Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing most liked content on 11/28/2017 in all areas

  1. 11 points
    Sprint does send reminders that the lease is expiring too. It's not like they are hiding the lease end from the customer. Everyone's a victim these days. If you admit that you're too naive or lazy, then you're admitting responsibility and copability...
  2. 6 points
    What? They have every incentive. If they can make video streaming from providers other than themselves so expensive that nobody uses it, that benefits them. Innovation on the Internet threatens their profits. And since in most places, there is no competition in the home Internet access space from anyone except another provider with its own video service (think Verizon FiOS TV versus Comcast), the market won't be able to correct this behavior. Even if you count wireless, AT&T and Verizon now own their own streaming services and would benefit from pushing you to those as well. - Trip (This comment is my own and does not necessarily reflect the view of my employer, the FCC.)
  3. 4 points
    Netflix is just an example here. Netflix may be able to afford it, but not a new entrant to the market. Look at YouTube when they first started. It prevents new players from entering the market in the future, not even necessarily in video, but anything bandwidth heavy. The logistics of paying extra to every ISP as a startup is absurd and logically insurmountable. You basically lock in the current players as the content providers going forward. As a customer, you pay for the bandwidth, the ISP shouldn't care what it's being used for. Charge the customer what you need to to handle the costs for the level of bandwidth they subscribe to, don't try to double dip and charge the other end as well. Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
  4. 4 points
    I care that I can send and receive whatever traffic I want on my connection without my ISP deciding what I should be able to use. I use my wired connection for work and for entertainment. I transfer a lot of data and I do not want anyone messing with my traffic in any way. The FCC has decided that with 3 nationwide wireless providers there would not be enough competition but with most areas having 2 wired ISPs or less, that the monopoly practices of the wired ISPs are just fine with them.
  5. 4 points
    Yes, they were starting to mess with traffic and that is why Net Neutrality was put into effect. It started with a demand that Netflix pay your ISP to carry high speed traffic to you over the ISP interconnections without being throttled. They also started messing with torrent traffic to keep people from using torrenting programs. Now they have low caps on high speed connections while exempting their own content from their caps or forcing their competitors streaming products to lower bandwidth so they have an inferior product. I have to pay $30 extra each month to so that I can go over 1TB of data download in a household were I often work from home and all our entertainment is streaming. Net Neutrality was supposed to be about forcing ISPs to be dumb carriers and not allowing them to mess with any traffic that they carry. Without it we will continue down the path of monopoly ISPs deciding what internet traffic to pass to and from their customers and at what speed.
  6. 3 points
    It hadn't happened before Net Neutrality. But it was starting to be discussed. And the free and open internet was getting more and more centralized around a few operators and content providers. And more consolidation will happen. Remember the Netflix ISP battles? All it took was an unholy alliance from one content provider and a mega ISP and a snow ball effect could Cascade. The waters started to be tested. The writing was on the wall and the plans being considered. Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
  7. 3 points
  8. 2 points
    Update: ignore what I said, (I stated I was in Frostburg, MD and had LTE on Sprint [or at least what my phone]. I was just roaming on USC and it showed Sprint).
  9. 2 points
    Your whole argument is flawed. I hate to say it but just because they didn't do it prior to X date means absolutely nothing in the technology sector. The technology is evolving and therefore it will and can change. Cable companies used to post profits on the video stream into the house. Over time that has dried up as more people move to a streaming sources. The pricing strategy, likewise, has to shift. The reason behind Net Neutrality was because companies were trying to change up how data was handled (and are wanting to now). I can tell you it is a lot more complicated than you are willing to give it credit for. I know many people on the insides of these companies and I can tell you the corporations would love to be able to increase their profits from data carriage. And sorry, your Netflix example does not fly. Netflix would not be the one paying the costs, that would be passed on to the consumer. Much like when you tax companies, wealthy, etc, they can typically pass the increased costs on. Netflix itself still is not that profitable. It has huge overhead costs and has been spending money at a very high rate. Further, when you say 'the first company that does this will hemorrhage customers like crazy', is definitely not true. Many people only have one or two choices and usually 1 is not as good as the other (DSL versus Cable). Verizon HAS been steadily increasing FiOS internet prices over the last few years, and this year even increased video prices substantially by hitting everyone with a RSN fee (which equates to a price increase). People would be forced to shut up and pay or change the way they live. Even a $15 a month increase, while not a lot to many people, the profits will increase and people will pay. Just look at the iPhone X. Many people said nobody will pay for it, yet it looks like it was an extreme hit. Hell Verizon literally took away 4k HD steaming on the cellular side and offered it back to customers as a $10 add on! Just because something has not happened in the past does not mean it won't happen in the future. Companies, specifically publicly traded companies, have an obligation to the shareholder, not necessarily the customer. Usually you treat the customer okay, they will stick with you, but there are many cases where this is not true. Comcast is one of the most hated companies in America, yet continues to do well financially. Being an economics major in college I can tell you companies are always looking for a way to increase their bottom line in the long run.
