Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : LAST MILE TECHNOLOGIES - Let's Discuss Them Here -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Curtis E. Bemis who wrote (2413)	12/2/1998 12:50:00 PM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Respond to of 12823

An interesting piece of coverage, Curtis... thanks. The fact that an ISP would depend on users demonstrating forbearance in a good-citizenry way is also quite interesting, if not just a little more than naive, I'd say. Do you see this accelerating the use of those type-of-service packet traps we spoke about recently? Further, this is an example of an information provider's attempt to prevent problems arising due to the limitations of its underlying facilities based provider. An interesting level of symbiotic cooperation, wouldn't you say? See my knee jerk to this speed bump issue at Message 6643888

To: Curtis E. Bemis who wrote (2413)	12/2/1998 1:46:00 PM
From: lml	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12823

Curtis: Good article. What a "poster-boy" newsbyte for the telcos who will be offering DSL in cable-internet territory. The article is demonstrative of why I would prefer a DSL v. cable access -- but I don't have the luxury of either right now, so choice right NOW is not an issue. Going forward when both services are available it will be. Frank: I agree with your criticisms of the cable solution. It will be a good interim solution & will drive IMHO, the future growth of the Internet because of pricing v. the telcos -- unless DSL pricing drops somewhat. Interactive programming, the feasability of downloading video [ie. 30 min TV programming,] & audio on-demand will drive demand for the broader bandwidth connection beyond the present consumer base. I truly think as all connectivity technologies evolve the cables are going to have to offer more than just a shared-pipe at a bargain basement price. One of the fundamentals of good marketing is market segmentation. [Increase that shelf space.] I don't see the future of delivering Internet access to be any different.

To: Curtis E. Bemis who wrote (2413)	12/2/1998 9:50:00 PM
From: ftth	Respond to of 12823

These guys are hilarious: <<@Home officials said the new limits don't affect the service's main attraction -- the ability to pull information off the Web at up to 20 times the speed of the fastest dial-up modem>> Oh, now they're down to 20 times (which is still bull$#!+). Out of the cache, MAYBE on a good day, but "off the web".....no way! Another curious change in @HOME's service--the cache function has changed. You can no longer count on (in fact, NEVER seems to apply anymore) large files being in cache if you need to download a large file a second time--even a few seconds later. Used to ALWAYS be there at least for an hour. As far as customers operating webservers, thru COX@HOME this is not allowed. That's the way it should be. I don't want non-paying customers using up bandwidth that I'm paying a premium for by downloading from a server on my node. Services like this SHOULD be premuim services allocated to a completely different channel. TCI made a (another) big mistake allowing this from the start. I also agree with the article that customer service (which is something @HOME states in their SEC filing is vital to their ability to differentiate themselves from the well-known mediocrity in customer service at other service providers) is mediocre to poor. I considered it excellent the first month or so I had the service, but it's fallen off a cliff. Inconsistent answers; LONG wait times; failed service-level queueing system (it could be easily improved, but hasn't been); frequent service outages. And people complain the subscriber growth isn't rapid enough? Can't imagine how poor and unreliable the service would be if growth were much faster. In short, sporadic speed is the only reason to keep the service. The content from their hompage is EXTREMELY LAME. They'll need both speed AND service to keep subscribers in the not-to-distant future, and all 3 (speed, service, and desireable content) to keep subscribers shortly thereafter. dh