|
Time Warner....I feel so bad for you poor S.O.B's stuck with these (Time Warner) jokers. Sure Comcast bullies the small guys too, but at leased they are spending some money on upgrades. | |
|
| |
Re: Time Warner....TW spends money on upgrades. In the eight years I've had their service I've watched it go from 3.0/128 to 5.0/384, then 8.0/384 and finally 10.0/512. The one time I wound up on an overloaded node (was pulling 3mbit/s during peak times) they addressed the problem within a few weeks of being notified about it.
I realize they could be faster with their DOCSIS 3.0 rollout but I'm honestly not that worried about it. When a service that I need appears on the horizon that won't run effectively on my 10mbit/s connection I'll start agitating for more bandwidth. | |
|
| | |
Re: Time Warner....That service won't appear until the speeds appear. And I've had the same service from Time Warner for 7 years. The exact same speeds, but higher prices. Yay. They have no intention of upgrading to DOCSIS 3 either. $20 per customer is apparently too much for them to handle. | |
|
| | |
to Crookshanks
said by Crookshanks:When a service that I need appears on the horizon that won't run effectively on my 10mbit/s connection I'll start agitating for more bandwidth. Porn. If you can't saturate your pipe, you're doing it wrong! | |
|
| | VeloslaveGeek For God Premium Member join:2003-07-11 Martinez, CA |
to Crookshanks
said by Crookshanks:TW spends money on upgrades. In the eight years I've had their service I've watched it go from 3.0/128 to 5.0/384, then 8.0/384 and finally 10.0/512. 10.0/512???? That is your idea of upgraded bandwidth? Wow, wake up and smell the real pipe. | |
|
| | |
to Crookshanks
said by Crookshanks:TW spends money on upgrades. In the eight years I've had their service I've watched it go from 3.0/128 to 5.0/384, then 8.0/384 and finally 10.0/512. The one time I wound up on an overloaded node (was pulling 3mbit/s during peak times) they addressed the problem within a few weeks of being notified about it. ROFL, what happened to the upload? | |
|
| | |
to Crookshanks
512 upload???
I think I had that with Cox about 5 years ago. What a joke. | |
|
| quatra Premium Member join:2003-06-22 Matthews, NC |
to antidelldude
TWC has already activated docsis 3.0 (52.5mbit/5.25mbit) where I live and they gave a "free" bandwidth upgrade to regular tier users (used to be 7mbit/384kbit then suddenly it became 10mbit/1mbit). What is Comcast doing in your area? | |
|
| | 88615298 (banned) join:2004-07-28 West Tenness |
88615298 (banned)
Member
2010-Nov-2 11:14 am
Re: Time Warner....said by quatra:TWC has already activated docsis 3.0 (52.5mbit/5.25mbit) where I live and they gave a "free" bandwidth upgrade to regular tier users (used to be 7mbit/384kbit then suddenly it became 10mbit/1mbit). What is Comcast doing in your area? Maybe all the commiunty fiber being laid in NC has something to do with that. Funny how a little competition works wonders. | |
|
| | | |
anonymiss
Anon
2010-Nov-4 10:16 am
Re: Time Warner....So, we should fund Time Warner's upgrade to fiber with taxpayer money then.
It's completely unfair for every single person in a community to be forced to pay for something they don't want to pay for.
This is just socialism at it's worse. | |
|
1 recommendation |
Time Warner failed to ask an important question! Was Wilson North Carolina born in the United States? If so they need to show us their birth certificate. | |
|
|
hmmmThey could always quit dragging out their failure against fiber and instead deploy cable where other services aren't available at all like my location. But we all know that won't happen. | |
|
| Tavokk Premium Member join:2009-05-05 Smyrna, DE |
Tavokk
Premium Member
2010-Nov-1 1:52 pm
Re: hmmmsaid by tman852:They could always quit dragging out their failure against fiber and instead deploy cable where other services aren't available at all like my location. But we all know that won't happen. Unless they get a viable competitor, this just won't happen. | |
|
| | |
Re: hmmmsaid by Tavokk:said by tman852:They could always quit dragging out their failure against fiber and instead deploy cable where other services aren't available at all like my location. But we all know that won't happen. Unless they get a viable competitor, this just won't happen. There's At&t u-verse also. The both fall short of many locations in my area, and they almost never overlap in coverage areas, so the people in the areas WITH coverage still only have one choice to pick from. | |
|
| | | |
Re: hmmmatt's product was NEVER meant to compete anyway but to give them a new network for their DSL product. they put TV in to see if they could get the customers. They failed to do it before and are doing it again. Wide Open West used to be Ameritech's baby before Ed took Ameritech under the SBC thumb and sold it off. The only market they didn't sell was the SNET area which they use now for backhaul into U-Verse which if they were smart they would have just relit the HFC network up and tossed DOCSIS 3 into it and been on their way. Hell they could have went FTTH with that instead of building out their copper shit.
