 
The Dv8or
DSLReports Forums -- The Mouse House 2.0
Premium
join:2001-08-09
Danbury, CT
clubs:
| Ah yes... Once again, a Times writer invents a theory so he has something to write about. Once again, he comes off as a moron.
In other breaking news, the sun came up, and 8AM occurred exactly one hour after 7AM.
--
You're so vain... I bet you think this post is about you. | |
|
 | 
not quite right
I'm not cool enough to be a Mac person
join:2001-06-23
Puyallup, WA
| Re: Ah yes... said by The Dv8or  :Once again, a Times writer invents a theory so he has something to write about. Once again, he comes off as a moron. In other breaking news, the sun came up, and 8AM occurred exactly one hour after 7AM. You so hit the nail on the head!1 
--
"Not many people know this, but I happen to be quite famous." | |
|
| | 
Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02 | Re: Ah yes... Damn the Wall Street Times! | |
|
| albie
join:2002-03-17
Decatur, IL
| A newspaper which is part of Rupert Murdoch's Newscorp writes an article taking Google's side against ATT.
I do not TRUST any of Rupert Murdoch's media enterprises, but I will admit to receiving a guilty pleasure reading the New York Post.
I do not trust Google with net based email accounts.
I do trust ATT with my DSL service although it is the price and reliability for which they receive my broadband business not their level of technological advancement which has been nil in my geographic region. | |
|
| | nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
 ·Comcast
| Re: Ah yes... there are two parts to the WSJ:
the editorial page, generally comprised of the writings of right wing, corporate tools (with the occasional neocon thrown in);
and the rest of the paper, which is still (for now anyway) comprised of stories written by real reporters doing real reporting (not stenography).
I like the news part of the WSJ, the editorial pages are entertaining more than they are informative. | |
|
| | | 
old_dawg
"I Know Noting..."
join:2001-09-22
Westminster, MD
| Re: Ah yes... said by nasadude :there are two parts to the WSJ: the editorial page, generally comprised of the writings of right wing, corporate tools (with the occasional neocon thrown in); and the rest of the paper, which is still (for now anyway) comprised of stories written by real reporters doing real reporting (not stenography). I like the news part of the WSJ, the editorial pages are entertaining more than they are informative. Another ad hominen from the capital beltway crowd
--
"Our network engineers are aware of the problem..." | |
|
| | | | puck0114
join:2005-12-24
Washington, DC | Re: Ah yes... Well, Rockville is actually outside the Beltway. | |
|
| | blazecom
join:2005-12-05
Columbia, MO
 ·CenturyLink
| I would have to say that their server sucks no matter where they are. I had them in Quincy, IL and also in Hannibal, MO and will never touch at&t again. The DSL tech they sent to my house didn't even know what a DSLAM was! "Oh the node can't be over-sold, DSL is dedicated" he said.... and I said "Yeah, up until it hits the DSLAM, then it has a connection to the internet and maybe that needs to be upped". He proceeded to look at me puzzled and then ask "What is a DSLAM?". LMFAO, good service is something you get from companies like CenturyTel and Verizon Wireless, at least CenturyTel has 80% of its entire landline area covered with DSL. | |
|
| | | 
fatmanskinny
Premium
join:2004-01-04
Wandering
 ·Comcast Digital Vo..
·Comcast
| Re: Ah yes... said by blazecom : The DSL tech they sent to my house didn't even know what a DSLAM was! "Oh the node can't be over-sold, DSL is dedicated" he said.... and I said "Yeah, up until it hits the DSLAM, then it has a connection to the internet and maybe that needs to be upped". He proceeded to look at me puzzled and then ask "What is a DSLAM?". When he asked "what is a DSLAM", you should have said "it is a move performed by wrestlers in the WWE."
--
Satan is always busy. He makes bad things look good and good things look bad! Watch that Devil. | |
|
| | |
| | | sonicmerlin
join:2009-05-24
Cleveland, OH | Re: Ah yes... Of course. AT&T is known as Ma Bell after all. Who wouldn't trust old ma??? | |
|
| | | albie
join:2002-03-17
Decatur, IL | Are you inferring that ATT is the ONLY ISP which caves or would cave to the Gubmint bureaucracies operated by clueless clowns like George Bush or Barry Obama? | |
|
| | 
Time
Premium
join:2003-07-05
 ·Dish Network
·Cox HSI
·Embarq
| said by albie :A newspaper which is part of Rupert Murdoch's Newscorp writes an article taking Google's side against ATT. I do not TRUST any of Rupert Murdoch's media enterprises, but I will admit to receiving a guilty pleasure reading the New York Post. I do not trust Google with net based email accounts. I do trust ATT with my DSL service although it is the price and reliability for which they receive my broadband business not their level of technological advancement which has been nil in my geographic region. And you trust Jeff Immelt's I'd imagine?
