Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Verizon's DSL Gets Naked

timothy posted more than 9 years ago | from the everyone-does-eventually dept.

The Internet 204

Ant writes "According to Broadband Reports' news story, Verizon today announced they are now offering 'naked DSL' service (DSL without mandatory local service) in the Northeast. CBS/Marketwatch indicates Northeast customers (ex-NYNEX and Bell Atlantic) can cut or switch their local service with no penalty, starting today. The company insists the move will be national in time, but gave no timeline for when naked DSL would be available elsewhere. Verizon had promised this in May of last year, but then seemingly backtracked."

cancel ×

204 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

What a shame (5, Funny)

Svippy (876087) | more than 9 years ago | (#12274791)

I was hoping now I could believe to surf naked without me feeling ashamed. :(

I still have to live with the suffering, it seems.

Re:What a shame (4, Funny)

Valiss (463641) | more than 9 years ago | (#12275022)

Yeah, well, I bet others would suffer less if you turned off the webcam. =]

Re:What a shame (1)

Svippy (876087) | more than 9 years ago | (#12275181)

I don't know, I'm terrible at everything... and so is my karma.

I have the feeling of bad luck. :o

Mmmmmmm (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12274801)

I, for one, welcome our new nude digital link Overlords, especially the female ones!!

It's about time! (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12274804)

I've been wanting this for years. So have many other people. Hopefully this will take off and show other phone companies where their customers want them to go.

Re:It's about time! (2, Funny)

meehray (715859) | more than 9 years ago | (#12274859)

...will take off... I think they already have.

Re:It's about time! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12275197)

You know it only makes sense to start offering "naked" DSL service.

They should be giving away a naked DSL line to those who qualify if they agree to use VOIP over it, so they don't have to keep spending money on stupid sh*t like switch ports.

And whoever the dude is that has problems at night, ask them if they checked for spectral interference, otherwise a new pair in the same binder won't help.

Re:It's about time! (3, Interesting)

UnknowingFool (672806) | more than 9 years ago | (#12275355)

Same here. One of the reasons I haven't switched to DSL from cable was price. True, DSL is only $30 a month, but you had to have an existing phone line which can range from $30 - $50 depending on fees and extras. But like many people, I haven't owned a telephone in years. I only have a cell phone.

About Time (4, Interesting)

Cheirdal (776541) | more than 9 years ago | (#12274805)

I haven't had a landline in years. I live with just my cellphone and cable modem. If Verizon had offered naked DSL when I moved a few years back they'd have gotten my service instead of a cable company.

Re:About Time (1)

anthony_dipierro (543308) | more than 9 years ago | (#12275047)

I haven't had cable in years. If Brighthouse had offered a cable modem for those of us who didn't have cable for a reasonable price they'd have gotten my service instead of Verizon :).

I guess it all depends where you live. Where I live, you're pretty much screwed either way, but when we moved in my girlfriend didn't yet have her cellphone so we figured getting a phone line essentially free would be better than getting cable essentially free. Now that she's got a cell phone, and Verizon has raised its rates, that equation is probably going to go in the other direction when we move.

Re:About Time (4, Funny)

joe_bruin (266648) | more than 9 years ago | (#12275214)

I remember having had an apartment in (the slums of) Beverly Hills, and having to apply for LifeLine phone service so I could get my DSL. A LifeLine is the most basic phone service you can get, for about ten dollars per month, but there's a maximum income limit. It was interesting telling the lady on the phone that my zip code is 90210, and then swearing that I make under $10,000/year to qualify for the LifeLine, and then adding DSL onto that.

Okay, quick question then: (1, Offtopic)

erroneus (253617) | more than 9 years ago | (#12274809)

Which is better? Comcast cable or Verizon DSL? I have Comcast now. Should I consider switching? Opinions? Technical facts?

Re:Okay, quick question then: (1)

keeleysam (792221) | more than 9 years ago | (#12274840)

Verizon is cheaper, Comcast is faster. It really depends on how fast you want to go. Ask otehr people in your area how they like Verizon. Broadband can be hell in some areas and heaven in others.

Re:Okay, quick question then: (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12274861)

Also, Verizon DSL has lower latency than Comcast Cable...

