 | | Hit your cap... Hit your cap even quicker!! | |
|
 | | | Re: Hit your cap... This horse has been beaten to death ad nauseam. | |
|
| | | | Re: Hit your cap... said by Ted Sheckler:This horse has been beaten to death ad nauseam.
An artificial problem to which attention needs to be focused on, regardless if horse or donkey. | |
|
| | | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
kudos:2 | Re: Hit your cap... More bandwidth doesn't always mean more consumption. What "problem" needs to be focused on? What outcome do you hope to achieve? Do you prefer providers to start charging to levels of data caps in addition to bandwidth tiers? | |
|
| | | | | | Re: Hit your cap... said by openbox9:More bandwidth doesn't always mean more consumption. What "problem" needs to be focused on? What outcome do you hope to achieve? Do you prefer providers to start charging to levels of data caps in addition to bandwidth tiers?
"More bandwidth doesn't always mean more consumption."
For most people, it does.
"What "problem" needs to be focused on?"
The unfounded claims of congestion and the creation of artificial scarcity in order to charge more for less and delay upgrades that rank US broadband at abyssmal levels compared to our economic competitors.
"Do you prefer providers to start charging to levels of data caps in addition to bandwidth tiers?"
I prefer providers to deliver the services purchased and not engage, in my opinion, in collusion, monopolistic behaviour, disinformation and employment of shills in order to defend their business practices. I prefer the competitive market to deliver a good value for the clients' dollar, impossible when we have regulatory capture by massive monopoly or duopoly forces. | |
|
| | | | | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
kudos:2 | Re: Hit your cap... said by WernerSchutz:the creation of artificial scarcity in order to charge more What's the best way to profit from any commodity?said by WernerSchutz:I prefer providers to deliver the services purchased Do you believe they aren't? | |
|
| | | | | | | | Re: Hit your cap... said by openbox9:said by WernerSchutz:the creation of artificial scarcity in order to charge more What's the best way to profit from any commodity? said by WernerSchutz:I prefer providers to deliver the services purchased Do you believe they aren't? Profit and gouging are different. Trying to charge more for less is not delivering the services purchased. | |
|
| | | | | | | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
kudos:2 | Re: Hit your cap... Absolutely...perspective and semantics.said by WernerSchutz:Trying to charge more for less is not delivering the services purchased. So where does this happen? This is where I lose you. If you subscribe to a Comcast tier with a 250 GB cap for $xx/mth, when does the "charge more for less" and failure to deliver service occur? | |
|
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Hit your cap... said by openbox9:Absolutely...perspective and semantics. said by WernerSchutz:Trying to charge more for less is not delivering the services purchased. So where does this happen? This is where I lose you. If you subscribe to a Comcast tier with a 250 GB cap for $xx/mth, when does the "charge more for less" and failure to deliver service occur? I am talking from the point of the old TW market now under CC. Truly unlimited data usage based on available speed morphed to throttled and initially undisclosed caps, harassment of paying users and capricious disconnections for one year. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
kudos:2 | Re: Hit your cap... Ok, so your issue is with something that happened in the past, that is now remedied? | |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: Hit your cap... said by openbox9:Ok, so your issue is with something that happened in the past, that is now remedied?
The caps aren't rooted in reality. They don't address network congestion, if there even was any, and they're applied across the board without concern for location. They also haven't gone up since they were implemented.
Given the nature of Moore's Law you would have expected these caps to at least have doubled by now.
Anyways, the real issue is cable companies have no competition, and need to be classified as common carriers. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
kudos:2 | Re: Hit your cap... I sense déjà vu. Roots in reality are irrelevant. Why would one expect an arbitrary cap to double based on Moore's Law? Competition does exist, just not enough for some people. I wouldn't get your hopes up for the FCC redesignation of ISPs as common carriers if I were you  | |
|
| | | | | | | | |  espaethDigital PlumberPremium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
kudos:2
 ·Clear Wireless
| 38mbps downstream channels are still only going to be able to move a maximum of 12.3TB/mo each. There are still 200-225 subscribers per channel (or channel-group in DOCSIS 3 systems).
