 patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1 | Bush FCC I guess Obama isn't Bush III. The Bush FCC would never think of such heresy. | |
|
 |  TransmasterDon't Blame Me I Voted For Bill and Opus
join:2001-06-20
Cheyenne, WY
 ·CenturyLink
| Re: Bush FCC said by patcat88:I guess Obama isn't Bush III. The Bush FCC would never think of such heresy. I have my doubts that Obama is even aware of this issue. It will white wash at any rate.
--
I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man's reasoning powers are not above the monkey's.
- Mark Twain in Eruption | |
|
| | pandoraPremium
join:2001-06-01
Outland
kudos:1 |  Re: Bush FCC
| |
|
| | | | | Re: Bush FCC said by pandora:Lets see what happens and hope for the best. We're not Congress. | |
|
| | AVonGaussPremium
join:2007-11-01
Boynton Beach, FL | That's not a certainty, the wireless industry is an easy target at the moment in the current climate. | |
|
| | | | He is actually. He was and still is an avid Blackberry user.
He's surprisingly aware of the 'little' issues that everyday Americans face, as he has revealed in his multitude of interviews.
Certainly refreshing when compared to the elitist ignorance of Bush. | |
|
|
| |
| |  KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK | Re: Who to blame??? I'd have to agree with you. I think the truth is more like "We rejected it because we knew AT&T would be uber pissed off." | |
|
| | |
| | patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1 | said by Linklist:Of course, the answer was: we rejected it and not AT&T and we rejected it because of UI issues. Do you believe them, because I don't. "revenue protection" would be a NN (but thats not a law) and Clayton Anti Trust Act conviction.
But here are some other ideas they should've used.
-network management, GV uses an unquantified amount of streaming bandwidth
-banned in our AUP/TOS
-will GV handle 911 calls if a user grabs the phone and sees the virtual keypad? (think of the children)
-we can't guarantee the quality of the users experience with GV (they sorta said it already)
-is Google a common carrier? if not we want a congressional act legalizing the questionable legal scenario around GV
-slow/confusing UI b/c iPhone doesn't have multitasking/background running (said it already kindda)
-GV service is too complicated for our users to figure out how to use and ruins "the iPhone experience"
-GV infringes on Apple's intellectual property by phishing the GUI | |
|
| | | Its not just that.. Have you signed up with Verizon and their Blackberry phone? They REQUIRE a data plan in order to activate your Blackberry phone. Talk about a money making opportunity since At&T do not require data plans for their Blackberry phones. It is very unfortunate that both companies apparently have a monopoly in the wireless market It is only a matter of time before enough people complain to the BBB so maybe FCC will actually do something about "unethical or questionable business practices"
Verizon has even started billing you for the current month in advance!! You still have till the end of month to pay. They already bill you for one month in advance!!! | |
|
| | | | Re: Who to blame??? So do cable companies...Not that big of a deal... | |
|
| | | | said by booboo45 :
Its not just that.. Have you signed up with Verizon and their Blackberry phone? They REQUIRE a data plan in order to activate your Blackberry phone. Talk about a money making opportunity since At&T do not require data plans for their Blackberry phones.
Verizon has required data plans for smartphones for a long time now. The reason they gave me when I got my first smartphone (Treo 650) was that people would get the phone with no data plan, the phone would use data and people would end up with big bills so they now have a policy of not activating any smartphones without a data plan. | |
|
| |  RobIn Deo speramus.Premium
join:2001-08-25
Kendall, FL
kudos:3 | said by booboo45 :
Its not just that.. Have you signed up with Verizon and their Blackberry phone? They REQUIRE a data plan in order to activate your Blackberry phone. Talk about a money making opportunity since At&T do not require data plans for their Blackberry phones.
I read that AT&T, starting sometime in September, will also require a data plan for all their smart phones.
--
CheckSite.us | YourIP.us | Reverseip.us | |
|
| | |
| |  NOVA_GuyObamaCare Kills AmericansPremium
join:2002-03-05 | AT&T will start requiring data plans for their smartphones too. And one already cannot purchase an iPhone from AT&T without having to sign up for a $30/mo data plan. I'm not saying that I agree with this practice; just stating that Verizon isn't the only one doing this sort of thing.
