republican-creole
site Search:


 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery






how-to block ads


 
Search Topic:
Uniqs:
3226
Share Topic
Posting?
Post a:
Post a:
Links: ·Shaw FAQ ·Shaw Support Site ·Shaw AUP ·Shaw Speed Test
page: 1 · 2 · 3
AuthorAll Replies

Karyudo

join:2011-03-01

reply to Lesaonar

Re: Using Shaw's cablecard outside shaw's boxes?

said by Lesaonar:

Data and logic don't support you. Shaw has millions of customers which trumps your hundreds or thousands. Business is about keeping the majority of customers happy, not the niche.

How many of those millions have problems like pkarlos_76's problem? I'll tell you: one. OK, one that's documented. I'm willing to say that's just the tip of the iceberg, and that there are 10 times that many. Or, doing the math, ten.

Oh, and do recall that pkarlos' problem was caused by Shaw's equipment and a grow-op, not well-made and independently-supported third-party equipment.

So yes, the data and logic do support me.

(By the way, what's wrong with you people?? You're talking like scared Shaw shareholders, not tech enthusiasts. You make up crazy FUD, and then defend it with equally-faulty imagined results!)


pkarlos_76

join:2004-08-24
Edmonton, AB
Reviews:
·Shaw

said by Karyudo:

said by Lesaonar:

Data and logic don't support you. Shaw has millions of customers which trumps your hundreds or thousands. Business is about keeping the majority of customers happy, not the niche.

How many of those millions have problems like pkarlos_76's problem? I'll tell you: one. OK, one that's documented. I'm willing to say that's just the tip of the iceberg, and that there are 10 times that many. Or, doing the math, ten.

Oh, and do recall that pkarlos' problem was caused by Shaw's equipment and a grow-op, not well-made and independently-supported third-party equipment.

So yes, the data and logic do support me.

(By the way, what's wrong with you people?? You're talking like scared Shaw shareholders, not tech enthusiasts. You make up crazy FUD, and then defend it with equally-faulty imagined results!)

No we just use common sense, logic, understanding, and practicality when we review ideas. We are merely trying to explain in the simplest terms to you that having multiple third party equipment on a network can be a nightmare to support. Much like COMCAST in the U.S. has suffered from, since before I worked in a Convergys call centre for about 2 years and about 8 years ago supporting COMCAST Internet. And the issue they had then, are the same ones they have today with supporting third party equipment. The majority of customers lack the knowledge to use them properly and causes massive headaches when trying to determine if an issue is customer or company problem. It's not as simple as you think, and if you continue to believe that then you may not be smarter then a 5th grader.

P.S. It does not make economical sense for a good business executive to support third party equipment. Comcast is forced by the FCC to support third party equipment which increases their support costs which is part of the reason customer experiences vary from extremely bad to extremely good.

Lesaonar

join:2000-07-25
Victoria, BC
Reviews:
·Shaw
·TELUS

reply to Karyudo

said by Karyudo:

How many of those millions have problems like pkarlos_76's problem? I'll tell you: one. OK, one that's documented. I'm willing to say that's just the tip of the iceberg, and that there are 10 times that many. Or, doing the math, ten.

Unless you work for Shaw, and have access to that information, it's nothing more than conjecture on your part. Your personal belief(s) don't validate a single thing.

said by Karyudo:

So yes, the data and logic do support me.

The needs of the few never outweigh the needs of the many in business. So no, logic and data don't support you. All I'm reading are the responses of someone who has a sense of self-entitlement.
If you can't understand that adding hardware that is outside the scope of support services knowledge causes those support costs to rise, then it's pointless even responding. You've obviously never worked in a call center, or even done tech support/services.

Feel free to move stateside, since you seem to enjoy their broken system(s).

The rest of your diatribe isn't even worth responding to.
--
Anon filter enabled. Register an account if you want to be taken seriously.

ravenchilde

join:2011-04-01
kudos:1

As long as DSL has a proprietary TV system, I doubt Digital Cable would be opened up for mandatory cable card.

