nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
 ·Comcast
| I pick data
If your provider argues that their cable lines are at capacity and a usage cap is needed because of that, ask them exactly how they deliver video on demand and voice over IP telephone service to their customers. Data is data. There doesn’t seem to be an impending demand that we turn off our televisions after three hours, stop ordering video on demand, or hang up our “digital phone” line because of a capacity problem.
dear cable company,
please take the bandwidth from HGTV, all the religion channels, all the business channels (CNBC, etc.) and all the shopping channels and add it to my broadband cap.
thnx |
|
wentlanc
You Can't Fix Dumb..
join:2003-07-30
Maineville, OH | And tack on ESPN, ESPN2, MTV, MTV2, VH1, WE, Oxygen, SAOP, and all of the music channels.....
Give me per byte billing for ALL services crossing the link, and let me pick ONLY what I want too. The base price should be about $5.
cw |
|
nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD | oh crap, I forgot about the music channels; wonder how much those suck up? |
|
tenpin784
I Went To The Dark Side?
join:2001-03-30
New Durham, NH
1 edit | reply to wentlanc
said by wentlanc  :And tack on ESPN, ESPN2, MTV, MTV2, VH1, WE, Oxygen, SAOP, and all of the music channels..... Ok, so with digital cable, you free'd up a whopping 2 channels.
All those channels you listed, you can throw on 2 6MHz channels. And that is the whole thing with DOCSIS 3.0....using multiple channels. |
|
smcallah
join:2004-08-05
Home | Well, technically, in cable systems (most of them) that still have analog channels, some of those channels are on analog too, like ESPN, ESPN2, MTV, VH1... so those right there would free up 4 channels on their own. |
|
tenpin784
I Went To The Dark Side?
join:2001-03-30
New Durham, NH | Hence I said with digital cable.
Cause I know, we have most of those on analog, except for the music channels, which are on digital. |
|
uid1307457
Premium
join:2005-12-30
Tempe, AZ
 ·Qwest.net
·Convergent Interne..
 ·DIRECTV
| reply to nasadude
said by nasadude :If your provider argues that their cable lines are at capacity and a usage cap is needed because of that, ask them exactly how they deliver video on demand and voice over IP telephone service to their customers. Data is data. There doesn’t seem to be an impending demand that we turn off our televisions after three hours, stop ordering video on demand, or hang up our “digital phone” line because of a capacity problem.dear cable company, please take the bandwidth from HGTV, all the religion channels, all the business channels (CNBC, etc.) and all the shopping channels and add it to my broadband cap. thnx x2 |
|
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| reply to tenpin784
said by tenpin784 :said by wentlanc :And tack on ESPN, ESPN2, MTV, MTV2, VH1, WE, Oxygen, SAOP, and all of the music channels..... Ok, so with digital cable, you free'd up a whopping 2 channels. All those channels you listed, you can throw on 2 6MHz channels. And that is the whole thing with DOCSIS 3.0....using multiple channels. Most DOCSIS nodes are fed off a single 6MHz channel. |
|
PDXPLT
join:2003-12-04
Banks, OR
| reply to tenpin784
dear cable company,
please take the bandwidth from HGTV, all the religion channels, all the business channels (CNBC, etc.) and all the shopping channels and add it to my broadband cap.
thnx Why would they want to?
Dave Burnstein's right; this is policy is clearly designed to prevent video downloading from cannabolizing Frontier's own video offerings. They want you to buy premium TV content from them, not off the internet.
Which, as a private company, they're perfectly entitled to do, so long as they disclose the caps. If you don't like it, you can move to an area served by a different provider - isn't that want you guys always say? |
|
bjbrock
join:2002-10-28
Mcalester, OK
| reply to nasadude
Not true. Video delivered from my cable operator does not have to go out over the backbone which is where the bottleneck occurs. The equipment and the cost for bandwidth after it leaves the head end is tremendous. TV content does not have to travel over this part of the network so your assumption is totally wrong. |
|
fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| reply to nasadude
said by nasadude :..snip.. ask them exactly how they deliver video on demand and voice over IP telephone service to their customers. Data is data. problem. .. I'll ask them this question as soon as this person explains which box of crackerjacks they got their information from. It's a nice spin and flame to make, I'm guessing, a point..? but it's complete lunacy and idiotic at best.
All telephone traffic runs over a very small amount of frequency.. and his/her cute attempt to talk about VOD? Um.. it's a freaking VIDEO company.. why would they not have VOD? I suppose he can't see past his own selfish arguments to understand that these MSOs offer more than one product and not just internet, not just telephone, and not just video.. I suppose that the new argument is to stop delivering cable TV and phone service and put it all towards internet.. I mean, because, after all EVERYONE only uses the internet.