--
Trusting the Democrats to fix our economy and give us health care is like trusting the fox with keys to the henhouse, a brand new gas stove, and a pantry full of goodies for side dishes. In the end, all will be dead and nothing but lies will be told. | |
|
|
|  NY TelPremium
join:2004-04-09
Smithtown, NY
kudos:3
 ·AT&T CallVantage
| Re: Rename Country: United Corrupt States of America. said by Mr Matt:  The actions of AT&T and Verizon is just the tip of the iceberg. Our lawmakers are corrupt. Today the lawmakers call it lobbying in the Fifties and Sixties there were scandals related to the fact that the record labels paid Disk Jockeys to plug their songs. Lawmakers called it payola. These days companies pay off lawmakers to write laws favorable to the companies. The companies in turn provide large contributions to the lawmakers campaign funds. Sounds like payola to me. Hopefully the current administration will take action against companies like AT&T and Verizon for price fixing and restraint of trade. It's the fall of the Roman Empire all over again!
What's next? Lead in our drinking water? Oh wait, we already have that. Hmmm, time to check the history books. | |
|
| | KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK | Re: Rename Country: United Corrupt States of America. Interesting to note from History---- almost all "great" and "Advanced" civilizations fell from within. External pressure usually just finished off the work the internal collapse began.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
| |
|
| | | | | Re: Rename Country: United Corrupt States of America. Well to be fair America's far too isolated to ever fall. Who's gonna take them out, Canada? Lol. Mexico? Gimme a break.
Any country trying to mount a Pacific or Atlantic Wide invasion is going to have some trouble getting through the red-neck states and its houses filled to the brim with gun-toting hicks. | |
|
| | | | patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1
1 edit | Re: Rename Country: United Corrupt States of America. said by sonicmerlin:Any country trying to mount a Pacific or Atlantic Wide invasion is going to have some trouble getting through the red-neck states and its houses filled to the brim with gun-toting hicks. Public executions of insurgents (everyone will bring a lawnchairs to watch and have a tail gating party) and fake Christian preachers infiltration agents that say your job as a Christian is to obey the law, without judgement; should take care of the hick problem. | |
|
| | | | | | So you think a major Al-Qaeda attack wouldn't provide that impetus? Look what 9/11 did to the economy. Now imagine what the next (and presumably more grandiose than 9/11) attack will do to this country considering the economy is already in bad (but improving) shape. I suspect that the next attack will impact this country much worse regardless of the condition of our economy.
--
| |
|
| | | | | | | Re: Rename Country: United Corrupt States of America. Actually it would probably have a smaller impact as the US is already somewhat desensitized to the whole thing.
Look at China, where more people die in coal mines every day than people died in 9/11.
Look at Israel and Palestine, Iraq, etc., where terrorist attacks happen seemingly on a daily basis. The attacks don't bring down the economy because people are desensitized, and the "terror" tactic is no longer as effective. | |
|
| | What can they do..... Slap the two companies on the wrist? Apple has said that AT&T played no part in the rejection of Google Voice.
How'd they get 60% of the wireless market? Growth and acquisitions, and having must-have handsets. Nothing illegal there. | |
|
|
1 edit | Re: What can they do..... Oh, and don't forget they built out their wireless networks with $200 billion in taxpayer money that was supposed to be spent on a nation-wide fiber network.
Nothing illegal there. | |
|
Reviews:
·ooma
 ·Optimum Online
 ·Verizon FiOS
| Complicity... part 2.. Don't forget, this is the SAME FCC that sold wireless frequencies at auctions for RECORD PRICES... and they wonder why 2 carriers control 60% of the marketshare in wireless phone and wireless broadband?!? HAH!
I don't see a remedy other than paying back the carriers and redistributing the airspace.. there isn't a simple remedy to this problem that THEY created.. and you can't lay 100% OF THIS BLAME AT BUSH 2'S DOORSTEP, THIS BEGAN AT THE INFANCY OF THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION!! | |
|
| | | Re: Complicity... part 2.. said by tmc8080:Don't forget, this is the SAME FCC that sold wireless frequencies at auctions for RECORD PRICES... Would you rather have them raise your taxes or beg China to fund the FCC?
