gabriel rosenkoetter on Wed, 8 Aug 2001 11:00:07 -0400 |
On Wed, Aug 08, 2001 at 10:45:36AM -0400, Michael Leone wrote: > 6 weeks, in my case. And I'm told that that's AVERAGE for ANY DSL line > provider. You wait and wait and wait ... Find me a line provider that's not a Bell and I'll find you a telco that's not in the States. That is a totally artificial waiting period. Um, okay, it's not, it's part of the Bells' work schedules, which are about that long behind what any reasonable person would expect for any non-emergency service. This is because they spend NO money upgrading their infrastructure, rather they just patch the leaky pipes. In the area around my apartment, there's a Bell Atlantic/Verizon truck (or three) doing service no fewer than three times a week. There are punchdown blocks on neighboring buildings whose metal shielding is damaged so badly that you can stand on a fire escape stairway above them and look down and see wires. I often wonder what happens to those folks' telephone lines when it rains. My point is, excusing Bell (noticed that they're trying to become one company again?) for the wretchedness of their service because that's how long they'll take anywhere is pretty senseless. :^> > "OK" means $39.95 for a 640/90 DSL line, that's got high uptime. "High"? Why should it ever NOT be up, short of physical line damage? (My DSL has been down once. Because a phone line was lying on the ground after a storm. It was rerouted, along with everyone's phones--even Verizon can't piss off that many customers for long and get away with it--a few hours later.) -- ~ g r @ eclipsed.net ______________________________________________________________________ Philadelphia Linux Users Group - http://www.phillylinux.org Announcements-http://lists.phillylinux.org/mail/listinfo/plug-announce General Discussion - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mail/listinfo/plug
|
|