Heh Lucent - perhaps you ought to go after this asshole.
---- Karl Denninger (karl@MCS.Net)| MCSNet - Serving Chicagoland and Wisconsin http://www.mcs.net/ | T1's from $600 monthly to FULL DS-3 Service | NEW! K56Flex support on ALL modems Voice: [+1 312 803-MCS1 x219]| EXCLUSIVE NEW FEATURE ON ALL PERSONAL ACCOUNTS Fax: [+1 312 803-4929] | *SPAMBLOCK* Technology now included at no cost-----Forwarded message from Jack Rickard <jack.rickard@boardwatch.com>-----
Received: from ipad2.boardwatch.com (ipad2.boardwatch.com [199.33.229.3]) by Mailbox.mcs.net (8.8.7/8.8.2) with ESMTP id QAA19346 for <karl@mcs.net>; Thu, 19 Feb 1998 16:47:46 -0600 (CST) Received: from ws38.boardwatch.com ([199.33.229.38]) by boardwatch.com with ESMTP (IPAD 2.03) id 2014300 ; Thu, 19 Feb 1998 15:49:22 EST From: "Jack Rickard" <jack.rickard@boardwatch.com> To: "Karl Denninger " <karl@mcs.net> Cc: <jurban@norden1.com> Subject: Re: (PM) Re: Nationwide Access - Please no Dweebs (fwd) Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 15:46:54 -0700 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <199802192049.2014300@boardwatch.com>
> Which means you DID NOT CALL ANY OF THEM TO VERIFY WHAT THEY WERE USING, > correct? > > If you had, you'd be reporting it. Since you aren't, I presume you did NOT. > > I'll wager $1,000 that they were virtually all, if not all, running either > ASCEND MAX or TNT hardware. Cripes, Rickard, all you have to do is look at > the market share of the central-site ports and this would be OBVIOUS.
Kripes Karl. Kalm fucking down. You jump to so many konklusions so kwickly, and with so little info, I can't deal with it. Almost everything you're saying isn't true. Why the panic.
1. Which means....incorrect. 2. If I had, I'd be reporting it... not necessarily and quite incorrect. I know a lot of shit I don't publish. 3. Ok. You're on. And I'm holding you to it on the $1000.00
Skynet. Five pops. All running 100% Livingston PM3's. 70% connect rate and scored 87 of 90. Have the check made out to Jack Rickard.
> > > We used a variety of Rockwell -based modems, and none with Lucent > > chips in them. Those were the results. > > Yep - and I'll bet that all the substandard connections were to ONE > manufacturer's hardware. Of course you won't report that, because doing > so would require that you actually INVESTIGATE the reason for the difference. >
No they won't. We might - who would care. It would require virtually no investigation. In short, no on all counts.
> And X2 works *so* well, and is *so* successful, that 3COM is falling over > themselves to meet Rockwell/Lucent on V.90, and get it out there > *immediately*, right? >
Yes. There are various reasons why but they get kind of detailed. This looks like a smart ass comment, not a request for information. I do have some insight into how the V.90 came together so quickly after stalling so long if you want to talk about it. But I don't think word is out on the disparity so they've hardly benefitted from that. Bottom line on V.90 was channel sales for everybody on the client end came to a HALT pending a standard.
> Yeah, that makes sense, and I'm the tooth fairy.
Your sexual proclivities are your own affair Karl and I don't want to discuss it.
> > > Stuff "coming soon to a theater > > near you" or "other stuff not tested" may of course operate differently. > > Stuff "IN SERVICE" does operate differently. Livingston/Lucent's offerings > are in fact *IN SERVICE*, unless, of course, you wish to argue that all the > hardware in my locations is a figment of my imagination, that the connect
> rates that I actually see, in real life (which, by the way, I can document > if you'd like - we actually log them) are also figments of my imagination, > or that all the OTHER ISPs who are buying, using, and loving the Lucent > hardware are ALL hallucinating. >
I didn't think so.
Read the above, and be as embarrassed as you like. Livingston hardware is in use in the pops, was part of the test, and sucked.
> > > And if I ever suffer any confusion as to what I "should be saying" I'll get > > on the horn to you directly and quite immediately. I'm sure you would > > know. > > > > Jack Rickard > > Are you ALWAYS this full of hot air and bluster Rickard?
Always? Well, most of the waking hours.
> > Now you know why I don't bother with ISPCON - its run by you, who has > ADMITTED ABOVE to doing ZERO RESEARCH before pontificating that a *PROTOCOL* > is inferior, when in fact the truth is likely that it is an IMPLEMENTATION > that is inferior. >
Again, I'm kicking at cripples here. Your reiterative thesis is based on the same thing, which isn't true. Starnet. Livingston. 70%. You don't bother with ISPCON? I hadn't noticed. I suppose it didn't matter. We'll miss you again real soon I fear.
> The bottom line - the ASCEND hardware is what you're going to find in the > national providers - for density and legacy reasons - they were there first. > This does NOT implicate K56Flex, as you have insisted that it does - rather, > it implicates ONE DEVICE YOU WERE CONNECTING TO, even if you DID dial 90 > different numbers. >
Not true.
