On 2003.06.14 07:09 Doug Riddle wrote: > > $80.00 ?! Darn. Isn't that close to the commercial > rate? I'm only paying $25.00! Now I know why you're > upset. For $25.00 I wouldn't expect to run a sever on > my line. For $80.00 I'd expect to. >
Uhh, no, sorry to be misleading. Cox "High Speed Internet" service is about $50/month for residential service. It's less if you own your own cable modem. The $80/month would include cable TV, typical of residential service. I don't get their cable TV service, so I would not know. Their "commercial" service started at $75/month and was slower than DSL. But tell me, why, even at only $25/month, would you not expect to be able to send your own mail? Such an arrangement is cheaper for the ISP unless you get owned or are a spammer. Every "client" that maintains their own mail server is support Cox does not have to provide. Every mail transaction that does not have to go through their server is bandwidth they save. Paradoxically, Cox charges about the same or less for local phone service than Bell South. This must be a tremendous bandwidth hog, yet it does not seem to cost them much. How can anyone who charges about $20 a month for VoIP seriously complain about P2P services? Add that $20/month and you have a $100/month Cox bill. Only one thing adds up here, except for one thing. Time/Warner thinks it can sap an average of $250/month for all residential services. They think that's what the market will bear. They get there by assuming people are willing to spend more for "Digital Cable TV" and "long distance" service, priced as if calls still traveled by microwave tower. They are right, as long as they can maintain a monopoly.