For P2P, that's no big deal. For Online Gaming, that's a huge deal...

Re:Okay, quick question then: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12275212)

What? I'm a comcast customer, and I routinely get 30ms pings to any server within a state or two of me. I have a 45-55ms ping to most places in california, and maybe a 65ms ping to New York. I live in Denver.

Unless Verizon harneses electricity (or photons) that move signifigantly faster than Comcast's, you're full of shit.

Re:Okay, quick question then: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12275361)

I'm in a DC suburb, on dsl. Pings to california: 35-40ms. Anything eastern tends to be 18-25ms. pinging gmx.net (germany) is around 115ms. That's lower latency.

Re:Okay, quick question then: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12274982)

Also, I seem to recall that Verizon told the RIAA to f*** off when asked for DMCA violation information, which to me is a big plus.

Re:Okay, quick question then: (1)

mangus_angus (873781) | more than 9 years ago | (#12274919)

There Customer service BLOWS. Hope you like long waits, vauge answers, and repair guys who show up a day late.

Re:Okay, quick question then: (1)

VoidWraith (797276) | more than 9 years ago | (#12274933)

In my area (Massachusetts Suburbs) Comcast beats Verizon in pretty much anything. Enough people in the area have Verizon DSL that during primetime their systems can't handle it. And, with Comcast's DNS screwups, I see them as losing a lot of customers who aren't as smart as me to use different DNS Servers (is that redundant?). So I'm sticking with them. What I would consider though, is getting DSL in addition to the cable internet... though thats kind of a pie in the sky for me =).

Re:Okay, quick question then: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12275037)

DNS = Domain Name Service so no, DNS Servers isn't redundant

- Mage Powers

Re:Okay, quick question then: (4, Interesting)

UWC (664779) | more than 9 years ago | (#12275075)

DNS Servers (is that redundant?)

I wondered the same thing the other day. According to Wikipedia [wikipedia.org] , DNS = Domain Name System, so "DNS Server" is correct and not redundant.

I just feel sorry for their call center people since the DNS crap started. They must be swamped. Have they resolved the issues yet? My router is still using 4.2.2.1 for now after I realized the problem was apparently recurring.

Phone company in these parts is BellSouth, with their overpriced "FastAccess" DSL, which I used from 2001 through last summer, at which point there were BellSouth service problems and a nice introductory deal going with Comcast. Haven't really regretted the switch.

My main beef is still the upstream bandwidth throttling on pretty much all consumer-grade broadband services. I regularly get over 400KB/s while downloading large files, but 30KB/s saturates my upstream and pretty much brings my internet connection to a halt.

Re:Okay, quick question then: (1)

lcsjk (143581) | more than 9 years ago | (#12275292)

Redundant? Since that is the way we talk, it does not matter. Everyone understands. Next time write it out instead of asking. Takes about the same time and there are always one or two readers who are going to ask, "DNS?, is that some new cell identification formula?"

Re:Okay, quick question then: (1)

caino59 (313096) | more than 9 years ago | (#12275134)

if you are seriously considering a switch to dsl, and speed matters over price...and service is something you want to pay for - go with speakeasy.

you can get the spead and wonderfull service they offer.

are you happy with comcast?

Re:Okay, quick question then: (1)

lowrydr310 (830514) | more than 9 years ago | (#12275274)

I've had Verizon DSL for exactly two years and three months and haven't had a single problem. I received my free DSL modem less than a week after I placed my order and when I plugged it in, it worked fine. Their prices have jumped around in the two years I've had service (39.95 then 34.95, and now 37.95) but the service has been the same.

I never had to call customer service, so I can't comment on that aspect. Their service has always worked fine, with no interruptions.

Breasts! (-1, Offtopic)

kentyman (568826) | more than 9 years ago | (#12274814)

...er, I dunno. Someone told me it would get my post marked as Funny.

Re:Breasts! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12274968)

My understanding is that 'funny' does not raise your karma. While you may get a funny or two (the article is about DSL and that is one way to get to see those), you probably will get an equal or greater bunch of off-topics, flamebaits, etc. Not really worth it. Unless you were to post an appropriate link in support of your point...