That said, more capacity can always be added for more money. Ultimately the cap is about keeping usage within limits that fit the business model. | |
|
| | | | | | | | |  dvd536as Mr. Pink as they comePremium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:4 | Re: Hit your cap... said by espaeth:Ultimately the cap is about keeping usage within limits that fit the business model. NO, the cap is all about protecting their lucrative VIDEO biz!
--
The shortest distance between 2 points adds 1.5 stars to T. want $25? solve »coord.info/GC20A37 for me | |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | said by openbox9:Ok, so your issue is with something that happened in the past, that is now remedied?
No. | |
|
| | | | |  maartenaElmoPremium
join:2002-05-10
Orange, CA
kudos:1
 ·AT&T U-Verse
 ·DIRECTV
| said by WernerSchutz:said by openbox9:More bandwidth doesn't always mean more consumption. What "problem" needs to be focused on? What outcome do you hope to achieve? Do you prefer providers to start charging to levels of data caps in addition to bandwidth tiers?
"More bandwidth doesn't always mean more consumption." For most people, it does. And do you have any data to back this up? Because I don't believe a word of it.
I have moved from a 10/1 Mbps connection through cable to a 24/3 Mbps connection through U-Verse, so it is 2.4 times the download, and 3 times the upload that I was used to.
Now.... downloading goed FASTER so I have my stuff SOONER, but I don't believe I am using more bandwidth then I was before. Maybe a little bit more, but not to the maginification of 2.4 times more or 3 times more like you seem to suggest.
--
"I reject your reality and substitute my own!" | |
|
| | | | | |  MattAll noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | Re: Hit your cap... said by maartena:said by WernerSchutz:said by openbox9:More bandwidth doesn't always mean more consumption. What "problem" needs to be focused on? What outcome do you hope to achieve? Do you prefer providers to start charging to levels of data caps in addition to bandwidth tiers?
"More bandwidth doesn't always mean more consumption." For most people, it does. And do you have any data to back this up? Because I don't believe a word of it. I have moved from a 10/1 Mbps connection through cable to a 24/3 Mbps connection through U-Verse, so it is 2.4 times the download, and 3 times the upload that I was used to. Now.... downloading goed FASTER so I have my stuff SOONER, but I don't believe I am using more bandwidth then I was before. Maybe a little bit more, but not to the maginification of 2.4 times more or 3 times more like you seem to suggest. I echo your sentiments. I have a 20/20 connection and I've found that my habits haven't changed very much. It's great that things download faster, buffer more quickly, or stream smoother, but I am not suddenly transferring hundreds of gigabytes more per month. | |
|
| | | | | | | | said by maartena:said by WernerSchutz:said by openbox9:More bandwidth doesn't always mean more consumption. What "problem" needs to be focused on? What outcome do you hope to achieve? Do you prefer providers to start charging to levels of data caps in addition to bandwidth tiers?
"More bandwidth doesn't always mean more consumption." For most people, it does. And do you have any data to back this up? Because I don't believe a word of it. I have moved from a 10/1 Mbps connection through cable to a 24/3 Mbps connection through U-Verse, so it is 2.4 times the download, and 3 times the upload that I was used to. Now.... downloading goed FASTER so I have my stuff SOONER, but I don't believe I am using more bandwidth then I was before. Maybe a little bit more , but not to the maginification of 2.4 times more or 3 times more like you seem to suggest. You have a faster connection and you use more, as per your words. I rest my case. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | Re: Hit your cap... said by WernerSchutz:said by maartena:Now.... downloading goed FASTER so I have my stuff SOONER, but I don't believe I am using more bandwidth then I was before. You have a faster connection and you use more, as per your words. I rest my case. Faster speed is not related to more usage, I rest my "case"....
It's easy to emphasize words arbitrarily... Also, what is your point? You seem have blinders on because of your hate of Comcast.
I'll pre-emptively answer your accusation - No I am not a shill | |
|
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Hit your cap... said by Ted Sheckler:said by WernerSchutz:said by maartena:Now.... downloading goed FASTER so I have my stuff SOONER, but I don't believe I am using more bandwidth then I was before. You have a faster connection and you use more, as per your words. I rest my case. Faster speed is not related to more usage, I rest my "case".... It's easy to emphasize words arbitrarily... Also, what is your point? You seem have blinders on because of your hate of Comcast. I'll pre-emptively answer your accusation - No I am not a shill Employee ? Contractor ?