LOL.
How can anyone trust any part of the media?
--
"If it can't be done with brains, it can't be done with hours" - Clarence "Kelly" Johnson | |
|
| puck0114
join:2005-12-24
Washington, DC
·RCN CABLE
·AT&T Yahoo
| said by The Dv8or :Once again, a Wall Street Journal Times writer invents a theory so he has something to write about. Once again, he comes off as a moron. Fixed it for you. | |
|
| |
| 
SLD
Premium
join:2002-04-17
1 edit | LOL... your personal opinions trump your reading skills.
Last time I checked the NYT and the WSJ are not even close to the same. | |
|
| | |
| |
The Dv8or
DSLReports Forums -- The Mouse House 2.0
Premium
join:2001-08-09
Danbury, CT
clubs:
| said by SLD :LOL... your personal opinions trump your reading skills. Last time I checked the NYT and the WSJ are not even close to the same. Theyre the same in that they're big people's newspapers. I prefer papers like Newsday and the Post, which allow me to give my brain a siesta while reading them during lunch.
--
You're so vain... I bet you think this post is about you. | |
|
| |
| sonicmerlin
join:2009-05-24
Cleveland, OH
| Since you might not get Karl's joke, there is intense irony in you decrying the "moron" Times article, when in fact it was a Wall Street Jounral article. Naturally you will never admit to yourself how foolish you made yourself look, but it's nevertheless fun to point out. | |
|
wahoospa
join:2006-03-23
Charleston, SC | High Priced Calle ID They charge too much for caller ID. A few years ago my caller ID cost $4.95 now it is $9.00. I have seen on the internet where it only cost AT&T one half of a penny per month to provide my caller ID service but they stick me with $9.00 every month. | |
|
cableties
Premium
join:2005-01-27
 ·Verizon FIOS
| Blame the ______! After talking with overseas friends, I begin to see how (compare) US telecoms are no longer innovators but greed-driven control phreaks.
I do understand capitalism, so don't preach to the choir. But I don't believe the government has done "any regulation" that is beneficial to the people, but financially beneficial to the execs.
That said, back to my coffee.... | |
|
| old_wiz_60
join:2005-06-03
Bedford, MA | Re: Blame the ______! The people don't give sizeable bribes to the government while businesses such as telecoms give a lot. In that situation, who gets favored in regulation (or lack thereof)? We have the best government for business that money can buy. | |
|
| |
not quite right
I'm not cool enough to be a Mac person
join:2001-06-23
Puyallup, WA | Yawn Rupert Murdoch should be more concerned with how he's killing the WSJ ...... 
--
"Not many people know this, but I happen to be quite famous." | |
|
| jaminus
join:2004-10-14
Arlington, VA | Re: Yawn Again, this piece was NOT written by anybody employed by the WSJ. It doesn't represent the WSJ's editorial staff or its reporting staff | |
|
| rmv1237
Premium
join:2003-06-07
Reno, NV | Yes...He's killing the WSJ..it takes twice as long to load. The journal sends me emails about coming back to the fold....No price reduction...just a "come on" | |
|
dib22
join:2002-01-27
Kansas City, MO
| sigh at&t... at&t spying on its customers and other citizens of the usa is what killed at&t for me... i am not sure they can ever recover the trust they have lost...
not that it matters with the collusion in the us wireless industry... and all the congress that money can buy. | |
|
| |
| | 
fireflier
Coffee. . .Need Coffee
Premium
join:2001-05-25
Limbo
·Skype
| Re: sigh at&t... I guess you learn something new every day! Hadn't heard of VPSes even though I do use IPSec to VPN to my home network. Didn't realize there were subscription options to go the other way. . .
Thanks for the post!
