[ale] [rant] I dislike "we only supportwinblows/OS X"AT&T internet
Dan Lambert
danlambert at bellsouth.net
Tue Mar 4 15:16:22 EST 2008
I was strangely silent because I had so much to do regarding my real job
that I simply deleted most of the posts for almost two weeks. I actually
didn't read most of that because I had more important things to do.
I would actually rather neither side of the political arena be injected.
Dan
On Tue, 2008-03-04 at 11:48 -0500, Jeff Lightner wrote:
> Dan,
>
> You were strangely silent in decrying "politics" when someone else
> injected Gun Control and "liberals" into a thread about MS a couple of
> weeks ago.
>
> Personally I'd rather this list were mostly technical discussions.
> However, by and large, when I post technical questions (as I did last
> week) they get ignored.
>
> As to injecting the politics - what I wrote was about something I knew
> about which was the FCC stuff with ILECs and CLECs and non-enforcement
> by the FCC which was certainly germane to the discussion. Perhaps I
> could have avoided the parting shot at Dubya but as noted above since it
> only seems to be an issue when it is a non-conservative injecting
> opinions I don't see a reason to avoid it especially because they were
> in fact his appointees. I've seen people go on about fair tax, gun
> control and all sorts of hot button issues including the near riot when
> someone had the gall to suggest that the list be split into a technical
> and a discussion lists because many people don't like the "discussions".
>
> The list is what it is and apparently is the way it is because people
> like it that way.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ale-bounces at ale.org [mailto:ale-bounces at ale.org] On Behalf Of Dan
> Lambert
> Sent: Monday, March 03, 2008 4:31 PM
> To: ale at ale.org
> Subject: Re: [ale] [rant] I dislike "we only supportwinblows/OS X"AT&T
> internet
>
> Sorry to have to say so, Jeff, but I am rather tired of you injecting
> politics into every discussion you can. It seems you never miss a chance
> to inject whatever negative you can about your chosen demon.
>
> If I wanted to be a member of a political forum, I would have joined
> one.
>
> I happen to have strong political opinions of my own, but I do
> everything I can to make my posts on this list about Linux and it's
> associated trials and tribulations.
>
> If I wanted to, I could load this list with political diatribes about
> various and sundry politicos and their cronies. I don't. Please do
> likewise.
>
> Dan
>
> On Mon, 2008-03-03 at 15:07 -0500, Jeff Lightner wrote:
> > Well it was a specious argument anyway because it assumes that the
> phone
> > company plays nice the way it is supposed to by law.
> >
> > By law the people that own the wire (ILEC = Incumbent Local Exchange
> > Carrier) were supposed to open it up to resellers (CLEC = Competitive
> > Local Exchange Carrier) in exchange for being allowed to sell long
> > distance. What the ILECs did instead is pretend they were "open" but
> > then do everything they could to sabotage the CLECs (e.g. not doing
> the
> > central office connections in a timely fashion) so that CLECs couldn't
> > really make a go of anything other than business connections.
> >
> > Unfortunately the FCC which was supposed to insure this didn't happen
> > got taken over by Dubya appointees and suddenly it didn't matter that
> > the ILECs weren't complying.
> >
> > You're supposed to have a choice but you don't really for the most
> part.
> > Witness the poster who has DSL from AT&T but for some reason can't get
> > it from any of the resellers because of the way it is provisioned.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ale-bounces at ale.org [mailto:ale-bounces at ale.org] On Behalf Of
> > Jeremy T. Bouse
> > Sent: Monday, March 03, 2008 2:14 PM
> > To: ale at ale.org
> > Subject: Re: [ale] [rant] I dislike "we only support winblows/OS
> X"AT&T
> > internet
> >
> > Actually have you checked out http://www.att.net/legal/tos cause those
>
> > specs you mention are no where within it nor is the explicit mention
> of
> > Windows or Mac. Closest I can find is section 3. Equipment & Software
> > and all it really says is:
> >
> > Due to the infinite number of possible combinations of hardware
> and
> > software, you are responsible for the compatibility of your system
> > with the Service. Any equipment that was not provided to you by
> AT&T
> > is not the responsibility of AT&T , and AT&T will not provide
> > support and will not be responsible for ongoing maintenance or
> > management of such equipment. Any AT&T-provided modem will be
> either
> > a new or a fully inspected, tested, and warranted return or
> > repackaged unit.
> >
> > Which I can understand, I provide my own router/access point behind
> > their DSL modem I'm not asking them to support that router but I am
> > asking them to support their connectivity which they do provide and
> thus
> >
> > should support. Yes I've had their modems fail, I've also replaced my
> > separately purchased Sangoma S518 ADSL card with their provided
> > Speedstream to prove a problem was not my modem but the line as the
> same
> >
> > problem was occuring. If your call to tech support is network
> > connectivity reasons, which I know for me is the only time I do ever
> > call, then nothing in their TOS (so far as I can see) says support can
>
> > be withheld because of your operating system.