Wow (5, Insightful)

jim_v2000 (818799) | more than 9 years ago | (#12274815)

If it makes it to where I am, I would gladly switch to dsl instead my cable. I don't need all the bandwidth that cable provides, but DSL costs just as much right now because I have to have a phone line with it. (I use a cell phone)

Re:Wow (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12275143)

Let me guess. You posted that from a mobile device, using T9?

Commercials.... (5, Funny)

JazzyJ (1995) | more than 9 years ago | (#12274816)

Is Verizon actually calling it "Naked DSL"?

If they are...can't wait to see the commercials for it.

Re:Commercials.... (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12274897)

More proof that Porn is the driving force behind the internet...

Re:Commercials.... (5, Funny)

Rob Riggs (6418) | more than 9 years ago | (#12275095)

Can you see me now?

Good!

Re:Commercials.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12275240)

No naked DSL in Texas though :-)

Ahh... (4, Funny)

Delta2.0 (846278) | more than 9 years ago | (#12274818)

Verizon's DSL Gets Naked

Put that back on, I don't want to see that!!!

Re:Ahh... (1)

mangus_angus (873781) | more than 9 years ago | (#12274963)

at least it's not Bell South with James Earl Jones.....I don't think any of us was to see the Dark Side in it's full glory.

Re:Ahh... (1)

soupdevil (587476) | more than 9 years ago | (#12275064)

Can you see me now? Good. Can you see me now? Good.

Re:Ahh... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12275078)

And look what slashdot just gave me:
$ HEAD slashdot.org | grep X-[BF]
X-Bender: But-- those girls don't wear cases! You can see their bare circuits!
What's going on in these places, most of us do not want to know!

US is ahead (3, Interesting)

superpulpsicle (533373) | more than 9 years ago | (#12274829)

http://www.broadbandreports.com/shownews/44065

In Canada, they can't offer naked DSL since the lines would oxidize and fail. Folks, I am not making this stuff up.

Re:US is ahead (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12274849)

You may not be making it up, but someone sure as hell is!

Re:US is ahead (4, Interesting)

Kiryat Malachi (177258) | more than 9 years ago | (#12274988)

Part of the reasoning behind choosing -48VDC as the line voltage was, in fact, to help prevent oxidation of buried lines.

I'm not making it up either. There's a lot of funky shit in the telco systems, but some of it is for very good reason.

Re:US is ahead (2, Insightful)

cbreaker (561297) | more than 9 years ago | (#12275065)

Something tells me they could still pump the 48V down the lines even without local analog service, though..

Re:US is ahead (2, Insightful)

delirium of disorder (701392) | more than 9 years ago | (#12275062)

They could just charge you for the DSL service and still run -48vDC on the line; it won't hurt you any. They don't have to actually assign a phone number to the line and won't have to pay for the load on there SS7 system to route the calls. Actually at least around here (suburban Illinois), mid 1990's DSL was a seperate line that your paid for totally seperatly from your phone service. I just upgraded mine to the kind that shares a line with the PSTN, and its a lot faster.

You can get naked DSL in Canada from Bell (2, Interesting)

Scott Tracy (317419) | more than 9 years ago | (#12275092)

I just had my Bell Canada landline cancelled today (I live in mid-town Toronto).

The CRTC (government regulator) ordered Bell to do what it promised last year by the end of March 2005, and they did. Bell is "soft-launching" it for now (i.e., you have to call and ask, they aren't advertising it on their website, for the obvious reason that they are rolling out their own VoIP in Ontario/Quebec this year)

But now I have Sympatico Hi-Speed (2mb/s) and Vonage VoIP (500min/month for $20CDN), with no landline (which beats $35/month for a landline with just Call Display)

Re:You can get naked DSL in Canada from Bell (1)

velkr0 (649610) | more than 9 years ago | (#12275313)

so does anyone know if Telus (out here in BC) offers naked dsl?

Total Nonsense (2, Informative)

brunes69 (86786) | more than 9 years ago | (#12275232)

Er... so this means that if I disconnect my local phone service, then the line to my house will oxidize and I would be unable to re-connect it next year?

Yeah... total BS. You need the *voltage* but not *dial tone*. The only thing standing in the way of naked DSL in Canada is that Bell wants to force you to get a landline.