His statement may strike a chord in some people that are looking for something to rally behind, but when you step back and take an educated look at it, the entire comment was a piece of sh*t... If he wants to argue capacity, then argue capacity, but to attack other services to favor one, the argument weakens. The same could be said of VOD fans that the internet takes up too much space if they were to view the internet as a waste.
Sorry Nasa, but your argument on pulling those channels, ESPECIALLY HGTV, is a bad place to go because HGTV is one of the channels are the high side of viewership/ratings. Further, while you don't watch religious channels (nor do I) there IS a viewership. In the Twin Cities, for example, I once argued over PEG and local orig programming.. there was a HUGE lash back on my comments as they were much more popular than I thought.
Still.. What the quoted posted said, and you said as well doesn't resolve an issue at all.. not in the way they are being stated. |
|
fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| reply to bjbrock
said by bjbrock :Not true. Video delivered from my cable operator does not have to go out over the backbone which is where the bottleneck occurs. The equipment and the cost for bandwidth after it leaves the head end is tremendous. TV content does not have to travel over this part of the network so your assumption is totally wrong. You should do some research and rethink your entire post.
I'll touch on a few for you:
The bottleneck is in the last mile more than the back=bone.
Data costs are still data costs but they are not "tremendous"...
TV content DOES in fact travel over "this part" of the network.. I suppose you're not aware, in Comcast's case, how they transport some of their video content?
But anyway.. I'll let you off to that research. |
|
ieolus
Support The Clecs
join:2001-06-19
Duluth, GA
| reply to PDXPLT
Sounds like a bit like a conflict of interest.. are they a common carrier ISP or are they a content provider?
Both you say? Then we should be talking about a neutral third-party bandwidth provider, free of all this bullshit.
--
"Speak for yourself "Chadmaster" - lesopp |
|
wentlanc
You Can't Fix Dumb..
join:2003-07-30
Maineville, OH
| said by ieolus :Sounds like a bit like a conflict of interest.. are they a common carrier ISP or are they a content provider? Both you say? Then we should be talking about a neutral third-party bandwidth provider, free of all this bullshit. Bingo. The minute a company provides internet access, but creates disincentive to another companies similar product via that access, is engaged in anti competitive behavior and should be punished as such. This is precisely why we need the ISP to be a "dumb pipe". To provide internet access. Let the media companies compete on their own merits and products.
cw |
|
wentlanc
You Can't Fix Dumb..
join:2003-07-30
Maineville, OH
| reply to tenpin784
said by tenpin784 :said by wentlanc :And tack on ESPN, ESPN2, MTV, MTV2, VH1, WE, Oxygen, SAOP, and all of the music channels..... Ok, so with digital cable, you free'd up a whopping 2 channels. All those channels you listed, you can throw on 2 6MHz channels. And that is the whole thing with DOCSIS 3.0....using multiple channels. Do you honestly think that I made my whole list of crap I don't watch? This is why people want ala-cart programming. I can list the channels I do want to get in a very short list. If I could cut my bill in half, I would be happy.
And before anyone goes off on me about how it would kill the media companies... I don't care. This is the economy that we are in. Any money I don't have to spend is a good thing for me, and my kids. Why is it that it's ok for people to lose their homes, and have a hard time making ends meet from month to month, when these gluttons are making profits quarter over quarter?
cw |
|
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| said by wentlanc :Why is it that it's ok for people to lose their homes, and have a hard time making ends meet from month to month, when these gluttons are making profits quarter over quarter? cw Perhaps they should cancel their cable TV and focus on paying their mortgage/rent and other necessary bills? Just a thought.
I'm sure that would cut into their profit margins. |
|
wentlanc
You Can't Fix Dumb..
join:2003-07-30
Maineville, OH | I don't disagree with you there. But the people who got screwed with subprime mortgages would not likely be saved by lowering their cable bill by $20, or eliminating it and saving $70.
cw |
|
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| said by wentlanc :I don't disagree with you there. But the people who got screwed with subprime mortgages would not likely be saved by lowering their cable bill by $20, or eliminating it and saving $70. cw I agree, but I was more pointing out that the people who are in that situation probably wouldn't cancel their cable ... they probably aren't willing to sacrifice. They'd rather have someone else bail them out or pay their own way. Sacrifice is hard, hand-outs aren't. (Look at the Home Makeover family as a perfect example.)
I bought a house two years ago and my credit wasn't the best. They tried to throw all sort of "creative" financing at me so I could get the house I really wanted, but I stopped myself and actually researched. I consulted with friends who own houses, read online about the different loan types they were throwing at me. I wound up with a $50k cheaper house - with a more expensive 30-year fixed mortgage - but there won't be any surprises and I know my payment will be easier to make over time and my interest rate won't budge.
I guess what I'm getting at, is I can sympathize with the people who were taken advantage of, but they bear just as much responsibility for letting themselves get into the situation as the predatory lenders who took advantage of them. |
|
