pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | Ed Whitacre Needs New Shoes
Man, he sure keeps stepping in it!
--
Tancredo 2008! |
|
chesney09
Premium
join:2004-07-26
Redford, MI
clubs:
| I'd swear.. everyone is already paying for access to those pipes.. .
I pay a monthly fee just like anyone else that has internet access.. be it business, residential, etc.. We all have to pay for the access to the Information Super highway.. Some of us require faster speeds and more bandwidth, which is reflected in the price!
If they want more money from me, they should really learn how to just provide customer service and not treat them like WE NEED THEM. I think if their customers were happy with the service and Customer Service as a whole.. They would be in a better position and probably make more revenue. Instead they choose to come up with some wackassed ways to create revenue that they really are justified to get. |
|
kcir
join:2005-07-30
Butner, NC
| reply to pnh102
Is AT+T giving away free DSL to subscribers? If no, aren't they paying for the content? Do other competing companies subscribers not want that content so they don't have ATTs problem? Or is it just that ATT is so poorly run they can't offer the same price/value as their competitors? |
|
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
 ·Comcast
| reply to chesney09
said by chesney09  :I'd swear.. everyone is already paying for access to those pipes.. . I pay a monthly fee just like anyone else that has internet access.. be it business, residential, etc.. We all have to pay for the access to the Information Super highway.. Some of us require faster speeds and more bandwidth, which is reflected in the price! No kidding. I am surprised Whitacre's comments haven't sparked a shareholder revolt. This kind of posturing might make AT&T's broadband investments worthless!
I have a small personal website and I am damned sure that I will never pay a nickel to any ISP for the privilege of their customers to see it. I pay for hosting. As far as I am concerned, that's all I should have to pay.
I really do hope that content providers grant AT&T's wish. Companies like Google, Yahoo, Vonage, etc. should degrade traffic to customers from AT&T-owned IP addresses, and/or redirect web requests from those IPs to pages which advertise alternative ISPs.
--
Tancredo 2008! |
|
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
·Comcast
| reply to kcir
said by kcir :Or is it just that ATT is so poorly run they can't offer the same price/value as their competitors? I don't think anyone can credibly describe a company which renames its wireless division to the same name that it chucked mere months ago as being well run.
--
Tancredo 2008! |
|
aztecnology
O Rly?
Premium
join:2003-02-12
Murrieta, CA
 ·Verizon FIOS
| said by pnh102 :said by kcir :Or is it just that ATT is so poorly run they can't offer the same price/value as their competitors? I don't think anyone can credibly describe a company which renames its wireless division to the same name that it chucked mere months ago as being well run. I don't think you should be talking about credibility, when you don't know what your're talking about...
AT&T Wireless was spun off from the former AT&T in 2001.
Cingular(SBC 60 / BellSouth 40) buys AT&T Wireless in 2004.
SBC buys AT&T in 2005. SBC becomes at&t.
The new at&t buys BellSouth in 2006.
at&t gains 100% control of Cingular. Changes name to at&t wireless
--
"Independent thinkers tend to ALWAYS have someone not agreeing with them. It's The non-thinkers that always come in legions." John Callari .:|:. Say no to the IRS Yes to the Fair Tax |
|
Primis1
join:2005-06-13
Coldwater, MI
| reply to chesney09
said by chesney09 :I'd swear.. everyone is already paying for access to those pipes.. . I pay a monthly fee just like anyone else that has internet access.. be it business, residential, etc.. We all have to pay for the access to the Information Super highway.. Some of us require faster speeds and more bandwidth, which is reflected in the price! Here's the thing some of you don't understand though:
Just because you pay $x-amount/mo. for your current access does not mean you DESERVE a higher tier as though it were some sort of right. And just because Developer Y wants to have Product Z on the market that is web-intensive doesn't mean the providers have to give them the time of day so they can.
