Slashdot Mirror
Cable Wants to Cut the Cord
skatephat420 writes "Wired News has featured an article on how "the cable industry wants you to chuck your cable -- at least when you're outside the house. The addition of a fourth wireless component to the cable package is now affectionately known as the 'quadruple play.'" With this addition to the standard package of voice, video and data, how long is it going to take DSL to compete?"
Cable access wherever I go? I think this is actually the wrong direction for them to persue - my strategy would be to first add some sort of uber-addictive MMORPG (which ought to be trivial) along with some other video games (subscription based, of course), and then the hard part: pizza, caffeine and beer delivery on-demand.
Then I would have no reason to leave the house, ever. I don't need to take it with me 'cause I ain't leaving.
The "quadruple play" is already a well understood investment play on Wall Street over the last few months. The big battle ahead is cable and what used to be the regional telcos. They're both arming themselves with everything they can think of, including faster and faster, two-way broadband, internet telephony, cellular and broadband wireless services, along with hundreds of content channels...and each side is committing to spend billions to do it. What investors are trying to understand is who remains standing with a semblance of a profitable business at the end of it. Each side is desperately trying not to end up being a "dumb pipe", but have a valuable "walled garden" of services to keep customers paying $50, 100 or more per month per household. Someone is going to end up losing these multi-billion dollar bets. More here: http://mp.blogs.com/mp/2005/07/on_wilting_wire.htm l
letting them access video content on their mobile device as seamlessly as they access "video on demand" programming at home.
So how long will they wait for the cellular & PCS companies to get somewhere near up to speed to be capable of live video? And no, Sprint's bullshit 15fps mobile "tv" doesn't count.
I think that's FiOS's job.
I don't get it.
Oh, wait.
SBC already offers a bundles package of:
Home phone service
Long distance
DSL internet service
Dish Network satellite TV
Cingular Wireless phone service
It seems that the cable companies are trying to catch up to DSL, not the other way around.
If cable can integrate their content onto the phones as the article suggests, maybe they will pull ahead.
It doesn't hurt to be nice.
You know, frankly, I don't want to give a single cent to the cable company. I don't have any interest in television service. I don't have any interest in talking to the idiotic telephone monopoly that controls DSL service in this town. But, if I want broadband internet, I HAVE to go with either the telephone monopoly, or the cable monopoly-- even though
About the only service I'm satisfied with is my cell phone service. I continue happily using my cell phone, and juggle switching between cable internet (but no cable tv) and dsl (but no phone service).
Now I find out that our cable monopoly may start trying to elbow in on cell phones too.
Great!
I'm sick of being beholden to the nonresponsive feudal lords who own the wires going into my home, while slashdotters repeatedly tell me how these same feudal lords are defenders of freedom from the big bad evil government who wants to own the internet. I very badly miss ten years ago, when the ISP market contained C O M P E T I T I O N and if my ISP wasn't treating me right, I could switch to another if I wanted.
I want to say fuck all of these people, especially the cable companies who now want to sell me incompetent wireless in addition to their extant incompetent cable service. I want to switch to a fully wireless ISP and get my internet by 802.16 or some shit. When can I do that?
It's obvious that all these large companies with massive infrastructure want to extend the use of said infrastructure as much as possible.
But what I'm really waiting to see is whether or not any new/fringe players will make a move to implement a WiMAX grid that has decent redundancy and large-scale coverage and move away from the "ground-based" bandwidth carriers.
IMHO, that's where the really interesting dynamics come into play. FTTH, increased cable speed/features, expanded DSL offerings, that's all great. But show me a completely tetherless solution for my voice/data/entertainment needs with mass coverage and you've got me hooked for your hundreds a month, with probably less cost to you than to (insert cable co./telco here).
From TFA:
"They want this phone to do everything that their TV does and everything that their PC does."
So I guess my phone will now gets viruses, worms, spyware, while it's busy playing mindless advertising interrupting my conversation every 5 minutes?
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
I can run a server on 29.99/mo DSL...
39.99+all sorts of fees = 54.00 / mo cable does NOT allow me to run ANY servers, and block most of the default service ports for unix... (most still allow windows, but I'm not about to buy IIS to run a simple site on that huge clunking POS).
