Physical & Digital EST: The Future of Home Video Discussion Thread

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by alchav21

Here again you read what you want, Net Neutrality does not give better Access. The Telco's primerily have access to the Fiber Backbone, and thus better Routing. When you talk about Fast Lanes, it's better Trunking or Direct Access. Remember a few years back when Netflix was complaining about access to their Content. AT&T and Verizon had Direct Trunking, while others had to rely on CDN's (Content Distribution Network.) So what you guys call Fast Lanes are just Direct Trunking and Routing. So is the Average Consumer affected, yes and all this has to be taken into account when picking an ISP and Internet priorities.

The italicized and quoted portions are both from the news stories I cited earlier. It has nothing to do with "reading what I want." I quoted the news article verbatim- that is what it means to quote a source after all. The quoted article defines exactly what it meant by "fast lanes", their phrase-not mine, and it has nothing to do with the jargon you spewed. "Fast lanes", quoted from the cited article and defined therein, refer to the acceleration of data for those websites that pay the ISPs specifically for it. This was not allowed under net neutrality, but it is allowable now. It has NOTHING to do with the ISPs making general network improvements. It is entirely about ISPs favoring those websites that pay them more and penalizing those that pay less. Netflix supported net neutrality- as did Amazon, facebook, Google, Microsoft, and Twitter, to name just a few.

Netflix tweeted this just last December: "We're disappointed in the decision to gut #NetNeutrality protections that ushered in an unprecedented era of innovation, creativity & civic engagement," read a tweet posted on Netflix's verified account. "This is the beginning of a longer legal battle. Netflix stands w/ innovators, large & small, to oppose this misguided FCC order."

Microsoft's chief legal officer said this: "The open internet benefits consumers, business & the entire economy," Smith wrote. "That's jeopardized by the FCC's elimination of #netneutrality protections today."

Amazon's chief technology officer said this: "I am extremely disappointed in the FCC decision to remove the #NetNeutrality protections."

facebook's chief operating officer said this: "Today's decision from the Federal Communications Commission to end net neutrality is disappointing and harmful. An open internet is critical for new ideas and economic opportunity -- and internet providers shouldn't be able to decide what people can see online or charge more for certain websites."

The preceding four quotes are from this article:
http://money.cnn.com/2017/12/14/tech...ons/index.html

That's four quotes from four executives employed at four major tech companies. They seem qualified to speak on the subject.

The purpose of net neutrality was to both regulate the ISPs and to ensure that they provided equal access to all websites.

"The net neutrality rules said companies had to treat all data equally."

Equal treatment of data from all websites is not only better access, it is the ideal access.

Without net neutrality, the FCC has relinquished its oversight of the industry: "the FCC will have essentially no role in preserving an open Internet and overseeing the broadband market." Now, the ISPs are free to auction off preferential website access to the highest bidder and that benefits them, not the consumer. Both of the earlier cited articles specifically mention the prospect of accelerating the data of websites that pay the ISPs for it and the slowing of data from websites that do not pay up. You really need to work on those reading comprehension skills.

"Enacted (net neutrality) in 2015, the rules sought to stop providers giving preferential treatment to sites and services that paid them to accelerate their data."

History has taught us time and again that when an industry becomes too deregulated, that same industry abuses that lack of oversight and commits excesses born of unrestrained greed and resultant corruption. We, as internet service subscribers, pay for our service, the bandwidth of it, and for the amount of data we use. The ISPs should not be able to influence how we use it nor what websites we visit.

[Ender14]

Originally Posted by alchav21

Here again you read what you want, Net Neutrality does not give better Access. The Telco's primerily have access to the Fiber Backbone, and thus better Routing. When you talk about Fast Lanes, it's better Trunking or Direct Access. Remember a few years back when Netflix was complaining about access to their Content. AT&T and Verizon had Direct Trunking, while others had to rely on CDN's (Content Distribution Network.) So what you guys call Fast Lanes are just Direct Trunking and Routing. So is the Average Consumer affected, yes and all this has to be taken into account when picking an ISP and Internet priorities.