All of us WANT higher speeds at the same or lower prices. It can't happen forever though, and eventually someone is going to have to pay for constant expansion. It's not fair to bash the telecos and cablecos for "not keeping up" -- maybe people should instead focus on software developers and engineers and find out why they can't be more-efficient witht he bandwidth we have *now* instead of the bloat.
That's what I don't get -- why it's all the providers' fault and all these people trying to make elaborate web-based apps (many of which are flat-out unnecessary and require way more overhead than they should) have nobody to answer to. it' snot "progress", it's scapegoating... |
|
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
·Comcast
| reply to aztecnology
And the short version of that story is that if you started as an AT&T Wireless customer, you became Cingular customer, and now you will be an AT&T Wireless customer again. Why not keep the Cingular name? Why throw away all the money spent building up the name from scratch, along with all the money spent integrating former AT&T Wireless customers into Cingular? Cingular has some serious issues with services in some regions. Wouldn't it be better to spend the money that would be going into rebranding the company yet again on service upgrades instead?
--
Tancredo 2008! |
|
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
·Comcast
| reply to Primis1
said by Primis1 :Just because you pay $x-amount/mo. for your current access does not mean you DESERVE a higher tier as though it were some sort of right. No one is asking for a higher tier for free. Whitacre wants companies like Google, Yahoo and any other major content provider to pay AT&T so that AT&T broadband customers will have access to those providers.
--
Tancredo 2008! |
|
aztecnology
O Rly?
Premium
join:2003-02-12
Murrieta, CA
·Verizon FIOS
| reply to pnh102
said by pnh102 : Why not keep the Cingular name? Branding...
at&t phone
at&t internet
at&t television
at&t wireless
at&t park
at&t center
at&t shampoo |
|
tsu9
join:2001-08-17
Wheeling, IL | at&t life...
(scary!) |
|
Primis1
join:2005-06-13
Coldwater, MI
| reply to pnh102
said by pnh102 :said by Primis1 :Just because you pay $x-amount/mo. for your current access does not mean you DESERVE a higher tier as though it were some sort of right. No one is asking for a higher tier for free. Whitacre wants companies like Google, Yahoo and any other major content provider to pay AT&T so that AT&T broadband customers will have access to those providers. ...yes, but why? Because these companies keep pushing software and web development beyond what it's really capable of at any given time. In Google and Yahoo's eyes (as examples), ISP's should just "man up" and provide bigger pipes to support their adventures in web-based everything.
The ISP's are naturally none-too happy about that, and their response is "ok then, if you want to do all this, pay us a premium to provide the updates and pipe to allow it".
So yes, it *IS* about higher tiers and speeds. It's about users and companies like Google just assuming/demanding that faster tiers be provided at their whim, whether it's practical for the providers or not. Eventually, it all come sback to developers wanting ISP's to provides end users higher speeds/tiers at ANY cost (because the developers could care less if it's profitable or even makes an sort of fiscal sense).
Look... the internet is NOT meant for what everyone wants to use it for nowadays, and it never will be. Web-based apps and OS's on any large scale will NOT work, because no provider will ever be able to keep up. Software development and scalability is WAY easier than network/bandwidth scalability. Once software developers get this through their thick, empty skulls, maybe we'll get somewhere. Until we do though, this issue isn't ever going to resolve because the ISp's literally CAN'T meet developer demand, and the ISP's will all just go broke trying... |
|
firewire9999
join:2004-07-11
Livonia, MI | reply to aztecnology
Hmm you forgot some other branding when AT&T buys these big guys out:
AT&T Microsoft
AT&T Yahoo
AT&T Google
AT&T Intel
AT&T AMD
AT&T Starbucks |
|
NGOwner
join:2000-11-21
Leawood, KS
2 edits | reply to pnh102
said by pnh102 :No one is asking for a higher tier for free. Whitacre wants companies like Google, Yahoo and any other major content provider to pay AT&T so that AT&T broadband customers will have access to those providers. Sorry, that's not right.
It's a question of preferred access vs. regular access.
