binarycode
join:2003-04-30
USA | Countdown...
...until the comcast fanboys wake up and tell us it's our fault.
--
The statement below is true.
The statement above is false. |
|
telcolackey
The Truth? You can't handle the truth
join:2007-04-06
Death Valley, CA
1 edit | You call it fan-boy... I call it
•Corporate-haters vs. corporate-real-world.
•liberal vs. capitalist
•left vs. right
Broadband ISPs are making business decisions to address real business costs. If a very small number of (very vocal) users are upset that they can't share the bandwidth an ISP sold THEM with the general Internet and 3rd party content companies, then so be it. |
|
LeftOfSanity
join:2005-11-06
Felton, DE
| reply to binarycode
said by binarycode  :...until the comcast fanboys wake up and tell us it's our fault. So how do you define a Comcast fanboy? Is it someone who doesn't agree with you? Someone who doesn't always go with majority? |
|
Noah Vail
Premium
join:2004-12-10
Lorton, VA
 ·RoadRunner Cable
| I will suppose that....
said by LeftOfSanity :So how do you define a Comcast fanboy? Is it someone who doesn't agree with you? Someone who doesn't always go with majority? I would define it as
someone who takes the corporate side of an issue,
while defending/denying/whitewashing
the corporate malfeasance that was critical in bringing us to this point.
Another definition might be
the blind acceptance of
corporation lawyers deciding the ethics of an issue,
by writing the laws for purchased legislators to pass.
Is that enough? I could provide some of the additional definitions.
NV |
|
telcolackey
The Truth? You can't handle the truth
join:2007-04-06
Death Valley, CA
1 edit | Can one take the corporate side of an issue because they understand the business issues and economics, but not be a fanboy?
I find people define a fanboy as anyone that is not a corporate-hater. |
|
moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
 ·Verizon Online DSL
| reply to Noah Vail
said by Noah Vail :said by LeftOfSanity :So how do you define a Comcast fanboy? Is it someone who doesn't agree with you? Someone who doesn't always go with majority? I would define it as someone who takes the corporate side of an issue, while defending/denying/whitewashing the corporate malfeasance that was critical in bringing us to this point. Another definition might be the blind acceptance of corporation lawyers deciding the ethics of an issue, by writing the laws for purchased legislators to pass. Is that enough? I could provide some of the additional definitions. NV DING DING DING!!!! WE HAVE A WINNAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It is NOT about taking the company's side but also ignoring the negative aspects or actions of the company. |
|
imanogre
join:2005-11-29
Mcdonough, GA
1 edit | reply to binarycode
Re: Countdown...
said by binarycode :...until the comcast fanboys wake up and tell us it's our fault. Oh good grief, you're so out of touch with reality it's sad.
When choosing an ISP, most consumers can only base their choice on what the corporation tells you. I have no problem with comcast choosing how to run their network how they see fit, but to lie to their consumers about their product... that in my book is akin to fraudulent business practices.
If Comcast would have been a bank, the OCC would have shut them down due to "unfair banking practices".
Unfortunately, no matter how you spin it, the internet is rapidly becoming a utility in the same way a phone is considered a utility. No, you don't need it to live, but with the amount of communication that is done over this medium, the corporate leadership of these companies need to be held to a higher standard then your standard Mom and Pop business model. My point here being is that there are many rules and regulations for businesses that necessary for the economy to run smoothly... i.e. the OCC comparison above. If Comcast is going to continue to operate as business as usual then it's time for them to either get their act together and stop lieing to the consumer, or it's time for the goverment to step in and (oh the horrors) regulate this industry. And as many of us know, government regulation is almost any form is bad. |
|
knightmb
Everybody Lies
join:2003-12-01
Franklin, TN
·AT&T DSL Service
| reply to telcolackey
said by telcolackey :You call it fan-boy... I call it •Corporate-haters vs. corporate-real-world. •liberal vs. capitalist •left vs. right Broadband ISPs are making business decisions to address real business costs. If a very small number of (very vocal) users are upset that they can't share the bandwidth an ISP sold THEM with the general Internet and 3rd party content companies, then so be it. Well she is right about one thing. Their commerical or business access isn't managed. I have 5 static IPs setup for my business and I can max all five of them out at 8MB D / 1.5 MB UP 24/7 all week (which I have at times when I was reading about the Comcast traffic shaping) just to see if this was for Residential customers or if it applied to both.
I'm fairly certain that all the "management" is to push residential customers out of the way for customers like me. I can eat up all the bandwidth for the neighborhood and my neighbor on a residential connection could do nothing but suffer slow downloads and uploads at my expense.
So while I don't agree with how things handled (basically having residential and business customers all sharing the same pipe), at the same time I'm glad that I do have priority over my neighbors because I'm paying a lot more for my connection a month than they do. I expect it to be able to handle my company using it to the fullest every single day without problems or slowdowns. Which so far it does, probably at the expense of everyone in my neighborhood as I'm the only business customer here.
So sure, I'm burning up 10GB daily, but that's exactly why I have the account with Comcast, to use it to the max that they will allow. Residential customers get the short end of the stick, with the best effort. Better translations, "what's left after all the high paying customers have used what they need".
Life sucks, then you die, end of story  |
|
blergh123
@net.nz | reply to telcolackey
Re: I will suppose that....
While at the same time taking the otherside because comcast doesn't come out and say what it's terms and conditions are and exactly what you'll be getting and what they'll be doing to your packets? |
|
jester121
Premium
join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL | reply to moonpuppy
Or, really, anything that you don't happen to agree with.
When you can't debate the issue intelligently, resort to name calling. It's how we do things now... |
|
bicker
join:2007-05-10
Burlington, MA
| reply to blergh123
They actually do outline their terms and conditions. Some folks simply choose to ignore them because they don't like them. File sharing is not permitted on the network. It's there in black and white. The terms and conditions also explicitly state that they will employ network management. No, they don't provide all the technical detail -- and the shouldn't. They are terms and conditions, not technical specifications. :rolleyes: |
|