Just speculation on my part tho...


Karyudo

join:2011-03-01

reply to pkarlos_76

said by pkarlos_76:

No we just use common sense, logic, understanding, and practicality when we review ideas.

No, you don't. You make up reasons, and then adopt that as fact. That's a straw man, and it's one demonstration of how NOT to use logic and understanding in an argument.

However, I understand that you're not going to be convinced. Neither am I going to be convinced by your FUD. In the end, we're just trolling each other, and it's pointless to keep arguing about nothing.

I do actually understand what you're saying (I do have more than a Grade 5 education), and can see (even before you posted) that there is a small possibility that there will be an almost-negligible added tech support load to Shaw.

But so what? I don't think that's a strong argument to prevent CableCARDs (and related third-party equipment) being used to receive Shaw services. I disagree with your implicit position that as end consumers we should be limiting what we ask? expect? hope for? based on pure speculation as to how that will affect Shaw's business model.

It is of course easiest for Shaw to argue exactly what you're arguing, but that's defeatist, and doesn't do anybody any good in the long run. Except maybe it'll increase the multi-million-dollar pensions of a Shaw ex-president or two.

Karyudo

join:2011-03-01

reply to Lesaonar

said by Lesaonar:

Unless you work for Shaw, and have access to that information, it's nothing more than conjecture on your part. Your personal belief(s) don't validate a single thing.

Aha! That's exactly the quote I should have used to rebut you! I bow to the master of making the other guy's point!

said by Lesaonar:

The needs of the few never outweigh the needs of the many in business.

Thanks, Shaw shareholder!

And you're wrong, of course: all kinds of businesses exist solely because they focus on the needs of the few to the exclusion of the needs of the many. (Sorry, Spock.)

said by Lesaonar:

All I'm reading are the responses of someone who has a sense of self-entitlement.

"Self-entitlement"? C'mon, please use real words when arguing. I can see you saying I've got a sense of entitlement, but I'd only partly agree -- and, unlike you, I think it's a good thing: I'm a long-time customer that wants to push Shaw in the direction of doing something different and exciting for everybody, rather than just accepting the mediocre, single solution that's currently available. It's not just about me. I'd like you to be able to get a CableCARD solution, too!

said by Lesaonar:

If you can't understand that adding hardware that is outside the scope of support services knowledge causes those support costs to rise, then it's pointless even responding. You've obviously never worked in a call center, or even done tech support/services.

Whether I've worked in a call center or not is irrelevant, because you don't seem to understand that *of course* I understand that, all other things being equal, adding hardware adds to the scope of support services. N+1 devices have more entropy than N devices -- yeah, I think I've got that.

I just think you're vastly overestimating the negative effects to the point that you're scared sh..pitless of upsetting the status quo. Which I think is dumb, since you have no data, either, and you can't prove you're right and I'm wrong. Even if one of us *did* have data, we'd probably argue about what exactly it showed. So why not just leave the "the support costs will kill us all!" argument outside the scope of this discussion -- which is posted in a users' forum, dammit, not on the agenda of a shareholders' meeting! -- and focus on how it could be done while minimizing the negative effects?

For example, if I were able to get a CableCARD, I'd be happy to have a note on my file that I don't get *any* help with it from Shaw. In fact, I'd agree that that's good business. Already happens with third-party routers, for example, does it not? So the bone I'm picking with you is to wonder why you'd side with Shaw and get angry about something that in all probability *wouldn't affect you in the slightest.* While we're both speculating.

said by Lesaonar:

Feel free to move stateside, since you seem to enjoy their broken system(s).

Oh, I'd prefer to agitate for change and improvement here, thanks. Progress is not made by people saying, "We should be glad that a large, profit-focused corporation has given us what they've given, assume that they'll continue to improve while we stay silent, and leave it at that."

said by Lesaonar:

The rest of your diatribe isn't even worth responding to.