Verizon's FIOS Even Better (5, Informative)

MBraynard (653724) | more than 9 years ago | (#12274835)

Verizon's Fios [verizon.com] puts their DSL to shame where available - naked or not. $50 a month for 15Mbps down and 2 up. Hot hot hot.

Re:Verizon's FIOS Even Better (1)

fm6 (162816) | more than 9 years ago | (#12275024)

And where is it available? I'm guessing that Verizon hasn't gotten around to digging up every street in America yet. Whereas their DSL service is available to anyone within a certain distance of one of their switches.

Re:Verizon's FIOS Even Better (1)

athakur999 (44340) | more than 9 years ago | (#12275050)

It is available in several suburbs of Dallas now. Most the farther out ones though where there is alot of newer development.

Re:Verizon's FIOS Even Better (1)

cbreaker (561297) | more than 9 years ago | (#12275114)

So, wondering why your post is marked as Informative.. it's got nothing to do with the topic at hand.

And FIOS is available... just about nowhere. Unless you live in select locations in California or Florida.

Re:Verizon's FIOS Even Better (1)

MBraynard (653724) | more than 9 years ago | (#12275217)

It is informative because it is available where I live - WashDC burbs.

Re:Verizon's FIOS Even Better (1)

zymano (581466) | more than 9 years ago | (#12275172)

Why does that not seem so fast for fiber ?

This is why we need muni FTTH .

Re:Verizon's FIOS Even Better (2, Insightful)

Shimmer (3036) | more than 9 years ago | (#12275205)

I wonder about this part of their FAQ:
Your router also contains special diagnostic software that can help us trouble shoot and correct problems should you experience trouble with your Internet connection. You will need to use the Verizon provided routers with the Fios Internet service.
Why do I have to use their router? What exactly does this "special" software do?

Really $50 per month? (1)

joggle (594025) | more than 9 years ago | (#12275335)

I checked the add which claimed it is $49.95. However, I have Qwest naked DSL which theoretically costs about $35. But after ever increasing fees, taxes, and service charges it now costs about $54 per month. I bet that Verizon Fios is similar and probably adds up to near or even more than $70 per month. (I'd love to be corrected if I'm wrong. I know broadband cable doesn't tack on such huge fees.)

Naked by birth not intervention (3, Insightful)

FidelCatsro (861135) | more than 9 years ago | (#12274847)

Well shouldnt this really be the way it should always have been.
The fact they they try to impose a mandatory term of services on people is has always been something i have had a great deal of problems with (im not from the USA ,dosn't work like this where im from , they just hit you with a contract for 2 years).
Very few other service industry impose such penalites upon us , infact its quite odd to me that this behaviour has been allowed , are there not laws top prevent companys from abusing monopolys in this way .

Re:Naked by birth not intervention (1)

Conspiracy_Of_Doves (236787) | more than 9 years ago | (#12274987)

No. The companies have seen to it that laws were passed to protect their monopolies and that their power to make draconian rules is protected.

Re:Naked by birth not intervention (1)

Timesprout (579035) | more than 9 years ago | (#12275013)

Actually its become quite common in Europe now for companies to try an screw you with recurring contract renewal unless you explicitly opt out by informing them with written notification, carved in stone, in quadruplicate, aprox 72 months before the contract was due for renewal. Of course they dont like to tell you this up front, preferring you to find out after they have charged you rather that clutter up their nice contract with clear t&c.

Re:Naked by birth not intervention (1)

FidelCatsro (861135) | more than 9 years ago | (#12275116)

Dont have to tell me about that one ;) ,They made the mistake of trying to pull that stunt on me (Detuches telekom) and the person i had on the phone got taken through every one of the consumer rights laws they had implemented over the last 50 years(i exagerate) , well in the end they droped my contract .

