SBC Ignores Cries For Naked DSL

from the how-many-requests-move-up-the-chain? dept

Not a surprise at all, but SBC claims that the reason they're not offering naked DSL is because no one seems to want it. While they're probably correct that people are interested in bundled services, that doesn't mean people don't want naked DSL. From the comments on this issue (and my own experience) it's obvious that plenty of people do want it -- but SBC is making a tidy profit in forcing people like me (who has a phone line that isn't hooked up to any phone, and whose number I don't even know) to bundle useless phone service. Of course, the whole resistance to naked DSL should be proof positive that the market for broadband services in the US isn't competitive at all. If there really were a competitive market place, I'd have other options that aren't force bundled. Instead, the only options are forced bundled DSL or force bundled cable (which either requires cable TV, or makes it ridiculously expensive). And, since cable rates remain artificially high and cable has shown itself to be ridiculously unreliable it seems that we're stuck for the time being. With Presidential promises on broadband proving to be nothing more than talk (as expected) and the FCC's idea of "competition" in broadband to be a technology (BPL) that almost never seems to work, it doesn't seem like things will change any time soon. Then, of course, when local governments actually try to do anything, they're attacked as being communists for trying to offer broadband. Oh well. I guess we're learning that the FCC's morality/indecency campaign wasn't just about covering up Janet Jackson's nudity, but DSL's as well.


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  •  
    identicon
    ripped-off-by-sbc-squirrel, May 24th, 2005 @ 11:33am

    I want it

    I have a storage site / business site that I have DSL in for security. I have to have a phone number for no reason there to have DSL in for my security. I would drop the phone in a heartbeat. Of course the cost of dsl would go up another $25 if I did that though, so this argument is probably muted.

    Also, the reason they don't want bare DSL is that you only need to have DSL + vonnage (less than the $50 / line unlimited "bargain" they offer). or DSL + some way to terminate SIP phone calls into numbered phones, and you'd need no phone service of any kind either.

    This is a case where unbundling would make incredible sense.

    Same with the cell companies, but that's another topic.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      grammar-and-usage-nazi, Oct 27th, 2005 @ 8:58am

      Re: I want it


      Your argument is not MUTED. It's MOOT. Man am I sick of that mistake. Also people:
      it's = it is
      its = possessive (e.g. its malodorous stink)
      And "irregardless" is bad usage. Use "regardless".

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Aug 3rd, 2007 @ 7:38am

        Re: Re: I want it

        Grammar-and-usage-nazi I hope you fall into a well and die.
        This is a blog, not a professional letter, so who gives a flying *uck if someone makes a few typos misses an apostrophe or incorrectly uses a word. There is a time and a place for grammar-and-usage-nazi's and this really isn't it asshole.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Johnny5, Aug 3rd, 2007 @ 8:17am

          Re: Re: Re: I want it

          "Usage Nazi": There are a lot of people out there who don't write the English language according to your standards. Most of them don't really care, and you're wasting your breath pointing out their mistakes. If you let it bother you, you're adding a lot of unnecessary aggravation to your life. You will be a less happy person.

          Anonymous Coward: Spelling/grammar trolls are abound on the internet. You will also be happier if you just let it go. Take comfort in the fact that they're spinning their wheels about, really, nothing. The troll doesn't care about your opinion of their trolling.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    The GT Guy, May 24th, 2005 @ 12:10pm

    Cable Reliability

    I worked in the telco business for years and agree naked DSL is a good idea. I know certain telcos are working on it as I have contacts. However, my experience with cable net access is much better than with DSL. My cable, in 1.5 years, has gone down once for 30 minutes. I stayed on the phone with my DSL provider in contrast.

    Things change ...

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Joe Baderderm, May 24th, 2005 @ 12:11pm

    SBC Local required for DSL

    I was going to change my ISP to SBC DSL but SBC screwed up our switch to one of their bundled services (we still use the line). They wouldn't give us the long distance services we wanted, because "we didn't already have their long distance service"?!?! [Yes that was exactly how they explained it to us several times.]

    Anyways, we didn't even want to mess with their DSL services at that point (we were already internet-less for a week) and decided to switch all of our calling plans to AT&T (including local). All of the "major" DSL carriers that served our area required SBC local service for some strange/dumb reason. Except AT&T, which went through Covad. And we also haven't really paid attention to the news much and didn't realize that SBC was acquiring AT&T. So we switched to the same company or something like that.

