dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
uniqs
18
hottboiinnc4
ME
join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH

1 edit

1 recommendation

hottboiinnc4 to funchords

Member

to funchords

Re: What Gives Cox the right to decide???

No i'm not a wuss.

you keep claiming that you and everyone else has control over Cox's network. In actually you don't. They own that last mile to your home. They can do with it what they see fit.

If they want to cap the connection at 500megs a day they can. If they want to cap you at 5gigs per month they can. You can't SUE them and make them change their mind in a court of law. You know what they're doing you have the right to change your provider.

You fail to see how that works. If you're not happy with what a company is doing with THEIR property you don't have to use them. The same way YOU DO NOT have to use Comcast. Comcast GIVES you the RIGHT to use them. Personally if I was Brian Roberts. I would have killed your connection for issuing suit against my company. Why? I would deem you not serviceable. Then let you bitch about that. Why? Because its a right to have Internet Access, it's a right to have access to Cable TV. and another one: You have a choice for Dish Network or DirectTV as well.

The IETF would only have the right to define the actual Web its self. NOT the private networks. The network is NOT theirs. It's not yours, It's not mine. It's not anyone elses on here (unless they own a good share of Cox that gives them the right to say what happens).

And like I said; if you are not happy with the way they run THEIR Company, THEIR Network, and THEIR services or do not like what they charge for THEIR TV services. CHANGE PROVIDERS or BUILD OUT A NEW COMPANY.

how hard is it to get that? You fail to see that. You just want to sit and complain how nothing is fair to everyone or to you. You bitched about Comcast treating Digital Voice separate from everything else, In actually it should be; its not VoIP it's actually a private phone service. Then Cox comes along and gives ALL VoIP dedicated access and not affected by any of that. And then P2P comes into play with you and everything else.

be glad that someone is actually willing to deploy Internet services at all in this country. With all the bitching going on. Especially by the people that thing that the companies OWE them uncapped, UNfilterd, UNLIMTTED Internet. THEY DONT OWE YOU A DAMN THING.

And you can't put this blame on anyone else but YOURSELF! You asked a Court to define everything for Comcast. Now that ruling sets the place for everyone else. Be glad their telling the customers. Blame yourself for this and nobody else. All you have to do is Ask, and you shall recieve. Which you did.
Rick5
Premium Member
join:2001-02-06

2 recommendations

Rick5

Premium Member

I think that not only did Robb bring this on himself because of the precedents that have been set..he's actually responsible for Comcasts caps now being LESS than they were before. It was my observation from observing many a post in the comcast forum that there wasn't a single person who ever ran into a problem with Comcast about bandwidth until they hit the 300 to even 400 gig range.

Once pushed into a corner and forced to put caps on service..it went down to the current 250gig level. It also started the ball rolling for TW's caps to be announced..AT&T's..and everyone elses. And now..this issue with Cox as well can be attributed to that as well IMHO.

The old adage is very true.. be careful what you wish for..because you just might get it. And then some.

As for what gives Cox the right to do what they are..I also concur that because it's their and their shareholders money..they have the right to do WHATEVER they want and people..as consumers..have the right to not take it.
We all make those choices all day long with all kinds of products we buy. In this day and age many of us have choices among not only cable providers..but various forms of dsl as well. And people also have the option of MOVING and deciding where the want to live if they aren't happy with what is offered in their current location.

Again..I have to refer back to my other post in this thread and say that people are simply expecting too much I think from these dollar + per day services. People have the option of having their own T1's or T3's or whatever where they can have as much bandwidth as they want. PROVIDED they're willing to pay the price. To expect these companies to give someone unlimited ..no restrictions access to these speeds and unlimited caps 24/7 is just totally unrealistic for these kinds of prices.

funchords
Hello
MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA

1 edit

funchords to hottboiinnc4

MVM

to hottboiinnc4
You're still missing the point. They're taking something of their own creation and labeling it "Internet" and selling that to customers.

This is no different from me taking diesel and labeling it "Unleaded" and selling it to unsuspecting motorists from my "private" gas station. And when their car doesn't work well on my mislabled mixture, I'll blame the people who made the car.

