http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r17378110 en Thu, 03 Dec 2009 15:22:09 EDT Thu, 03 Dec 2009 15:22:09 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17379265 FightingBlue : Your argument is totally fukakta, by the way. To compare a Verizon-style walled garden--complete with razorwire and guard dogs--to an open market like TV or newsprint is just ridiculous. You're completely rewriting definitions to fit the idea that Verizon's approach is somehow market-friendly, when in fact it's completely anti-marketplace, and deliberately leverages Verizon's position as a major carrier to force users onto their particular video platform.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17379265 Fri, 01 Dec 2006 16:07:31 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17378282 Zoder : I agree. My main point was in response to ricep5 who said restrictions were fine. But if wireless broadband is going to become a real competitor to dsl and cable those restrictions are going to have to fall across the industry. Not just with one company since a companies coverage area isn't universal.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17378282 Fri, 01 Dec 2006 13:17:03 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17378228 SRFireside : I am aware of that. We're still dealing with a scenario where if you can't get what you want from Verizon there are many other competitors out there who will oblige. Sprint makes wireless cards too, you know. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17378228 Fri, 01 Dec 2006 13:07:32 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17378110 Zoder : You are aware that Verizon sells wireless cards for your notebook computer right? The TOS limits what you can download if you sign up for that service. One of the prohibitions is that you can't use it as a substitute for a dedicated wired data line.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17378110 Fri, 01 Dec 2006 12:42:43 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17377983 SRFireside : But we're talking about mobile video here. Not Internet services for the home of office. I see no issue here. If somebody wants to pay the fees to see a show on their phone let them. I'm sure another provider will offer the service cheaper anyway. As for me I use my phone to call people and my television (and sometimes computer) to watch shows. It's not like there is no competition in the cellular telephone market. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17377983 Fri, 01 Dec 2006 12:20:07 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17377879 Zoder : The major difference is that wireless broadband is being touted by the CTIA, FCC, and members of Congress as a clear competitive alternative for cable and DSL broadband. Until the walls come down however, that comparison is a lie and cable/dsl will remain a duopoly.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17377879 Fri, 01 Dec 2006 11:59:35 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17377440 ricep5 : Walled gardens are perfectly acceptable by many people. Let the market decide if "open" vs. "walled" is preferred. If people didn't like it, they wouldn't keep offering it.

Journalisticly DSLR has not been a fan of the walled garden approach to data delivery (just read your wealth of 'news' on AOL)

Some people don't want an open access methodology, they like to pay to have it molded and delivered to them for their convenience. So what? This is bad?

Media outlets like TV, newsprint, newswires, magazines, radio (and now the Internet) have been molding and delivering their 'gardens' for years of their existence, warts and all. How far back must the wall go before its no longer considered a garden?

Technically I could say DSLR is a walled garden of thorns about what is wrong with the world of broadband, but then I would be violating your goals of finding more stories on aardvarks.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17377440 Fri, 01 Dec 2006 10:31:14 EDT