FCC Chooses SamKnows For Broadband Speed Testing > Not Real Data

reply to Gaff

Re: Not Real Data

To agree with you 100% and go a little further.. people need to stop with the comparisons to make/prove their points.. that in itself IS the problem!!!

Don't turn to soda to compare internet, they're not the same. Don't compare apples to oranges.. the point is that when you look at something ELSE to justify what you THINK is right in others, you're going to look at a false model for your answers.

People need to look at the very issue/topic/item that is in question and seek out the correct answer.. in retail or service, nothing is always the same nor is it black and white especially when compared to something else.

Clearly, the internet is far more technical than that of a box of soda. Like you said, a box of soda has 12 cans in it, period. To sell soda, you place a number of cans in a box - it's simple. The internet is far more complex than a box of soda anyway and until someone understands and educates themselves on what the internet IS, then this kind of issue will continue.

Years ago, I about died when I saw McDonalds replace a real cash register with one that has pictures of food on it.. that simply dumbed down the need for people to actually learn and educate themselves. Technology is supposed to make people smarter, not more stupid, as in many cases and for many people, it does.

Oh, and it seems we've been on this can of soda path before.. remember when you'd buy a bag of chips and the bag would be partially full? 12oz of chips were not 12oz volume, rather, it was 12oz weight.. I believe that was the big scandal of the 80's wasn't it?

Sometimes customers DO need to educate themselves and not sit back and wait to be educated. No one ever said life was going to be simple and handed to them ... that is, unless you believe the current democratic administration.

reply to TheRogueX
Except that if speeds can never actually reach the "up to" point then this is false advertising. "Up to" implies that the speed can reach this point, if it can't it's a lie based on one reading of it. The other way to read "Up to" is that the speed can never exceed this. If you read "up to" this way then you have sue the company if you ever achieve a higher speed than what they advertise. Since most people agree that this is silly the first interpretation feels like it ought to be the correct one. Either that or I know a few people who should sue Verizon when their bottom end DSL lines went too fast.