No hate, just experience. | |
|
| | | | | | | maartenaElmoPremium
join:2002-05-10
Orange, CA
kudos:1 Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
·DIRECTV
| said by WernerSchutz:You have a faster connection and you use more, as per your words. I rest my case.
Perhaps indeed a little more. But not to the extend that if I have 24/3 now, and would have 100/10 next month, that next month I would download 3 or 4 times as much. My habits haven't changed much, and neither has my TIME. I have other things to do in life then to watch computers video.
--
"I reject your reality and substitute my own!" | |
|
| | | | | |  NightfallMy Goal Is To Deny YoursPremium,MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI
 ·Site5.com
 ·Comcast
 ·Callcentric
| said by maartena:said by WernerSchutz:said by openbox9:More bandwidth doesn't always mean more consumption. What "problem" needs to be focused on? What outcome do you hope to achieve? Do you prefer providers to start charging to levels of data caps in addition to bandwidth tiers?
"More bandwidth doesn't always mean more consumption." For most people, it does. And do you have any data to back this up? Because I don't believe a word of it. I have moved from a 10/1 Mbps connection through cable to a 24/3 Mbps connection through U-Verse, so it is 2.4 times the download, and 3 times the upload that I was used to. Now.... downloading goed FASTER so I have my stuff SOONER, but I don't believe I am using more bandwidth then I was before. Maybe a little bit more, but not to the maginification of 2.4 times more or 3 times more like you seem to suggest. I also agree. I have had Comcast for a long time now. Before I upgraded to the highest tier, I was using 150gb per month on average. In the last 3 months since upgrading, I am using the same amount. So what gives?
Faster speeds does not equate to more bandwidth used. To say that it does with no data to back it up means someone is talking out of their ass.
--
My domain - Nightfall.net | |
|
| | | | | | | | | Re: Hit your cap... said by Nightfall:I also agree. I have had Comcast for a long time now. Before I upgraded to the highest tier, I was using 150gb per month on average. In the last 3 months since upgrading, I am using the same amount. So what gives?
Faster speeds does not equate to more bandwidth used. To say that it does with no data to back it up means someone is talking out of their ass.
Using a little bit of logic, it won't mean greater consumption until you find an internet application that was either difficult or impossible to use before due to bandwidth constraints.
If, for example, you suddenly find that Onlive works really well with your upgraded connection, you may find yourself with a ballooning bandwidth consumption. | |
|
| | | | | | | | NightfallMy Goal Is To Deny YoursPremium,MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI Reviews:
·Site5.com
·Comcast
·Callcentric
| Re: Hit your cap... said by sonicmerlin:said by Nightfall:I also agree. I have had Comcast for a long time now. Before I upgraded to the highest tier, I was using 150gb per month on average. In the last 3 months since upgrading, I am using the same amount. So what gives?
Faster speeds does not equate to more bandwidth used. To say that it does with no data to back it up means someone is talking out of their ass.
Using a little bit of logic, it won't mean greater consumption until you find an internet application that was either difficult or impossible to use before due to bandwidth constraints. If, for example, you suddenly find that Onlive works really well with your upgraded connection, you may find yourself with a ballooning bandwidth consumption. Correct! The thing here is that most applications are catering to the low bandwidth lines as well as the high ones. Look at Netflix for example. It works on low bandwidth connections as well as high ones, with the main difference being quality.
I really don't know of an application that I would use that would increase my bandwidth consumption. I didn't get a faster line for bandwidth consumption. I got it so I could get I want faster, but that doesn't mean I am going out there to get crap that I don't need or want.
I think that is the thing that most people just don't understand. A faster line does not equal a higher consumption rate. Just a faster rate of consumption. 