> > <http://www.att.net/legal/tos>
> > Ned Williams wrote:
> > > You miss my point.
> > >
> > > Regardless of what it takes to do a ping..you have their service you
>
> > > agreed to their terms of service, that TOS states they only support
> > > windows...that means you understood at the time of getting the
> service
> >
> > > that calling in because your Linux connected machine has a problem
> is
> > > a lost cause. The effect of the operating system is not what is up
> > > for debate, the effect of the contract the customer agrees too, is.
> Is
> >
> > > it a wrongly minded contract sure if your a Linux person, but that
> is
> > > not of any consequence to AT&T. .If you don't like, don't be their
> > > customer. That is your greatest method to effect chance upon them.
> > >
> > >
> > > Ned
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 1:32 PM, Jeremy T. Bouse
> > > <jeremy.bouse at undergrid.net <mailto:jeremy.bouse at undergrid.net>>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > But again these specs you quote also fall back to the issue of
> > what
> > > affect the Operating System has on OS-independent network
> routing
> > > issues. Those are really specs for software being installed not
> > > what is
> > > needed to provide a level of network service connectivity. If
> they
> > ask
> > > you to do a ping does it really matter what OS you do it from?
> > > Same for
> > > traceroute, opening a web page, etc...
> > >
> > > Ned Williams wrote:
> > > > If you have 19 machines on a network, why don't you have a
> > > switch and
> > > > a router and not force a linux box to do the job of the
> > > aforementioned
> > > > 10 dollar router?
> > > > Sorry I know there are people out there who insist on
> > demonstrating
> > > > value in their stll creaking along 486/66 by making it their
> > dsl
> > > > router/firewall...but I mean rather than get spitting mad on
> the
> > > phone
> > > > with techs who you KNOW are not going to know squat about
> linux
> > nor
> > > > are they required too...(a google of "AT&T system
> requirements"
> > > first
> > > > hit spells out what they are required to support)
> > > >
> > > > * Intel or equivalent Pentium Pro, II, III, or IV at
> 133MHz
> > > or faster
> > > > * Windows 95/98/ME/XP or Windows NT 4.0/2000 (TCP/IP and
> > > Ethernet
> > > > support must be enabled)
> > > > * RAM -
> > > > o Windows 95/98/XP - 32 MB
> > > > o Windows NT - 32 MB
> > > > * Hard drive with 100 megabytes available
> > > > * Ethernet Network Interface Card (NIC) or built-in
> Ethernet
> > > port
> > > > supporting 10 Base-T
> > > > * CD ROM
> > > > * Microsoft^(r) TCP/IP stack
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > This means when you, you're gf, your mom,dad uncle or whomever
> > has
> > > > their service all agreed to these terms when you got the
> > service..
> > > >
> > > > don't agree fine, get speak easy, they support Linux and your
> > blood
> > > > pressure will be lower...but don't expect the AT&T's Chennai
> > > support
> > > > center to understand the eccentricities of the latest Debian
> > > release,
> > > > when their product list is limited to windows only..
> > > >
> > > > and hey if it helps..they don't support Vista either
> > > >
> > > > Ned
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 12:05 PM, Jeremy T. Bouse
> > > > <jeremy.bouse at undergrid.net
> <mailto:jeremy.bouse at undergrid.net>
> > > <mailto:jeremy.bouse at undergrid.net
> > > <mailto:jeremy.bouse at undergrid.net>>> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > The other problem with being able to go with any one
> > > other than the
> > > > telco is if you're like me, stuck behind a remote DSLAM
> the
> > > telco
> > > > won't
> > > > provide the resellers with the ability to service you.
> Every
> > DSL
> > > > provider claims they can't service my house but I have the
> > top
> > > > speed DSL
> > > > from AT&T. Luckily I don't have to call them for support
> too
> > > often
> > > > considering I've got a very non-standard configuration in
> > the
> > > > house that
> > > > would drive their script-readers nuts, along with myself
> > > trying to
> > > > explain it to them.
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Ale mailing list
> > > > Ale at ale.org <mailto:Ale at ale.org> <mailto:Ale at ale.org
> > > <mailto:Ale at ale.org>>
> > > > http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Ale mailing list
> > > > Ale at ale.org <mailto:Ale at ale.org>
> > > > http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
> > > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Ale mailing list
> > > Ale at ale.org <mailto:Ale at ale.org>
> > > http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Ale mailing list
> > > Ale at ale.org
> > > http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Ale mailing list
> > Ale at ale.org
> > http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
> > ----------------------------------
> > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail may contain privileged or
> confidential information and is for the sole use of the intended
> recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure,
> copying, distribution, or use of the contents of this information is
> prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this electronic
> transmission in error, please reply immediately to the sender that you
> have received the message in error, and delete it. Thank you.
> > ----------------------------------
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Ale mailing list
> > Ale at ale.org
> > http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ale mailing list
> Ale at ale.org
> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ale mailing list
> Ale at ale.org
> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
More information about the Ale
mailing list