Re: this is going to suck... :( in http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r4134570 en Mon, 30 Nov 2009 23:35:38 EDT Mon, 30 Nov 2009 23:35:38 EDT Re: this is going to suck... :( http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,4134570 vallis : Well I (at$t bb user) have officially been capped. My download/upload speeds were capped from 1500/300 to 600/100. In other words, the average 150-200kbs i used to get is now 50-60kbs. This is a warning to all at&t bb users around Massachusetts to switch to some other company! Nuff said.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,4134570 Thu, 15 Aug 2002 03:34:09 EDT Re: this is going to suck... :( http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,3867334 dvd536 :
said by wzoo1:
This is going to suck... I currently have Roadrunner which is high speed internet cable modem service direct from Time Warner and it's excellent right now! Since time warner is opening its cable lines/broadband lines and letting other ISPS use time warners HFC network, then ALL OUR CABLE MODEM SERVICE WILL DEGRADE AND GET WORSE!!! THIS IS SERIOUSLY A BAD IDEA!!! I dont agree with this and WHY IS THE FCC DOING THIS??? Serisouly, Time Warner controls and owns the cable lines and cable modem broadband lines and why should it give it to other isps???
Its not going to suck anymore than it already does. If people cant get roadrunner they cant get it through any competing ISP's using their lines. And remember AOL/TW still owns the wire therefore controls the speeds. opening their lines to others only opens the ability to fingerpoint.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,3867334 Thu, 18 Jul 2002 00:11:40 EDT Re: this is going to suck... :( http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,3863747 DrTCP : No, they share the same RF network and backbone connection is still provided by RR. Basically, this is a re-marketing ploy. It is very similar to those dial-up ISP's that use the modem banks of AT&T, Worldcom, Level3 etc. and only provide the email etc. services and bill you.

However, since the same customer will not be listed twice on the node who cares if the customer is getting service from Earthlink or RR in terms of bandwidth use it will be the same. And the prices are plus or minus equal as well.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,3863747 Wed, 17 Jul 2002 17:55:31 EDT Re: this is going to suck... :( http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,3862861 JakCrow : Having other ISPs on the cable network isn't going to affect your service at all. The other ISPs will be separate from your bandwidth limited, piece of crap RR service. You don't have to worry about other companies ruining your cable internet, TW is quite capable of doing that itself.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,3862861 Wed, 17 Jul 2002 16:24:55 EDT Re: this is going to suck... :( http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,3862726 DrTCP : Time Warner already did this in Texas. You can have Earthlink over TimerWarner cable in addition to TW/RR. TW still controls the pipe and backbone connection and the RF network single handedly. The only difference is who assigns your IP and which email/news server you use, web space, dial roaming etc. Other ISP's have the same bandwidth caps, same routing, same port blocking as TW/RR.
[text was edited by author 2002-07-17 16:09:48]
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,3862726 Wed, 17 Jul 2002 16:08:17 EDT Re: this is going to suck... :( http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,3861817 BrianDamage : Learn what you are talking about.
What you are describing is a headend, and capacity augmentation will require more cable when the existing capacity on existing cable is exhausted.
Also, don't comment on DSL when you obviously know nothing about it.
Perhaps you should stick to your area of experience....games.
Leave broadband service delivery to those who have a clue about it.
[text was edited by author 2002-07-17 14:34:27]
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,3861817 Wed, 17 Jul 2002 14:32:16 EDT Re: this is going to suck... :( http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,3861740 wzoo1 : You are WRONG!!! Time Warner owns the cable broadband nodes and they can handle up to loads of users... If they time warner was to install more nodes, they just install the node right near the old node from the same cable... The transfer between a cable headquarters where its sending the signal to the node is actually fiber optic. The node coverts fiber signal into coax signal for cable tv and cable modems!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,3861740 Wed, 17 Jul 2002 14:24:55 EDT Re: this is going to suck... :( http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,3861417 jhboricua :
said by dontworry:
If push comes to shove and the service degrades; TWC just pops in another node to handle the load in that area. That's something DSL can't do.
Clarify this please. The way I see it is actually easier to do this with a dsl setup than with a cable setup. With dsl the capacity augmentation is done only at the CO. With cable, adding a node involves working at the street level and depending how good/bad the network was designed it may involve having to run more underground lines thru the street to feed the new node, correct me if I'm wrong.
--
"Look, If I warm up my breasts with my hands, do you think they'll get bigger or smaller?" - Asuka on the subject of thermal expansion]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,3861417 Wed, 17 Jul 2002 13:50:37 EDT Re: this is going to suck... :( http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,3860941 pupowski :
said by wzoo1:
... Serisouly, Time Warner controls and owns the cable lines and cable modem broadband lines and why should it give it to other isps???
It's called competition, aka." the American way ". It works in Korea, it works in Tacoma, and it can (and does) work on the TW network. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,3860941 Wed, 17 Jul 2002 12:56:08 EDT Re: this is going to suck... :( http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,3860503 tomsprat :
quote:
This is going to suck...
No, in fact it's a good thing. New customers would have signed up with TW anyway, so the customer base won't significantly increase simply because there are additional providers. Now there will be increased competition for service, which should help to keep prices down, and services up.
--
The glass is neither half-empty, nor is it half-full; it is merely twice the size required to contain the liquid elements therein.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,3860503 Wed, 17 Jul 2002 12:04:26 EDT Re: this is going to suck... :( http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,3860336 anon : Don't sweat it too much buddy. I'm in Charlotte and we had to open our lines to Earthlink, AOL, and Max.inter.net and the service still rocks....the download and upload caps were put into place to help with the worries that you expressed. If push comes to shove and the service degrades; TWC just pops in another node to handle the load in that area. That's something DSL can't do......It'll be fine.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,3860336 Wed, 17 Jul 2002 11:43:25 EDT Re: this is going to suck... :( http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,3860248 BrianDamage : For one, it is not the the FCC that is doing it, it is the FTC. Read more closely.
Secondly, opening their facilities was part of the agreement of the AOL/TW merger, from what I understand.
--
The only human truth is that we live and we die. Everything in between those events is open to interpretation.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,3860248 Wed, 17 Jul 2002 11:28:26 EDT this is going to suck... :( http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,3860152 wzoo1 : This is going to suck... I currently have Roadrunner which is high speed internet cable modem service direct from Time Warner and it's excellent right now! Since time warner is opening its cable lines/broadband lines and letting other ISPS use time warners HFC network, then ALL OUR CABLE MODEM SERVICE WILL DEGRADE AND GET WORSE!!! THIS IS SERIOUSLY A BAD IDEA!!! I dont agree with this and WHY IS THE FCC DOING THIS??? Serisouly, Time Warner controls and owns the cable lines and cable modem broadband lines and why should it give it to other isps??? ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,3860152 Wed, 17 Jul 2002 11:17:50 EDT