--
My domain - Nightfall.net | |
|
| | | | | | | | | Same. Ever since i had cable from 1Mbps 10 years ago to having 16Mbps now. My average download usage is still the same. 35gb-50gb a month, and i feel that's alot. I would never know how to hit the 250gb cap legally. | |
|
| | | | | |  RallyBah HumbugPremium
join:2000-10-27
Astoria, NY
·RoadRunner Cable
| i think i will be the only honest person here. I have a 50/5 connection, upgraded from a 15/768 and i use more. I watch more movies online now (got netflix) - and i download alot more game demos that me and my son pour over.
so i'll be the first to say and honestly state, faster speeds = me using more.
--
Fantasy football is Dungeons & Dragons for the guys who beat up kids that played D&D. | |
|
| | | | | | | MattAll noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | Re: Hit your cap... said by Rally:i think i will be the only honest person here. I have a 50/5 connection, upgraded from a 15/768 and i use more. I watch more movies online now (got netflix) - and i download alot more game demos that me and my son pour over.
so i'll be the first to say and honestly state, faster speeds = me using more.
Just because you are a statistic anomaly, doesn't mean every one else is dishonest.
You "got netflix" ... that has nothing to do with your new 50Mbps connection. 15Mbps is more than adequate, even for Netflix HD streaming. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Hit your cap... said by Matt:said by Rally:i think i will be the only honest person here. I have a 50/5 connection, upgraded from a 15/768 and i use more. I watch more movies online now (got netflix) - and i download alot more game demos that me and my son pour over.
so i'll be the first to say and honestly state, faster speeds = me using more.
Just because you are a statistic anomaly, doesn't mean every one else is dishonest. You "got netflix" ... that has nothing to do with your new 50Mbps connection. 15Mbps is more than adequate, even for Netflix HD streaming. The reality is bandwidth consumption increases exponentially every year | |
|
| | | | | | Rekrul
join:2007-04-21
Milford, CT Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
| said by maartena:And do you have any data to back this up? Because I don't believe a word of it.
I have moved from a 10/1 Mbps connection through cable to a 24/3 Mbps connection through U-Verse, so it is 2.4 times the download, and 3 times the upload that I was used to.
Now.... downloading goed FASTER so I have my stuff SOONER, but I don't believe I am using more bandwidth then I was before. Maybe a little bit more, but not to the maginification of 2.4 times more or 3 times more like you seem to suggest. Each time I've upgraded my U-Verse speed, I've found myself more willing to download larger amounts of data than I would have previously. It's not a directly proportional increase, but my usage has gone up. | |
|
| | | | | | |  SeleniaI love DebianPremium
join:2006-09-22
Lanesboro, MA
kudos:2
 ·Verizon Online DSL
·AT&T Wireless Br..
·Verizon Wireless..
| Re: Hit your cap... Having downgraded to 3/768 dsl due to broadband availability in the area I moved to, my bandwidth usage has gone down some. Some of it being efforts to be conservative, such as fine tuning my squid cache, as such measures help bring a perception of speed. Some is adaptive apps, such as Netflix, running at a lower bitrate. Yet another part is a tendency to download, rather than stream, as that only uses the bandwidth for the initial copy, with each additional play costing 0 bandwidth. Line speed can influence habits, as well as some app behaviours. Would you try Netflix or BitTorrent with dial up? I hope not!
--
The new Sony rootkit-Using the ability to remove features you paid for. What's next? Boycott Sony products »[Rant] ps3 update = no more Linux
»It's a Sony (once and forever) | |
|
| | | | | TheWiseGuyDog And ButterflyPremium,MVM
join:2002-07-04
Yonkers, NY
kudos:1 Reviews:
·Optimum Online
| said by WernerSchutz:said by openbox9:More bandwidth doesn't always mean more consumption. What "problem" needs to be focused on? What outcome do you hope to achieve? Do you prefer providers to start charging to levels of data caps in addition to bandwidth tiers?
"More bandwidth doesn't always mean more consumption." For most people, it does. In many cases someone who is already a high bandwidth user might use more bandwidth, but for the vast majority of users who use their connection to do specific things, no it does not mean more consumption. A higher bandwidth connection would not get me to do anything that I do not do now. Might I at some time in the future find something that I want to do that will use more bandwidth, probably, but if I found something I wanted to do, I believe I could easily find a way to do it with the connection I already have.