To add to Vilya's assessment of this, ISP's can now throttle speeds for services that don't pay them.

So let's assume you use Vudu to stream your movies and have Comcast as your ISP. Comcast goes to Vudu and says "pay us X amount of dollars or we throttle your connection and give more bandwidth to the companies that pay us". Vudu tells them to kindly go pleasure themselves so Comcast lessens the bandwidth for Vudu. Now when you try to stream movies through Vudu, you can only get a stable connection streaming at HD quality if you're lucky. You have lost the ability to stream 4K content because Comcast has reduced the bandwidth. If Comcast is your only option for an ISP then you have no recourse.

This scenario is highly likely, not just a paranoid doomsday outcome. Ending net neutrality benefits no one but the ISP's. I am very confused as to why you view this as a good thing.

[Vilya]

After 7 days and 18 hours, my internet is now crapping out on me again. I have not been disconnected, yet, but my download speed is now just 8.1 Mbps; it should be 10 times that.

ISPs need more regulatory oversight, not less. In my area, Medicacom is a monopoly and they routinely fail to deliver the service they are paid to provide. Nixing net neutrality is not going to make them a better ISP, just a wealthier one. They sucked before this news and they will find a way to suck even more in the future.

[Vilya]

32 days, and counting, of shoddy internet service, dozens of phone calls to Mediacom's tech support, 5 tech visits, and 2 supervisor visits- the most recent one was this morning, and these are the speed test results I am getting.

[Show spoiler]Speed12June2018ASmall.jpg

I am using their modem now, too, and as you can see that has made zero difference. I have not been outright disconnected, yet, but I can't exactly do much with results like these. 32 days of complaining and I am no better off now than I was on May 11th. "Pathetic" isn't pathetic enough of a word to describe my ISP.

Again, this ongoing surreal experience only reinforces why I will never allow myself to become dependent on an ISP to watch movies or TV. At least I know I am keeping a certain someone entertained with these updates on my asinine ISP's lack of service. He likes pictures, so I had to oblige.

[alchav21]

Originally Posted by Vilya

32 days, and counting, of shoddy internet service, dozens of phone calls to Mediacom's tech support, 5 tech visits, and 2 supervisor visits- the most recent one was this morning, and these are the speed test results I am getting.

I am using their modem now, too, and as you can see that has made zero difference. I have not been outright disconnected, yet, but I can't exactly do much with results like these. 32 days of complaining and I am no better off now than I was on May 11th. "Pathetic" isn't pathetic enough of a word to describe my ISP.

Again, this ongoing surreal experience only reinforces why I will never allow myself to become dependent on an ISP to watch movies or TV. At least I know I am keeping a certain someone entertained with these updates on my asinine ISP's lack of service. He likes pictures, so I had to oblige.

The good news is being in a rural area you're kind of lucky. I know these other Posters on DSL Reports in South Carolina that are in a rural area, and Spectrum wants to charge them $29,000 for Internet. You said you had another Supervisor visit, did they take a reading at your Pedestal Feed? Because your Bandwidth was way down, so you have to find out what the Pedestal Feed reads to see if it's enough for the 7 to 8 homes. The homes have TV and Internet which takes up bandwidth. I have a feeling it's not Engineered and Balanced properly. When everyone jumps on, the Bandwidth is going to go down.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by alchav21

The good news is being in a rural area you're kind of lucky. I know these other Posters on DSL Reports in South Carolina that are in a rural area, and Spectrum wants to charge them $29,000 for Internet. You said you had another Supervisor visit, did they take a reading at your Pedestal Feed? Because your Bandwidth was way down, so you have to find out what the Pedestal Feed reads to see if it's enough for the 7 to 8 homes. The homes have TV and Internet which takes up bandwidth. I have a feeling it's not Engineered and Balanced properly. When everyone jumps on, the Bandwidth is going to go down.

