site Search:


 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery






how-to block ads


 
Search Topic:
Share Topic
Post a:
Post a:
AuthorAll Replies


bigpimpatl

@bellsouth.net

reply to en102

Re: No, no, no.

Its definitely about pulling in more revenue, but I believe thats secondary. The way the internet is headed, with streaming videos and movies and HD etc, there is a clear interest for providers to limit that access as much possible, and instead force users to use their video service or their portals. By providing caps on the connection, the provider accomplishes two things: force the consumer to use their product only (since it doesn't count against the cap) and pretty much have a stranglehold on the market because in essence the provider has erected another economic barrier to entry. Smaller providers or content producers simply can't compete when the telco/cableco are the backbone AND content of the network, and on top of that limit how much access is allowed outside the network.


en102
Canadian, eh?

join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA

I tend to agree.
This is similar to wireless companies (AT&T Mobility/VZW/Sprint) offering mobile Internet, then stating no streaming... unless you use 'OUR' (read paid for) service. Apps like Skype Mobile should work fine
--
Canada = Hollywood North



mjimih

@comcast.net

reply to bigpimpatl

Re: No, no, no. yes it's a monopoly

oh brother, ahem I mean, BIG BROTHER is in control! Nobody to stop the viral monopoly from spreading and constricting it's victoms, er um customers. No way to stop them from "controling" what you get to see or hear either.
Better download lots more now right away, before the price goes up. Get it out of your system and then go for a walk.

Thursday, 31-May 17:05:56 Terms of Use & Privacy | feedback | contact | Hosting by nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo
over 12.5 years online © 1999-2012 dslreports.com.
Most commented news this week
Hot Topics