If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(BusinessWeek)   Time Warner Cable offers free rabbit ears so customers can again enjoy 1966 CBS quality programming   (businessweek.com) divider line 240
    More: Asinine, Time Warner Cable, Time Warner, CBS, cable operators, BBY, hold down  
•       •       •

6914 clicks; posted to Main » on 27 Aug 2013 at 8:07 AM (52 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



240 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-08-27 11:20:56 AM
I have been trying for two weeks to get internet from TWC.  I stupidly stopped paying them and had service disconnected three months ago.  So, needing internet again for work, I called and scheduled a new installation.  I went to the TWC store, waited for one hour 15 minutes because they had one CSR for 20 waiting customers, returned my old equipment (had to, linked with old account) and paid off my balance.  Installation day rolls around, no one shows up.  I called and found out that they had cancelled my installation because the final payment and equip return was put on the new account and not the old one.  I spent the next two weeks fighting with them to mark my address and "serviceable" and unlock my account because of their mistake.  I literally called every day and spent a minimum of one hour of time each call.  I must have been cold transferred around 15 or so times.  Upon asking if I could talk to a supervisor, I was told "they are too busy and won't come to the phone" or "they don't take direct calls, but I will give them your info for a callback.:

FINALLY, I get an install scheduled for last Saturday 10am-11am.  No one shows.  I call and spend another hour on the phone while they contact dispatch.  Apparently, someone "accidentally" marked my service as complete.  They said that they would send a tech before he goes to his 3pm appointment.  Tech shows up with ladder, works on connection at the pole outside, then takes off.  I called again saying that they didn't give me any equipment.  CSR says that they can ship me out one, but there would be a $9.99 charge.  I gasped and he quickly said that I could go to the TWC store. I ran to the store since they closed in an hour (4pm) and they had five CSR's working, so I got right in and got my equipment.  Finally, I'm connected.
Was paying $40/month for 30mb/s, now paying $65 for the same.

I truly am baffled at how they get away with doing what they are doing.  I have no other choice than to go with them.
 
2013-08-27 11:25:38 AM

slykens1: Vodka Zombie: Or, you know, they could ditch the home shopping crap to cover the cost.

You do realize cable companies don't *pay* for home shopping channels but are paid to carry them?

If they drop the home shopping channel then the price will go up elsewhere.


Oh. But then they should dump the commercial breaks instead. Those look super expensive to produce.
 
2013-08-27 11:28:09 AM

Buttknuckle: I have no other choice than to go with them.


Sounds like you're ultimate problem is with their CSRs.  That's a problem with a hell of a lot of companies, and ashamed to say even the one I work for.  Part of the problem is people are dicks, on both sides.  I've seen some really good new hire CSR's get beaten down by dick customer's to the point where they become jaded dicks themselves.  Plus its a crappy barely minimum wage job so its not going to attract the best people.  Not an excuse of course, that's just the way it is.  Point being, even if you had another choice (which you probably do, DSL, Satalite, wireless, etc...) they're customer service is probably going to have their own bag of dicks.
 
2013-08-27 11:28:47 AM

Kimpak: Reading comprehension, do you have it?

One last time.


I suppose this is where people you troll usually tell you to stuff it up your ass.  Far be it from me to break with tradition.
 
2013-08-27 11:30:41 AM

slykens1: Vodka Zombie: Or, you know, they could ditch the home shopping crap to cover the cost.

You do realize cable companies don't *pay* for home shopping channels but are paid to carry them?

If they drop the home shopping channel then the price will go up elsewhere.


WAT? We're getting a shiat deal because I'm pretty sure my company pays for it.
 
2013-08-27 11:32:53 AM

bunner: I suppose this is where people you troll usually tell you to stuff it up your ass.  Far be it from me to break with tradition.


This is the part of the conversation where you realized you have no argument, lost and are trying to preserve whats left of your ego.
 
2013-08-27 11:37:00 AM

Kimpak: This is the part of the conversation where you realized you have no argument, lost and are trying to preserve whats left of your ego.


