| reply to Nightshade
Re: Let's Look at the Numbers... Chances are those cheap dial up providers have no local numbers in the same markets as where the price increase is likely to hit. |
|
|
|
aglinka
join:2005-10-21
Saint Johnsbury, VT | btw, AOL is down to $9.95 now. Level(3), which supplies most cheap dial-up numbers, has access numbers everywhere.
AT&T is basically saying we dont want to provide dial-up anymore. |
|
1 edit | Just checked a few no local numbers here.
Give me a link and I will believe you. |
|
3 edits | reply to older dog
The way I look at this is that AT&T is trying to force a decision on their dial up base to switch or be charged more than what it costs for their DSL service. AT&T hopes, that by using this tactic, that they will switch.
Now I can see the AT&T dial up folks who can get DSL service from AT&T make the switch. I know I would. It may be a small number, or a large number who may have this opportunity to do so. There is no way to tell how big this base is since there is no realistic measure of who can get DSL and who can't.
There is a third choice that will present itself for the AT&T dial up folks. The people who are stuck because they have to pay to have a internet connection, even if it is dial up, because despite the price hike it's still cheaper than satellite. This choice will be eventually all that is left of the AT&T dial up base. But expect this base to get smaller over time because the cheap dial up providers will add more access numbers. |
|
| reply to aglinka
said by aglinka:btw, AOL is down to $9.95 now. Level(3), which supplies most cheap dial-up numbers, has access numbers everywhere. AT&T is basically saying we dont want to provide dial-up anymore. I wish they would say they dont want to provide service of any sort, and just shut the hell down altogether. |
|