He tested inside and he completely removed the "pedestal's" cover and he left it fully exposed to the elements. I don't think he did anything at that "pedestal" except to take away its cover; he put it in the back of his truck and he drove away with it. It has been left partially uncovered for 10 days and now it is fully uncovered. Yep, a supervisor's visit has made so much difference.

He also thinks we might be dealing with a thief hacking into the network and thereby causing outages and drops in bandwidth levels. More theories, but still no results- after 32 days! I really think that these techs and this supervisor could not find their own reflection in a well lit hall of mirrors. They are all pleasant enough, but they are not particularly competent. If they can't identify the problem, they certainly can't solve the problem.

My service has stabilized since about 2:30 pm, but for how long?

If I was ever quoted $29,000 for internet service I would suggest that provider do anatomically impossible things with their internet hardware.

[Steedeel]

Phase 1 2018 month June date 12th

Just as I and others predicted when people were saying streaming was the future, we now have cable dominance mark 2. Different technology same end result imo.

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

The only real major difference is a lot (and I mean a lot) more mobile content. Expect free streaming on mobile to be a big offering for these monopolies. Maybe that will be the catalyst for what I have been predicting all along. The shift to mostly mobile Nd eventually mobile’s complete doninance.

[stonesfan129]

Removing 'net neutrality' laws imo is just going to cause a race to the bottom. ISPs know that if you have no alternatives, they don't have to improve their services and work to keep your business. You're left at the mercy of whether or not these companies care about the customer experience.

[alchav21]

Originally Posted by stonesfan129

Removing 'net neutrality' laws imo is just going to cause a race to the bottom. ISPs know that if you have no alternatives, they don't have to improve their services and work to keep your business. You're left at the mercy of whether or not these companies care about the customer experience.

I've never had problems with ISP's, but then I never played any games with them. I'd stick with the one that gave me the best price for what I wanted. We have always negotiated for the best price, and the service has always been there. If we had a problem we isolate and fix it, very simple and straight forward. I've had AT&T, Earthlink, Time Warner, Verizon, and now Cable Systems Nevada. I always say, you get what you pay for and if you have a problem work it out and fix it together.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by alchav21

I've never had problems with ISP's, but then I never played any games with them. I'd stick with the one that gave me the best price for what I wanted. We have always negotiated for the best price, and the service has always been there. If we had a problem we isolate and fix it, very simple and straight forward. I've had AT&T, Earthlink, Time Warner, Verizon, and now Cable Systems Nevada. I always say, you get what you pay for and if you have a problem work it out and fix it together.

What a nice fantasy! Flawless ISPs wherever you have been, all the time, every time, and a selection of providers to choose from, too! You have "never" had a problem with an ISP, not once, not anywhere? The service "has always been there?" That is beyond improbable and it smacks not only of hyperbole, but of steaming BS. Utah's state slogan is Life elevated, not Life hallucinated.

The reality, for many of us, is very different. Many areas have one provider; try negotiating with that. ISPs are not very open to discussion when they have such a monopoly.

I know many people who have had to fight to get the service that they pay for- most of my neighborhood, actually. I am just one of many victims of my ISP's staggering ineptitude. When there is only one ISP in a market, they are not as responsive to customer complaints as they would have to be if they faced any competition.

When there is a problem, and they occur frequently here in the real world, it is not for the customer to identify it, yet alone repair it. Tell me genius, how exactly am I going to find a problem that five techs, a maintenance crew, and a supervisor have been unable to identify after 32 days of trying? Isn't it their alleged area of expertise and their responsibility to determine the cause of a problem? Isn't that part of the service for which I am paying them?

It is most definitely not my responsibility to fix any issues with my ISP, either. It is a service that customers pay for and the responsibility to maintain and repair that service rests entirely with the ISP. ISPs are paid to provide a service and when they fail to deliver it, they, and they alone, bear the burden of repairing that service.