The spectrum auctions help ensure that the FCC pays for itself mostly. It pays for everything from recordkeeping for licensees to DTV coupons. | |
|
| | Reviews:
·ooma
·Optimum Online
·Verizon FiOS
| Re: Complicity... part 2.. said by fifty nine:said by tmc8080:Don't forget, this is the SAME FCC that sold wireless frequencies at auctions for RECORD PRICES... Would you rather have them raise your taxes or beg China to fund the FCC? The spectrum auctions help ensure that the FCC pays for itself mostly. It pays for everything from recordkeeping for licensees to DTV coupons. What I've said.. one action begets the other action (large price paid... price passed on to some consumers--mainly postpaid accounts). If what we're ultimately talking about is a smoke screen-- just like investigating the OIL industry for $5 gasoline.. then nothing much comes of it.. that's what this sounds like.. without actually regulating what companies charge there isn't much the FCC could do-- and that authority is mostly with States anyway (local public utility commissions, a primary reason your POST PAID cellular bills are so chock full of taxes/fees/surcharges).
IMHO (and sorry to get political for a moment), but all this great HOPE of the Obama administration gonna set right all the wrongs that have been happening for decades is just a fantasy.. you have over 300 politicians up there who REALLY control the show and of that maybe 20-30 top dogs who are the power mongers. And that whole redistribution of wealth? FANTASY! not gonna happen.. what MAY happen is more opportunity for low income people to work hard and climb back above the water line (and it WON'T be as good or as fast as the clinton years even in 8 years of a possible Obama admin).
Now, back to the whole FCC thing.. The frequencies that are auctioned off are the sole property of the awarded contract bidders.. 3rd party cell towers operate the towers & equipment to transmit backhaul data to the cell company's network for processing of data (some of which is VOICE CALLING). This is done this way BECAUSE it is DIRT CHEAP based upon the number of subscribers the companies rake in to utilize the network. You can compare this to franchises RENTING retail space as opposed to BUYING real estate to operate a B&M company. There is a NET PROFIT or companies wouldn't do it! If you look at the Verizon footprint, they've been VERY SMART about which areas are served.. and getting rid of unprofitables (yes, I'm talking about wireless too, not just the FIOS/copper controversy). AT&T takes a different approach due to the geographic nature of the market, by ACQUIRING geographies and to some extent failing comanies for pennies on the dollar. So you can see that they've come by this success through different strategies.
Trying to dismantle this and tilt the playing field towards competitors.. aka t-mobile & sprint would be a very hard task indeed (these two carriers have limited overlap, moreso with AT&T). Inviting new players to the market assumes there is enough spectrum to go around and this.. I doubt. Above 5ghz, power levels need to be much higher to blanket the same geography. The government does NOT favor new competitors (read the tea leaves). The dysfunctional solution currently is to place 3rd party carriers such as Tracfone, Virgin Mobile, and other small prepaids (aka MVNO=moible virtual network operators) to fulfill a need for discounted / subsidized (think Safelink wireless) mintue plans on crappy crippled feature phones. These are attempts to right the wrongs of having monopoly power in wireless but is dysfunctional at best. Since MILLIONS of copper lines went to VOIP.. we can only expect a crappy solution to be tried becuase our expectations are so low to begin with. Consumers EXPECT to have periods of downtime with wired/wireless communications because of how the markets developed and if you want something better, your going to pay MORE for it-- so the only thing we can hope for is for the FCC to pressure Verizon to join the MVNO party and sell dirt cheap calling too. The other thing is to prevent a two tiered network where the MVNO data is deprioritized while post paid data given top priority, even with 911 calls. Sort of (separate neworks)what is happening with Sprint PCS postpaid /versus Nextel prepaid (yes, the company will strongly deny it, but it's true). Sorry if you don't understand all of this, but it's actually somewhat complicated and difficult to follow. | |
|
| | come on we line in the USA why cant these two companies have 60% of the market because they did something right, why do we assume they did something wrong. When did it become wrong to succeed in this country. The att apple and Google voice thing aside I do think that was wrong obviously | |
|
| | | Re: come on It's wrong when you use your position to lock out competition.
