NOZIREV
join:2008-07-10
New Bedford, MA | Competition
This is what competition will do, 50/10 for 99.95 that isnt bad at all. 22/5 is probably good enough for the average person and is a resonable price as well.
--
"Citius, Altius, Fortius" [Faster, Higher, Stronger] |
|
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
 ·Comcast
 ·Qwest.net
 ·magicjack.com
 ·BeeCreek Communica..
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
| Verizon's 50/20 is $90, $100 or so if unbundled. 20/20 unbundled via DSLExtreme at least is $60. $55 will get you 20/5 though I really don't know why you'd do that.
Bottom line: when FiOS rolls out to an area Comcast, even with the new 50 mbps pricing and DOCSIS 3, is the losing party. If CC decides to go with 100 Mbps, Verizon simply reprovisions their packages and wins again. Though at this point who really cares above 50 Mbps symmetric except large businesses? Oh wait, "symmetric" isn't in Comcast's vocabulary. |
|
dadkins
Can you do Blu?
Premium,MVM
join:2003-09-26
Hercules, CA
·Comcast
1 edit | ... and in places where Verizon will never provide FiOS, Comcast is beating the hell out of them because VZ isn't even there.
The slowest POS service from Comcast is better than a non-existant VZ service, right?
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera |
|
Eat Me
join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ | reply to iansltx
As we are seeing in Cablevision territory, Verizon isn't bothering really to respond.
Honestly most people I know who have FiOS got it for the TV service. |
|
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| reply to iansltx
Contrary to popular belief here, whomever offers the least expensive service and makes the most profit per customer is the winner. So while FiOS may be a superior product in all aspects, I'd say Comcast (for the foreseeable future) will actually have the last laugh. |
|
jadebangle
Premium
join:2007-05-22
Olathe, KS
·SureWest Internet
·AT&T Yahoo
·Comcast
|  said by Matt  :Contrary to popular belief here, whomever offers the least expensive service and makes the most profit per customer is the winner. So while FiOS may be a superior product in all aspects, I'd say Comcast (for the foreseeable future) will actually have the last laugh. I'm laughing at those who will pay for 50/10 which is no better then 10/10 for a lot less with fiber service
Even 20/20 for 69.99 by surewest or verizon is a lot better value
a symmetric connection is a lot more useful then asymmetric
even 15/15 vs 50/10, many would go with 15/15 for the same price
don't give us excessive download and mediocre upload to fool us because smart user aren't that gullible |
|
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| While that is undoubtedly true for DSLReports users, most people don't care. Around 1Mbps or 2Mbps, they are completely happy with their upload speed and I would wager a guess to say they are oblivious to it.
If video conferencing or some other upstream dependent application emerges, then FiOS will have the upper hand, but for now, people want inexpensive and companies want to improve their bottom line. Comcast is in a better position to do that.
FWIW, I am a HUGE Verizon fan and I think they made the right decision to go all-fiber now. I just think in the current economic situation, Comcast is better positioned to reap the rewards of lower consumer spending. |
|
RadioDoc
58ef2c0
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11 | reply to dadkins
Not necessarily. An unreliable 4 to 6 megabits from Comcast doesn't beat much of anything. |
|
jadebangle
Premium
join:2007-05-22
Olathe, KS
·SureWest Internet
·AT&T Yahoo
·Comcast
| reply to Matt
Most user don't have a choice
I think they do care but their choice are limited
Why would I go with comcast at 42.95 for 6/1 when I can get 20/20 for 69.99
In my area comcast only offer 6/1 and 8/2
You probably want to laugh too
att formerly sbc is even worse then comcast thought their cheaper you get slower speed, 3.0/512k then 1.5/384k recently
due to stricter speed caps because the technician are playing guessing game called setting speed base on distance. DSL is obsolete, slow and a waste of investment
comcast have no problems kicking a few user off their network because we use more bandwidth
i would have to limit my computer use with comcast or face disconnect. what kind of attitude is that?