The fact is that I and my neighbors have not been getting what we pay for and our ISP's techs, maintenance crews, and their supervisors are bumbling, albeit amiable, half-wits who have been unable to solve a 32 day old, and counting, service problem. There is no justification for their inability to fix a problem that is entering its 33rd day. None. My ISP's incompetence is indefensible.

I have had 38 outright service outages in 32 days with innumerable service slow downs in between. Each incidence has been meticulously documented. I have made dozens of phone calls and I have spent what feels like an eternity on hold waiting for the next clueless tech to answer my calls. I have had 7 service calls to my home, two from a supervisor, and two maintenance crews visit and they still don't know a damn thing. If it is "very simple and straight forward" for an ISP to "isolate and fix" a problem, please explain why the morons at my ISP can neither "isolate" nor "fix" this "very simple and straight forward" problem? Is it because they don't have you working on the case?

You are the consummate ISP apologist and fanboy with the temerity to imply that service problems are in any way the responsibility of the customer to diagnose or repair. It is the sole responsibility of the ISP to maintain their network. Customers pay their ISPs for a service; they do not work for them. The ISP's service is supposed to work for the customer. No customer should be expected to tolerate shitty service- period.

You are old enough to remember the saying: "the customer is always right." While that saying is not literally true, it is mostly true, most of the time. It is incumbent upon a business to satisfy their customers and NEVER the other way around.

[alchav21]

You are absolutely right Vilya, your ISP Mediacom should have found the problem by now. Maybe that is why they are way down on the Customer Service List, Very Poor Service. Like I said, in order to fix something you have to know how it works. Yes I worked for one of the biggest ISP's, AT&T so I am very familiar on how they work. I lived in a Community where all they had was Dial-up, and we brought in ISP's and Time Warner and Verizon answered the call. I put my skills to work, and I was a Tech in that Community. So people would call me when they could not fix an Internet problem. When something is Hard Down, it's easier to Isolate and Fix. Intermittent problems take more analyzation. That's why I was asking about your Pedestal and the Feed, something is Sucking that Bandwidth. You have to work your way back, but it might be a very poor system set up.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by alchav21

That's why I was asking about your Pedestal and the Feed, something is Sucking that Bandwidth.

Maybe gremlins are draining all of that bandwidth?



It's as good a theory as any presented so far.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by Vilya

Maybe gremlins are draining all of that bandwidth?

You're so close.

[Vilya]

My ISP sent me a letter today and it wasn't even perfumed. It reads:

"...we have recently placed a new or replacement cable wire across your property. This black or orange coaxial cable wire running across your property to your home (called a 'drop') is temporary and a permanent wire will be buried as soon as possible"

It then blathers on about "bury seasons" and the need to obtain permits to bury the cable.

I just walked across my yard and that of a couple neighbors and I see no cable running through anyone's yard. The squirrels will be so disappointed.

I think they are referring to that uncovered "pedestal" in my neighbor's yard. The first maintenance crew accidentally drove a spike through one of the underground cables 11 days ago. Mediacom sure moves fast to fix their self inflicted wounds.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by Vilya

I just walked across my yard and that of a couple neighbors and I see no cable running through anyone's yard. The squirrels will be so disappointed.

They probably ate it already.

[alchav21]

Originally Posted by Vilya

My ISP sent me a letter today and it wasn't even perfumed. It reads:

"...we have recently placed a new or replacement cable wire across your property. This black or orange coaxial cable wire running across your property to your home (called a 'drop') is temporary and a permanent wire will be buried as soon as possible"

It then blathers on about "bury seasons" and the need to obtain permits to bury the cable.

I just walked across my yard and that of a couple neighbors and I see no cable running through anyone's yard. The squirrels will be so disappointed.

I think they are referring to that uncovered "pedestal" in my neighbor's yard. The first maintenance crew accidentally drove a spike through one of the underground cables 11 days ago. Mediacom sure moves fast to fix their self inflicted wounds.