Not a question of access vs. no access.
preferred access = new, larger pipes, guaranteed RTT & jitter, better MTTR, etc. Note that the fees for preferred access are paid by the content company (Google, Yahoo, etc.) directly, and not directly (if at all) by you and me (residential broadband subscribers).
regular access = best effort, as it is today
[NG]Owner
--
It is impossible to create an idiot-proof product. Humanity is simply too adept at churning out better idiots. |
|
King P
Don't blame me. I voted for Ron Paul
Premium
join:2004-11-17
Inman, SC
 ·Windstream
·Charter Pipeline
| reply to Primis1
Maybe the reason that the web can't handle these "intensive" apps is because Whitacre pissed away the billions of dollars the government gave him and the other telcos to have fiber laid to all of our homes by 2006.
This nonsense about the web not being able to "handle" apps and software is complete and utter crap. It's not a software developers fault that the Telcos would rather spend precious money lobbying to have municipal fiber initiatives shut down, than invest that money into their own infrastructure to make it better and more "app and software" friendly.
Ed Whitacre is full of crap. Everyone with half a brain cell knows that copper can only go so far and that Fiber is the next step for Telco evolution, but Whitacre would rather whine about people getting a "free ride" on his network and spend money lobbying congress and buying off the FCC. |
|
b10010011
Whats a Posting tag?
join:2004-09-07
Bellingham, WA
·Comcast Formerly ..
| reply to pnh102
said by pnh102 :I don't think anyone can credibly describe a company which renames its wireless division to the same name that it chucked mere months ago as being well run. Agreed, and AT&T Wireless was always The Worst 
One would think a business would want to avoid that kind of name recognition.   |
|
mr sean
Professional Infidel
Premium,ExMod 2001-07
join:2001-04-03
N. Absentia
clubs:
| reply to firewire9999
said by firewire9999 :AT&T Starbucks I draw my line in the sand at coffee!
--
How you can make the world a Better Place |
|
yaplej
CCNA
Premium
join:2001-02-10
White City, OR
·Charter Pipeline
| reply to Primis1
said by Primis1 :yes, but why? Because these companies keep pushing software and web development beyond what it's really capable of at any given time. In Google and Yahoo's eyes (as examples), ISP's should just "man up" and provide bigger pipes to support their adventures in web-based everything... Dude! How much of a dumb a$$ are you? Seriously ISP's provide *BANDWIDTH*. If customer x purchases y bandwidth its the ISP's job to deliver that amount of bandwidth. If they fail to then customer x will go to another provider than can provide the bandwidth they need.
You, and others like you make it sound like customer x isn't already paying for their bandwidth. So get your head out of the dirt, and stop spreading that horse shit around.
Customer x already pays for ALL the bandwidth they use. It doesn't matter if customer x is a DSL user, or a big content provider like Yahoo/Google. Both still pay their bill they receive from their ISP each month.
The only party in this equation that's trying to get a "free ride" are the f-ing ISPs! They want "anyone but themselves" to pay for THEIR network upgrades! AHHHHHHH!!!! STOP THIS MADNESS!!! |
|
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
·Comcast
| reply to b10010011
said by b10010011 :Agreed, and AT&T Wireless was always The Worst Tell me about it. I was an AT&T Wireless victim until 2002 when I switched to Cingular (they are great in Philadelphia, where I was at the time). I loathe the idea of having to see that name on my phone again.
--
Tancredo 2008! |
|
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
·Comcast
| reply to Primis1
said by Primis1 :...yes, but why? Because these companies keep pushing software and web development beyond what it's really capable of at any given time. In Google and Yahoo's eyes (as examples), ISP's should just "man up" and provide bigger pipes to support their adventures in web-based everything. It's ultimately the customer that drives the demand. Say I am a VOIP provider. I know this service doesn't work with 56K. Am I going to expect that the dialup ISPs pay more to provide faster service to their customers who use my service? No... I am going to expect my customers to order broadband service that meets their needs.
--
Tancredo 2008! |
|