The thing is they have no real right to do this and more people need to be infomred about our rights to tell these people where to go .
you are right though , they are really trying to tighten the thumb screws and we should not stand for it

Good ! an extra 20-30 bucks a month in my pocket (1)

up2ng (110551) | more than 9 years ago | (#12274848)

Now I can drop my home service that was needed just to get the DSL !
If all you use is cellphones then the home line is just redundant and wastes 20-30 bucks a month for something you don't use

Naked DSL (0, Offtopic)

Princess Tarja (876619) | more than 9 years ago | (#12274856)

brrrrr, I feel a draft

Too Late (2, Insightful)

poofyhairguy82 (635386) | more than 9 years ago | (#12274868)

Too little, too late for me. I asked them to do this for me at the begining of the year. I had used their DSL for a year, and I got about 3.0 MB down (400kbs up) for about 80 bucks a month. It would have been 30, except for the fact that the phone service costed the difference. I never used the phone, and I wanted cheaper DSL. When they kept saying it wouldn't happen, I dropped verizon and picked up my local cable company for broadband. I get 4 mb down and .5 mb up for 50 bucks a month, without Verizon's shit.

Re:Too Late (2, Insightful)

periol (767926) | more than 9 years ago | (#12275086)

you're obviously not the sharpest tool in the shed. all you need is a dialtone, which verizon would have provided you for $12 a month. all this does is drop that $12 fee. if you paid more, there's only one place to point the blame, and you can do it tomorrow morning in the mirror right before you get in the shower.

Good, now ignore local monopolies. (4, Interesting)

DarkSarin (651985) | more than 9 years ago | (#12274875)

Seriously, if Verizon, or any other phone company would just start offering service EVERYWHERE, instead of JUST in localized areas, so that we had truly competitive phone lines, then I would be happy.

I hate that I can't get DSL without phone service--I too am a vonage user, so that's why I hate it. Unfortunately, my cable company sucks, and I have a period every other day or so when my line goes down mysteriously, and I have to reset my vonage box or my cable modem (or both).

Re:Good, now ignore local monopolies. (2, Interesting)

ender81b (520454) | more than 9 years ago | (#12275012)

Well Verizon could, they'd just have to put their DSLAMs in every CO in the country. And to do that they'd have to, almost certainly, file a lawsuit with every single local telco in the country since while, theoretically legal, no telco will let that happen without a serious fight. Once all those get resolved, in about 5 years, then they could actually start deploying the DSLAMS, hooking them into a SONET ring, etc. All just to compete in a already saturated market place ;).

Yep. Not going to happen.

I am somewhat happy that in my home state (Nebraska) Qwest offers Naked DSL for an extra $5 over their current prices. So, for instance with us as your ISP, it'd be $34 for a 256 symmetrical line, and $43 for a 1.5megabit/896 kbit line. Not bad really.

Of course, I'm stuck in the part of the state where we got alltel. Who don't believe in naked DSL and has fought/is fighitng Qwest over access to its market in court for the last bazillion years. And, to top it off, we have a retarded City Council that keeps blocking our local power company (one of the best in the country, thank god for small favors) from offering ISPs access to its (almost completely unused) SONET ring because it would "create a monopoly".

Sigh.

Re:Good, now ignore local monopolies. (1)

terraformer (617565) | more than 9 years ago | (#12275048)

The first step to solving this problem is using Speak Easy... [speakeasy.net] . I won't go into details but VZ has been dragging their feet offering DSL, loosing market share for DSL as a whole to cable in the process, simply to kill off the little guys. When they do, they will engage in a particularly nasty price war with cable and eventually settle with 34-45% of the market before jacking up their prices. Get away from the cable and phone monopolies, regardless if there is "competition" in your area, since even with "competition", since they are regulated and game the system big time.

Re:Good, now ignore local monopolies. (1)

Auckerman (223266) | more than 9 years ago | (#12275147)

"I have a period every other day or so when my line goes down mysteriously"

You should get a doctor to check that out.

Re:Good, now ignore local monopolies. (1)

stretch0611 (603238) | more than 9 years ago | (#12275316)

Let see the choices are now:

1) your local cable monopoly

2) your local phone monopoly (assuming you are not currently in verizon's market)

3) a different local phone monopoly. (verizon has part of its roots in Bell Atlantic and Nynex RBOC's)

I fail to see why the parent post thinks he is ignorning the monopolies.

Too bad it won't be available at Burning Man (3, Funny)

WillAffleckUW (858324) | more than 9 years ago | (#12274882)

that's where Naked DSL would go over really well.

But I hear they use FireWire there instead.

Bout Time (1)

Rollsbot (859293) | more than 9 years ago | (#12274884)

It's funny. You think government would have lead the push for this, but instead it's the market-force pushing for it.

