Gog123
join:2008-03-25 | reply to tc1uscg
Re: And this is news?
People were arguing with me on the Verizon FIOS forum when I posted how I would not use Verizon.
I am sticking with Time Warner Cable which will upgrade its infrastructure and raise speeds in the future. |
|
MrSpock29
join:2008-02-09
Hammonton, NJ
2 edits | said by Gog123  :People were arguing with me on the Verizon FIOS forum when I posted how I would not use Verizon. I am sticking with Time Warner Cable which will upgrade its infrastructure and raise speeds in the future. You are re-writing history. The debate had nothing to do with this, you were insisting that TWC has better infrastructure, will have more speed, etc.
You never once said you wouldn't use verizon because of billing or the emails. In fact, you were arguing it in the "Fios to all by 2014" thread. |
|
Gog123
join:2008-03-25
1 edit | I said Time Warner Cable has infrastructure on par with Verizon FIOS as far as the end user is concerned once Docsis 3.0 is implemented. Both systems are fiber optics based with different headend, billing and provisioning.
Yes I was saying that if Verizon FIOS was more money for the same speed, people would be choosing FIOS cause of Verizon's marketting department.
Verizon locks into year or multiyear contracts and keeps pushing contracts which have expensive penalty fees for non compliance. Time Warner has no contracts and will also improve upon speed.
These comments yet again confirm I will be staying with Time Warner Cable for service.
I am planning on getting the new Lenovo T61 replacement with the Montevina chipset so I will have my WiMax wired solution connected to my Time Warner Cable for wired.
Time Warner Cable is going the right way here. |
|
MrSpock29
join:2008-02-09
Hammonton, NJ
| said by Gog123 :I said Time Warner Cable has infrastructure on par with Verizon FIOS as far as the end user is concerned once Docsis 3.0 is implemented. Both systems are fiber optics based with different headend, billing and provisioning. Yes I was saying that if Verizon FIOS was more money for the same speed, people would be choosing FIOS cause of Verizon's marketting department. Verizon locks into year or multiyear contracts and keeps pushing contracts which have expensive penalty fees for non compliance. Time Warner has no contracts and will also improve upon speed. These comments yet again confirm I will be staying with Time Warner Cable for service. I am planning on getting the new Lenovo T61 replacement with the Montevina chipset so I will have my WiMax wired solution connected to my Time Warner Cable for wired. Time Warner Cable is going the right way here. If you believe that cable connections which are shared and terminate at a node instead of a home is better, that is your opinion that you are entitled to, however, it is not fact.
Everyone locks into multi-year contracts. I left Comcast, and they are STILL trying to get me locked in for 2 years. That is nothing at all unique to verizon, and yes, others do charge termination fees.
You have given TWC credit for so many things they haven't even done yet, while telling everyone all the things Verizon wouldn't do.
After being asked several times, you have avoided the issue of caps in the future with TWC.
It's fine to be happy with what you have, but there is no need for you to troll everyone else. |
|
Mad Mac
join:2003-03-10
Moorpark, CA
 ·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to Gog123
said by Gog123 :I am sticking with Time Warner Cable which will upgrade its infrastructure and raise speeds in the future. Maybe so, but will anyone on this board live long enough to see it? |
|
EPS
join:2008-02-13
Hingham, MA
| reply to MrSpock29
Let's be fair- passive optical networks as currently deployed are also a shared medium, though with far more bandwidth than coaxial cable networks.
It is theoretically possible to use wavelength division multiplexing to provide each house on a PON Fiber-optic network with a dedicated connection, but the technology isn't cheap or feasible for home deployment yet. |
|
MrSpock29
join:2008-02-09
Hammonton, NJ
1 edit | said by EPS :Let's be fair- passive optical networks as currently deployed are also a shared medium, though with far more bandwidth than coaxial cable networks. It is theoretically possible to use wavelength division multiplexing to provide each house on a PON Fiber-optic network with a dedicated connection, but the technology isn't cheap or feasible for home deployment yet. This is a continuation from trolling from another thread, no one said that GPON wasn't shared either. However, 32 vs. well over 100, maybe a lot more, plus all the other advantages, is the point.
I'll also add it is a little humorous to see those who want to contact every lawyer in the country, even though no one has said their rates were changed unfairly. |
|
