Re: Why provide a Rolls-Royce when a Chevrolet will do?

djrobx join:2000-05-31 Valencia, CA ·PHONE POWER ·AT&T U-Verse ·AT&T CallVantage ·Time Warner VOIP ·RoadRunner Cable 1 edit	reply to cornelius785 Re: Why provide a Rolls-Royce when a Chevrolet will do? He's mostly referring to ATM overhead, not PPPoE overhead. Typical ATM+PPPoE DSL circuits have an overhead that is quite close to 85%. He got his facts a little wrong but he's hardly smoking crack. -- Rob -- AT&T U-Hearse Your funeral. Delivered.
	to forum · permalink · · 2008-09-06 13:58:41 ·
cornelius785 join:2006-10-26 Worcester, MA	reply to dvd536 put down the crack pipe dude. the overhead is less than a percent (1492/1500*100=0.5333...). nowhere near 85%.
	to forum · permalink · · 2008-09-06 09:40:33 ·
dvd536 as Mr. Pink as they come Premium join:2001-04-27 Phoenix, AZ	reply to en102 said by en102 : quote: Qwest is on "the other side of municipally backed telecom projects" mostly because "of the long-term harm to consumers." Back in 2003, Fenn asked the question: "Why provide a Rolls-Royce when a Chevrolet will do?" Because Qwest is charging Rolls-Royce pricing for their Chevrolet. I don't think the average user cares that its 50Mbps vs 12Mbps... they will care if they are being charged more for their 12Mbps after bundling than others pay for 50Mbps. Lets see... $39.95 for symmetrical 50Mbps service or $42.95 for 12Mbps/896kbps AFTER having to pay for voice service, bringing it past $60 Don't forget the 15% PPPoE penalty you'll pay with that tired old protocol so that shiny new 12000/896 is really 10200/762 and thats assuming PERFECT SERVICE which we all know doesn't exist on qworst[qwest]. -- When I gez aju zavateh na nalechoo more new yonooz tonigh molinigh - Ken Lee
	to forum · permalink · · 2008-09-06 06:02:33 ·


Thursday, 10-Dec 15:47:24	Terms of Use \| Privacy Policy \| Hosting by www.nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo \| feedback \| contact over 10 years online! © 1999-2009 dslreports.com.republican-creole page compression OFF