  10. 2 points
    Mobilitie has filed their 48 hour work notice for the six sites they seek to install on public RoW. Sadly, the work won't be complete until the end of March. Hoping the schedule holds!
  11. 2 points
    Just because somebody hasn't done something, doesn't mean that they won't. The issue with all the net neutrality concern is that the protections to keep those scenarios from happening are at risk of going away. It's a precautionary measure, not a reactionary measure.
  12. 2 points
    It is confirmed. The S8 Active has Calling Plus if anyone else wanted to know. Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
  13. 2 points
  14. 2 points
    I'll be the curmudgeon in the thread: My prediction is lower than expected/needed capex spending while continuing to showcase plans that are more "me too!" than "look at me!" (hulu for sprint vs netflix for T-Mobile). I do expect Sprint to slowly build out and densify more towers but to in general start falling behind the other players again. Sorry but they won't small cell their way out of the still existing backhaul and slow tower problem. It is great that Sprint has done so well cutting down operation costs but they can't cut themselves to a faster network. Oh and lastly I predict another year of 3G/barely serviceable LTE at the Austin Airport. I also expect plan costs to rise now that T-Mobile plan costs are also on the rise. marketwise I expect that 2018 will bring even more people cord cutting and looking for services such as DirectTV Now and continue to add to AT&T dominating this area with the AT&T+DirectTV Now bundle discounts.
  15. 1 point
    Agree to disagree. People have presented evidence of companies trying to change the internet before net neutrality. You seem to favor the internet not being treated like a utility and I respect that. However, you cannot say that companies have not tried to change the way the internet was handled before Net Neutrality. That is where people are pointing out it HAS happened (https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2014/06/13/fcc-probes-netflix-isp-fight/10439635/). You can see further what is predicted in this article (http://fortune.com/2017/11/21/net-neutrality-fcc-winners-losers/). While the Verge is not my go to news source this is a decent article (https://www.theverge.com/2017/11/28/16710450/fcc-net-neutrality-fact-sheet-is-total-nonsense). Paid fast lanes (https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/11/comcast-quietly-drops-promise-not-to-charge-tolls-for-internet-fast-lanes/). Throttling before net neutrality (https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/11/comcast-throttling-bittorrent-was-no-big-deal-fcc-says/). And if you do not think ISPs charge more simply because of competition in the area, I can tell you my cable bill is lower in the NYC area than my parents in CT and in-laws in Ohio merely because my building is a FiOS and Optimum building. The building down the street has higher prices for Optimum because they cannot receive FiOS. So yes you can make the case that prices will not increase with a repeal of net neutrality, but there is evidence that this will not be the case as noted above. The costs of these paid fast lanes will ultimately come down to the consumer. If you think Netflix is going to pay huge interconnect fees WITHOUT increasing their prices to the consumer, then I have a bridge to sell you, especially if their competitors face the same fees. And again companies have been raising the price steadily of the internet over the past few years. This will likely just increase that cost on multiple fronts (content providers like Netflix) and your ISP bill with additional fees. People do not tend to switch ISPs readily, even with price increases. Again, I'm not looking to change your mind, but I do want you to at least notice why people might be nervous/upset about this change. Saying that market will handle it, is not a good argument when most people have to purchase from a monopoly. I am fully aware that you believe the markets can and will respond and I am making the case for a market inefficiency. Whether or not the repeal of net neutrality will actually change the way the internet is handled can be debated for awhile until we actually see changes. I suspect we would see changes within the year. But you cannot use the argument that because it has not been done in the past does not mean it will not in the future. Times change and the way we consume media has drastically changed over the last 5 years. As for price increases: http://bgr.com/2017/10/07/home-internet-service-providers-no-contract-price-2017/
  16. 1 point
    My hypothesis is not evidence free. I was an economics concentration in college. If you would like I can send you some papers that study these exact cases for corporations over the years. That extra $15 would be disguised as a 'fee' and most people would not change carriers over that. Plus with ISPs there is largely no place for most customers to churn to. Fees are the best way to increase prices while not changing the overall rate. That is basic marketing. Sure Verizon could have increased my price plan for video on FiOS, but that would make it seem like a price increase. By adding an RSN fee they are making the customer feel like they had no choice but to tack on the fee based on the RSNs. Another industry to look at is the airline industry. The extra fees are everywhere. I work in academia, and I can tell you most colleges have drastically slowed down tuition increases but guess what is much higher now, fees!!! That is still revenue! Also, there were cases already of ISPs harming the end user experience, so I don't know what you mean by that. Many people were complaining of throttling before. There are plenty of cases out there from 2012 until Net Neutrality.
