Overwritten.net
Community => General Discussion => Topic started by: Cobra951 on Monday, May 11, 2009, 11:24:54 AM
-
This story (http://money.cnn.com/2009/05/11/news/economy/antitrust/index.htm?postversion=2009051112) made me smile. Few things do lately. Preventing a few businesses from effectively owning everything is crucial if we're ever going to recover economically. The story isn't particularly prominent, and it will be missed by most people. That's a shame, because it's one of those decisions that will have a tremendous impact on the future.
-
Oh how I wish this was happening out here on my side of the world too.
Fickin' internet is costing me $100/month for a 2mb connection.. Only one company offers internet, phone, and digital TV here. It's the only cell phone company too.
-
That sucks. But you know, even here where I live, there's only 2 worthwhile methods, cable and dsl. My brother had dsl for a while, then got fed up with their troublesome service and switched to cable. The final straw came when he started to get ridiculously slow speeds (something like 768 kbps, I think) and instead of fixing it, the phone company just told him that's all they guarantee.
So in effect, the only good game in town is Warner Cable. That's much cheaper than you're paying, though, and for like 7 mbps (which is below the national average, I read recently).
There was supposed to be AC-line modem tech deployed here at one point. I don't know if anything ever came of that.
-
Fee lucky you even have a choice. No cable, no DSL, and if some other company wanted to run it to me they wouldn't be allowed to. Its about as shitty as it can be.
-
That's exactly the shit that good antitrust enforcement should rectify. What do you mean no other company is allowed to run it to you? If anyone owns any exclusive rights they shouldn't have, they need to use them or lose them. Broadband in particular is a priority of the current government.
-
Im under the impression that cable companies and such make deals with local government so they can make a mess and hang wire or dig or whatever. Why else would most areas have one cable company?
I mean, I may (and probably am) wrong about that.
-
Usually they negotiate a franchise with each city, and then they have to secure permits for any construction work. The agreement with the city gives them eminent domain rights, which let them run cables across other people's private property. Typically, as part of the franchise negotiations, the city may provide a list of requirements for the network operators (eg, must provide service to x% of households by time t+3 years, must service all households in area A by time t+5 years, etc).
The reasons for only having one cable company are:
- It's pretty much impossible to compete with a literally entrenched monopoly, since they already have a network in place and partially paid for. Unless you have some fundamental advantage over them (eg better technology), you'll never be able to compete on price.
- It might be possible to compete with entrenched monopoly if the law requires local-loop unbundling under reasonable terms. (Local-loop unbundling is where one company rents the "last mile" cable from another, like when Qwest sells DSL over an AT&T-owned telephone line.)
- Corrupt local governments.
- Franz Kafka (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gEyFH-a-XoQ).
-
There was supposed to be AC-line modem tech deployed here at one point. I don't know if anything ever came of that.
Yeah, it is called Current here in Cincinnati. It's actually been around for years but there was never a big push. When it first came out there was like a 3 GB monthly bandwidth cap or something crazy like that.
-
I checked it out in detail and the internet options here are DSL and "Fibre to the Home" (which is the one I have). Both are run by the same company. I used to have DSL but the company decided to switch me over to Fibre, no choice in the matter, which in turn forced me to go look for a new router (the DSL one I had didn't have a WAN port and I couldn't find any firmware that would turn the 4th port into one).
I feel for you, Idol. I thought I had it bad with all the restrictions and rip-offs from my monopoly but at least I get a 2mb connection out of it. Hopefully things will look up for you soon, man.
-
The neighbor just down from me is trying a local wireless broadband service. He got it a few weeks ago, but they werent sure if it would continue to work once the trees greened out. Of course, they are closer to the road and facing the opposite way into an open field, where my house is set back in the woods so I'm probably out of luck with it.
-
Do you get 3G cell service where you are? If so, that's an option now too. I have no idea if it's good for gaming or not though.
-
Do you get 3G cell service where you are? If so, that's an option now too. I have no idea if it's good for gaming or not though.
Isn't it expensive though?
I know out here it is very expensive, but so is a mediocre internet connection. What's it like up in North America?
-
It's like a cell phone contract, basically. I believe I've seen it for $40/mo. I'm guessing it's a limited use plan though. Just saying there are options.
-
It's like a cell phone contract, basically. I believe I've seen it for $40/mo. I'm guessing it's a limited use plan though. Just saying there are options.
I see. Out here it's similar but they also charge on bandwidth usage, something like 25c per 100Kb.
In terms of gaming upload rate counts for a lot too, right?
My current connection is 2mb download rate with a 256k upload rate, which I have always blamed for having crap game connections to anything outside of the UAE. Am I mistaken?
-
No, upload rate is typically capped. Mine is very poor also, at something like 360 kbps.
-
I've looked into going the cell phone route, but they are less than idea. First, coverage is a little on the spotty side. If I mounted the sucker on the roof it might be ok, but as it is to use our phones (and we've had ATT, Verizon, and Virgin Mobile) we have to go stand in the driveway where its a little more open to get a signal. Even then it can be weak.
But the other issue is cost. $60/mo for 5GB is what I see for available plans. No unlimited option, and I can only imagine what such a plan would cost if it existed. I can download 5GB in a month already, so you give me some high speeds and I'll blow through that in a day. Now ATT, if you get that $60 plan, will give you access to their wifi hotspots. That could be nice, as that means I can go to any Starbucks and download stuff but I can buy 2 hour access for $4 each visit. I'd have to go 15 days a month to meet the $60 cost of the other plan. I could even register a Starbucks gift card for $5 and as long as I use it once a month I get free wifi every day.
The only thing that would be nice if it worked at home would be playing online. Games dont transfer all that much data so 5GB would be enough for me to play the games I normally cant play. But I'm not sure if its worth the $720/year to play online.