Of course if I manage to get around it by shifting ports around, they threaten to cut off my service if I do not disconnect the server within 5 days of being notified. (if it happens a second time, they DO cut off the service as they have done to me before)
In my book, DSL is still light years ahead of cable for what ***I*** need!
For browsing its a tad slow, but they don't have nearly as many DNS outages as the providers in my area.
" What luck for rulers that men do not think" - Adolf Hitler
Dog is my co-pilot.
When the DSL provider says you're getting X bandwidth, that's what you and only you get. When the cable company says you get X bandwidth, you're actually sharing it with up to 253 neighbors.
...who think watching on the freeway is a good idea.
Yup. They run Linux. If you telnet in, both the login and password are "admin." You can telnet in from both the LAN and WAN sides. Indeed, you can connect to the web administration page from the WAN side. And the CGI script is broken enough to let you open arbitrary files. If it weren't for an utterly complete lack of functionality, I'd be very worried.
After all, I am strangely colored.
and I pay SBC a lot less than the cable company wants or will want.
Better, SBC is going head to head with cable, trying to get cable channels unbundled.
Let's see:
1. charging more
2. trying to sell what's already available
3. pulling a poor sales job to make it look like it's their idea
4. doing their damnedest to make sure I have to buy tons of crap with the few things I want.
There's your cable quadruple play.
"I may be synthetic, but I'm not stupid." -- Bishop 341-B
VOIP is reliable enough for me. Are you really that frightened not being able to dial 911? I don't have a cellphone, so I lose 911 service every time I walk out my front door. So what? It's like saying people shouldn't buy a home over a half mile from the fire department, just in case those extra few seconds end up making the difference between life and death. Humbug! A thousand other mishaps will kill you before a VOIP outage does.
Here's what I want. If anyone out there works for a cable company, please feel free to pass this along. Currently when I subscribe to cable, not only do I get access to all the shows they air, but I also get limited access, through Comcast's Digital Cable, to something vaguely PVRish... I can watch a select number of shows at any time for free. I can pause them and rewind them as I see fit. If this service is already available, I don't see any reason why I can't have the following feature:
I would like to be able to go online, log into my cable company's webpage, and download any show that's aired since I began my subscription. These are all shows I theoretically have access to already (I could have taped them), so why not allow me to watch them when I want. Give me a username and a password; go ahead and keep track of when I joined and only give me access to content I'm entitled to. Bittorrent distribution is fine, I don't mind contributing a little bit of bandwidth to this scheme.
In addition, I want to be able to schedule downloads of new shows in a PVR like system. So, anytime I decide I like a show, I can download the whole back catalogue since I started my cable subscription, and download every new episode that airs automatically.
Also, I should be able to access this content anywhere, at any time. This would actually be a big selling point if I were presenting this idea to a cable company because it means you could sell something of a discounted product to people outside of your traditional market. Why do I need to deal with Comcast when I can subscribe over the internet to Time Warner, even though they're not in my area? Suddenly, all the cable companies will be competing against each other to provide the best selection of programming at the best price with the most ease of service... something that isn't really happening today.
I'm sure there's legal issues with this from the point of the content producers. All I know is that I'd be happy to download shows via bittorrent with commercials directly from my cable company if they allowed me to do so. I'd be happy to switch away from my local cable company if someone else on the internet could provide me with a better deal. The cable companies already have the rights to distribute the content to end users... this scheme would require a renogotiation, but it's within their power (unlike some crazy startup).
Anyone else interested in this sort of service?
--
RumorsDaily
I don't want to rely on the same company for my Internet connection, both wired and wireless, and the voice, data and video coming over it. Especially one so hostile to customer service as my cable company. Each of those services should be delivered by a competing company, not some monolithic monopoly which controls all my access to information. Which can censor info it doesn't like, like "obscene" or "terrorist" websites. Which can eavesdrop on my calls. Which can cross-reference all my info together. Which can cut off my wired (and unwired) life completely as leverage behind an "accidental" SNAFU in billing me for one service.
There's all kinds of integrated billing / customer service systems that already bundle multiple outsourced services into one bill, one "help desk". That's what cable and phone companies already use to bundle the services they market and control into one "customer relationship". These bundled services are like Microsoft controlling the markets of OS, apps, development and content. And cable companies have even less minority competition to "keep them honest". Bundling like this proposal should be prohibited, to protect consumers. And to create opportunities for entrepreneurs, like an independent "customer care" service that wraps up billing and customer care into one contact. Without creating a bottleneck through a cable company that's guaranteed to fail, with devastating results, all the time, all over the country.