  17. 1 point
    Take a look at Portugal.... http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-portugal-internet-20171127-story.html
  18. 1 point
    My question to everyone who's only retort is how it hasn't happened, therefore it won't happen...why are you opposed to keeping the current provisions in place? If you claim it's pointless and has no necessity, why not just leave it be? This isn't knocking on wood, throwing salt over your shoulder or saying a quick prayer. Don't be so naive to believe that a stunt like that wouldn't be attempted if allowed. You seriously believe in the good Samaritan situation...from a corporation? What's the saying? Give them an inch and they'll take a mile. As for "Let these mega corps fight out who gets what profits, it make no never mind to me or you." where do profits come from? Payer's pockets. As a payer, I should have a say in where and how my money is spent. Not some corporation. Next thing you know, electric companies will say that if you want to watch tv while doing laundry at home, it'll be an extra 10cents to power your washing machine and possibly 5 more cents to power your dryer.
  19. 1 point
    Alpha Wireless Concealed Antenna Node The following consists of Alpha Wireless Concealed Antenna Node (CAN) small cell sites. This is a type of stealth setup for small cells where the small cell enodeB and relay antenna is located within the stealth enclosure which also acts as the antenna. This type of site is under beta trials with positive results and is likely to expand in deployment scope nationally to fulfill municipality requests for "good looking" small cells that they would approve. The finished build. Note the utilities attached to the pole and routed directly into the concealed antenna node where the small cell eNB and Relay backhaul antenna are located. In traditional small cell deployments, like such they are mounted on the exterior with visible wires. The following is an additional example of an Alpha Wireless CAN setup. Notice the CAN's position relative to the utility pole which is at an angle. Here is another one that is a standalone metal pole install. Photo Credits to dkyeager and the rest of the Ohio sponsor group that helped locate these small cells.
  20. 1 point
    Do you want to be nickle and dimed for every service you want to use? Example... Comcast/Xfinity is your ISP, you pay say $70/month, so all the NBC Universal Streaming services are untiered, they want you to use their services, view their commercials, etc But wait, you want ESPN GO, Fox Sports Go, NBA League Pass, MLS Live, etc then in addition to paying the provider for those services, you need yo pay Comcast an extra $5/month Hold on, you love you social media platforms, well Twitter, Instagram, facebook, reddit, etc are going to cost you $5/month Oh you like video streaming? Netflix, Hulu, HBO Go, Paramount, etc kick Comcast about $15/month, on top of paying for the services. You might still be able to use all these services for your $70/month, but the data rates will be heavily capped or rate shaped to extort more money from you. Couple years down the road, new ISP pops up and you switch because its the same $70 for faster speeds. Uh oh, its not Xfinity any longer, so all those NBC Universal streaming services that have been given network priority at no cost to you, stump up $25/month to the new ISP. As noted earlier, just because this hasn't happened, doesn't mean it won't. Corporations a greedy and will squeeze every penny they can out of every side of a business deal to drive up stock prices. There isn't any competition in the Wired Internet market because the infrastructure is so freaking expensive and so hard to deploy with the myraid of local government regulations.
  21. 1 point
    I think all Apple CDMA enabled iPhones sold in the past few years use SRLTE by default. Apple patented their implementation of SRLTE a few years ago which may be a little different than the way other phones use SRLTE.
  22. 1 point
    Only 2 devices support it right?
  23. 1 point
    256 QAM would make the biggest difference given proper backhaul. 4x4 MIMO would be great for urban high capacity sites assuming the need for high capacity CDMA has declined.
  24. 1 point
    Or if the ISP decides they don't want to pay more for Netflix and pull access to it, like cable and satellite providers do all the time when they have a contract/price dispute with a channel. Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
  25. 1 point
    I think there are some free speach issues that i am concerned about but that extends to platform owners like Facebook and google. I think these platforms have become so ubiquitous that i am uncomfortable with a hand full of companies having the ability to restrict access to them. But that can exist in a net neutrality environment, so that isnt a solution to the problem I am concered with.
  26. 1 point
    It depends on the depends on the elasticity of demand for Netflix, which I would think is rather high, meaning Netflix would pay most of the addition cost. Look, why wouldnt the ISPs just raise prices on consumers by the amount they want to extract from Netflix? The same reason, elasticities of demand. It wont raise costs to consumers, it just adjusts the distrabution of profits.
  27. 1 point
    You are mixing up different things into the net neutrality basket. ISP were messing and are messing with torrent sites because content providers were threatening them with law suits. The part about netflix is true but why do you carw who gets what profits?
  28. 1 point
    Smart Car Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk
  29. 1 point
  30. 1 point
    “They basically took $140 away from me because I’m naive.” That’s all you need to know about this person/situation. Everybody else’s responsibility but his. In other news: Overdue library item fines can cost you more than the book does. Renting a car at the daily rate for a week can be more expensive than the weekly rate.
  31. 1 point
    They're not going to announce any dates for anything. They've got burnt far too many times since 2011. Ie. We already know and have found new LTE only expansion areas with no previous sprint coverage but it's not publicized anywhere. Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
  32. 1 point
  33. 1 point
    Something cool I noticed. You know how in Allo you can see who has it downloaded by trying to start an Incognito chat? With RCS (at least in Samsung Message) you can see who has RCS enabled by clicking the menu button in the top right corner and clicking "start a group chat" and it'll show you all the people that have it.
  34. 1 point
  35. 0 points