--
Warning, If you post nonsense and use misinformation and are here to argue based on those methods, you will be put on ignore. | |
|
| | | | | Just irks me when I have moved into a Comcast area and my last provider had me at 30 down and 5 up, no sneaky network management, and no caps. Why should content from Comcast such as xfinitytv.com count against my meter. Next thing that will count against the meter is the new web based guides on the TV service they will be coming out with. | |
|
| | |
| | | | | Re: Hit your cap... ... that looks more like a fat kangaroo. =/ | |
|
| | | | | | Re: Hit your cap... I think you are right. The tail is a giveaway. Not sure the cliche works as well when you say "Beating a dead kangaroo." | |
|
| pinjas
join:2011-01-31
River Falls, WI | Business class | |
|
 baineschile2600 ways to livePremium
join:2008-05-10
Sterling Heights, MI | Kudos To making the effort of increased speeds. The rest of the cable industry seems to be following.
In other news, higher upload = host more often in Black Ops | |
|
| | | Re: Kudos I noticed that they other day when I went on an 11 game wininng streak.... | |
|
| | | | Re: Kudos LOL, I never get host on anything. My Comcast pings are extremely mediocre. Someone with stolen Wi-Fi pulls host over me for example. Pathetic stuff... | |
|
 Romney2012Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe inPremium
join:2002-03-03
USA
kudos:4 |  Channel bonding a benefit even if tier speed remains same
And if they add bonded channels on the upstream, users will be able to get that upload speed(even if only 2 mbps) much more consistently. | |
|
| | | Re: Channel bonding a benefit even if tier speed remains same good job comcast now lets double all the upstreams.
lets work like fios did.
comcast economy no longer qualifies by law as broadband so comcast needs to change it to 3/3
comcast performance 6/1 needs to goto 15/5=49.99
performance plus 12/2 needs to goto 25/15=54.95
blast 16/2,20/4 needs to goto 50/20 =79.95
extreme 50/10 needs to goto 75/25=89.95
new tier 100/20 needs to goto 100/30=119.99
also needs to change prices on tiers. | |
|
| | DrDrew
join:2009-01-28
Apple Valley, CA
kudos:6 | Re: Channel bonding a benefit even if tier speed remains same said by rootuser :comcast economy no longer qualifies by law as broadband
What law? | |
|
| | | | | Re: Channel bonding a benefit even if tier speed remains same said by DrDrew:said by rootuser :comcast economy no longer qualifies by law as broadband
What law? He means FCC classification. | |
|
| | | | DrDrew
join:2009-01-28
Apple Valley, CA
kudos:6
1 edit | Re: Channel bonding a benefit even if tier speed remains same said by sonicmerlin:said by DrDrew:said by rootuser :comcast economy no longer qualifies by law as broadband
What law? He means FCC classification. BIG difference as the "classification" means almost nothing especially when cable internet hasn't really been marketed as "broadband" for years. Cable internet is marketed as "high speed", HSD, HSO, HSI, or Wideband ever since the FCC defined "broadband" several years ago.
If the cable companies were going after government funding for broadband deployment, it might make a difference but cable companies normally don't just launch low end products when building a new area as there isn't enough ROI for them.
--
If it's important.... back it up... twice. Even 99.999% reliability isn't enough sometimes. | |
|
|  ptrowskiGot Helix?Premium
join:2005-03-14
Putnam, CT
kudos:4 | Same here, speeds were much more consistent after buying a 6120. | |
|
 moko
join:2002-12-22
Fayetteville, GA | upload speed that's what i'm talkin about | |
|
| | Portland, OR Upgrade here please... | |
|
| | | Re: Portland, OR I second that. | |
|
 mobModerhatedPremium
join:2000-10-07 | And in 10-15 years TWC will do the same If not by then, surely by 2100CE TWC will be able to match this in a market or two. | |
|
| maartenaElmoPremium
join:2002-05-10
Orange, CA
kudos:1 | Re: And in 10-15 years TWC will do the same 15 years? You are an optimist. | |
|
| | If only they increased their usage caps like their price Although 250GB is reasonable on some extent I feel with more HD content available they should increase it. | |
|
|
| dvd536as Mr. Pink as they comePremium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:4 | Re: this is a rather paltry upload speed, don't you think? Compared to the paltry few its available to?
comcast is available in more areas than surewest.