as for comcast user, you may as well go to the library frequently to conseve bandwidth for comcast subscriber
It is obvious that comcast network are limited in bandwidth usage, especially the upload. their network capacity is so small that they can't offer similar speed to fios
hence the same limit with 50/10 tier for 99.95 a month
its a scam to make more profits for the investor or insider
not very exciting... its like a faster car but you're only given 10 gallons of gas to drive per month so you can't go any further then those with slower car. |
|
sonicmerlin
join:2009-05-24
Cleveland, OH
| reply to Matt
If it were true that people are happy with their slow upload speeds, then DSL companies wouldn't be hemorrhaging customers to cable. If that were true Verizon wouldn't have bothered spending $23 billion on fiber rollout. DSL can achieve decent download rates, but upload-wise it fails miserably. |
|
vinnie97
join:2003-12-05
Mesquite, TX | reply to jadebangle
Yes, AT&T is abysmal...now combine them with TWC as the two incumbent providers and things can't get much worse (welcome to hell...Dallas, TX metro area and many points to the east). |
|
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| reply to sonicmerlin
said by sonicmerlin :If it were true that people are happy with their slow upload speeds, then DSL companies wouldn't be hemorrhaging customers to cable. If that were true Verizon wouldn't have bothered spending $23 billion on fiber rollout. DSL can achieve decent download rates, but upload-wise it fails miserably. DSL is typically not cheaper than cable. So all things being equal, cable is generally less expensive. Especially if you figure in the discount for multiple services. |
|
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO | reply to RadioDoc
Yeah it does. How about unreliable 512k-2M wireless? With a 25-35GB cap? Cable is better than no cable, unless you're on JetBroadband  |
|
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO | reply to Eat Me
$90 per month vs. $100. $0 setup vs. $300 setup. If CV kills the setup fee I'd expect VZ to respond in a speedy fashion to stay on top. |
|
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO | reply to Matt
Comcast won't have the last laugh. Verizon will. It's just that the last laugh may be awhile in coming. |
|
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
·Comcast
·Qwest.net
·magicjack.com
·BeeCreek Communica..
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
| reply to Matt
One word: cloud. Actually two words: cloud computing. When yu get more people wanting to "live in the cloud" upload speed differences will be noticeable. It's all about what applications you want to run over the pipe. Right now there are apps that like more bandwidth than is available over even a DOCSIS 3 cable connection... |
|
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
·Comcast
·Qwest.net
·magicjack.com
·BeeCreek Communica..
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
| reply to sonicmerlin
I don't think that's the issue so much as being "too far out" for decnt DSL speeds, yet paying prices close to those provided by a cable bundle. DSL is actually on the uptick. It's landlines that telcos are losing, and fast. This is because a $33 (or $40) cable VoIP line is cheaper than a $45 + $15 in taxes landline from the telephone company. Since lots of people have cable anyway, triple play bundles from the cable company are attractive to consumers. No dish, one bill.
Verizon, with FiOS, provides superior service on that triple play. Thus they get custoemrs. |
|
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO | reply to vinnie97
Shoot, Dallas is one of THE BEST cities for bandwidth. Smeone should be offering FTTH up your way...
...oh wait, FiOS doesn't like to go into AT&T areas  |
|
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| reply to iansltx
said by iansltx :One word: cloud. Actually two words: cloud computing. When yu get more people wanting to "live in the cloud" upload speed differences will be noticeable. It's all about what applications you want to run over the pipe. Right now there are apps that like more bandwidth than is available over even a DOCSIS 3 cable connection... Cloud Computing is years and years away. Aside from video, people can store all their files in the cloud right now on most connections anyway. |
|
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
·Comcast
·Qwest.net
·magicjack.com
·BeeCreek Communica..
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
| Cloud computing is only years away because there isn't the bandwidth to do it. Take Animoto for example; it's an online video slideshow maker that's quite awesome. But high-quality photos take several minutes to upload on a 512k or even 2M up cable connection. On a 20M connection the photo uploads take seconds and everyone's happy.
On the business side of things, I could give you examples of awesome systems that are bandwidth-hungry, if you're interested  Just finished talking with a guy here in town that's going to try bringing serious bandwidth into town for this purpose. He and I actually want to do many of the same things, and fat pipes are required for his IT solutions.
On the cloud side, my primary computer just shut off last night. Have to drive about 60 miles to the Apple store to see what's wrong with it. Fortunately I have much of my stuff on GMail, however my Adobe CS4 install is sitting on that computer. I'm at a local coffee shop to download Photoshop CS4 trial to get the work done I need to. It's a cable connection but bandwidht is much better than at home 9WISP). However on uploads things still take a bit.
If I had this connection, but symmetric, I'd be happy (15/15). 10 Mbps up? Not so much. |
|
