Communications is always measured in bits per second, not bytes per second. It sounds like things were just fine until whatever upgrade thing started happening.
Well, there is hybrid fiberpower cable for tower applications. The cellular industry uses it pretty heavily now. For actual infrastructure, it's not impossible, just not done and not overly practical.
I wish publications would do a little more to not lump all ISPs into one barrel. Sure, this article does a little more than normal to make a distinction, but the general theme is still "ALL ISPS ARE BAD!!!!"
It makes it hard for us independents to compete against the big guys.
No, there are no packets being treated differently. The packets never originate. Comcast never gave Sony access to the authentication server to do HBO Go. Comcast just isn't on the list of providers you can choose from.
Very much not network neutrality.
You make my point without acknowledging it. Comcast couldn't possibly interfere with packets on someone else's network and it still doesn't work. That means it's nothing to do with Net Neutrality.
You say every major ISP, but you mean every major TV provider. For example, DirecTV is not an ISP, but is a TV provider. You can authenticate your DirecTV TV subscription on your Comcast Internet connection.
You're free to believe it, but there's no regulation about being incorrect.
You say no other ISP has had any problems, but you should be saying no other TV provider has had any problems... because that's where the problem lies. Not with the ISP, but with the TV.
Completely unrelated. NetFlix was a paid peering vs. settlement free peering dispute. NetFlix didn't want to pay anything and COmcast disagreed. NetFlix departed from the established CDNs which do pay for their peering to ensure quality IP (afterall, that's exactly what their clients pay them for) to roll their own, hoping they could strong-arm entities into free connections.
Now I personally would thoroughly enjoy a settlement free interconnection with NetFlix (hopefully later this year or next?), but it was Comcast's decision to not. Highly dubious motivation, I'm sure, but their decision.
There is a huge difference between refusal to authenticate and throttling. One is the TV division, one is the Internet division. One is not subject to net neutrality regulation, while the other is.
You are correct in that they both result from Comcast being a dick, but you can't regulate that out of somebody. If they're a dick, they'll always find a new way to be a dick.
Once again, nothing t all to do with Net neutrality and the Internet, everything to do with TV.
Okay, this has nothing to do with their Internet service. If you had Comcast TV and AT&T Internet, it still wouldn't work. Comcast's servers that authenticate with HBO to determine if you're an eligible subscriber haven't completed the integration work. This may very well be intentional on Comcast's behalf, but has nothing to do with their Internet service and therefore has jack shit to do with Net Neutrality.
If you had DirecTV service and Comcast Internet, I bet it would work just fine.
If you had an HBO subscription directly with HBO, you could do this on Comcast.
I don't know the details behind HBO Go on PS4 on Comcast. However...
ESPN 3 (or 360 or whatever) isn't available on many ISPs including mine and I'm not blocking a thing. ESPN charges ISPs for access to their service and as a business decision, I (and many others) don't pay them for that access. I have to pay for every subscriber I have to access ESPN 3, whether they will ever use it or not.
That's the Net Neutrality I care about... content providers forcing me to pay for their garbage just like the cable TV subscription model.
There's not enough evidence here to say what's going on., but Comcast hasn't blocked anything yet, so I'll reserve my decision until someone technical reports on the issue.
Re: Pure lies, and refusal to help
Communications is always measured in bits per second, not bytes per second. It sounds like things were just fine until whatever upgrade thing started happening.
Re: fiber
Well, there is hybrid fiberpower cable for tower applications. The cellular industry uses it pretty heavily now. For actual infrastructure, it's not impossible, just not done and not overly practical.
Re: bs
That's common in tech reporting.
Re: I love the numbers and Claims
Fixed Wireless serves most residents not served by DSL and cable.
Re: Re: Lumping of ISPs
I do just that, but it gets kinda old everyone thinking you want to sacrifice their firstborn just because you sell Internet service.
Re: Re: Lumping of ISPs
That is highly incorrect. Most ISPs see lots of competition. The few ISPs people love to hate (and for good reason), don't.
Lumping of ISPs
I wish publications would do a little more to not lump all ISPs into one barrel. Sure, this article does a little more than normal to make a distinction, but the general theme is still "ALL ISPS ARE BAD!!!!"
It makes it hard for us independents to compete against the big guys.
Re: Re: Re: Re: This isn't a net neutrality issue
No, there are no packets being treated differently. The packets never originate. Comcast never gave Sony access to the authentication server to do HBO Go. Comcast just isn't on the list of providers you can choose from.
Very much not network neutrality.
You make my point without acknowledging it. Comcast couldn't possibly interfere with packets on someone else's network and it still doesn't work. That means it's nothing to do with Net Neutrality.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Net Neutrality...
You say every major ISP, but you mean every major TV provider. For example, DirecTV is not an ISP, but is a TV provider. You can authenticate your DirecTV TV subscription on your Comcast Internet connection.
You're free to believe it, but there's no regulation about being incorrect.
Re: Re:
I would love to know the details of their interconnection. If you have the details, please let us know!
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Neutral networks
Tommy Wheeler came up with fast lanes, not ISPs.
Zero rated apps sound great.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Neutral networks
You say no other ISP has had any problems, but you should be saying no other TV provider has had any problems... because that's where the problem lies. Not with the ISP, but with the TV.
Re:
In the world of TV, the content creators (HBO, Viacom, etc.) set the rules.
Re: Funny how that works isn't it?
Completely unrelated. NetFlix was a paid peering vs. settlement free peering dispute. NetFlix didn't want to pay anything and COmcast disagreed. NetFlix departed from the established CDNs which do pay for their peering to ensure quality IP (afterall, that's exactly what their clients pay them for) to roll their own, hoping they could strong-arm entities into free connections.
Now I personally would thoroughly enjoy a settlement free interconnection with NetFlix (hopefully later this year or next?), but it was Comcast's decision to not. Highly dubious motivation, I'm sure, but their decision.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: I can tell you why
There is a huge difference between refusal to authenticate and throttling. One is the TV division, one is the Internet division. One is not subject to net neutrality regulation, while the other is.
You are correct in that they both result from Comcast being a dick, but you can't regulate that out of somebody. If they're a dick, they'll always find a new way to be a dick.
Once again, nothing t all to do with Net neutrality and the Internet, everything to do with TV.
Re:
Okay, this has nothing to do with their Internet service. If you had Comcast TV and AT&T Internet, it still wouldn't work. Comcast's servers that authenticate with HBO to determine if you're an eligible subscriber haven't completed the integration work. This may very well be intentional on Comcast's behalf, but has nothing to do with their Internet service and therefore has jack shit to do with Net Neutrality.
If you had DirecTV service and Comcast Internet, I bet it would work just fine.
If you had an HBO subscription directly with HBO, you could do this on Comcast.
I don't know the details behind HBO Go on PS4 on Comcast. However...
ESPN 3 (or 360 or whatever) isn't available on many ISPs including mine and I'm not blocking a thing. ESPN charges ISPs for access to their service and as a business decision, I (and many others) don't pay them for that access. I have to pay for every subscriber I have to access ESPN 3, whether they will ever use it or not.
That's the Net Neutrality I care about... content providers forcing me to pay for their garbage just like the cable TV subscription model.
There's not enough evidence here to say what's going on., but Comcast hasn't blocked anything yet, so I'll reserve my decision until someone technical reports on the issue.
There is a DSL provider in my area that offers 10 meg plus DSL. Other forms and areas have DSL I believe over 50 megs.