It's OK; I understand that you don't get it. Think calming thoughts. Breathe in. Breathe out. Better?

I get the feeling you're about one or two posts from reaching a Godwin Law ratio of 1, so I'm done. Thanks for your pessimistic, unfounded, and rather unfriendly opinions on what I thought was a pretty interesting topic!

ilianame

join:2002-06-05
Burnaby, BC
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Shaw

Kids kids kids...

Can't we just live peacefully and dream that one day, all we're going to have is a big thick fiber sticking out our wall, and we can all just pick and choose our telephone and tvtainment services from companies world-wide, independent from
Geolocation
Royalties
Proprietary equipment
Lobbying groups
and other such FUD

Which is constantly causing all this unrest between nerds,
meanwhile the final objective of having the choice to control every little bit of the reality around us (if one so desires),
should be one's and everyone's ultimate goal...


tlhIngan

join:2002-07-08
Richmond, BC

reply to tlhIngan
Well, if you're a Shaw shareholder, I'd recommend SELLING your shares.

Because if Shaw's cable network is so unstable that a third party device on the network will screw up the entire network, then the US cable networks must be seriously screwed, indeed. Oh wait, they aren't, so by admission, Shaw's network must be much crappier than Comcast's, Time-Warner's, etc., where they're forced to accept 3rd party devices on their systems (and SUPPORT them). In other words, Shaw's network is so close to completely failing, that someone will splice a line wrong somewhere, plug in the wrong splitter, and take down the Shaw network for hours. Imagine the stock price then. Double plus funny if it's a Shaw tech that does it.

Oh wait, there's probably lots of TVs connected to Shaw as well - no cablebox or anything. VCRs too. Maybe fancy ones for HTPCs and such, as well. Each one of these is a ticking timebomb, ready to take down the network because the owners refuse to own a cablebox.

But hey, Shaw needs to lock down every PC connected to their internet - because just a few people can legitimately take down the node just by uploading. So perhaps Shaw needs to sell routers (they do), and PCs, and only allow those PCs on their internet service. No tablets, no smartphones, because they too can screw it up).

Telephone service as well. After an earthquake, telephone systems go offline because the handsets fall off hook and locking up switchgear not meant to handle that amount of offhook phones at once. So Shaw should come around and install a Shaw phone in a proper location ensuring it won't fall off hook, and don't you dare move it. Oh wait, that's a Telus problem. But just in case, Shaw should do the same.



XT0RT
S3x, Drugs, War

join:2001-07-28
Edmonton, AB

2 edits

Please remove the tinfoil hat and reduce the caffeine intake. That last rant was TL;DR, and didn't have any relevance.

quote:
Much like COMCAST in the U.S. has suffered from, since before I worked in a Convergys call centre for about 2 years and about 8 years ago supporting COMCAST Internet.
The same karlos that was dethroned from #edmonton on DALNet many years back? Sorry for the off-topic comment, but I know it's you.

ravenchilde

join:2011-04-01
kudos:1

I used to hang out in #Edmonton on DALnet many years back too :P


twixt

join:2004-06-27
North Vancouver, BC

reply to tlhIngan

said by tlhIngan:

Well, if you're a Shaw shareholder, I'd recommend SELLING your shares.

Because if Shaw's cable network is so unstable that a third party device on the network will screw up the entire network, then the US cable networks must be seriously screwed, indeed. Oh wait, they aren't, so by admission, Shaw's network must be much crappier than Comcast's, Time-Warner's, etc., where they're forced to accept 3rd party devices on their systems (and SUPPORT them). In other words, Shaw's network is so close to completely failing, that someone will splice a line wrong somewhere, plug in the wrong splitter, and take down the Shaw network for hours. Imagine the stock price then. Double plus funny if it's a Shaw tech that does it.

Oh wait, there's probably lots of TVs connected to Shaw as well - no cablebox or anything. VCRs too. Maybe fancy ones for HTPCs and such, as well. Each one of these is a ticking timebomb, ready to take down the network because the owners refuse to own a cablebox.