No one's trying to tear Google to shreds because so far they haven't used their incredible control over their specific market to stifle competition. | |
|
| | KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK | Re: come on said by sonicmerlin:It's wrong when you use your position to lock out competition. Locking out Competition has been modus operandi for Bell since... well, forever.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
| |
|
|  jtudorXm 60's On 6 FreakPremium,MVM
join:2002-12-07
Morganton, NC | said by tuminatr:When did it become wrong to succeed in this country. When Obama was elected. He and his ideas are doing everything they can to punish successful people and businesses to redistribute the wealth to those who do not have the ability or desire to succeed.
--
Best of luck
"Do, or Do not, there is no try!" Yoda
| |
|
| |
See 6 replies to this post |
|
| KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK | said by tuminatr:why do we assume they did something wrong. It's not an assumption. We were there. Watching them do it the wrong way. Well wrong way for US, anyway. Worked out great for them.
Remember the inception of these "2" companies: The break up of ONE company, Ma Bell. They've been handed it since the beginning.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
| |
|
| | Anybody say monopoly What were seeing now is the same thing we saw when AT&T got the hammer dropped on them when they totally monopolized the telecom industry. Right now companies like AT&T are stealing the consumer blind with outrageous and non competitive pricing for broadband.
Look around the world at broadband prices. 100mbps is common overseas for pretty cheap. I love my country (US) but we have some of the most selfish, greedy business in the world. GREED is why the world economy is where it is right now.
I don't think 60 bucks a month plus surcharges is a fair price for 600kbps-1.4mbps mobile broadband limited at 5GB per user. How come you can get twice as much for half the price in foreign countries where the cost of living is much higher then ours? | |
|
NOVA_GuyObamaCare Kills AmericansPremium
join:2002-03-05 | Can net neutrality play a role here as well? I wonder if the FCC can also take a look at how carriers like AT&T are raping the hell out of the spirit of things like net neutrality during these hearings as well.
Why is it that carriers can determine that audio/video streaming is acceptable from some sources onto some handsets, and not others? For example: AT&T allows the Major League Baseball app to stream audio/video of one game per day onto iPhone handsets over 3G, while completely disallowing apps like Slingbox player to do the very same thing on their 3G network.
I don't own either app (or own a Slingbox myself), but think that something is obviously fishy here when some applications can be cherry-picked to permit certain activities that other applications can't. Something should be done to address the inherent unfairness of carriers getting in the way of people being able to actually use the data connections they're already paying for.
--
Trusting the Democrats to fix our economy and give us health care is like trusting the fox with keys to the henhouse, a brand new gas stove, and a pantry full of goodies for side dishes. In the end, all will be dead and nothing but lies will be told. | |
|
|  SWF
@roltaus.com | Re: Can net neutrality play a role here as well? Because MLB pays for the additional bandwidth, duh! | |
|
| | NOVA_GuyObamaCare Kills AmericansPremium
join:2002-03-05 | Re: Can net neutrality play a role here as well? Ahh, so it's not a problem of overloading their network, causing the sky to fall and hell to freeze, as AT&T has said so many times?
Then why not create a separate plan for those who would like to stream audio/video, charge more for the privilege to cover additional costs, and be done with it? That would seem to make the most sense to me-- a win-win situation. AT&T gets more gold, and those who would like to do what they want with the connection they've already bought can do so without having to sneak around behind AT&T's back.
It's sickening when a wireless carrier charges insane prices for 5GB of bandwidth, and then proceeds to tell you what you can and can't do with it. Once you buy the pipe, the provider should get the hell out of the way and let you enjoy the services you've paid for.
--
Trusting the Democrats to fix our economy and give us health care is like trusting the fox with keys to the henhouse, a brand new gas stove, and a pantry full of goodies for side dishes. In the end, all will be dead and nothing but lies will be told. | |
|
|
|