--
Tradition: Just because you've always done it that way doesn't mean it's not incredibly stupid. --despair.com | |
|
| | | |
| | patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
| said by iansltx :Easy to fix: run a PPTP VPN for a few bucks per month to a Xen-based VPS in a nearby data center. Your traffic is encrypted 128-bit until it reaches the DC, and AT&T has better things to do than crack 128-bit encryption (read: look at unencrypted connunications). Your 128 bit encryption is meaningless with my quantum brute force decryptor. | |
|
| | | iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO | Re: sigh at&t... Problem is, it only works 1E-30% of the time  | |
|
| 
cudanew
@bellsouth.com | Once again, I have to say... It was not only at&t. Why do the sheep keep forgetting Verizon was guilty of it also. Oh yea, I forgot, being snuggly with verizon is the new cool. | |
|
| |
dib22
join:2002-01-27
Kansas City, MO
| Re: sigh at&t... no i have no love for Verizon either... but we only have testimony of at&t's involvement... if you look at who went running to congress youll find that the only 2 not invoved were tmobile and qwest.
at&t used to protect consumers from govt eavesdropping back in the day... of course this thing were calling at&t is just Southwestern Bell (SBC) with a new brand on it... | |
|
Murdoc
join:2009-02-08
Manitowoc, WI | high priced voicemail too $9 something I have dsl and phone and I don't really trust a place thats not accountable for bad behavior. Don't know why I still have these services still. | |
|
Hazen
join:2003-02-25
Sapulpa, OK | Thats's Funny WSJ will be dead long before AT&T. | |
|
|
EdG
@eastlink.ca
| Re: Thats's Funny said by Hazen :WSJ will be dead long before AT&T. Why such a defence about an evil corporation? Only someone paid by AT&T would post such drivel... | |
|
| | Hazen
join:2003-02-25
Sapulpa, OK | Re: Thats's Funny Defence or not, its a fact. | |
|
| | | hottboiinnc
ME
join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH | Re: Thats's Funny facts have to be proven before they can become a fact.
care to prove it? | |
|
| | |
EdG
@eastlink.ca | You don't know the meaning of the word 'fact', obviously. | |
|
Amy Schatz
@verizon.net | editorial page, not news Just wanted to note that Andy Kessler isn't a staff reporter for the WSJ. The AT&T piece ran on the editorial page, not one of the news pages.
Best,
Amy | |
|
| jaminus
join:2004-10-14
Arlington, VA
| Re: editorial page, not news also it's an op-ed so it doesn't necessarily reflect the views of the WSJ editorial board. and in this case it most certainly doesn't -- just a few weeks ago the WSJ ran an editorial that argued against the very regulations Andy Kessler was promoting | |
|
replaytv1
join:2008-04-12
Miami, FL
|  Bye AT&T. One less customer
AT&T home phone business is out of the game.
Google voice and Callcentric make me realize I was wasting my money with AT&T.
I disconneted my AT&T home phone line last week.
Bye AT&T. One less customer. | |
|
SD6
join:2005-03-26
1 edit | Don't take telecom policy advice from this guy... "End phone exclusivity. Any device should work on any network."
He doesn't realize the distinction between contractual obligations and interoperability.
"Transition away from owning airwaves. As we've seen with license-free bandwidth via Wi-Fi networking, we can share the airwaves without interfering with each other. Let new carriers emerge based on quality of service rather than spectrum owned. Cellphone coverage from huge cell towers will naturally migrate seamlessly into offices and even homes via Wi-Fi networking. No more dropped calls in the bathroom."
He doesn't realize that WiFi (802.11x) is designed for a noisy, unlicensed environment and that cellular coverage would decrease DRAMATICALLY if the spectrum was shared rather than allocated."
"End municipal exclusivity deals for cable companies."
He doesn't even know exclusive franchise agreements ended long ago
"Encourage faster and faster data connections to our homes and phones."
Gee, wish someone would have that of that before...
 | |
|
| |
| binded2
join:2009-08-11
Providence, RI
| said by SD6 :"End phone exclusivity. Any device should work on any network." He doesn't realize the distinction between contractual obligations and interoperability. "Transition away from owning airwaves. As we've seen with license-free bandwidth via Wi-Fi networking, we can share the airwaves without interfering with each other. Let new carriers emerge based on quality of service rather than spectrum owned. Cellphone coverage from huge cell towers will naturally migrate seamlessly into offices and even homes via Wi-Fi networking. No more dropped calls in the bathroom." He doesn't realize that WiFi (802.11x) is designed for a noisy, unlicensed environment and that cellular coverage would decrease DRAMATICALLY if the spectrum was shared rather than allocated." "End municipal exclusivity deals for cable companies." He doesn't even know exclusive franchise agreements ended long ago "Encourage faster and faster data connections to our homes and phones." Gee, wish someone would have that of that before... you sound like a ass i have read nothing in the news but these telcos trying ban local towns and citys from making there own networks while at the same time refusing to build it out them selfs | |
|
| Lazlow
join:2006-08-07
Saint Louis, MO | SD6
In many areas exclusive municipal cable contracts exist even today.
