MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
 ·AT&T U-Verse
 ·AT&T Southwest
| reply to nasadude
Re: Must be law
said by nasadude  :said by MyDogHsFleas :...There's a TON of competition out there. I live in area code 20850; I eagerly await your list of multiple broadband providers in my area. You said:
quote:
there is no meaningful competition in the U.S. market and there won't be any for years to come.
So now "the US market" equals "zip code 20850" ?? Come on. Pick an argument and stick with it, OK??
quote:
sorry, satellite broadband is not a substitute for wired or even wireless broadband.
umm... yeah... it is. Maybe not a perfect one, but it is. I have a co-worker who lives in a remote area in Northern California on a ranch. He barely has POTS service (he has to maintain his own 1/4 mile of twisted pair). He is a work at home guy like me with heavy internet/VPN use, and uses satellite. It works OK for him. Maybe it's a little slower than if he had DSL or cable, but it works. |
|
Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02 | "it works" != "ton of competition" |
|
nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
 ·Comcast
| reply to MyDogHsFleas
said by MyDogHsFleas :.. but it works. you know a potato and a few wires "work" to produce electricity - does that mean potato batteries are a substitute for duracell batteries? |
|
ross
join:2000-08-16
·Digizip
| reply to MyDogHsFleas
said by MyDogHsFleas :said by nasadude :said by MyDogHsFleas :...There's a TON of competition out there. I live in area code 20850; I eagerly await your list of multiple broadband providers in my area. You said: quote:
there is no meaningful competition in the U.S. market and there won't be any for years to come.
So now "the US market" equals "zip code 20850" ?? Come on. Pick an argument and stick with it, OK?? quote:
sorry, satellite broadband is not a substitute for wired or even wireless broadband.
umm... yeah... it is. Maybe not a perfect one, but it is. I have a co-worker who lives in a remote area in Northern California on a ranch. He barely has POTS service (he has to maintain his own 1/4 mile of twisted pair). He is a work at home guy like me with heavy internet/VPN use, and uses satellite. It works OK for him. Maybe it's a little slower than if he had DSL or cable, but it works. Yeah, and look how far we've come since the Telecom Act of 1996. Yep, competition all over the place, and getting cheaper by the minute/byte (which they'll soon be charging by). How much USF money do you think the telcos have collected over the intervening years? Enough to enable them to provide service to your friend's rural abode? Probably...
Where I live, a major metropolitan area, I only have one telco (AT&T), one cable company (Comcrap), to choose from. While there are plenty of resellers still for telco service, the prices are anything but competitive. Cable is an unattractive, even less reliable, and more expensive option. No teleco entity/reseller here offers speeds over 3Mbps/384Kbps without surcharging the hell out of you. Five miles away, there is Verizon Fios, but they can't compete in my location because AT&T is the monopoly telco here. The wiring in my neighborhood is the shits, and it is routine that my line pairs are stolen at least once a year by AT&T service techs in search of a reasonably quiet pair for a "new" install. The F2 cable run to my central office is defective, which AT&T has known for years, but AT&T won't replace it. Uverse is a substandard promise I won't hold my breath for, and probably won't be able to afford by the time it is implemented here, anyway.
Telecom competition is just a bad, and expensive, joke...but the subject under discussion was/is network neutrality, right? |
|
lordofwhee
join:2007-10-21
Everett, WA
1 edit | reply to MyDogHsFleas
I wouldn't call sub-dial-up speeds (satellite) "useable". I'm also far away enough from apparently everyone to get DSL, so I have two choices: dial-up (can't use it for gaming, which is basically all I do on the internet, anyway), or Comcrap. Tell me, how the HELL is there competition there? |
|
MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Southwest
2 edits | I wouldn't call sub-dial-up speeds (satellite) "useable". I'm also far away enough from apparently everyone to get DSL, so I have two choices: dial-up (can't use it for gaming, which is basically all I do on the internet, anyway), or Comcrap. Tell me, how the HELL is there competition there?
Satellite has high latencies which make it unsuitable for gaming. If gaming's your thing you need DSL or cable, for sure.
Of course, gaming is optional entertainment, you are not using your broadband connection to make a living like I am! So frankly I have little sympathy. Pay your Comcast bill and play your games, or don't.
My co-worker who has satellite signed up for the "professional package" which doesn't have the download limits. He reports that once it gets going, speeds are pretty good, certainly a lot better than the dialup he used to have.
And, hey, check out this Wednesday Evening Links here on our very own dslreports.com! "Satellite Broadband to serve 1.2 million homes by 2012". |
|
lesopp
join:2001-06-27
Land O Lakes, FL | reply to MyDogHsFleas
VPN over satellite broadband is no better than over dial-up. |
|
JakCrow
join:2001-12-06
Palo Alto, CA | Heavy UDP traffic, like VPN, kills sat internet connections. |
|
Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02 | When you've got a 280MB monthly cap that, if broken, results in your connection being throttled back to 14kbps...everything kills satellite Internet connections. |
|
MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Southwest
| said by Karl Bode :When you've got a 280MB monthly cap that, if broken, results in your connection being throttled back to 14kbps... everything kills satellite Internet connections. That's exactly correct. My co-worker I was referring to got some kind of "professional" level subscription that did not have the caps. Pretty much required if you're going to be a heavy user. |
|
Drywall
@comcast.net
| And I'm sure the monthly cost for this satellite service is competitive with Cable/DSL prices.... not.
Cable and DSL are fungible; satellite simply isn't. It's not competitive from a cost/performance standpoint. The only people using satellite are people who can't get cable or DSL. Thus, it's not really a legitimate option for switching should a consumer wish to penalize their ISP for being non-neutral.
Having 2-3 firms to choose from isn't really competition, it's oligopoly. Or have you forgotten your Econ 101 lessons on the four basic types of markets? |
|