    If cable were cheaper, we would have just switched to Comcast (which used to be AT&T Broadband in our area) and forgot about the DSL service. We haven't quite gotten to the point where we are only using our cell phones, but we are getting closer.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Chomper, May 24th, 2005 @ 12:52pm

    No Subject Given

    I was going to say, in the New Jersey area, DSL is horrible and cable is king. Cablevision, although I hate their guts, has the best internet service out of everyone in the area. It is consistent to the point where I had one outage over a three year period.

    The prices are a bit high, but then again, with four people in the house, it's a bargain compared other alternatives like going back to dialup.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    rick, May 24th, 2005 @ 1:32pm

    get naked dsl on SBC lines

    You can get naked DSL (in some locations, like Chicago) over SBC lines if SpeakEasy DSL is available in your area. check them out at speakeasy.net- they also rock because their TOS are great, you can host your own servers, and even resell your bandwith, or open a wifi hotspot- all completely legally. Try doing that with cable! i have had speakeasy for about 10 months and I couldn't be happier

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Mike (profile), May 24th, 2005 @ 1:54pm

      Re: get naked dsl on SBC lines

      I called Speakeasy about naked DSL in my area. The answer was that there were two prices. If I had SBC local service, it was much cheaper (but still more expensive than if I just went with SBC). If I didn't have SBC local, it was ridiculously expensive.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        rick, May 25th, 2005 @ 7:07am

        Re: get naked dsl on SBC lines

        mike, that stinks- i'm paying $60 a month right now for speakeasy, the cheapest i could get with SBC+local was around 75. granted, i'm in chicago so there is a cable monopoly in my neighborhood that makes cable much more expensive than in other neighborhoods where there is a choice (i'm stuck with comcast, some neighborhoods also have rcn, which has the best digital cable/modem combo deal i'm aware of)- let me know what the quote from speakeasy was vs. sbc, i'd love to know if i could haggle with them over pricing!

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          Mike (profile), May 25th, 2005 @ 9:18am

          Re: get naked dsl on SBC lines

          SBC was $26 for DSL + $12 for phone.

          Speakeasy, without SBC was $99

          Speakeasy, with SBC was $69

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            identicon
            rick, May 25th, 2005 @ 9:54am

            Re: get naked dsl on SBC lines

            wow, that is crazy. like i said i have speakeasy service and it's "onelink" no phone line required. check it out here: http://speakeasy.net/home/dsl/?service=homeplus&type=onelink
            i couldn't love it more, and it's a decent deal for 1.5 down/768 up, but there is no way i'd pay 99 for it. 55 is pretty much my limit- which is much less than i'd pay for cable+cable modem. I know the speakeasy modem itself is 99, but I'm sure the service is 55. anyway, hope that helps- it's still not as cheap as SBC/Yahoo dsl, but I'm betting the quality is better, and the TOS are much better. of course if you're not concerned about those, then it really doesn't matter. good luck searching!

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            •  
              identicon
              chris, Jul 27th, 2005 @ 5:30pm

              Re: get naked dsl on SBC lines


              speakeasy is 56 clams.

              sbc dsl WITH the local phone package is only 40 clams. you are getting scammed.

              CE

               

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            identicon
            chris, Jul 27th, 2005 @ 5:25pm

            Re: get naked dsl on SBC lines


            my current phone bill is 25 clams

            speakeasy naked dsl is 56 clams.

            sbc phone service plus DSL is 40 clams (15 clams for DSL)

            definitely can't figure out why i can't get naked dsl. need it bad.

            CE

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Stephen, Jan 22nd, 2007 @ 11:02am

      Re: get naked dsl on SBC lines

      I would not recommend SPEAKEASY. Not even if they are the only choice. Their customer service sucks. They will not even respond to emails without an automated response. What kind of internet provider refuses to provide support via email? They really have been horrible to have to deal with.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Joshua, Feb 14th, 2007 @ 9:41am

    SBC is better

    any one with SBC is lucky, where I am from you have to get a phone line for DSL, obviously, but there is only ONE phone service in town and its 25 a month!! and then those morons charge ANOTHER 25 for 256k dsl!!!!! sure naked DSL would be nice but with sbc, its not that bad of a deal.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This