moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
 ·Verizon Online DSL
| reply to asdfdfdf
Re: Oh really?
Disection time:
said by asdfdfdf :
If the present internet situation won't change for those who don't want the enhanced service, then I'll ask this again: AHHH, but it will change.
Just as operating systems and programs have increased in size (from kilobytes to gigabytes), so will data files. Imagine being able to copy a full 10MB HD over the net in under 5 minutes (when 10MB disks were considered huge.)
Now, MP3 files are around 5MB each, videos can be 10MB or much more, Linux distros are CD sized. More and more people are getting on the net daily and more and more data is flowing. It has to go somewhere. So the Bells are making their networks bigger to cope with the influx of users and the increase in file sizes. Otherwise, no one will want to surf a bottle necked system. This is one of the main selling points of a broadband connection; speed.
said by asdfdfdf :
A number of bell executive statements say that google, vonage, etc. are PRESENTLY freeloaders. They don't say they would be future freeloaders if they wanted enhanced service but didn't pay for it but that they are PRESENT freeloaders(that is, freeloaders under the presently constructed order of things). Do ATT, BS, Verizon plan to allow them to continue to be freeloaders, even though the statements they have made say that the freeloading can not continue? If they don't intend to allow this freeloading to continue, then they clearly intend to radically alter the nature of the present internet, NOT to continue it undisturbed.
O.k. by your reasoning, if I were to call you (long distance) on the phone, not only would I have to pay but so would you. When you call someone long distance, only the caller pays, not the receiver. The Bells would like both sides to pay. Should SBC pay when they try to call a Vonage number? What about a Verizon customer calling a T-Mobile number? Should they have to pay the cell airtime too?
Now, how are Google, Yahoo and Vonage "freeloaders?" They pay their ISPs to get on-line. We pay our ISPs for a connection to the net. Where is the free ride?
One explanation for all of this could be that the Bells know they can't hit up their customers for more money. Can you imagine the backlash if Verizon told all its customers that they need to charge an extra $5/month for network upgrades. It would probably be more for business customers.
This is nothing more than a shakedown of large companies that have money. The Bells need to upgrade their systems but are afraid to ask their customers for the money to pay for it. They want someone else to pay for it. There are enough studies out there that show what people will pay for broadband and many think that price is too high as it is. How many people have dumped POTS lines in favor of cellular (not including those that don't even have VOIP.) |