In the end, it's a smart move. It's always best to give the customer what it wants. They must have realized that DSL has more of a future than land lines. I'm betting we see competitors eventually follow. Land lines seem to be a dying breed.

Free photoipod (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12274890)

I'll pay $20 to the person who completes an offer first

e-mail me after completion:
Socrplyr808@yahoo.com

free photoipod (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12274928)

I'll pay $20 to the person who completes an offer first
http://www.freephotoipods.com/?r=11487275 [freephotoipods.com]

e-mail me after completion:
Socrplyr808@yahoo.com

I was about to cancel my Verizon DSL (1)

jfengel (409917) | more than 9 years ago | (#12274954)

I've had massive problems with my Verizon DSL. Some sort of noise on the line that happens every single night, but it's fine in the day. It's obviously some sort of problem up the line, perhaps crosstalk, but they've shown no interest in helping me track it down. I was going to cancel it tonight.

I was about to bail on Verizon DSL and try cable, but cable's more expensive. So I'm going to see if I can get it on one of the other dry pairs that go into my house and see if that helps.

Re:I was about to cancel my Verizon DSL (1)

Monkelectric (546685) | more than 9 years ago | (#12275099)

How are your house lines? When I had DSL my house lines were *CRAP*. The speed would drop everytime I got a phonecall (yes I had the filters installed correctly -- we had 2 lines and there was crosstalk). I ran a seperate line from the distribution point and it thereafter reset my DSL no more then every few months.

I would suggest running a direct line to the modem and seeing what happens. Also, you can put the DSL modem in your garage (or wherever your distributino box is) and run cat5 from it into the house -- or simply use wireless.

Re:I was about to cancel my Verizon DSL (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12275123)

Cable's not more expensive if you drop the phone line too. Lots of people, including myself, just use cell phones. Land lines are...outdated. Paying extra for long distance... Cha!

Only the Northeast? (2, Informative)

anthony_dipierro (543308) | more than 9 years ago | (#12274969)

Bah, those of us with Verizon DSL in Florida just got our rates raised unless we sign a year long contract. I think I'm paying something like $40/month just for DSL (more when you factor in the phone line that I don't use, with taxes it comes out to $63.75/month). Where I live Verizon is the only choice for DSL, and cable modem service is even more expensive if you don't already have cable television (at least it was before the new rate raise, I'll have to reconsider cable modem service when I move in June). I even thought about just going with dialup. But I'd still have to pay the $20/month for a phone line I don't use so it wouldn't be worth it.

Re:Only the Northeast? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12275055)

those of us with Verizon DSL in Florida

That's the price of having a corrupt Republican governor.

Re:Only the Northeast? (1)

anthony_dipierro (543308) | more than 9 years ago | (#12275141)

Hmm, so $63.75 is the price for living in a state with no income taxes? I think I'm gonna have to take that deal.

Re:Only the Northeast? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12275198)

Yes, in addition to adding the Northeast, Verizon will soon be covering California, Oregon, and Washington. Here is a map [umich.edu] of verizon's naked DSL coverage.

finally verizon does something right (1)

z00ky (614811) | more than 9 years ago | (#12275019)

i'm rather suprised that verizon has done this, and i give them the thumbs up. i've had issues with them, and my cellular phone service, and clients using their broadband solutions. verizon has (IMO) a reputation of being cheap, and stupid, and now since they've opened this up, i think they're turning over a new leaf. thanks guys.

Love now or hate?? (3, Interesting)

danielsfca2 (696792) | more than 9 years ago | (#12275023)

So, somebody remind me, do we hate Verizon now, for their CEO hating municipal wifi? Or do we love them for being the first behemoth telco to offer naked DSL in a big way? What's the Slashdot party line now?

Re:Love now or hate?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12275118)

i think it's a love AND hate relationship...

Re:Love now or hate?? (2, Funny)

anthony_dipierro (543308) | more than 9 years ago | (#12275124)

They're a corporation. I don't hate them or love them, I just treat them in a profit-maximizing way, just like they treat me.

OK, OK, I love google. But don't tell anyone.

Re:Love now or hate?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12275174)

They're still blocking most European and Asian incoming emails.

'nuff said.

