Lipid, another factor, not usually mentioned, is that other providers use the Bell lines to provide DSL services to customers, and only pay a small portion, per Federal law, for use of these lines, well below what it cost the Bell companies for the lines. Until Federal law is changed concerning this practice, the Bell companines are going to limit their investments in the DSL area.

YIKES!

Where I live the trees are all in the way for satellite and they are telling me it will be three to five years for cable anything, or broadband....I'm moving!

kateri - the techno terror

Homer6,

I think the FCC just voted to relieve the telcos of the need to open their networks to other providers.

Originally, in 1996, the telcos agreed to allow access because that agreement would give them access to, what was then, the lucrative long distance market. When the long distance market collapsed, the telcos decided they would take their time making access to their networks available. This eventually starved out most of the third party DSL providers.

And, as it stands today, DSL is still not a money maker. Hence, no rush by the telcos in getting it up and running.

Given the problems (and issues) with DSL, it looks like cable wins the race for broadband. With, maybe, satellite coming up a fast second.

According to what my company told us, the push was to get the FCC to let the Bell companies charge the indenpendant providers actual costs of those leased lines, instead of the reduced rates, which the FCC chose not to do. We haven't received any word on what you mentioned, but it would be good news to know that did happen.

Where the push for DSL happened was in the large cities, where the money is. Sure, the rural areas got DSL, but only within 15,000 feet of the telephone's central office. So anyone beyond that, or not having cable, or satellite, are out of luck. I've heard there is technology being developed, or already out, that extends the range that DSL can be offered. But as you said, because of the low return on investment, this technology isn't being used either.

Homer6,

The source of my information can be found here .

The most telling quote from the article is this:

When it comes to high-speed DSL and fiber-optic lines, Baby Bells will no longer have to share their networks with rivals.

I could be wrong, but that doesn't sound like just a rate increase.

And that brings us back to your point about the inability of the telcos to make enough money on DSL to justify the costs of offering it. Or offering it at a reasonable price. If there is no one other than the telcos to offer DSL, I wonder what the price will be? And whether the telcos will be willing to let DSL fade away like ISDN?

working for a telephone company i can tell you that fixing landlines (the regular lines that you have coming into home and "wired" into a jack or telephone) are the last thing on the list to seem to get attention to get repaired. You see, most of the landlines are getting very old and need to be updated which could mean anything from new electronics to new cable being run and it is not as profitable as wireless now. because it would cost more to keep it updated than to kind of just let it 'die out.everything "seems to be going wireless" to quote the cmpny and others, so they as companies do- who want to make the $'s -(not that it is passed down to the employees)they are spending big to keep wireless service updated and going. BUT this is not the same as the BROADBAND....and unless you are a big business using it....you will get inline after the wireless customers if you have a problem.and , unfortunately unless you know a lot about it and are lucky enough to get a repair tech who "just hasn't read a manual" who acutally understands how it works and TAKES THE TIME TO LISTEN TO WHAT YOU TELL HIM YOU ARE HAVING TROUBLE WITH AND WHAT IT IS DOING--ya pays your money and takes your chances. The sales of broadband through private companies specializing in it and others such as cable companies is generallly higher because they've had more experience but...as everything else more info and good service can keep customers happy.
i started w/this occupation years ago and the idea was to help the customer and at the same time be pleasant. you know....customer service 'old school'. now, we are not to engage customer in unecessary conversation. we are to handle the call in 21 SECONDS or less. it is horrible and unfortunately to keep your job you end up having to rush customers off the line or interrupt them to get info. many time it takes that retiree in Florida who lives alone 21 seconds to remember why they dialed "0" and would you not give them the same service as another? Makes me so sad to realize how far the personal touch has fallen. AND the other thing about this get off the line in 21 seconds is we don't get to hear the call connect, therefore you have customers calling back several times because the call did not go thru the 1st time when it could have probably been avoided the first call. Especially on international calls--where dialing info might have been changed since that customer began using that number to call over there.
sorry about the rant. that is why trouble is so slow in getting reported and fixed, and the operators get no trouble reports like we used to...we've been cut out of the loop for info. we work w/data bases that are not kept current and online tools that are poorly designed. if you have a problem w/your service the first thing to do is report it to your telephone office (be sure to ask if there is a charge to fix it....)and if it does not get fixed call the C.E.O. of the company....they're supposed to know what is going on in the compnay and from what i have seen(and from info from other operators from other companies it is the same) they could not handle a customer call if their life depended on it. sorry i got carried away but i like my dial up service (my provider may not be the best but it's my choice) and since i am not a student or use this for work i don't want to pay DOUBLE+ for broadband for my computer.