--
make install -not war
In my area, cable internet is $25/mo, and I don't have to pay for a phone line or cable TV service. Not everyone wants or needs a land line.
"I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
at best, you'll get the 37kbytes per sec sustained stream... of course, it will rarely be that, usually getting 27 to 28kbps in busy neighborhoods.
:)
Add in the frequent DNS outages comcast had when I was a customer (and from what my buds in northern Virginia say, comcast still has them) I dare say I'll still take DSL over them... only issue I've ever had with DSL was that it took them awhile to reach the places where I've lived
" What luck for rulers that men do not think" - Adolf Hitler
Too bad VOIP does not work when there is no power...
A few years ago, I thought Verizon was cooked. Long distance was dead, and they were not one of the leaders in wireless, and DSL has always been a bit of a joke outside of heavily populated areas.
But in the Washington DC area, we've seen in the past few years:
1) Verizon Wireless has become one of the leaders for voice.
2) Verizon Wireless offers their 1X service which gives 90-110K web service in most areas of the country
3) in metro areas their EVDO service is now offering mid-speed internet access
4) They still offer DSL
5) In the Washington DC area, they're rolling FIOS out to everybody, far beyond their DSL offering, and they're spending money faster than I've seen anybody short of the military spend money on this rollout. Its amazing.
6) In the process of this rollout, they're getting rid of 40 year old copper infrastructure.
7) Using this fiber they'll be offering increasing video services that strike right at the heart of the cable companies.
Seriously, Comcast should be scared. They looked to be in the driver's seat 3 years ago, but Verizon has come on strong and now Comcast has to come up with an answer. Maybe they'll even start offering decent help desk and helpful employees.
Nah. I think they'd rather go out of businss.
You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
It's the Quintuple Play! It's a wireless cable modem phone MUSIC PLAYER!
And it's edible, with Zero Carbs! Just don't nibble on your phone before your two year service agreement is up...
With all this talk of DSL vs Cable, howcome my cable bill is still like $80/month for sub-par service?
I use maybe 3 channels of cable, and that part of the bill costs 50 bucks! Not to mention, they block my service internet ports and ask me to pay bajillions for a business account to run a personal website.
The DSL around here sucks. The cable around here sucks. Satellite isn't an option because I want 99% reliable internet.
I don't want a land-line. I don't want any web-portal, pop-up blocker tools, tech support, or whatever whiz-bang features ISPs use these days. I don't want 77 of my ~90 TV channels.
I am so fucking tired of these communications companies and their monopolies. I am in a state capitol, a fairly big city. For godsake, I should have better service than they offer. If I lived in the boonies, I would be glad to have internet access at all, but that is not the case.
This is incredibly unfair to consumers. I have no choice but to pay either SBC, Charter, or DirecTV for broadband internet access. I don't want to fund any of those bastards!
Yeah, a little off-topic perhaps, but I need to vent.
Buckle your ROFL belt, we're in for some LOLs.
VOIP is reliable enough for me.
That's what Time Warner Roadrunner was trying to tell me when I was on hold for the THIRD TIME THIS WEEK because my cable had gone down from 2PM to 5PM.
"Hello," I said to the customer service representative, after I finally got through their new and exciting phone system that told me two times how to spend 15 minutes resetting the DVR I don't own, "Could you tell your management that having ads for your phone service when people are on hold trying to get their cable service back... on a phone they couldn't use because their cable service was out... is probably NOT going to win many new customers?"
I was in Houston when Alicia hit. A tornado took out the U-Haul storage place across the street. I had no power for 6 hours. But my phone worked, I could even get online (on a BBS, the Internet wasn't around yet) and leave a message for the folks I knew back at college. When the floods hit we lost power for half a day, of course there was no cable. But my phone worked, I could let my family know I was OK. This June a storm (and possibly another tornado) dropped someone else's fence on my roof and took mine in exchange. I had no power and no cable for several hours. But I could call up the power company and report the outage, and the insurance company to make a claim! I'm getting a partial rebate for July, because a bad splitter had packet-loss going to 85% every time the weather got hot, but I could still call the cable company to report it even if it took them two weeks to get someone out at a time I could be home.
