On Friday 13 August 2010 08:18:38 Matt Kanninen wrote:
> Southern Califronia has a major toll highway, google maps used to drop
> you on it all the time if you drove from Los Angeles to San Diego.
> 
> Getting back on topic, I can't get myself fired up yet about net
> neutrality.  I'm expecting the market will fix the problem, and there
> will be plenty of geek rage each time an ISP is detected as violating
> it.
> 
> The wireless internet is still a more wild west type place, so I can
> see some companies getting away with giving one of theirs or a
> partners service some sort of priority.
> 
> But I can think of lots of examples where I'd want that.  If I
> switched to skype as my primary voice provider on my phone I'd want
> it's traffic prioritized.

What?  Why would a telco want to sell prioritized access to skype a competitor 
of their charging for phone minutes?

> I'm cool with traffic that is considered
> "real time", gaming traffic, streaming video, voice, etc. to gret
> priorized over every random webpage's ajaxed advertising related
> network calls.
> 
> Also the cell phone companies do have less monopolistic control then
> ISP's do in the US.  You have your choice of the 1 Cable operator in
> the area in most places, if you want the fastest consumer internet
> speeds.  But the market is much more fragmented for cell phones.
> 
> My 2 cents,
> -MK
> 
> On Aug 11, 1:52 pm, Brian Conrad <[email protected]> wrote:
> > FYI, some of the tollroads were around before the Interstate projects.  
> > They are widely unknown in the west however.
> > 
> > Raymond C. Rodgers wrote:
> > > While I generally agree with you, I would like to point out that there
> > > are toll booths on some of the national interstate highways in some
> > > parts of the country. Take for example I-80 outside of Chicago, IL,
> > > and also through much of Ohio, or I-44/40 in Oklahoma... The
> > > interstates were long ago paid for by our taxes, and their upkeep is
> > > paid by more tax money, and yet states are allowed to profit from them
> > > apparently, though most don't have toll roads.
> > > 
> > > That said, I whole heartedly agree that internet management needs to
> > > be something outside the control of governments and businesses, but I
> > > can't come up with a reasonable idea for a governing body that would
> > > be able to enforce rules and provide equal access for all at a
> > > reasonable cost as well...
> > > 
> > > Raymond
> > > 
> > > On 8/10/2010 2:30 PM, Brian Conrad wrote:
> > >> Though I applaud Google's developing Android as an open source
> > >> platform I DO NOT applaud their activities regarding the end to Net
> > >> Neutrality.   I'm getting tired of this growing trend of what
> > >> essentially is "corporate communism" or where the corporations run
> > >> everything including the government.  Let's leave the Internet as it
> > >> is. Or if the telecoms are crying because their expansion need to be
> > >> paid for (after their exec's new yachts, private jets and mansions,
> > >> of course) and start behaving arrogantly then it is time to take the
> > >> Internet out of their hands and put it in the commons.  It is the
> > >> "information highway" and should be treated like our interstate
> > >> highways with free and open access to everyone.
> > >>
> > >> Web site devoted to blocking this kind of activity:
> > >>http://www.savetheinternet.com/
> > >>
> > >> Also make your local small business people aware of this.  They often
> > >> just contract someone to do a web page and don't pay attention to
> > >> this stuff.  Let them know their customers will have difficulty
> > >> getting to their web pages if net neutrality ends.  Time to set fires
> > >> under the usual apathetic asses of Americans.
> > >> 
> > >> Shane Isbell wrote:
> > >>> Some info on Google and Verizon on net neutrality in the link below.
> > >>> 
> > >>> The article is a bit muddled. What Verizon is really trying to do is
> > >>> QoS and
> > >>> charging more for better service, something very similar to how they
> > >>> are now
> > >>> charging for tethering (although in a new way which I explain below).
> > >>> T-Mobile never built out their QoS so we can expect them to remain
> > >>> neutral;
> > >>> but with Verizon and Google both coming out in support of this, I'd
> > >>> expect
> > >>> two things to happen on VZW.
> > >>> 
> > >>> First, Android services are going to become tiered so to get the
> > >>> full-experience is going to start costing end-users more.
> > >>> 
> > >>> Second, companies like Google are going to be able to strike deals
> > >>> so that
> > >>> services like YouTube will be unrestricted, while services of
> > >>> competitors
> > >>> (or other third-parties) who don't pay Verizon will be throttled.
> > >>> 
> > >>> I understand the reasons carriers give for this, they pay a lot for
> > >>> the network so the people that use it the most should pay more. This
> > >>> is standard
> > >>> business practice. But this new argument emerging that certain
> > >>> websites or
> > >>> services should be restricted is rather smelly and reflects back the
> > >>> old
> > >>> Verizon (the true Verizon?) prior to Android. It's basically saying
> > >>> that
> > >>> companies that pay more will have better service and this allows
> > >>> whole competitive landscapes to shift in ways that QoS on the
> > >>> end-user couldn't.
> > >>> 
> > >>> To make this more specific, say you have a really popular Android
> > >>> application and then Verizon has a most-favored vendor that decides
> > >>> to come
> > >>> up with a competitor to your application. Well, when your service
> > >>> becomes
> > >>> twice as slow (or even unusable), which service do you think users
> > >>> will move
> > >>> to? This is a very dangerous slope for Android.
> > >>>
> > >>>http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-08-09/google-verizon-offer-joint-i.
> > >>>..

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Android Discuss" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/android-discuss?hl=en.

Reply via email to