Look how hard Verizon had to fight just to get apartment building not to have exclusive agreements(that has been within a year or so). | |
|
| | SD6
join:2005-03-26
| Re: Don't take telecom policy advice from this guy... said by Lazlow :SD6 In many areas exclusive municipal cable contracts exist even today. Look how hard Verizon had to fight just to get apartment building not to have exclusive agreements(that has been within a year or so). Those exclusive municipal CATV franchise agreements that still exist today are the ones that have not yet expired. But it is no longer legal for municipal CATV franchise agreements to be exclusive, and so it is pointless to suggest such a reform.
Apartment building exclusive contracts are a different thing than exclusive municipal contracts. | |
|
| | Mce Saint
join:2007-10-03
Saint Louis, MO
·AT&T Midwest
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
| Mixing apples and oranges only gets you fruit salad.
In 1984, Congress passed the Cable Communications Policy Act which deregulated cable television and, effectively, put the kiss of death on municipal "exclusivity" deals (i.e., monopolies) with cable companies. Now, any cable company can - in theory - compete in any city, township, municipality, or county it wants to. Problem is, few want to go head-to-head with another company, especially when there is an established incumbent.
There may be *some* municipal exclusive deals that have not yet expired. But they will in time.
Apartment building exclusive agreements are entirely different deal altogether being that the apartment is owned by a private land owner, not a municipal (i.e., public) owner.
Finally, there's a difference between municipal exclusivity deals with cable companies and municipal supplied internet service. Again, the former are dead (or dying) since the federal legislation in 1984.
As to the later, there is no legal barrier to a cable company (or other internet service provider) from providing internet service in are area covered by a municipally owned internet service provider. Instead, the "barrier" is (so, it is argued) a practical one: Cable companies (and other internet service providers) oppose municipally *owned* internet service providers because they think that they will be unable to compete with the municipally owned internet service provider since it doesn't have to worry about making a profit and can be subsidized by tax dollars. | |
|
|
| patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY | Re: AT&T is dying. Uhh, right Someone has to provide all the gold paved T1 lines to all the wireless carriers. | |
|
| |
smueller
join:2009-08-11
Albuquerque, NM
| Good! Americans pay for better, than what at&t can deliver Compare the prices Americans pay for wireless services (from at&t, and others)
with what any other developed, industrialized nation, pays. Why the vast gap between the two??
Is service in America, really that much more costly to provide?
Is at&t just subsidising handsets, by passing costs onto other customers?
I think the 'new at&t' is absolutely MORE evil, than the AT&T that was torn apart, in 1984!
They DO NOT give one iota of care about customers, or employees!
I've been both and it shows... by how you're treated. Expectations of a 55 hour work week, as part of some "unwritten rule" ... demanding that you donate to United Way ... "or else" because at&t wanted 100% of the employees to donate.
Does at&t really stifle innovation now? ...not really ... but most of the folks at at&t labs these days, are talentless arse clowns!
The middle managers that run most of the day to day operations, are also arse clowns who don't know what they hell they're doing!
remember conficker? Yeah... at&t happily blocked 100,000 domains on the internet, in the name of protecting customers. How quickly, would the 'new at&t' block some service, feature, or specific websites, in the future??
It's dangerous! and 'we're' protecting you ... ugh huh. So YOU say ...
if the AT&T broken up in 1984 was "Ma Bell" ... this 'new at&t' must be inbred uncle, twice removed bell. Not only am I happy to see at&t die, I'd gladly put it's feet in concrete, and throw it, into Charleston Harbor! It can sit at the bottom, with Oliver Cromwell's floatilla.
the 'new at&t' could have done some super things. Had they used the army of lobbyists for good rather than the usual evil. Tisk! Tisk! Tisk!
How funny would it be today, if AT&T, hadn't sold off NCR (national cash register) in 1991? Instead of the 'new at&t' the company would be cr&p (cash registers & phones).
You know... at&t customers, could bring at&t to it's knees... It's not hard.
Just coordinate a massive phone call, to take place at a coordinated time, and ring into a specific number, or series of numbers. The network can't handle 60 million calls, at once!
Add to that, large file downloads, and U-Verse activity... the network will crumble, like the house of cards it is.
I say, let it die! A curse is upon at&t! | |
|
| nitzan
Premium,VIP
join:2008-02-27
·ViaTalk
·Comcast
| Re: Good! Americans pay for better, than what at&t can deliver said by smueller :They DO NOT give one iota of care about customers, or employees! Totally agreed. Ever since Stephenson stepped in, they not only don't care about the customer - they don't even care about their own employees anymore. This is another GM just waiting to happen.