U-Verse TV will go away after a while. They'll still keep the Internet and the phone and that will be it. | |
|
| | | | |
Re: hmmmATT did reuse Americast's fiber to uverse nodes, if available, but uverse placement has nothing to do with abandoned americast fiber routes. But its sad to see miles after miles, of universal coverage americast plant on every road, when barely anyone can get Uverse. I'm shocked RCN never bought Americast back when RCN had dotcom money. Uverse coverage is black grains of sand on beach. Most of the population can't get it since their area is too urban, MDU, or too rural. Uverse is only deployed on SAIs that meet a very narrow specification of houses on the SAI, distance of those houses to the SAI, ease of installing the VRAD, pole mounted SAIs are always preferred since that area will get a pole mounted VRAD, sidewalk/dirt mounted SAIs are very rarely upgraded. If your SAI only has 30 houses on a dead end, forget Uverse. MDU forget it. Single family subdivision with underground utilities, only if the neighborhood makes 6 figures and already has an RT (not an SAI). Non subdivision with underground utilities? forget it. Commercial building on the SAI along with you? forget it. 100 feet of grass between each house? forget it Garden apartments? forget it. No SAI because your hood has a homerun to the CO? forget it.
VRADs are also awesome for grafitti. 5 sq feet of white canvas. The SAIs that those VRADs are hooked up to 90% of the time are high up out of the reach of pedestrians. | |
|
| |
to tman852
Nope, because filing lawsuits is cheaper than doing upgrades.
If TWC allows a FTTH project to get off the ground, they'll have to do upgrades, and yet they'll still have a competitor to deal with. If they can sue the project out of existence, then there's no need to upgrade, and they'll have one less competitor to compete against. | |
|
| KearnstdSpace Elf Premium Member join:2002-01-22 Mullica Hill, NJ
1 recommendation |
to tman852
IMO if the public has voted Yes to a Muni Fiber project then the courts should automatically toss out any lawsuits from companies that already provide services in the area. The people voted, what right does a corporation have to step all over that vote. | |
|
| | |
Re: hmmmI agree with you, but there are people who believe that a private entity's ability to make a profits supercedes all else.
Also, you have to remember that corporations are amoral. They don't care what is right or wrong; only what can or cannot be done to achieve an end. To these companies, the fact that the people voted on this issue only matters insofar as it makes it more difficult for them to stop it. It's an obstacle that they have to find a way around. So, no, they don't care how many people voted for the project to go forward. If they can find a way around that vote, they'll take it. | |
|
| | | |
anonymiss
Anon
2010-Nov-4 10:37 am
Re: hmmmAnd the government FORCING even those people that voted against the Muni fiber is better then a company that has to make money on only the subscribers it has?
Yeah, much better to make the GOVERNMENT force everyone to pay for a luxury. | |
|
| | bentand Inga Premium Member join:2004-10-04 Loveland, CO |
to Kearnstd
said by Kearnstd:IMO if the public has voted Yes to a Muni Fiber project then the courts should automatically toss out any lawsuits from companies that already provide services in the area. The people voted, what right does a corporation have to step all over that vote. The Right to Due Process, just like any other person. Er... | |
|
| | | |
Re: hmmmBut why cant a corporation be convicted of murder and then sent to the death chamber like every other "person"? | |
|
| | | | bentand Inga Premium Member join:2004-10-04 Loveland, CO |
bent
Premium Member
2010-Nov-1 8:06 pm
Re: hmmmBecause they're Incorporated. No Liability for the Shareholders! | |
|
|
DOCSIS 3.0I'm curious. I work for TWC in California, you complain about not having DOCSIS 3.0, but no one wants even 15 Mbps, except for the gamers and video downloaders. Will people notice 50Mbps when they are playing Pogo? Or typing they just came from Starbucks on Facebook? I guess you like to just bitch, complain how slow everything is, yet won't even upgrade to 15Mbps, much less 50. (20 Mbps just came out, and 30 and 50 are testing now) | |
|
| |
Re: DOCSIS 3.0In fairness, I experimented with the 15.0 mbit/s "Turbo" tier (not sure how it's marketed out your way) but dropped it because I could never achieve that speed for sustained transfers except at 3AM.
