Slashdot Mirror
FCC Clears Comcast Purchase Of AT&T Broadband
Torgo's Pizza writes "The FCC just granted final approval for Comcast to complete its $30.5 billion purchase of AT&T Broadband. Despite consumer worries of increased rates and clear domination of the market, Chairman Michael Powell stated, "The benefits of this transaction are considerable, the potential harms negligible.""
Oh yeah, of course the potential downsides are negligible if you can afford to pay $100 for $hitty service. I'm having a hard time paying the 46 those bums are charging now. I mean honestly, is there any end to their greed. How many of you think Powell got a promise of free service AFTER the price jumps to 200 for a line?
Even now comcast cable is more expensive than DSL in my area - plus they forbid using VPN over the 'residential' package. If you want to work from home you basically have to spring for the $100/month business package. I wish the Bell Atlantic would get thier act together with DSL rollout.
This is only for the purchase of AT&T Broadband. This includes AT&T Cable, related infrastructure, and associated connectivity-via-cable (cable modem) customers. This has nothing to do with local phone, long distance, leased lines, web hosting, solutions, etc.
What? I have Comcast, and it uses DHCP. Maybe you are in an area that uses PPPoE, which also works in Linux.
Actually, this is not true. The comcast system works with any operating system that runs a decent dhcp client. For example, under linux, running `dhcpcd ` provices all the authentication you need to connect to the service. Authentication is provided based on the MAC address of your modem, not based on any windows-proprietary method.
Certain service areas of Comcast use PPPoE for authentication rather than the commonplace DHCP for authentication. You can get Linux PPPoE software from Roaring Penguin.
"The lesson to be learned is not to take the comments on slashdot too literally." --Vinnie Falco, BearShare
Which says:
"If you feel that you have been a victim of Internet abuse which took place in part or completely on the Comcast Network, please report the incident to abuse@comcast.net. Make sure to include the date and time of the incident, log files, spam examples or any other information that may be useful to the investigation and verification of the incident as well as your name and phone number or e-mail address so we may contact you directly."
w/the bottom up provisioning that is already in place w/ATTBI, I doubt that there will be much of a problem moving over to Comcast (as long as Comcast keeps the provisioning model the same, which I can't see why they wouldn't).
:)
From @Home -> ATTBI they tried to manually put everyone into the provisioning database, but couldn't w/anyone that had a proprietary modem (Motorola Cybersurfer Wave, COM21 proprietary, some LANCity's).
So when AT&T RoadRunner when to ATTBI all the users had to do was call and get the instructions, some of them actually recieved instructions in the mail (that most people here would have no problems following).
there is a web page called the SAS registration page. You goto that site (w/a proxy set temporarily) and the site grabs your MAC address from the modem and allows you access to the new network.
PRAY that Comcast keeps this. The changeover will be mostly painless.
Comcast was telling the CSRs that they would have more concentration on GOOD customer service and less problems... They WANT to keep customers, not ignore them till they leave.
Again, we can always hope
why are you glad you got DSL? 768k/128k service for the same cost as 1.5/256k
Are you saying all DSL is 768/128? If you think that, you are horribly mistaken. Not everyone has such shitty DSL in their area.
My DSL provider gives me 1.5/256, for $49 per month. I also get a static IP, DNS services, several e-mail boxes, and almost never do I get downtime. Not only that, I don't even have to use PPPOE.
DirectTV DSL truely IS a very good provider. When I first started out with them over a year ago they had a few minor issues but it's all blue skies now.
In fact, the ONLY people in my area who WILL touch cable are those who for whatever reason can't get DSL. The cable provider in our area (Charter) blows goat cheese. Frequent downtimes, lag for no good reason, crappy agreements, no static IP, not allowed to run any servers, etc. etc.
I think the reasons for using DSL are pretty obvious. There is no argument here.
"Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"
Moderation Totals: Wrong=2, Stupid=3, Total=5.
The only people who should be very concerned about this merger are people who _sell_ to cable operators (i.e. programmers like HBO or equipment vendors like C-Cor, SA, Motorola, etc.).
For end customers, it won't make a damn bit of difference. AFAIK, not a single market in the US are served by both of these providers, so no consumer will see a reduction in the service offerings provided to them.
For folks who complain about only having one cable operator, it's not a regulatory issue. Every local franchise agreement (contract between the cable company and your city or town that says the cable company gets to string wires and provide service, and in exchange the city government gets a % of the revenue plus free cable service for city offices and schools) signed in the last 15 years is non-exclusive, so another cable operator is welcome to come in and set up shop. Problem is, with a few exceptions (quite dense, wealthy neighborhoods), the economics just don't justify building a second network. It's not some global conspiracy, just the fact that you can pay for building a network to pass 100 houses if you get 65 of them as customers, but not if you only get 37 of them.
Um...@home was *not* Comcast. Comcast was an @home franchise. It was Excite that sent "@home" down the crapper.