It as an endless source of amusement to me the degree to which dime store internet insult artists and pissant pedants are thoroughly convinced that the health of the egos of the people they target are wholly dependent upon the kindness of random c*nts on the internet.  Seriously.  It's like this little bubble world.
 
2013-08-27 11:38:41 AM

Kimpak: Buttknuckle: I have no other choice than to go with them.

Sounds like you're ultimate problem is with their CSRs.  That's a problem with a hell of a lot of companies, and ashamed to say even the one I work for.  Part of the problem is people are dicks, on both sides.  I've seen some really good new hire CSR's get beaten down by dick customer's to the point where they become jaded dicks themselves.  Plus its a crappy barely minimum wage job so its not going to attract the best people.  Not an excuse of course, that's just the way it is.  Point being, even if you had another choice (which you probably do, DSL, Satalite, wireless, etc...) they're customer service is probably going to have their own bag of dicks.


My problem is with the CSR's, correct.  I was going to go with Cincinnati Bell DSL even though it was more expensive and the fastest speed is 10mb/s (No Fioptics to my building), but after taking a poll from acquaintances, found that their customer service was just as shiatty.
I'm really at a loss for words over what they put me through the last two weeks - all so I could BE THEIR CUSTOMER.  wtf?  I'm 32 years old and have never yelled at a CSR on the phone before.  Until last week.  Fark Time Warner Cable up their monopolied asses.
 
2013-08-27 11:40:08 AM

bunner: It as an endless source of amusement to me the degree to which dime store internet insult artists and pissant pedants are thoroughly convinced that the health of the egos of the people they target are wholly dependent upon the kindness of random c*nts on the internet.  Seriously.  It's like this little bubble world.


Then why are you butthurt so much that you keep trying to get a last word in that had nothing to do with the original argument.

I'd love to debate, but you seem to have run out of talking points and decided to start trading insults instead.  I was just playing along.
 
2013-08-27 11:43:09 AM

bunner: It as an endless source of amusement to me the degree to which dime store internet insult artists and pissant pedants are thoroughly convinced that the health of the egos of the people they target are wholly dependent upon the kindness of random c*nts on the internet.  Seriously.  It's like this little bubble world.


Kimpak: This is the part of the conversation where you realized you have no argument, lost and are trying to preserve whats left of your ego.

 Don't make me stop this car...
 
2013-08-27 11:44:45 AM

Kimpak: I'd love to debate, but you seem to have run out of talking points and decided to start trading insults instead.  I was just playing along.


Of course you were Euripides.  Oh, you gallant man.  Hint.  When you start dishing out piss pail "Nuh UH!  U R teh stupid0r!1" it's fairly obvious that you not only have no argument, but what you use forums for.   Go needle somebody it works on.  Or don't.  Bye.
 
2013-08-27 11:45:14 AM

Waldo Pepper: I only have antenna tv and the picture rivals that of cable and it's free


I built my own antenna, because, those rabbit ears suck at catching the HD signal's array of frequencies. I'm no longer amazed at the quality of my HD picture, and it is better than the signal I was receiving from Centurylink.  This was the only part I spent money on. If time-warner thinks a simple set of rabbit ears will suffice, you can assume, they're woefully inadequate providing transmission signals of any kind to their customers.

Cable can go and suck on a dongle.
 
2013-08-27 11:52:44 AM
Meanwhile here in the civilized world, I pay just shy of €36/month ($45-50, depending on the exchange rate) for 100Mbit fiber internet, 150-ish TV channels (I've never bothered to count), two phone lines with unlimited calling to domestic numbers and international numbers in 40-some countries, and free wifi for my phone and laptop when I'm out and about.

/that number includes rental of the box and fees, FWIW
 
2013-08-27 11:53:30 AM

bunner: Kimpak: I'd love to debate, but you seem to have run out of talking points and decided to start trading insults instead.  I was just playing along.

