Join the Wireless Phone Revolution for $10!

IMHO IIRC wrote:
> In news:fjf6l2$q9j$3@registered.motzarella.org,
> Jon <Jon@Cebridge.net> typed:
>> O x f o r d wrote:
>>> "Kevin Weaver" <kevinkeithweaver@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Wow, 34.00 for 2 months. Quick, Call brinks armored truck service.
>>> or $204 a year, or about half my DSL bill each year.
>>>
>>> sweet!
>> Wow you pay $408 a year for DSL? What speeds do you get?
>
>
> He probably has the ultimate DSL package so he an support the 250 people
> parked around his house using his "FREE" open WiFi. lol
>
>
>
Yea, that is way to expensive for a connection to the internet.

I only pay $200 a year for 5M down/512k up cable connection

"IMHO IIRC" <NOSPAM@NOSPAM.NOSPAM> wrote:

> >> or $204 a year, or about half my DSL bill each year.
> >>
> >> sweet!
> >
> > Wow you pay $408 a year for DSL? What speeds do you get?

nothing too speedy, about 1300 kb/s down - 740 up

what are you getting wise tonight?

http://www.speedtest.net/

> He probably has the ultimate DSL package so he an support the 250 people
> parked around his house using his "FREE" open WiFi. lol

nope, i never allow more than 10.

O x f o r d wrote:
> great, but you probably aren't getting that on dsl. i also live in a
> more expensive area that you, so that plays into it as well.

DSL speeds are defendant on the telco copper, not housing costs.

Case in point:

There areas near me with $300,000 - $500,000 homes that can't get any
DSL, but the trailer park across the street from them can get 3 Mbps
speeds.

DTC wrote:
> O x f o r d wrote:
>> DTC <me@nothingtoseehere.zzx> wrote:
>>
>>> Directed to Oxford to answer...
>>>
>>> Have you filed your necessary FCC paperwork? There are two
>>> forms you need to submit.
>>>
>>> The maximum possible fine for violations of these rules
>>> could be as much as $130,000 per day with a maximum of
>>> $1,325,000 per violation.
>>
>> doesn't apply to base stations. try again.
>
> Where does the FCC use the phrase "base stations" in the applicable
> descriptions of the aforementioned forms? Try again.
>
> Oh wait...you likely don't even know the forms they want to to provide.
>
> But then, you could quickly start "goggling" for that information.

Google must be slow tonight. Oxford hasn't found the answer yet.

"O x f o r d" <iphone@superphone.com> wrote in message
news:iphone-0671B7.20025208122007@mpls-nnrp-04.inet.qwest.net...
> Jon <Jon@Cebridge.net> wrote:
>
>> Yea, that is way to expensive for a connection to the internet.
>>
>> I only pay $200 a year for 5M down/512k up cable connection
>
> you're probably forgetting taxes / fees, etc...
>
> so you are only paying $16.50 a month for DSL? very doubtful, but if
> so... where?

If you would learn to read he said cable connection. Not for DSL...

O x f o r d <iphone@superphone.com> wrote in
news:iphone-EE7AF9.19544308122007@mpls-nnrp-04.inet.qwest.net:

> "IMHO IIRC" <NOSPAM@NOSPAM.NOSPAM> wrote:
>
>> >> or $204 a year, or about half my DSL bill each year.
>> >>
>> >> sweet!
>> >
>> > Wow you pay $408 a year for DSL? What speeds do you get?
>
> nothing too speedy, about 1300 kb/s down - 740 up

And you tell everyone you're on the cutting edge? I'm getting 8400 down
and 1460 up tonight and spend about half of what you're paying. Of course,
it simply continues to peove that Apple fanbois pay way too much for way
too little performance.

But I'm sure those slow speeds are fine for your little Fisher Price
macbook.