--
The shortest distance between 2 points adds 1.5 stars to T. want $25? solve »coord.info/GC20A37 for me | |
|
| |  spewakR.I.P DadkinsPremium
join:2001-08-07
Elk Grove, CA
kudos:1
·SureWest Internet
·Clear Wireless
| Re: this is a rather paltry upload speed, don't you think? said by dvd536:Compared to the paltry few its available to? comcast is available in more areas than surewest. My post was supposed to drip with sarcasm. Epic fail on my part! 
--
The weekend is here, grab a can of beer!
| |
|
| | | In case anybody is confused by spewak's post, Ookla Flash-based speedtests just glitch on us because Surewest has funky upload speed limiting. It will burst insanely high, but over the course of a second, speed will average ~25Mbps which you are playing for. Ookla speed tests are just flawed (especially on high-bandwidth low-latency connections) since they only reports peak speed. Java based speed tests report average speed, so they don't have this issue.
Ookla speedtests are good for a laugh, but that's about it. Ookla designed their speedtest to favor ISP, and fool customers into believing they are getting advertised speeds when they may not be averaging anywhere close. Surewest completely breaking it, is a perfect example of what's wrong with it. | |
|
| | spewakR.I.P DadkinsPremium
join:2001-08-07
Elk Grove, CA
kudos:1 Reviews:
·SureWest Internet
·Clear Wireless
| Re: this is a rather paltry upload speed, don't you think? said by cyberbeing:Ookla speedtests are good for a laugh, but that's about it.
Thanks cyber. You understood where I was coming from.
--
The weekend is here, grab a can of beer!
| |
|
| | The rich get richer Dear Comcast,
Why don't you try expanding the areas that you serve instead of wasting your money trying to make already overkill speeds even faster for those who are rich in broadband access? | |
|
 pokesphIt Is Almost FastPremium
join:2001-06-25
Sacramento, CA
kudos:1 | upstream.. Great news! Now if wee can only get them to rush-deploy it to all D3 areas, and beyond, and get a nice tier adjustment with at least double the upload... all would be well in the Land of Comcast. | |
|
 FreedomBuildWell done is better than well saidPremium
join:2004-10-08
Rockford, IL
·Comcast
| All the hype but... So we hear of all this hype about wonderful this and wonderful that, however real time experiences in my market always indicate subpar performance and massive cost to service ratio.
The only thing I truly believe on my own experience with ComCrap is the prices raises. That's the only thing they get right...just saying.
Any Comcast fanboys that choose to rebuttal my comment will be ignored. This is my experience and I'm sticking to it.
--
»www.rockfordremodeling.biz
»www.rockfordremodeling.biz/blog/ | |
|
 JohnInSJPremium
join:2003-09-22
San Jose, CA
·PHONE POWER
·Comcast
| On Topic! Yes, more upstream is Good... I welcome the upstream speeds. The sooner they get to symmetric speeds, the more competitive their business class service becomes.
Imagine 15/15 as "starter" business class for $60-$75/mo (dynamic or static IP) - that's 10x T1, for chump change. Assuming the 12->15 along with all the other 12/2's we're halfway there already...
--
My place : »www.schettino.us | |
|
| | Actually It doesn't matter if the increase speeds don't have you downloading "more". Even if the benefit is getting what you want, faster, you're going to have some bandwidth that normally would have carried over in to the next month show up in your current month, because you got what you wanted, faster.
Unless of course, you have limits of your own that you follow. | |
|
 jblues
join:2001-04-28
Allen Park, MI | Upgrade your markets first Damn! Upgrade the big markets first...Detroit (and many many many) others are waiting. THEN-THEN - worry about all the tiers and bonding and crap...geez! | |
|
 BHNtechXpertBHN StaffPremium,VIP
join:2006-02-16
Saint Petersburg, FL
kudos:32
·Clearwire Wireless
| Censorship at DSLR? Say it isn't so! Apparently anyone that points out the obvious here when it comes to Karl's posts run the risk of getting censored. An entire response (mine) and several very high quality and very relevant responses were deleted tonight. Very sad...sad indeed.
