 | | I Hate Time Warner If Genachowski would stop being such a corporation-loving coward and enforce line-sharing on DSL and Cable providers, we'd see some real competition finally. Once the CLECs started to accumulate some body and build out their own lines stagnant companies like Time Warner would be forced to upgrade. | |
|
 | |
| |
| | | | Re: I Hate Time Warner said by swintec:said by sonicmerlin:If Genachowski would stop being such a corporation-loving coward and enforce line-sharing on DSL and Cable providers, we'd see some real competition finally. That's not how cable technology works for one. Two, why should the cable companies be forced to let competitors on there network that they built with there own cash-o-la, over the years? Any cable company can already come in and over build in a town or city if they choose..heck you could to. Just because it doesnt make financial sense is not the current companies fault is it? Because they use public rights of way and have received the benefits of franchises for years? Your argument is that they receive no public or government subsidies , but that's simply incorrect. | |
|
| | |  swintecPremium,VIP
join:2003-12-19
Alfred, ME
kudos:3
 ·RapidVPS
 ·Sprint Mobile Br..
 ·VoicePulse
 ·RoadRunner Cable
| Re: I Hate Time Warner said by sonicmerlin:said by swintec:said by sonicmerlin:If Genachowski would stop being such a corporation-loving coward and enforce line-sharing on DSL and Cable providers, we'd see some real competition finally. That's not how cable technology works for one. Two, why should the cable companies be forced to let competitors on there network that they built with there own cash-o-la, over the years? Any cable company can already come in and over build in a town or city if they choose..heck you could to. Just because it doesnt make financial sense is not the current companies fault is it? Because they use public rights of way and have received the benefits of franchises for years? Your argument is that they receive no public or government subsidies , but that's simply incorrect. Usage of right of ways is a swap off for the towns to get cable service for there citizens. Free service for the libraries, schools and other community areas. How much of the government slush finds do cable companies get? Looking at the phone companies I would say yea you are right, they were largely constructed from government subsidies and what not, but I have never seen a report showing cable companies get a substantial government handout to run there network.
--
Usenet Block Accounts | Unlimited Accounts | |
|
| | | | | | Re: I Hate Time Warner They have franchises... there are several states that outright forbid or at least make very difficult the construction of public municipal networks. The cost of providing service for libraries and schools absolutely pales in comparison to how much it would cost a cable company to negotiate a payment to *every single person's* property that they run their lines through.
Even without the exact data it's not hard to justify implementing line-sharing for both cable and DSL. | |
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
1 edit | Re: I Hate Time Warner Fault isn't the issue here. Internet service ends up being a natural monopoly. Every utility that uses public right of way is heavily, heavily regulated. I don't see what the problem
with regulating cable ISPs would be.
I also don't know about the technical feasibility of line-sharing with cable, but were there not cable CLECs before the FCC gutted the '96 Telecom Act? | |
|
| | | How would cable TV and Internet be line shared exactly?
Each house doesn't connect directly back to the cable head end.
They connect to nodes, which cover dozens to hundreds of houses.
So in order for there to be "line sharing" in a cable plant, a second provider would have to take over whole neighborhoods.
That wouldn't exactly be sharing.
Not to mention, the cable companies paid for the infrastructure themselves.
DSL and phone line sharing came about in the 90's because the telcos had the majority of that copper system subsidized by the government because of the requirement to get phones to most of the US citizens. | |
|
| | iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 Reviews:
 ·Verizon Online DSL
·Comcast
| Re: I Hate Time Warner Cable line sharing would have to be done at the aggregation level. It can be done (see Earthlink and a few other providers running off of TWC) but the results don't seem to be economically viable i.e. you don't get a cheaper product due to line sharing in this case. | |
|
| | | |
| | | | iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Verizon Online DSL
·Comcast
| Re: I Hate Time Warner Earthlink does their own routing, as do the other providers (LocalNet is one of them in the Rochester area) running on top of TWC. Again, it's done at the aggregation level, though I don't imagine there's much of a discount to doing it.
As for TV etc., I don't see anyone clamoring for different providers to satisfy VOD selection desires. | |
|
| | | | | swintecPremium,VIP
join:2003-12-19
Alfred, ME
kudos:3 Reviews:
·RapidVPS
·Sprint Mobile Br..
·VoicePulse
·RoadRunner Cable
| Re: I Hate Time Warner said by iansltx:Earthlink does their own routing, as do the other providers (LocalNet is one of them in the Rochester area) running on top of TWC. Again, it's done at the aggregation level, though I don't imagine there's much of a discount to doing it. As for TV etc., I don't see anyone clamoring for different providers to satisfy VOD selection desires. VOD was just an example, but channel line ups and such would still have to be addressed.
Then there are speed tier issues. If Comcast had 50 MBit speed tiers nation wide how do they offer them in TW land without DOCSIS 3 systems in place?
I just dont see line sharing as a viable option for those that think it is a huge savings.
--
Usenet Block Accounts | Unlimited Accounts | |
|
| | | | | | iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Verizon Online DSL
·Comcast
| Re: I Hate Time Warner Channel sharing is out. This would be for internet only.
As far as tiers go, there would have to be special tiers for line-shared markets. Not that hard to do.