Of course you were Euripides.  Oh, you gallant man.  Hint.  When you start dishing out piss pail "Nuh UH!  U R teh stupid0r!1" it's fairly obvious that you not only have no argument, but what you use forums for.   Go needle somebody it works on.  Or don't.  Bye.


Since you also seem to have some sort of Alzheimers, let me recap.
Me "Comment about how I want speeds to improve so we can offer better service, but in the mean time our service is good"

You "WAARRGBLL.  Don't tell me what is "Good", I'll tell you what's good.  I need eleventymillion mips down and a brazillion mips up for 5 bucks a month"

Me "er..ok.  Like I said, we're working on offering those speeds.  But again, our current speeds are more than adequate for the vast majority of our user base"

You 'thinking, Crap..my argument doesn't make sense now, and I can't think of an intelligent counterpoint'  "OMG You don't get it, you're dumb!"

Me "Well I see this is a circular argument.... "Naw mate you are"

You "Nuh, uh you are"
 
2013-08-27 11:54:48 AM

Robo Beat: Meanwhile here in the civilized world, I pay just shy of €36/month ($45-50, depending on the exchange rate) for 100Mbit fiber internet, 150-ish TV channels (I've never bothered to count), two phone lines with unlimited calling to domestic numbers and international numbers in 40-some countries, and free wifi for my phone and laptop when I'm out and about.

/that number includes rental of the box and fees, FWIW


But do yet good Merkin programming like Honey Boo Boo?  Huh, do ya commie boy?  *sigh*   :  /
 
2013-08-27 11:56:48 AM
We finally dropped DirecTV last month.....got tired of paying over $150/month for a bunch of channels that we never watch (and the fact that we don't watch that much TV anyways).

Went out and purchased a long-range antenna that I could hang in the attic and connect to the cable outlet in my TV room - picks up all of the OTA network channels with an occasional drop-off on the signal, but manageable (and as others mentioned, the HD quality of the picture is a huge jump compared to satellite).

Also have two Roku 3's in the house (plus Hulu and Netflix subscriptions; I think $16/month total?) and have finally begun watchin shows that we've always wanted to see but never got around to watching or recording (Breaking Bad, House of Cards, Tudors). We've found enough kids' programming on the Amazon/Netflix/PBSKids apps to keep them happy....

Now I'm eagerly awaiting Aereo's deployment across the Houston market in a few weeks.

Yeah - cable/satellite companies can suck donkey balls right now for all I care....
 
2013-08-27 11:57:20 AM

Kimpak: You "WAARRGBLL.  Don't tell me what is "Good", I'll tell you what's good.  I need eleventymillion mips down and a brazillion mips up for 5 bucks a month"


And you're telling me to learn how to read?   :  )  Trolls.  Irony proof since AOL.  Well, you better find another rope to piss up.  I have a delectable lunch here.  *click*
 
2013-08-27 11:59:28 AM

bunner: And you're telling me to learn how to read?   :  )  Trolls.  Irony proof since AOL.  Well, you better find another rope to piss up.  I have a delectable lunch here.  *click*


I'm still waiting for an argument...all I'm seeing are insults and straw men.
 
2013-08-27 12:13:37 PM

gfid: I love it.  Cable is dying a slow death.  They farked us over for years and now they're paying the price.  I can get this shiat over the internet.


Uhhh, no.  Les Moonves/CBS is representing the dying party here like usual.  Cable is also 'the internet' for the most part and they hate the internet because it doesn't fit into their 50 year old business model.  He is still probably behind any attempt you see to keep radio relevant.
 
2013-08-27 12:19:24 PM
OTA + Netflix: Most stuff that most people watch.  Except possibly sports.  If you're into sports, its a little bit harder to be a cheapass.
 
2013-08-27 12:24:57 PM

Mr. Titanium: sonofslacker: Waldo Pepper: I only have antenna tv and the picture rivals that of cable and it's free

I think the headline was referring to the actual programs on CBS not the quality of the picture. And the over the air (OTA) picture should be as good as cable or better. OTA is coming straight from the source and if the show is in HD the signal should be 1080i (high quality). Cable could be degrading the signal to a lower quality such as 720p (middling quality) and passing it off as HD. There's a big difference in picture quality between the two.