This is nothing new.... (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12275053)

A major corporation announces a service, but doesn't actually offer it until a year later? How is that news? Microsoft does it all the time! I recall that other phone companies (the smaller local ones) have been doing this in some way or another for about 18 months on average now. Of course, I could be mistaken....

mod do]wn (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12275070)

Importance (5, Interesting)

fm6 (162816) | more than 9 years ago | (#12275074)

Note the importance of this. There must be a lot of unused copper pairs in Verizons service area for them to even consider doing this. It suggests that a good fraction of the people living in the northeast are dispensing with landlines. In other words, Verizon's core business, which has been the biggest industry in the U.S. for over a century, is dying.

This is the start of a big trend (2, Informative)

Krusty_Klown (533651) | more than 9 years ago | (#12275104)

With the RBOCs getting on board with VOIP you will see this happen with all the US telcos. There is talk about pair bonding in the works for DSL which will provide 26 meg in the next year or so. My ISP has 6 meg now. With those speed increases, VOIP and IPTV (we shall see) become viable and the need for regular DSL (with the clothes on) will no longer be needed. I know that in the eyes of the consumer that time has passed. However it is a big move when the phone companies see it as well.

I have it and I hate it. (3, Interesting)

syukton (256348) | more than 9 years ago | (#12275108)

I have Verizon DSL and I have had few problems until just recently. Just recently they changed their IP scheme (used to be 4.x.x.x now it's 71.x.x.x) in my area as well as the behavior of their DHCP servers (MAC-based authorization). It's been a huge pain in my ass that I wasn't at all notified about. They've also been getting progressively slower over time and just recently (Saturday) they had an unexplained 5-hour outage in the 425 area code (the *entire* area code). However, I am at the outer limits of DSL's coverage range and any number of factors could be affecting my own personal experiences.

Comcast is running a special right now, first 5 months for $29.99 each month (This makes it the same price as Verizon) if you're a current Comcast subscriber. It's $10/month extra for "naked cable internet" as it were. That's the nice thing about Comcast: they'll give you what you want, for a price, while Verizon is just not about making people happy.

I say that they're not about making people happy because I spent 35 minutes on hold while waiting to talk to somebody about their nullroute problem. They play a "helpful tips" message over and over again, no hold music, and a "your call is important, you're in a queue, yadda yadda" message, looped as well. There's a pause between the voice offering tips and when it plays the first tip, lulling you into some kind of false sense of security, as if it's picking a random tip to share. Nope, it's the same stupid tips, over and over. ("unplugging and restarting your DSL modem can fix most DSL problems!") I really wish they'd just give me some hold music and an option to press 1 for some quick tips if I want them. But you see, Verizon isn't about choices, which is why they like locking people into the "you need basic phone service to get DSL" thing. They don't like people having options, they like to dictate what people can and can't do. I say fuck 'em, if they're gonna be like that.

Tangentially, I wonder how much latent anger towards women is generated by these automated female voices that do nothing other than frustrate and irritate us? I would prefer an obviously-synthesized robotic voice over a trying-to-sound-human voice. I hate those machines

New Customers? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12275117)

This is interesting, but I wonder how they will handle new customers? I recently built a house in an area serviced by Verizon, and previously had SBC as my local telco. When I ordered Verizon phone service, I attempted to add DSL, but was told that you can't add such services until you've been a Verizon customer for at least a year...

Re:New Customers? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12275142)

Well, you certainly didn't attempt to add DSL before this change.

Insanity is trying the same thing and hoping for a different result!
Try again! Maybe they'll accept you now.

Re:New Customers? (1)

anakin876 (612770) | more than 9 years ago | (#12275300)

WoW! We can't sell you DSL until you've lived there a year? WHat the hell are they thinking? I wouldn't sit there and patiently wait for a year, then say "yippee! Now I can order DSL!" By the time that year was up they wouldn't have me as a customer ever again. idiots

Qwest (1)

skydude_20 (307538) | more than 9 years ago | (#12275138)

If I remember correctly, Qwest had this out west (CO), anyone know what happened to it?

Re:Qwest (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12275261)

Qwest does indeed offer it, and I've used it for about a year in Seattle. 1.5M down/[max] 1M up for $5 more than how much they charge you for DSL if you also have a land-line.