Hell with dialling 911. I want a landline phone because I need Time Warner's repair service on speed-dial.
No doubt. I can count on one hand how many times I've called 911 in the last 30 years. Most of those situations haven't been life threatening emergencies where arrival was critical. Most recently called 911 because some old man was wandering into traffic on a busy street - more preemptive than emergency. People are all crazy about this alleged 911 problem, but I bet the odds are better of getting struck by lightning than being in a situation where you have to call 911 and your cell phone either doesn't work or you aren't coherent enough to tell the dispatcher where you are. I know there have been incidents where crime victims have called 911 from a cell and the emergency personnel have not been able to reach them, but they are few and far between.
That said, I don't see how DSL is economical at all. Landline service is relatively expensive. We are all going to have cell phones anyway, why pay for both. I got a cable modem and got rid of my land line. It's pretty much a wash - and DSL wouldn't have been cheaper if I combined the DSL charge with my landline charge.
Find coupons in Greeley
On the other hand, I can count the number of times our landline service has gone out over the last five years on ONE hand with a few fingers left over.
VOIP and cell phones may indeed work well enough for a lot of people but it's hard to beat a standard landline for reliability and, as mentioned elsewhere, the fact that phones can work when the power is out is a pretty big trump card. Like most people, we use mostly cordless phones, but there are a couple of phones lying around that requiring no external power just in case we need them.
"VOIP is reliable enough for me. Are you really that frightened not being able to dial 911?"
Having personally lived through the Ice Storm in 1998 and more recently the massive blackout, i was thankful for a reliable means of communcation, even if it weren't to contact 911. It was also nice to have a reliable method of being reached.
Even just a normal power outage is not all that uncommon in winter. Following your suggestion, we'd cross our fingers and hope that in an emergency a)The ISP is up, b)The VoIP provider is in a similar state and c) You actually have power to run your end of the VoIP equipment. Brilliant plan.
Maybe you don't need a landline, but you'll be thankful your neighbour has one when it counts.
There's NO WAY I'll rely on them for telephony. I truly wish they weren't a broadband monopoly. I can't get DSL with any reasonable speed where I live, so Comcast is the only game in town.
What i'd like in a phone
Take calls, play mp3's, browse web, with hdd for downloading, the latest linux distro, keeps me warm in the winter, keeps me cool in the summer, Mega Massage setting for when I'm very tense, Those crazy electric muscle exerciser thingies, heart monitor, video games, High speed gyros for force-feedback during games, video camera, regular camera, multi-format flash card reader, usb connector, RS232 serial interface with data logger, corkscrew, penknife, extra-sharp knife, toothpick, bottle opener, bat-signal, tincture of bat-anti-merry-go-round spray, laser level, laser sight, laser weapon, maser, pants reinforcing field 'cause the phone's got everything, microwave doppler radar, compass, gps, small vial of whisky/gin/vodka/... for sprucing up drinks, mint spray for sprucing up dates, emergency chocolate ration for mountain rescue or sprucing up dates, calender for remembering dates, hypno spray for getting dates despite the gigantic cellphone holster, Forget-o-spray for making the joke, "Is that a rediculously oversized marginally usefull phone in your pocket or...", appear less lame, kitchen sink, Plays episodes of Family Guy when i'm bored
If all those things are added to cell phones, i'll almost be satisfied.
Can you be Even More Awesome?!
genuity has a ton at
4.2.2.4
4.2.2.5
4.2.2.6
4.2.2.7
4.2.2.8
they just flat out work.. i don't use comcast's all.. override the ones i get via dhcp from them and put x.x.x.4 and x.x.x.5 and they are fine...
just ran www.dslreports.com speed test.. 7200/764
nasty fast...
sig goes here!
In france, I subscribe to Free (www.free.fr)
I have Video, Data (20Mbit), TV, and wireless.. and it's been available for months now.
It all comes over the adsl connection.. (which does not necessarily imply a France Telecom subscription)
If I decide I don't like free.fr, there are at least 2 other competitors on the market with the same package..
So what's the big deal? Once you have the bandwidth to the user, its just software that provides the services.. (and a little hardware - the freebox)
Why is a cable company so special when they do it? Oh yeah.. its the USA...
Like hell it is.
300MB per month?
I've got more than 300MB in my download history just for this morning.