--
"I can’t give you a surefire formula for success, but I can give you a formula for failure: try to please everybody all the time."
~ Herbert Bayard Swope | |
|
| | | Re: Censorship at DSLR? Say it isn't so! Do not worry, your fantastic vision has been imprinted forever on the minds of those unlucky enough to read it and Karl may invest in a few fabric items just to touch the dream look. | |
|
| | BHNtechXpertBHN StaffPremium,VIP
join:2006-02-16
Saint Petersburg, FL
kudos:32 Reviews:
·Clearwire Wireless
| Re: Censorship at DSLR? Say it isn't so! said by WernerSchutz:Do not worry, your fantastic vision has been imprinted forever on the minds of those unlucky enough to read it and Karl may invest in a few fabric items just to touch the dream look.
LOL! Werner it wasn't just about that and you know it. There were two parts to that post...the later of which involved tights and well a cape and was a very humerous take on the obvious. I find it amazing that it only took what 10 hours. They must have argued about that one for a very long time (moderators do that a lot on such posts because there is always the risk the OP will post back with a response like this...)
Bottom line what I stated about Karl's FiOS obsession is true. Karl did a decent job with the original article until the very last paragraph when he couldn't help but inject his pet FiOS into the equation under the auspice of competition. And there lies the purpose of my original post...to point that out.
Now I could have been rude about it...instead I opted to have a little fun and apparently someone got their tightys in a bunch. Next time I'll leave the humor out and point out the painful truth in a much more direct approach.
Where is a good Karl Bode photo and photoshop when I need them (only kidding Karl...the mental picture was bad enough)
--
"I can’t give you a surefire formula for success, but I can give you a formula for failure: try to please everybody all the time."
~ Herbert Bayard Swope | |
|
Reviews:
·Sprint Mobile Br..
·Comcast
| Karma will some day get comcast for all that thay do wrong we will all just have to take it up the but antill that day comes
Imagine you are in a situation where someone has done something horribly wrong to you. Like comcast. How would you handle it? Would you want revenge, or would you rather let life happen? There can be many possibilities as to what could happen in life to comcast for doing you wrong; whereas if you get personal revenge, it may cost you in the long run. Everything has consequences, good and bad. Karma is something that should be appreciated for what it is: A consequence for Comcast's actions. One thing I like about karma is that it dose not always happen when one expects it to. Karma can happen years from now, or it can happen immediately after an action has occurred. I have always believed that karma is real, ironically specific, and its power must not be underestimated.
comcast will one day face there wrongs but antill then we must take it up the but by the company there employee's and there practices.  | |
|
| |
Reviews:
·Optimum Online
·Verizon FiOS
| comcast can't handle the speed, except like this. 105/20 is more like this-- too fast in one direction, not fast enough in the other.
»www.youtube.com/watch?v=mk7VWcuVOf0
Perhaps working on a decent symmetric set of tiers such as 15/15, 25/25, 50/50, 75/75 first. Also, the pricing isn't very tempting either. Comcast yet to prove themselves in either. | |
|
ebubman
join:2002-01-17
Mechanicsburg, PA Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
·Comcast
| comcast reach into your wallet what this article means, in english, is that comcast is exploring or exploiting ways to reach deeper in to your wallet for their semi-annual rate hikes. i have long said that if they could find a way to charge you for the air you breath while you are online, they'd do it in a heartbeat. (ooops, didn't mean to suggest this to team roberts). | |
|
| fldiverPremium
join:1999-12-27
Jacksonville, FL | Re: comcast reach into your wallet Well, my speeds are fast enough; so I don't really care what others think, until they increase the b/w with the new plans they can shove it..I don't really use more than about 100GB per month, but really that isn't the point. I see no perceived value in 50/20 service if there isn't a requisite increase in b/w to go with it. | |
|
u3912974
join:2007-07-31
San Francisco, CA | 105 Mbps tier available in half of their markets by mid year Oh please. 105MB is always "coming soon" here in SF. | |
|
|
|