Not really.  I dropped cable about 10 years ago (I'm not "principled", just cheap!).  In bad weather, local stations might get a little snowy, but you could still watch them.  Since they went to digital signals, if the weather is bad, the picture gets pixilated and the audio has lots of interruptions-- enough to make it impossible to follow the story at times.  I'd go back to cable, but I hate Time-Warner with a passion.  And I really don't want to pay huge amounts of money for the same crap I get now, but on 300 stations.


Check on getting a signal amplifier. I'm 30+ miles out of an urban area and use an amplifier to get all the stations. Some come and go depending on the weather and season but mostly they are good enough to get the full data rate of 1080 (thanks to person pointing it out).
 
2013-08-27 12:25:30 PM

IRQ12: gfid: I love it.  Cable is dying a slow death.  They farked us over for years and now they're paying the price.  I can get this shiat over the internet.

Uhhh, no.  Les Moonves/CBS is representing the dying party here like usual.  Cable is also 'the internet' for the most part and they hate the internet because it doesn't fit into their 50 year old business model.  He is still probably behind any attempt you see to keep radio relevant.


Radio and TeeVee were never relevant.  The content was relevant.  They were access methods to content.  As is the internet.  The whole idea of the relevance being something inherent the distribution method is totally a new jack, woo hoo, "we are the future" kiddies notion.  It has one essential point of leverage over radio and TeeVee.  And you're using it.  It's interactive.  Other that that. it's no more "relevant" than a 94 Dodge is more relevant than a 72 Olds.
 
2013-08-27 12:30:33 PM

Kimpak: I live in the middle of nowhere Iowa, in a valley.  I can't get OTA reception w/o a bigass 100' tall antenna and 2 amps to run the line to my house.  The nearest broadcast antenna is >60mi away.  I may be going out on a limb here, but I'm guessing NYC has broadcast antenna's closer than 50 miles of you.


It would be kind of funny to see what would happen if I put up a 100' tall antenna in my backyard. Not only would the HOA come after me, the city probably would too and I don't have the land to secure such a thing anyway.  The weather would probably dismantle it before the city or the HOA did.

I'm not in the middle of nowhere, but still about 60 miles from the nearest broadcast antenna

IRQ12: gfid: I love it.  Cable is dying a slow death.  They farked us over for years and now they're paying the price.  I can get this shiat over the internet.

Uhhh, no.  Les Moonves/CBS is representing the dying party here like usual.  Cable is also 'the internet' for the most part and they hate the internet because it doesn't fit into their 50 year old business model.  He is still probably behind any attempt you see to keep radio relevant.


We'll see if CBS or TWC lasts longer.  Sadly they'll probably be around 100 years from now, but I'd bet TWC won't be known as a cable TV provider by then.
 
2013-08-27 12:33:25 PM

gfid: We'll see if CBS or TWC lasts longer.  Sadly they'll probably be around 100 years from now, but I'd bet TWC won't be known as a cable TV provider by then.


Leviathan corporations are purely interested in making more money than last year and taking it all home.  The product or service is, at worst, viewed as a tertiary concern and a nuisance and at best, a stepping stone and a means to an end.
 
