Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

1.  

   Naked DSL

   

   Jerry Lyles, Feb 17th, 2004 @ 10:23am

   
   

   Truth is, I and others would have bought DSL in an instant if it were available out in the boondocks, which it isn't.
   
   We have used the internet for seven years now, and the local phone company has made little effort to reach the "last mile."
   
   Effort is under way to get that last mile by other means, so the phone company had better get with it, or they will find themselves downsized.
   
   
   

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

2.  

   This is great news

   

   Oliver Wendell Jones, Feb 17th, 2004 @ 10:34am

   
   

   I had "naked" DSL for a couple of years, originally through Telocity, and then DirecTV-DSL who bought out Telocity.
   
   When DT-DSL decided to go out of business, they tried get everyone provisioned with SBC-Yahoo! DSL, as SBC was providing the last link between us and the internet already.
   
   When I called SBC to make the transition, they wouldn't sign me up because they only offer DSL to existing SBC phone customers. It didn't matter that I already had the lines run between the telco and my house, it didn't matter that the connection was going through SBC and was working at that very minute - if I didn't want to switch my home phone system to SBC, they COULD NOT and WOULD NOT provide me with DSL service.
   
   I called the cable company and had cable modem access before DT-DSL quit gasping and choking and have been pretty darn happy with it so far.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

3.  

   Re: Naked DSL

   

   mike, Feb 17th, 2004 @ 11:40am

   
   

   i'm the anonymous qwest employee...the problem with provisioning dsl in the boondocks is the cost. you're looking at roughly $75k-$100 to add a remote terminal to serve those locations. that's a lot of dsl at $15 bucks a pop just to recover costs, let alone make a profit and pay my salary.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

4.  

   Re: Naked DSL

   

   chasinash, Feb 17th, 2004 @ 11:51am

   
   

   Mike,
   
   Is it really "naked" DSL that Qwest is working on??? I thought the $15 DSL was "without ISP". Without ISP is a lot different than without required phone line.
   
   Ashley
   
   

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

5.  

   Re: Naked DSL

   

   mike, Feb 17th, 2004 @ 12:04pm

   
   

   (the qwest guy) 'naked' means something else to us. to us, 'naked' means no isp. to techdirt-mike (if i might speak for him) it means dsl without pots. if you order our dsl for $15, you can add on our basic isp service (no email or web space) for $6.99. still cheaper than aol!

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

6.  

   Law for the corporations Qwest for one

   

   Andrea Lawrence-Stuart, May 8th, 2007 @ 1:12pm

   
   

   "...Because, we’re told, the bill’s good for us. Competition lowers prices. Really? Qwest lobbies legislators to reduce its prices and profits? I don’t think so. As AT&T’s CEO told Wall Street, “it’s going to be a war of value and services,” not prices...." One would do well to read Nicholas Johnson's complete article in the ILF Post--a blog of the International Leadership Forum, a nonprofit internet based think tank.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

Add Your Comment