> Next time, do your research before you indict - it makes for much less > sensationalistic "coverage", but as a JOURNALIST you are supposed to be > somewhere above the level of the National Enquirer. > > Quite simply, you're not. >
This gets a little vicious and childish Karl. You're REAL wounded about something. What?
> This was appropriate when you ran a BBS magazine. In the world of actual > commerce, where its not a HOBBY, its entirely INappropriate. > > Not that it seems to matter to you - indictments and sensationalistic > bullshit sell magazines, and that's all that appears to concern you. > > Just like your pontification on the spamming issue (which is also a load of > crap - an ISP has the right to determine who does, and who does not connect > to their infrastructure and *on what terms*) was, in fact. > > Take your National Enquirer style of "reporting" somewhere else. > > --
It's being rather well and widely received here. So why would I want to take it somewhere else?
> -- > Karl Denninger (karl@MCS.Net)| MCSNet - Serving Chicagoland and Wisconsin > http://www.mcs.net/ | T1's from $600 monthly to FULL DS-3 Service > | NEW! K56Flex support on ALL modems > Voice: [+1 312 803-MCS1 x219]| EXCLUSIVE NEW FEATURE ON ALL PERSONAL ACCOUNTS > Fax: [+1 312 803-4929] | *SPAMBLOCK* Technology now included at no cost > > > ---------- > > > From: Joseph Urban <jurban@norden1.com> > > > To: jack.rickard@boardwatch.com > > > Subject: Re: (PM) Re: Nationwide Access - Please no Dweebs (fwd) > > > Date: Wednesday, February 18, 1998 4:18 AM > > > > > > From: Karl Denninger <karl@Mcs.Net> > > > Date: Tue, 17 Feb 1998 10:54:35 -0600 > > > Subject: Re: (PM) Re: Nationwide Access - Please no Dweebs (fwd) > > > > > > It never ceases to amaze me how little Rickard knows sometimes. > > > > > > What he should be saying is "average connect rates to ASCEND TNTs and > > MAXes > > > is just over 30kbps". > > > > > > Why? > > > > > > Because, to my knowledge, this is all that the companies named below > > > actually use in their K56Flex infrastructure. > > > > > > This ends up being an indictment of a particular product, not a > > technology > > > difference. Rickard ought to try calling some ISPs who use PM3s; he'd > > find, > > > as I have, that the consistent connect rates are in the mid-40kbps range > > > (basically identical to the X2 results he claims are so wonderful). I've > > > been all over the United States, and where I can get a PCM connection at > > all > > > (many hotels, for example have bastardizes telephone networks with > > multiple > > > A/D conversions that prevent it from working) I consistently get good > > > connections in the 40s. > > > > > > That one product sucks does not mean that an *open standard* sucks when > > > taken in total, yet this is precisely what he appears to be ready to > > print. > > > > > > - -- > > > - -- > > > Karl Denninger (karl@MCS.Net)| MCSNet - Serving Chicagoland and Wisconsin > > > http://www.mcs.net/ | T1's from $600 monthly to FULL DS-3 > > Service > > > | NEW! K56Flex support on ALL modems > > > Voice: [+1 312 803-MCS1 x219]| EXCLUSIVE NEW FEATURE ON ALL PERSONAL > > ACCOUNTS > > > Fax: [+1 312 803-4929] | *SPAMBLOCK* Technology now included at no > > cost > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 11:45:01PM -0800, Blake Hudema wrote: > > > > > > > > I thing this would be of interest. > > > > > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > > > > Date: Mon, 16 Feb 1998 20:08:33 -0600 > > > > From: Jack Rickard <jack.rickard@boardwatch.com> > > > > Reply-To: isp-ceo-owner@isp-ceo.com > > > > To: isp-ceo@isp-ceo.com > > > > Subject: Re: Nationwide Access - Please no Dweebs > > > > > > > > > > > > We just finished a kind of interesting test series of 90 "national" > > dialup > > > > ISPs who had POP in 25 area codes or more. We picked 5 POPs somewhat > > at > > > > random from each ISP for 450 POPs. But we of course wound up with 328 > > > > individual phone numbers. THe reason of course is that manyof these > > ISP's > > > > gain a national footprint by purchasing POP services from national > > > > companies who wholesale such services. I can tell you that MCI, UUNET, > > > > PSINET, and GTE/BBN all do this. From what I can gather, the price > > ranges > > > > from $7 to $13 per subscriber per month. Lower prices are for longer > > term > > > > contracts and higher customer body count minimums. Also there is the > > basic > > > > POP service or you can get POP service with tech support, etc. > > > > > > > > I don't want to spill the beans too hard as it is rather the center of > > our > > > > March Boardwatch Issue and the Winter Directory which will be released > > at > > > > the ISPCON show. But two things did jump out. I fear I'm going to > > take a > > > > terrible beating from some very unhappy ISPs over part of it. The > > > > K56flex/x2 battle is over. We have bought into the concept that these > > were > > > > two peer technologies struggling for dominance for over a year. It is, > > > > unfortunately, not so, and V.90 probably won't change it. Average > > connect > > > > speed for x2 modems to x2 ports - long distance - was over 45kbps. > > K56flex > > > > was just over 30 kbps. These two types of modems are not even in the > > same > > > > class or comparable. > > > > > > > > The other aspect is of course call completion rate. We made 145,000 > > calls > > > > to 450 POPs during the month of January. Average call completion rate > > of > > > > 89% but it varied from a low of 63% to a high of 97%. > > > > > > > > IBM's dialup network is the best in the land gents. I met with them > > last > > > > week to try to get them to get more into the wholesale business and it > > > > looks good. Sprint has an excellent call completion rate right up at > > the > > > > top in the 97% range. But they have older equipment and average > > connect > > > > speeds were in the 27 kbps range. > > > > > > > > Right now MCI looks like the best source of national footprint. All > > x2, 45 > > > > kbps average connect speed anywhere, and high nineties on the scale. > > And a > > > > number of the ISP's were caught in the act of using them, so clearly > > they > > > > offer the service. > > > > > > > > On the K56flex side, GTE/BBN look fully deployed. Good call > > completion, > > > > but poor average connect speed due to the K56flex move. They do a lot > > of > > > > POP wholesaling. > > > > > > > > I haven't seen many viable alternatives to wholesaling from a larger > > > > service actually. The roaming thing never did quite happen. There is > > > > somebody out there with kind of an interesting idea to aggregate CLEC > > pops > > > > and package them for ISPs and I think they'll be at ISPCON. > > > > > > > > But the biggest trend is large nationals who haven't really been able > > to > > > > compete with local ISPs on price because of the customer service thing. > > So > > > > they are groking to the concept of just wholesaling it to smaller ISPs > > and > > > > letting them do the hard work. And there are more of them getting > > into > > > > it. AGIS is going to setup national dialup footprint and wholesale to > > > > ISPs. And several other smaller backbones are making the same noise. > > I > > > > think it is a coming thing and wiithin a year we think we'll see > > hundreds > > > > > > > > of national dialup ISPs operating from a dozen or so providers. > > > > > > > > The interesting part is the $7. We're kind of finally shaking out what > > the > > > > true basic cost of providing dialup infrastructure is. It's something > > less > > > > than $7 per customer. If we assume that the $19.95 price was correctly > > > > arrived at by market forces, then that leaves about $13 to cover > > marketing, > > > > support, and overhead. It's a bit shy of being all the riches of > > Crocius > > > > I'm afraid, but it's a "good" business potentially. > > > > > > > > And I think end users will have the following criteria in the following > > > > order: > > > > > > > > 1. Price > > > > 2. Call Completion Rate > > > > 3. National Footprint > > > > 4. Connect Speed/modem match > > > > 5 Customer Service. > > > > > > > > I rate national footprint higher than you've heard. But I think it > > > > accounts for a good bit of the AOL huge membership. People do want to > > be > > > > able to get on their service wherever they go, even if they rarely go > > > > anywhere. Items 1 and 2 are soft in order. Too many busies will > > convert a > > > > customer to reverse these two priorities. But I think the price > > sensitive > > > > nature of the end user is consistently under rated. There are dozens > > of > > > > hgher bandwidth schemes that all assume a $40 or $50 per month rate. > > There > > > > is a band of power users that would be all over that instantly. But > > after > > > > they are quickly absorbed, I think the entire industry will be > > surprised to > > > > see the numbers of Internauts that stick with dialup at $15-$20 over > > xDSL > > > > and Cable at $40. It will make headlines and come as a huge shock.
> > But I > > > > think it is true. > > > > > > > > So I see a lot of pressure to go national, and do it with someone who > > can > > > > complete calls. > > > > > > > > Jack Rickard > > > > Boardwatch > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _____ * ISP-CEO Email Discussion List * ____ > > > > To Remove: mailto:remove-isp-ceo@isp-ceo.com > > > > To Join: mailto:join-isp-ceo@isp-ceo.com > > > > To Post: mailto:isp-ceo-owner@isp-ceo.com > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > To unsubscribe, email 'majordomo@livingston.com' with > > > > 'unsubscribe portmaster-users' in the body of the message. > > > > Searchable list archive: <URL:http://www.livingston.com/Tech/archive/> > > > - - > > > To unsubscribe, email 'majordomo@livingston.com' with > > > 'unsubscribe portmaster-users' in the body of the message. > > > Searchable list archive: <URL:http://www.livingston.com/Tech/archive/> > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > > > > > > -- > > > jurban@norden1.com > > > Nehmen wir die Welt als Erscheinung so beweiset sie gerade zu das Dasein > > > von Etwas das nicht Erscheinung ist. (Looking upon the world as > > appearance > > > demonstrates that something that is not appearance exists.) -- Kant
-----End of forwarded message----- - To unsubscribe, email 'majordomo@livingston.com' with 'unsubscribe portmaster-users' in the body of the message. Searchable list archive: <URL:http://www.livingston.com/Tech/archive/>