Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

DSL Amidst Phone Wars

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the baby-bells-in-the-wrong,-as-usual dept.

DrewCapu writes "The SF Chronicle has an article which talks about the battles between SBC and AT&T & MCI over supposed unfair practices concerning DSL and switching phone companies. All sides have their own spin on it. Can't we all just get along? Things have been heating up ever since SBC got closer to offering LD in CA."

3 of 139 comments (clear)

  1. Re:How About Permitting _Real_ Competition? by Kevinv · · Score: 4, Interesting

    and of course the gov't subsidies most phone companies recieved (in direct payments and via grants of monopoly status) to run those lines doesn't entitle the tax payers that funded them to anything.

  2. Re:How About Permitting _Real_ Competition? by John+Hasler · · Score: 4, Interesting

    > and of course the gov't subsidies most phone
    > companies recieved (in direct payments and via
    > grants of monopoly status) to run those lines
    > doesn't entitle the tax payers that funded them
    > to anything.

    Why should they receive either subsidies or protection of their monopolies?

    --
    Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
  3. related by jchristopher · · Score: 5, Interesting
    An offtopic, but related question:

    Why do I need a voice line in order to get DSL service in the first place? I don't want a voice line and I can't be the only one.

    Because of this, anyone who wants DSL must also pay (Verizon, in Los Angeles) $26/month for a voice line they have no intention of using.

    Is it like that everywhere or just here?