2013-08-27 12:37:54 PM
TW really is the lowest of the low. (Tl;dr) Several years ago I dropped direct tv due to the fact that we had years of great service, I could not get high def due to living in trees. (Bought into them when Uniden sold $50 recievers as opposed to the $500 rivals had. yes, very old). Tw was called, I asked for permission to record the phone call. I got the sales droid stating that all cable runs of direct tv would be removed as part of their install. When the TW installers arrived, I asked them to remove the direct tv stuff first, based on their reputation. They said that was not part of the job. I disagreed and played the phone call. The installers walked out. They are not regulated by the state, but I listed complaints with the state, the BBB and filed a small claims with the bill for a handyman that did remove all of the direct tv wiring. Tw didn't show up, judgement was against them. Eventually I did get paid, but a filing of a law enforcement judgement was added to the list. As it ends up, the sales droid was fired, att uverse entered the neighborhood and is just awesome. Also far cheaper for two phone lines, fast unlimited Internet (in my area, not all), and great service people. Since TW is against another evil corporation in my area (Journal-Sentinal, home of the most biased media I have ever seen, and their local TV news blog was (since departed) actually used by middle school teachers on "improper use of grammar" on every update. Seriously, there was a whole section of a national middle school teacher's forum that I was pointed to discussing the news blog every time one was posted. Probably written by an MPS dropout who was interning at tmj4. So, right now have an antenna for local broadcast TV that is not compressed or subject to the 10 sec uverse delay, uverse for the cable channels we like/two phone lines/decent Internet.
 
2013-08-27 12:42:42 PM

bunner: IRQ12: gfid: I love it.  Cable is dying a slow death.  They farked us over for years and now they're paying the price.  I can get this shiat over the internet.

Uhhh, no.  Les Moonves/CBS is representing the dying party here like usual.  Cable is also 'the internet' for the most part and they hate the internet because it doesn't fit into their 50 year old business model.  He is still probably behind any attempt you see to keep radio relevant.

Radio and TeeVee were never relevant.  The content was relevant.  They were access methods to content.  As is the internet.  The whole idea of the relevance being something inherent the distribution method is totally a new jack, woo hoo, "we are the future" kiddies notion.  It has one essential point of leverage over radio and TeeVee.  And you're using it.  It's interactive.  Other that that. it's no more "relevant" than a 94 Dodge is more relevant than a 72 Olds.


I don't know what you are trying to say but assuming you actually know how relevant is being used in context:  The content is becoming less relevant too.  That content is losing eyes because of the content not the distribution model.

My assertion was that Les Moonves is trying to keep his business model alive long after the tides have shifted.  He may as well start suing beta because of piracy.  People in his position are used to their near monopoly like powers and are now basically chum in the water.
 
2013-08-27 12:45:52 PM
Yet another example of how governmental interference with basic market processes causes a sharp increase in cost and a decline in quality.  Hoover "regulated" the radio industry in the late 1920s, and his licensing scheme effectively froze radio technology in place for decades.  Frequency-hopping technology would have allowed many more radio channels to co-exist, but because the government's licenses were handed out in terms of 1928 technology, the technology stayed where it was in 1928.  That's why we still have only one or two content providers of each basic format in any given (terrestrial) radio market today.  (Which is also the reason that most radio music sucks, since the music producers learned to appeal to fewer radio stations, and thus lowest-common-denominator music, due to the limited number of media alternatives.)

Then came television licensing, and the government was again the reason we only had 3 channels for 40 years.  The threat of withdrawing that license was a powerful tool in ensuring that TV content was homogeneous and inoffensive, and was therefore stupid.

Governmental "regulation" of cable TV ensured that tons of worthless channels were purchased that had no market viability whatsoever, but which had to be bought along with the desired ones.  There were also a thousand different other governmental restrictions on where various providers could and could not go, and what they could charge, and what they had to offer, which (again) was the reason that the number of cable providers shrank to the point where there are only a handful of them.

When are people going to learn that "regulations" exist to benefit the mega-corporations, to stifle competition and innovation, and to screw over the consumer?
 
2013-08-27 12:48:12 PM
I just got a Roku 3 and Netflix and told Comcast to piss up a rope (except for internet). I only regret not doing it a year ago. But my girlfriend likes to watch the Today Show for some unholy reason so I was thinking of getting an HD antennae as well. I live in an apartment, so no roof access, but my TV is right next to a window that has pretty unobstructed views for a few miles. Has anyone used an indoor one they recommend?
 
2013-08-27 12:52:07 PM

IRQ12: I don't know what you are trying to say but assuming you actually know how relevant is being used in context:  The content is becoming less relevant too.  That content is losing eyes because of the content not the distribution model.