Perhaps the situation has improved since then (I also couldn't max out my 10mbit/s connection until a few months ago except late at night) but it was hard to justify paying for that level of service when I could not receive it at a reasonable hour.
There's also the matter of whether or not you need such a level of service. I have yet to find the application that I can run on 15mbit/s that won't work on my non-turbo 10mbit/s connection. I suppose it might be nice for someone who does a LOT of downloading but outside of that I don't see much use for it at the present time. | |
|
| |
to alpha_kky
It isn't so much the download as it is the upload 512k is pitiful. If I was stuck with that, I could bearly do anything that contributed back to the internet. Slingboxes, video conferencing, sending files, voice conferencing are all slow, poor quality, or unachievable on time warner. | |
|
| |
to alpha_kky
So what you are saying is that because YOU can't find a reason for it then others don't need it?
Regardless of that you think, if it is rolled out as it should be then user's will find a use for it and companies will be able to innovate and utilize it.
So instead of trying to bring more people into your little noncreative box, why don't you get out of it before people start breaking out the lack of technology insightfulness quotes for you ("640K ought to be enough for anybody."). | |
|
| aztecnologyO Rly? Premium Member join:2003-02-12 Murrieta, CA |
to alpha_kky
said by alpha_kky:I'm curious. I work for TWC in California, you complain about not having DOCSIS 3.0, but no one wants even 15 Mbps, except for the gamers and video downloaders. I had TWC after the network/area swap with Comcast in Murrieta (b4Fios), and TWC was flat out awful compared to what Comcast was. Not to mention that when TWC took over my internet speeds went down (both upload/download, and my price went up) and was out of service on about a weekly basis. Completely lost the HUGE VOD offering that Comcast had, to TWC garbage. I had to move a couple blocks away in order to get FiOS and it was the absolute best thing, nothing like being back on an ISP with rock solid uptime and decent speeds 25/15. Sure you guys offer 20/1 now, but took you forever to even offer it. I'm also neither a gamer or a downloader. What used to take hours to upload pictures to sites like shutterfly, are now done in seconds on FiOS. I like using my bandwidth and can be watching esp3.com to watch soccer, cbssports.com to watch college football and using skype all at the same time if I want to without a hiccup. I also recommend FiOS to everyone first, and only mention TWC as a last resort here in the valley. TWC has you guys brainwashed, too much emphasis on your bundles and price extortion if you don't have one. I'm getting ready to cut off my FiOS tv (Cord Cutter) and up my ISP to 25/25 and go online only for my video needs. Tell the TWC big wigs to offer me the same service for less $ and I'll think about switching... | |
|
| |
to alpha_kky
When will TWC start upgrading their upload speeds. I'm still stuck on a 512 upload. What are you guys doing with those huge profits you've been earning? | |
|
| | |
Re: DOCSIS 3.0they pay to lease the Time Warner name. | |
|
| cramer Premium Member join:2007-04-10 Raleigh, NC Westell 6100 Cisco PIX 501
|
to alpha_kky
Thank you shill. The issue, as has been proven numerous times, is the relatively high cost associated with those higher speeds. Saying "people don't want 50Mbps service" is misleading and wrong; it leaves out the part that people truly don't want... the $100+ per month price tag. The downstream part isn't nearly as important as the upstream -- and the only way out of 384k hell is substantially high download speeds and monthly costs. Here in NC, it's been 384k up forever. It was 3M/384k when they took their first order back in '99(?). Since then download speeds have crept up... 3, 5, 6, 7, 8 -- due to improvements in ADSL and ADSL2, but upstream has remained constant @ 384k. Also, prices have gone up several times.
If TWC had been investing even a single digit % of the millions they make every month on improving their infrastructure, we wouldn't have the mess we have today. I find it very hard to believe their executives could not see the day when their change-a-number-in-a-config-file "upgrade" wouldn't cut it anymore. Had they been doing technology upgrades / refreshes, they would not now be facing multi-million dollar "emergency", wholesale upgrades. The lawyers really ARE cheaper than upgrading at this point.