Expectations of a 55 hour work week, as part of some "unwritten rule" ... demanding that you donate to United Way ... "or else" because at&t wanted 100% of the employees to donate. LMAO!!! Amen. I never donated a single cent to United Way just on principal. And no kidding about the 55 hour work week. I've done that (and more) for years and never got paid a single cent of overtime.
The middle managers that run most of the day to day operations, are also arse clowns who don't know what they hell they're doing! There are a few decent ones- but 99% of them really are clueless. Not like they have the power to change anything anyway.
I don't think AT&T will "die", as their wireless division is pretty healthy - but the rest of the company and especially anything to do with landlines will die a slow, painful death over years to come. | |
|
WhatNow
Premium
join:2009-05-06
Charlotte, NC
| Networks don't build themselves The biggest problem with Google Voice is it needs some body's network to work. AT&T and the other big networks maybe jerks but new startups seem to have a hard time making it to completion or staying in business unless they are connected to one of the big networks. What happened to all the city wifi projects.
Could it be networks are harder and more expensive to build as you scale up. | |
|
| |
binded2
join:2009-08-11
Providence, RI | got to blame it on some thing blame it on the rain ya ya
gotta blame it on some thing | |
|
| 
sivran
Long Live The Suite
Premium
join:2003-09-15
Arlington, TX
clubs: | Re: got to blame it on some thing Wow. You just dated yourself.
...but then so did I by recognizing.
--
In dadkins' memory, Think outside the Fox... | |
|
Telco_Tech
join:2009-05-18
Toledo, OH | Hell yeah! I have complete and utter contempt for AT&T; any article which points out what a dirty pile of @#$% that company is deserves two thumbs up in my humble opinion.
- Tate
--
Down with AT&T! | |
|
DiscoBiscuit
@tcdi.com | Using Google Voice I use Google Voice on AT&T right now, on my Blackberry Curve.
What's the problem? | |
|
alchav
join:2002-05-17
Palm Desert, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC
|  AT&T and the Car Manufacturers have a lot in Common!
| |
|
|
| BosstonesOwn
join:2002-12-15
Everett, MA
clubs:
·Comcast
| Re: Question about GV and at&t That is because RIM doesn't allow any company to load down thier handsets , the best they can do is add a theme and store icon , which is easily removed.
Any bb can run gv app.
--
"It's always funny until someone gets hurt......and then it's absolutely friggin' hysterical!" | |
|
fiber_man
Things Happen For A Reason
Premium
join:2001-01-27
Port Saint Lucie, FL
·AT&T U-Verse
| Google wants to free load from other networks. Google should spend trillions of $ over the years building out their own network before trying to free load from others. AT&T, Verizon ,etc... spent over 70 billion buying spectrum the last few years and deserve to make a return on that investment. I for one have seen how much it cost to lay new cables,place new towers,offices,etc...
--
GO NOLES!! | |
|
| sonicmerlin
join:2009-05-24
Cleveland, OH
| Re: Google wants to free load from other networks. Good thing they had an extra $200 billion dollars laying around to build out that network. What, you thought they just pocketed the taxpayer money the government handed out to them to build a national fiber network? Well, they certainly did that, but they also used it to fund the creation of their wireless networks.
They've been milking their unethically profitable wireless network cows to fund their various projects and increase their cash reserves for years now. All that profit, no worrisome private investment. Must have been nice living on easy street for the last couple of decades. | |
|
|
dib22
join:2002-01-27
Kansas City, MO
| if only... COME ON GOOGLE... DO IT 
these us communications companies keeping the usa stuck in the 80's communications wise... why kill the golden goose right?
google could really shake it up... | |
|
|
EdG
@eastlink.ca
| said by fiber_man :Google should spend trillions of $ over the years building out their own network before trying to free load from others. AT&T, Verizon ,etc... spent over 70 billion buying spectrum the last few years and deserve to make a return on that investment. I for one have seen how much it cost to lay new cables,place new towers,offices,etc... Stop being idiotic - so every company now doing buisness on the Internet now must build their own infrastructure? Do you know how stupid that sounds?
Hear that, amazon? Apple? eBay? MS? Anyone selling on the net better get busy...
There are going to be a lot of cable to bury!!! | |
|
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY | fios vs uverse Isn't these the same folks that derided Verizon for FIOS, and cheered AT&T for Uverse? | |
|
|
|
|
WSJ: AT&T Is Dying
·
AT&T is dying. Uhh, right
Question about GV and at&t