There are complexities, but it could (and does) work on the internet side with TWC already. Up north, TekSavvy is now doing cable line-sharing (aggregation level). | |
|
| | | cramer
join:2007-04-10
Raleigh, NC
kudos:5 Reviews:
·AT&T Southeast
| I'm an Earthlink cable subscriber. The only thing that's "earthlink" is my IP address and email address. It is 100% TW's network. I, in fact, do not pay a single cent to Earthlink... my bill comes from Time Warner; my check goes to Time Warner; when it breaks, I call Time Warner. My IP address is from an address block assigned to Earthlink; that's where Earthlink's involvement ends. | |
|
| | | | iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 | Re: I Hate Time Warner What do traceroutes look like? | |
|
| | | | Reviews:
·EarthLink
| I too am an Earthlink cable subscriber, all the same issues apply to me as well. However, my main complaint is the slow speeds I get. I pay for that "up to" 7 Mbps, in reality it averages around 3.5 Mbps. I have called both EarthLink & TWC and of course they say nothing is wrong. In this area we have very little choice and that is why we stand no chance of being upgraded to DOCSIS 3.0 any time soon. | |
|
etaadmin
join:2002-01-17
Dallas, TX
kudos:1 | At least TWC changed... their tactic from 'surgical' to 'smart'. Who knows maybe tomorrow they'll change it again from 'smart' to 'general'
All this is just semantics. TWC know that if they push DOCSIS3.0 too hard that will attract unwelcome attention from the FCC. TWC is more afraid of AT$T's lobbyists than of competition. | |
|
|
1 edit | Re: At least TWC changed... said by etaadmin:TWC know that if they push DOCSIS3.0 too hard that will attract unwelcome attention from the FCC. TWC is more afraid of AT$T's lobbyists than of competition. Can you explain that a little bit? Are you saying that AT&T would complain that their competition was trying to roll out improved service? | |
|
Mr Matt
join:2008-01-29
Eustis, FL
kudos:1 |  Still waiting for DOCSIS 3.0 in Lake County, Florida
 I guess Comcast is using the same philosophy deploying DOCSIS 3.0 in Central Florida. All I care about is having my speed increased to 12Mbps. | |
|
| | Charlotte will never see Docsis 3.0 There is no competitive choice in Charlotte. We're still hunting around trying to find U-VERSE customers. TWC is taking a beating in NC right now because they are trying to stop the municipalities from deploying fiber to the home. That is stimulating legislators to ask "Where is fiber to the home in North Carolina from TWC". Answer "In Hawaii." (There is no Hawaii, NC) | |
|
| | ask the right question... slow & expensive... and in a smart way? for who? the competition? stockholders?
if you have the consumer in mind.. you've completely missed the point.. if the consumer can't afford it.. there's nothing to talk about. | |
|
| iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Verizon Online DSL
·Comcast
| Re: ask the right question... Suddenlink seems to like DOCSIS 3 a lot...they pride themselves in delivering the fastest internet available to a given area, and some people actually buy the higher tiers that require D3 to do well. Not a ton of people, but if you can sell service with speeds aove the competition, you can price it above the competition as well... | |
|
 en102Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | Docsis 1.x works ok here. I have no real issues with Docsis 1.x here in SoCal. I'd take Docsis 3.0, only if they don't jack up the prices.
 | |
|
| | interesting whats funny is that cox has faster internet than TW does. And they are a smaller company. | |
|
| iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 | Re: interesting And Mediacom. And Suddenlink. | |
|
|
| | if i was you i'd get all my friends and get pitch forks then go down to the nearest charter HQ and demand DIAL UP form the ancient times , get all dressed like peasants of the middle ages for the journalists that show up and talk in old english and speak about the ancient time of dial up
BET that gets you 2 -3 megabit dsl in short order or cable er whatever | |
|
| iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 | Re: if i was you Nope. | |
|
| | price it is to high of a price. like 12 +$ for a dvr keep it dude people don't have money for this stuff or maybe i will forget to feed my kids so i can have more speed i don't think so my bill is like 160 now come on give it a rest | |
|
Reviews:
 ·Verizon FiOS
·Time Warner Cable
| 1,000 of their 212,000 .....? The reason why TWC has only 1,000 people using DOCSIS 3.0 out of their 212,000 is because they won't roll it out to anyone!!! I live in Dallas and it seems basically every street within a 5 minute walk or so around me has it but me! If they quit thinking of "what's best for the customer" and give what your customer wants.
If they stopped feeding into their Ego and read some books pertaining to Customers, then maybe their philosophy and "best business practices" would be different and maybe customers wouldn't be so hateful towards them.
It's my opinion and speaking on behalf of someone that has both their Residential AND Business service. | |
|
| cramer
join:2007-04-10
Raleigh, NC
kudos:5 Reviews:
·AT&T Southeast
| Re: 1,000 of their 212,000 .....? Yeap, their marketing department is populated by pure Nobel Geniuses! There's "low demand" because there's very little availability. And charging an insane $99/month is certain to cause low numbers of takers. I know several people who dropped their cablemodem because it was $50/month (for crappy ~7M/384k.)
(It doesn't cost anywhere near that much to offer those speeds.) | |
|
|
|