My assertion was that Les Moonves is trying to keep his business model alive long after the tides have shifted.  He may as well start suing beta because of piracy.  People in his position are used to their near monopoly like powers and are now basically chum in the water.


As irrelevant as it may be, the content is still the product.  My point is that the whole "chum in the water" thing basically comes down to fads and trends and one model is no less relevant than another if used effectively.  It seldom is and I agree that set in their ways old men don't want to have to pick up a new shovel to keep driving a Bentley, but the tail of the internet is just one more dog wagger and people are starting to notice that the whiz bang is wearing off.  People get what their money demands when the market is actually working.  When it isn't, you get pundits and billionaires saying what you're allowed to have and what matters and what doesn't.  And we've had that a little too long in all three distribution models, IMO.
 
2013-08-27 12:54:33 PM
gfid: ...
We'll see if CBS or TWC lasts longer.  Sadly they'll probably be around 100 years from now, but I'd bet TWC won't be known as a cable TV provider by then.

Definitely not, but it's just as likely that CBS will be the largest retailer of coffee houses with a happy ending.
 
2013-08-27 12:57:47 PM
And, all in all, a committed system that blows video through your wall in HD and 7.1, and does nothing else, is largely way more effective than getting bandwidth intensive content through your net connection, as a rule.  Things that do everything seldom do them all well in my experience.  See digital v. analogue audio consoles.
 
2013-08-27 01:01:18 PM

bunner: Leviathan corporations are purely interested in making more money than last year and taking it all home.  The product or service is, at worst, viewed as a tertiary concern and a nuisance and at best, a stepping stone and a means to an end.


As opposed to what?   As far as I know, any business is purely interested in making more money than last year.  If they're not, its probably not that successful of a business. Cable TV isn't a charity, but it is in their interests to sell the product that the consumer wants (and they do want it, otherwise nobody would be subscribed) at the highest price they're willing to pay without losing customers.  That's simple economics.
 
2013-08-27 01:03:57 PM

bunner: And, all in all, a committed system that blows video through your wall in HD and 7.1, and does nothing else, is largely way more effective than getting bandwidth intensive content through your net connection, as a rule.  Things that do everything seldom do them all well in my experience.  See digital v. analogue audio consoles.


...the hell is this supposed to mean?  Are you trying to argue that HSD and Video shouldn't come over the same cable?  If so, then you really don't know how a cable network works and should probably not try to make up stuff about it.

/source: I'm a network engineer
 
2013-08-27 01:04:13 PM

Waldo Pepper: I only have antenna tv and the picture rivals that of cable and it's free


I ha...ve............anten........na.....[no signal]..........t......v.....[no signal].....,.....hav....e....sp....en...[no signal]...t....hun....dreds.....of dol....l....[no signal]....ars....on antennas an.....d....[no signal]...stil...l...can't...ge..t.....[no signal] NB....C...loc...al...clear....ly....[no signal]....[rescanning]....Bu...t...I'll be dam....n...ed...if....[no signal] I ev....er....go...b...ack...to...c...[no signal]...ab.....l...........e.

/european digital tv works beautifully but that's because they didn't try to squeeze too many channels in, thus intentionally crippling broadcast tv and forcing people to remain slaves to cable or satellite. it's all about stacking the cheese...and it's my cheese they're stacking....and I like my cheese....dammit
 
2013-08-27 01:06:20 PM
Around here, (Western NC), OTA signals have always been spotty.  You are lucky to get four or five channels, three of which are still very staticy on a good day.  When it rains or snows, that can drop to one or two, depending on where you are located.   Digital antennas really don't help that because of pixelation, audio drops, etc.   Charter has us by the short hairs here.  if you have a family who is hooked on television, you can't really cut the cable, because of the caps Charter has set on net usage.  Two adults and two kids can eat 250gb of streaming video and internet usage pretty rapidly in a month, especially on the 30mbps tier.  Cutting the cable is not really an option for a medium/large family.  The other offering around here is 6mbps DSL, and I think they cap their bandwidth also..   I imagine if our local stations, (WLOS, WYFF, WSPA, and WHNS),  didn't renew contracts every year with the cable companies, their advertising dollars would dry up quickly, because of the limits on the OTA viewing area.   Charter has everybody held hostage..