How much of your hardware in CA is even capable of D3? (base chassis that can support D3 line cards) How much of the upstream infrastructure (inside and between POPs/DCs) and global connection(s) are sized to support the higher speeds? A fully loaded ($750k) ubr10k would need 10G interfaces to support all that traffic. | |
|
| 1 edit |
to alpha_kky
said by alpha_kky:I'm curious. I work for TWC in California, you complain about not having DOCSIS 3.0, but no one wants even 15 Mbps, except for the gamers and video downloaders. Will people notice 50Mbps when they are playing Pogo? Or typing they just came from Starbucks on Facebook? I guess you like to just bitch, complain how slow everything is, yet won't even upgrade to 15Mbps, much less 50. (20 Mbps just came out, and 30 and 50 are testing now) I have 15 with FIOS and at a fair price, do I want 50 sure but I don't wont to spend the extra $$ for it when i know I will get it at the price of what I am paying for 15 in the future. I hope N.C. wins, if a community or township wants to install there on network they should be allowed to. Having TWC, Comcast, Verizon or any other corporation say you can't even if its in there contract in bull crap. Let them compete for price and service not monoploy power. | |
|
| |
to alpha_kky
Yeah.. but in the end, we would still have shitty Time Warner service. No thanks,...... just die and go away Time Warner.. Nobody will miss you. | |
|
| 1 edit |
to alpha_kky
Use GetRight and you will hit 10-15 mbps on any site. Every webserver is plugged into a 100 mbit port connected to a 10G backbone line. Most sites throttle each TCP connection, but they don't throttle by IP address. | |
|
|
Pole FeesWhat needs to be discussed by TWC is the pole fees for Wilson. As they own the poles they also don't have to pay to lease them like TWC does. That itself is wrong there. TWC should be suing for that to change and see another body - not related to Wilson to oversee payments and put them into a general fund- NOT held by the City.
You want a fair and level playing field; well the city pays for the poles and the ROW just as TWC and T pays. | |
|
| ••••••••••••• |
AlakarFacts do not cease to exist when ignored join:2001-03-23 Milwaukee, WI |
Alakar
Member
2010-Nov-1 2:28 pm
True Americans/sarcasm
But Time Warner has shown themselves to be true Americans by fighting the that horrible government socialism. Remember the government can't do anything right.
/sarcasm off | |
|
|
Anon6
Anon
2010-Nov-1 3:36 pm
hmmwell instead of fighting the muni broadband they should be upgrading their network to compete, they do have all that money, well its time for them to use some of that money and get to upgrading. | |
|
|
Stuck in TW territory...I'm stuck in NC with these Time Warner jerks. I had them when I first moved here. Between their ridiculous pricing and horrible service, I got rid of them within the first year and went with my only other option Windstream DSL.
Between Time Warner's long term goal of bandwidth caps and this garbage with Wilson and Salisbury they've lost $600 a month in revenue. They lost me as a customer and in the last two years my in-laws, my parents and one of my siblings have moved here and I've steered them all away from Time Warner.
I know it's small potatoes, but maybe someday we'll actually get real competition as opposed to the Cable/DSL duopolies. | |
|
elray join:2000-12-16 Santa Monica, CA |
elray
Member
2010-Nov-1 4:25 pm
Time Warner Will PrevailThe government can't simply take away their franchise customers without compensation, nor can they underwrite a competitor to do the same.
Eventually, this will get to the Supreme Court, which still understands the Constitution (barely), and you'll see munis coughing up some dough or selling their infrastructure to the incumbent. Munis better hope one of the Justices has a little Harold Greene in him.
Meanwhile, most of the munis will fail, since they have no incentive to operate efficiently (and in many cases, competently), and they won't keep up with the incumbent's offerings, which will improve dramatically in reaction to the threat. | |
|
| •••••••••••••••• |
gwilsonBP Premium Member join:2010-09-28 Tustin, CA |
Time warner speeds on the west coast are horribleI live in the Los Angeles area and I subscribe to the fastest TW service available and pay a fortune for it considering all I subscribe to is internet access. The service I get is slow, slower and slowest. They gave me a new router one time as if that was going to make any difference - it didn't.
If there were any other option I would jump at it - I'm to far from a CO for DSL so I'm stuck. This is what deregulation has brought us - no competition means no incentive to improve or even live up to your obligations.
TW knows there is no other option so they could care less what the speeds are. TW's attitude is "go f#@$ yourself if you don't like it. | |
|
|
|