I still think you should Post your problems here, and maybe we will get to the bottom of this:

https://www.dslreports.com/forum/mediacom~filter=IL

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by alchav21

I still think you should Post your problems here, and maybe we will get to the bottom of this:

https://www.dslreports.com/forum/mediacom~filter=IL

If I really thought that would help, I would do so. My service issues have already been "escalated" to the corporate "total care" (aka: total BS) department. I have the direct phone number and email to the supervisor of technical operations. I don't see how some tech who answers forum posts can do any more than the people who are already involved. This circus has plenty of clowns already without inviting still more.

[Dynamo of Eternia]

Originally Posted by Ender14

To add to Vilya's assessment of this, ISP's can now throttle speeds for services that don't pay them.

So let's assume you use Vudu to stream your movies and have Comcast as your ISP. Comcast goes to Vudu and says "pay us X amount of dollars or we throttle your connection and give more bandwidth to the companies that pay us". Vudu tells them to kindly go pleasure themselves so Comcast lessens the bandwidth for Vudu. Now when you try to stream movies through Vudu, you can only get a stable connection streaming at HD quality if you're lucky. You have lost the ability to stream 4K content because Comcast has reduced the bandwidth. If Comcast is your only option for an ISP then you have no recourse.

This scenario is highly likely, not just a paranoid doomsday outcome. Ending net neutrality benefits no one but the ISP's. I am very confused as to why you view this as a good thing.

He thinks it is a good thing because Fiber™!

[alchav21]

Originally Posted by Dynamo of Eternia

He thinks it is a good thing because Fiber™!

You're right, I keep saying Fiber is The Future. AT&T and Verizon are ramping up their Fiber Deployment, but only in areas where the ROI is worth it. The race now is for Content, and it's going to be available Streaming. The big trend is Cord-Cutting, and people are turning to Video Streaming. It's very clear to Companies like AT&T and Verizon that lots of Bandwidth is going to be needed, and that means Fiber!

[Dynamo of Eternia]

Originally Posted by alchav21

You're right, I keep saying Fiber is The Future. AT&T and Verizon are ramping up their Fiber Deployment, but only in areas where the ROI is worth it. The race now is for Content, and it's going to be available Streaming. The big trend is Cord-Cutting, and people are turning to Video Streaming. It's very clear to Companies like AT&T and Verizon that lots of Bandwidth is going to be needed, and that means Fiber!

You make a door knob look smart. The fact that you not only responded, but in this manner, just shows how daft in the head you are.

I made that statement as a joke because you seem to only have knowledge of wiring (etc.) infrastructures, and little to no comprehension about most other aspects that go into this.

Go back and read Ender14's post, which you conveniently dodged replying to (because it would require you to address something that you clearly do not understand).

The removal of net neutrality would allow ISPs to do what Ender14 descried, and charge services like Vudu, Netflix, etc. for preferential speeds.

Even if you live in an area with the absolute best infrastructure for internet in the entire country, the rate at which how much data that wiring and infrastructure is capable of providing becomes a moot point if the ISP purposely throttles it. As in Ender14's example, if Comcast tells Vudu to pay them money to allow the connection to their service to run at a speed capable of providing full 4K quality, and Vudu says no, then Comcast can throttle that connection to run at a lower speed/data-per-second rate that would prevent that from being possible.

It's like taking a gallon container and putting 4 ounces of water in it. The fact that the container is capable of holding up to a gallon really doesn't matter if the person filling it is only willing to put 4 ounces in it.

Metaphorically speaking, if the ISP is only allowing "4 ounces" of data to move through an infrastructure capable of quickly moving "a gallon" of data, then that infrastructure being fiber (or a "gallon container") really makes no god damned difference. What part of this don't you understand?

You should have a huge problem with this given your pro-streaming, pro-cord-cutting stance on things.