It really sucks, but it seems like everybody is at the cable company's mercy.
 
2013-08-27 01:07:34 PM

bunner: And, all in all, a committed system that blows video through your wall in HD and 7.1, and does nothing else, is largely way more effective than getting bandwidth intensive content through your net connection, as a rule.  Things that do everything seldom do them all well in my experience.  See digital v. analogue audio consoles.


They both come over the same fiber optic cable..... Is there a more effective way to deliver tv and internet?
 
2013-08-27 01:10:27 PM

metallion: It really sucks, but it seems like everybody is at the cable company's mercy.


I spoze.  Dope dealers like their customers to be very humble and forgiving.  Then again, there's always rehab.

encinitaslibfriends.org
 
2013-08-27 01:12:33 PM

bunner: metallion: It really sucks, but it seems like everybody is at the cable company's mercy.

I spoze.  Dope dealers like their customers to be very humble and forgiving.  Then again, there's always rehab.

[850x566 from http://encinitaslibfriends.org/images/frontinday.jpg image 850x566]


What is that place? I need one of those word things that tell you what words mean? Where can I get one? Anybody?
 
2013-08-27 01:13:08 PM

Carth: bunner: And, all in all, a committed system that blows video through your wall in HD and 7.1, and does nothing else, is largely way more effective than getting bandwidth intensive content through your net connection, as a rule.  Things that do everything seldom do them all well in my experience.  See digital v. analogue audio consoles.

They both come over the same fiber optic cable..... Is there a more effective way to deliver tv and internet?


I realize that, but in my experience, whatever sub carrier is handling just the A/v seems to be very robust at delivering the goods as opposed to the stutter / buffer / crappy res on your RJ-45.  Then again, I've had some pretty piss poor ISPs who just blew me smoke when I asked why I as getting a fraction of what I paid for.
 
2013-08-27 01:15:48 PM

George Babbitt: What is that place? I need one of those word things that tell you what words mean? Where can I get one? Anybody?


Knock at the door by the old elm after midnight.  Ask for Barney.

Bring your own weenies in case Montag snows up.

upload.wikimedia.org
 
2013-08-27 01:17:31 PM
shows up...
 
2013-08-27 01:20:57 PM

bunner: I realize that, but in my experience, whatever sub carrier is handling just the A/v seems to be very robust at delivering the goods as opposed to the stutter / buffer / crappy res on your RJ-45.  Then again, I've had some pretty piss poor ISPs who just blew me smoke when I asked why I as getting a fraction of what I paid for.


Is your problem actually that you're getting slow internet speeds? If that's the case, first read the fine print, you're paying for  up to Xmbps.  Not exactly Xmbps.  That's not a marketing ploy, its the nature of the beast.  We can provision a modem for say 15mbps down, which is what it would get at the head end if it was on its own port.  But there's a lot of stuff between your modem in  your house and the head end.  Everyone who has a cable splitter without terminators, every nick in a line, every outdated internal wire contributes a little bit of noise to the system, plus you are sharing a connection with your neighbors.  So, you'll get good speeds at off peak times, worse speeds at peak times.  Also it depends on what you're trying to connect to.  We can't control other people's networks, we can just make ours as clean as possible.  That being said, maybe you do have a legit issue but its a single issue that's specific to you or your node and could be fixed if its properly diagnosed.  Speed issues can be difficult to fix due to the variety of causes.

I can guarantee its not because, TV is running over the same cable as your internet, if someone told you that then they're full of shiat.
 
2013-08-27 01:24:03 PM
Hipsters rejoice!
 
2013-08-27 01:29:49 PM

ReverendJynxed: Hipsters rejoice!


They make hand carved bubinga wood antennas with real bakelite bases?
 
