them as my isp so I don't have that problem  |
|
number3fan
Number3fan
join:2003-10-15
·AT&T Midwest
| Maybe someday
Sure would like to see the cable co's have to deal with the same regualtory hurdles as the telcos..........
Be intresting to see what all the cable shill/telco bashers have to say about this post.........roflmao |
|
vic102482
Premium
join:2002-04-30
Upper Marlboro, MD
| I hate to say it
But since they paid for the network it should belong to comcast. Telcos should be open to regulation because they used government funds.
--
I tie a rope around my penis and jump from a tree, don't you wanna grow up to be just like me!!!! |
|