>
> what are you getting wise tonight?
>
> http://www.speedtest.net/
>
>> He probably has the ultimate DSL package so he an support the 250
>> people parked around his house using his "FREE" open WiFi. lol
>
> nope, i never allow more than 10.

10 on that connection will drop it down to slow dialup speeds.

>

Jon <Jon@Cebridge.net> wrote:

> Yea, that is way to expensive for a connection to the internet.
>
> I only pay $200 a year for 5M down/512k up cable connection

you're probably forgetting taxes / fees, etc...

so you are only paying $16.50 a month for DSL? very doubtful, but if
so... where?

CozmicDebris <isheforreal> wrote:

> > nothing too speedy, about 1300 kb/s down - 740 up
>
> And you tell everyone you're on the cutting edge?

when did i say that in relation to dsl speed? never.

> I'm getting 8400 down
> and 1460 up tonight and spend about half of what you're paying.

great, but you probably aren't getting that on dsl. i also live in a
more expensive area that you, so that plays into it as well.

> Of course,
> it simply continues to peove that Apple fanbois pay way too much for way
> too little performance.

what? your logic doesn't make sense.

> But I'm sure those slow speeds are fine for your little Fisher Price
> macbook.

wireless is only so fast, if i was on a windows or linux box, speeds
would be the same. cozmic continues to show his ignorance.

> > what are you getting wise tonight?
> >
> > http://www.speedtest.net/
> >
> >> He probably has the ultimate DSL package so he an support the 250
> >> people parked around his house using his "FREE" open WiFi. lol
> >
> > nope, i never allow more than 10.
>
> 10 on that connection will drop it down to slow dialup speeds.

50 perhaps but 10 isn't noticeable. cozmic continues to show his
ignorance.

O x f o r d <iphone@superphone.com> wrote in
news:iphone-7F8409.20142708122007@mpls-nnrp-04.inet.qwest.net:

> CozmicDebris <isheforreal> wrote:
>
>> > nothing too speedy, about 1300 kb/s down - 740 up
>>
>> And you tell everyone you're on the cutting edge?
>
> when did i say that in relation to dsl speed? never.


I thought all Apple fanbois were on the cutting edge of everything? At
least that's what you've said in the past.

>
>> I'm getting 8400 down
>> and 1460 up tonight and spend about half of what you're paying.
>
> great, but you probably aren't getting that on dsl. i also live in a
> more expensive area that you, so that plays into it as well.
>

In Minnesota? Doubtful. In fact, a quick check of the Qwest website
shows that to be untrue, Oxtard.


>> Of course,
>> it simply continues to peove that Apple fanbois pay way too much for
>> way too little performance.
>
> what? your logic doesn't make sense.

Sure it does:

iPhone- overpriced
Mac- overpriced
your slow speed dsl- overpriced

>
>> But I'm sure those slow speeds are fine for your little Fisher Price
>> macbook.
>
> wireless is only so fast,

No- yours is slow in comparison to many

> if i was on a windows or linux box, speeds
> would be the same. cozmic continues to show his ignorance.

No- Oxtard continues to show his stupidity.

>
>> > what are you getting wise tonight?
>> >
>> > http://www.speedtest.net/
>> >
>> >> He probably has the ultimate DSL package so he an support the 250
>> >> people parked around his house using his "FREE" open WiFi. lol
>> >
>> > nope, i never allow more than 10.
>>
>> 10 on that connection will drop it down to slow dialup speeds.
>
> 50 perhaps but 10 isn't noticeable. cozmic continues to show his
> ignorance.

Wrong.

O x f o r d wrote:
> Jon <Jon@Cebridge.net> wrote:
>
>> Yea, that is way to expensive for a connection to the internet.
>>
>> I only pay $200 a year for 5M down/512k up cable connection
>
> you're probably forgetting taxes / fees, etc...
>
> so you are only paying $16.50 a month for DSL? very doubtful, but if
> so... where?
Only 7 states in the US have to pay taxes on internet. I guess you must
live in one of them...