2013-08-27 01:31:38 PM

alkhemy: I live in Los Angeles County, about 12 miles north of Hollywood, but we're in the Foothills and there isn't a single TV channel that is watchable OTA because of the mountains. So we're stuck with Time Warner (no Fios or Uverse here...) I'd go internet only if I could find a good streaming news option for the mornings, to play in the background while breakfast etc. is going on.


try hooking the coax cable directly to your TV (w/o the damn cable box), I discontinued my cable service (still have internet) and I get the local broadcast channels..ymmv
 
2013-08-27 01:39:32 PM

bunner: Ah, TWC.  "This is what we charge, this is what you'll get, kiss my ass."  We don't just rip you off, we insult you sh*tless.  Had a 30/5 TWC roadrunner feed.  Never even came close to 4/1mbps.  Add a sh*tty VoIP phone with no UPS and 72 channels of utter sh*t and you're oinking up 180.00 a month for whatever the hell they feel like capping you at.  If this company falls into the ocean, maybe the .gov crews will get off their ass and start a WPA type program blowing 100/10 fiber to every house in America.  You know, like the civilized countries.


Ooooo hahhahahahhahhahahhahaaaa.  The USA isn't civilized at all!  THe citizens don't believe it yet but they will soon.  As soon as they realize that all of those backwards socialist countries everywhere else are actually in really good shape and they are... soylent green for the rich...
 
2013-08-27 01:43:15 PM

sonofslacker: Waldo Pepper: I only have antenna tv and the picture rivals that of cable and it's free

I think the headline was referring to the actual programs on CBS not the quality of the picture. And the over the air (OTA) picture should be as good as cable or better. OTA is coming straight from the source and if the show is in HD the signal should be 1080i (high quality). Cable could be degrading the signal to a lower quality such as 720p (middling quality) and passing it off as HD. There's a big difference in picture quality between the two.


Yup. The difference between the NBC HD feed off my local cable system and what I pull off my antenna is night and day. The cable company SWEARS it is 1080p but I'm 100% certain they are lying.

/ on the flip side, my cable internet speed averages 90-95% of advertised speed, so... YMMV.
 
2013-08-27 01:44:42 PM

Towermonkey: The cable company SWEARS it is 1080p but I'm 100% certain they are lying.


See here.
 
2013-08-27 01:51:20 PM

Towermonkey: on the flip side, my cable internet speed averages 90-95% of advertised speed, so... YMMV.


My company regularly accomplishes this too.  Little secret.  A cable company provisions your modem for the advertised speed, say 15mbps.  But on average, not counting burst speed you'll probably get around 12-14mbps depending on time of day.  What we do is advertise the 15 but actually provision the modem for 18. We also have high burst speeds.  So you'll see an average of 14-16 depending on time of day, but at off peak times on a good node you can see stints of 50-100mbps assuming you have a docsis 3 modem.
 
2013-08-27 02:00:30 PM

Kimpak: Towermonkey: on the flip side, my cable internet speed averages 90-95% of advertised speed, so... YMMV.

My company regularly accomplishes this too.  Little secret.  A cable company provisions your modem for the advertised speed, say 15mbps.  But on average, not counting burst speed you'll probably get around 12-14mbps depending on time of day.  What we do is advertise the 15 but actually provision the modem for 18. We also have high burst speeds.  So you'll see an average of 14-16 depending on time of day, but at off peak times on a good node you can see stints of 50-100mbps assuming you have a docsis 3 modem.


Yeah, I worked for AT&T for a few years and when the Uverse rollout started, a premises tech I knew mentioned something like this.

I actually like my cable company, it's a pretty smallish concern, their CSRs aren't assholes, and I've never really had any service issues I couldn't resolve myself. The only real complaint I have is I haven't figured out how to hook a 1 TB external drive to the DVR yet, and that's due more to me being lazy and not researching it deeply enough. I started a new job recently and just haven't had the time, since I'm working 60 hours a week...
 
Displayed 50 of 240 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report