But hey, Shaw needs to lock down every PC connected to their internet - because just a few people can legitimately take down the node just by uploading. So perhaps Shaw needs to sell routers (they do), and PCs, and only allow those PCs on their internet service. No tablets, no smartphones, because they too can screw it up).

Telephone service as well. After an earthquake, telephone systems go offline because the handsets fall off hook and locking up switchgear not meant to handle that amount of offhook phones at once. So Shaw should come around and install a Shaw phone in a proper location ensuring it won't fall off hook, and don't you dare move it. Oh wait, that's a Telus problem. But just in case, Shaw should do the same.

-

This whole argument is a drivelfest.

This is the PC vs the MAC. And we already know how that argument has gone.

Don't need "theory", FUD, wild speculation, unsupported "facts", and so on.

The game's already been run. Marketshare has overwhelmingly decided who "won".

Note: The iPhone adapts to the network, not the other way around. Even Apple has come to the realization that having proprietary hardware is counterproductive!

Now, would the people who want to hold back diversity in the marketplace - due to their own incompetence, laziness or greed - please follow Lee Iacocca's advice in his most famous quote?

Thanks.


XT0RT
S3x, Drugs, War

join:2001-07-28
Edmonton, AB

quote:
Even Apple has come to the realization that having proprietary hardware is counterproductive!
Uhh, no they didn't. When Jobs came back, the first thing he did was kill off the MAC clones such as the Motorola StarMax and UMAX SuperMac. Those guys love their proprietary hardware and have thrown their patents at numerous competitors. Don't buy into their crap like the other iSheep have. /offtopic.
--
Core i7 2720QM : GTX 485M @ 580M : 8GB DDR3-1333 : 320GB x 2 in RAID 0 : Windows 7 Professional x64 SP1
Anonymous posts are filtered.


pkarlos_76

join:2004-08-24
Edmonton, AB
Reviews:
·Shaw

reply to XT0RT

said by XT0RT:

Please remove the tinfoil hat and reduce the caffeine intake. That last rant was TL;DR, and didn't have any relevance.

quote:
Much like COMCAST in the U.S. has suffered from, since before I worked in a Convergys call centre for about 2 years and about 8 years ago supporting COMCAST Internet.
The same karlos that was dethroned from #edmonton on DALNet many years back? Sorry for the off-topic comment, but I know it's you.

Never been on dalnet that I recall, I have been on efnet and free net #edmonton-lug, so no I am not the same person you are thinking of.


pkarlos_76

join:2004-08-24
Edmonton, AB
Reviews:
·Shaw

reply to XT0RT

said by XT0RT:

quote:
Even Apple has come to the realization that having proprietary hardware is counterproductive!
Uhh, no they didn't. When Jobs came back, the first thing he did was kill off the MAC clones such as the Motorola StarMax and UMAX SuperMac. Those guys love their proprietary hardware and have thrown their patents at numerous competitors. Don't buy into their crap like the other iSheep have. /offtopic.

I'm an Isheep, though I just choose to be an Isheep though and are of the mindset that if you want non proprietary hardware then go build a Windows machine or Hackintosh. Just don't expect Apple to support it, same rule applies to Shaw. And don't complain if your software or third party hardware don't work at present or in the future properly.

P.S. Just a general comment for all. I've made my case anyhow, so rather then respond to a troll, I am just gonna let this thread rest.


XT0RT
S3x, Drugs, War

join:2001-07-28
Edmonton, AB

It's not a matter of Apple not supporting it, it's the danger of being sued/fined for having OS X on anything other than an iMAC or a licensed VMWare virtual appliance.

--
Core i7 2720QM : GTX 485M @ 580M : 8GB DDR3-1333 : 320GB x 2 in RAID 0 : Windows 7 Professional x64 SP1
Anonymous posts are filtered.

page: 1 · 2 · 3

Monday, 04-Jun 13:25:11 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