Cox is a private network. The Internet is a cooperative of private networks, all of which have agreed to a certain set of standards and practices (the "formula") that has made the Internet a raging success.

Now Cox thinks that they're smarter than the rest of the cooperative, and they're going to start doing their own thing. That's not the way that the Internet works. They ought to suspend this idea and submit it to the IETF -- or stop selling "Internet" service.
funchords

funchords to Rick5

MVM

to Rick5
said by Rick5:

I think that not only did Robb bring this on himself because of the precedents that have been set..he's actually responsible for Comcasts caps now being LESS than they were before.
Nothing I did contributed to this. That was all the quiet work of the Florida Attorney General.

I do think that if a service has a limit, it ought to be disclosed. I think if you check, Comcast's 250GB limit has garnered only certain specific concerns from me concerning limits on future innovation and customer awareness (a meter). Beyond that, I'm disappointed but can accept their decision and I'm glad that their "top 1000" limit -- one that existed in secret all along -- was now disclosed.
said by Rick5:

Once pushed into a corner and forced to put caps on service..it went down to the current 250gig level. It also started the ball rolling for TW's caps to be announced.
That's a revision of history. TW's caps were announced long before Comcast said anything about caps.
Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

Skippy25 to hottboiinnc4

Member

to hottboiinnc4
Being you think you are so smart and all do you want to address why in a vast majority of EVERY community in the US there is yet one cable company to choose from?

You want to address why in a vast majority of the US there is yet one telecommunication company?

I would also suggest you review some history concerning the cable companies AND the telecommunication companies and the benefits BOTH of them received to build out as they did. They BOTH received "incentives" that enabled them to become the companies they are today.

At best there is a monopoly/duopoly environment in a vast majority of the country. And the reason isn't as simple as you would like to think, because no one else wants to build another network. Barriers to entry go well beyond the desire to build it, you know and the current incumbents know it. Even if I was able to put together a group of investors with 100's of millions of dollars to build a network my local monopolies/duopolies would do everything they can to stop me.
hottboiinnc4
ME
join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH

hottboiinnc4 to Rick5

Member

to Rick5
Well said Rick, But as below. Someone doesn't agree.
hottboiinnc4

hottboiinnc4 to funchords

Member

to funchords
Nothing was actually stated in writing by Comcast until YOU decided to hit the main stream with them and your staffed lawyers.

You can try and claim it was FL but you're the one that has your name attached to everything regarding their caps and bandwidth limits NOT the Attorney General.
hottboiinnc4

hottboiinnc4 to funchords

Member

to funchords
Cox did NOT agree to anything except GIVE YOU the right to access what they have access to. They other wise do not agree to give you anything else.

Cox is the same as ATT, Comcast, TWC, Earthlink, CableOne, Cablevision, VZ, and every other company. They provide the last mile to the home. That is THEIR network. NOT yours. If they choose to limit that network that is THEIR right. NOT YOURS to decide for them and for everyone else.

You're going to get your name attached to the news media again if you keep claiming they need to fix it. EVERYTHING will be set as not-time sensitive and then when everything bottles out the customers can blame you.
hottboiinnc4

hottboiinnc4 to Skippy25

Member

to Skippy25
No. You are more than welcome to build out without any stopping in many states. Texas, CA, Ohio, and there are many others that will give you the option just to go to the state.

And i'm sorry Cable may have went to the cities to begin with to get the right to build there but they did NOT receive anything that the Telcos did.

And people only have the choice of one actual cable company because nobody else wants to build out. Instead they want to sit and bitch the way a company should be and cater to their needs and wants. Instead of doing something about it.

But as far as cable TV goes; if you want cable TV you can sign up with; U-Verse, FiOS TV, Dish Network and DirecTV. And you can also get in some areas, RCN and WOW that are over builders.

Robb and many others just want something to bitch about instead of building out.

And if you can put your investors together by all means go to a state and jump in and start building out. Or where's an idea! Go help Charter out and take over some of their coverage areas. I'm sure they have they'd like to get rid of. Maybe even Wave Broadband has some.