Hi there, Gamenut..........Hooray for your observations. Having retired from the telecommunications industry myself, I am lined up right beside you on this issue. IMHO....

In the words of a close friend who is currently deeply engaged in this newer offering..."the bottom line here is MONEY, MONEY, MONEY." Nothing new, huh? Good solid customer service is becoming as scarce as hen's teeth.

Love, Witchen =O)

By "wireless" do you mean cell phones?
Cell phones are useless for telephone orders where you have to give secure information.

Too bad customers don't have a choice. You're stuck with whatever service your local phone or cable company gives you.

This is turning into a Mixed Bag thread.

I'd say that phrase pretty well sums up the concerns surrounding an online-only game that requires broadband.

Well, I'm going to pipe in here. I'm really looking forward to the release of Uru. I do have broadband, DSL in fact, so that's not an issue. I'm also assuming there will be monthly subscription fee, which, if it's in the range of $12-$15 per month (US dollars) I will pay. I'm glad to be in a position where I have broadband and I can pay a monthly fee - I know it's not like that for everyone.

Just thought I'd say this, while we were in the midst of discussing other things. Uru, Uru, Uru, hurry up!

You are indeed fortunate and I hope Uru exceeds your expectations.

Thanks for the info, Lipid, it was something we had not yet heard. And since I don't have the time to be online for hours on end, I would never have heard about it. And that article hit the nail right on the head, and I wonder how many more telcos are going to go belly up before the FCC changes their ruling.

When I started with the telco company I work for, 25 years ago, THE CUSTOMER drove the business, and making THAT CUSTOMER happy was THE first and only thing that mattered. Over the years, that has changed, and changed drastically. Now, MR. MONEY is the ONLY topic of the day, everyday. And because MR. MONEY has taken over the business, the general plant has really taken a beating.

Some of the cables in our outside plant are 50 years old or older, lead sheathed, 100% full, and are in dire need of repairs. Instead of replacing these 100% full cables, or older cables, with larger, newer cables, additional cables are buried along side, or spun up with the existing cables, taking up valuable space. And because PRODUCTION is right up there with MR. MONEY, any cable repairs will be taken care of when that's the only thing that can keep the techs busy for the day. But with such a reduced work force, that rarely happens. Thus, telephone plant is in a very sad state of neglect.

As long as a city has cable TV, there will be competition within broadband services. Those living in the rural areas will be the losers in all of this, unless they have a phone company that will offer them broadband service, like the CO-OP I belong to. Or can, and are willing to, invest in satellite services. And for get about placing fiber optic cable to homes in rural areas, it's just too expensive an investment for the return.

What really needs to happen, is the development of a transmission system that allows broadband to be delivered regardless of distance, over existing lines, which allows greater return than investment. Go ahead, someone slap me, wake me up. I have these funny dreams on occasion.

Well, this thread has gone down something of a detour, in my opinion. Is anyone else, who hasn't posted about the game, thinking about playing Uru when it comes out?

Just wondering. It's not that I'm not interested in broadband issues, I am, but now I'm interested in Uru! I wonder if anyone else who hadn't posted was interested in the game.

Are you kidding? I just bought another 256 ram, an 80 gig HD, 2.0 ghz processor, and a Geforce 4 ti4200 video card just in anticipation for this game. Not to mention I only paid $250.

Yes, I'll definitely be playing Uru. I appreciate all the info on this thread, as I don't keep up with the latest about Uru on my own.