It was a bitch to set up because they wouldn't do it until I activated a line (and then cancelled after a month), because their system couldn't verify my address. I didn't have to go through that again when I moved, however.

I just called Verizon.. (1)

Conspiracy_Of_Doves (236787) | more than 9 years ago | (#12275145)

...and the operator didn't seem to know anything about it being available now and insisted that it would be out sometime in the next year. I live in Maryland and I'm pretty sure that when I was a kid (not too far from here) we had Bell Atlantic. Is this just a case of cluelessness on the part of Verizon employees, or so you think they are trying to force people to keep paying for local service?

Verizon - naked - emporer has no clothes (1)

krbvroc1 (725200) | more than 9 years ago | (#12275149)

The company insists the move will be national in time, but gave no timeline for when naked DSL would be available elsewhere. Verizon had promised this in May of last year, but then seemingly backtracked.

I'd be willing to bet money the timing of both this release and the previous was carefully planned to mollify some states public service utilities or some bill being reviewed in Congress.

Perhaps http://www.thestandard.com/internetnews/000850.php / [thestandard.com]

Re:Verizon - naked - emperor has no clothes (1)

krbvroc1 (725200) | more than 9 years ago | (#12275165)

oops - make that emperor.

Went with T-Mobile (1)

Nonillion (266505) | more than 9 years ago | (#12275173)

I also had problems with Verizon. I went from being able to get DSL to not being able to get it, and when I asked about naked DSL the support person was dumbfounded. This was also met with the usual "We have no plans to upgrade the DSLAM equipment in the CO you are connected to."

My answer was "cancel my phone service please." Since then I have been using T-Mobile hot spots for my access and where ever I can find a open access point. With T-Mobile I get synchronous T-1, and since I am a T-Mobile subscriber I get the T-Mobile hot spot use for $19.95 a month. Yeah it's kind of a pain in the ass, but Comcast costs WAY too much and Verizon can stick it till they offer naked DSL in my area.

I sure miss not being able to run my own servers :(

Speakeasy, and preparing for this w/ one pair (2, Interesting)

dacarr (562277) | more than 9 years ago | (#12275180)

Speakeasy [speakeasy.net] had this first, branding it Onelink. I think they rolled it out in September. Note too, if you only have one copper pair (some places have this), it complicates things a little bit - you'll have to come in with a VoIP line already established, forward your old phone number to the VoIP, and when the DSL is ready to hook up, instruct the tech to make the switch at the punch board. At your option, you either shuck the old number, keep it, or arrange for a transfer, which *might* involve a new VoIP account (and all the logistics thereunto related).

DSL beats cable hands down! (2, Interesting)

mattotoole (872355) | more than 9 years ago | (#12275193)

I've had both Adelphia cable and Verizon DSL for the last few years. DSL has been *way* more reliable. It's faster too, because Adelphia's network is so bogged. But for the last year I've had cable because I didn't want to pay an extra $20/month for a land line I didn't need (I use my cell phone, also Verizon, for all my calls.) It looks like now I can switch back. I wonder when naked DSL is coming to the mid-Atlantic.

This should be mandatory (1)

Husgaard (858362) | more than 9 years ago | (#12275226)

I prefer to let the free market forces rule, and this seems to be what has happened here.

But in some cases it makes sense for government to regulate the free market, in particular about (near) monopolies and anticompetitive behaviour. Forcing customers to buy fixed-line telephony from the same company if they want DSL is clearly anticompetitive behaviour.

In Denmark where I live more people have high-speed Internet access than in the United States. This is mostly due to our government imposing restrictions on anticompetitive behaviour in the telecom sector. For example we have no requirement to buy fixed-line telephony if we want high speed Internet access. And market-dominant telecoms are required to lease access wires (last mile of cobber to the consumer) to competitors at a reasonable rate (the ones owning the wires are still getting a good price so they can earn money). In some cases you can even buy telephony from one company and buy Internet access from another company on the same physical wire, but I do not think this is government-mandated.

Which areas exactly? (2)

Free_Trial_Thinking (818686) | more than 9 years ago | (#12275291)


Guys, I live in Maryland. Is that included in the naked DSL?

More generally, how can we lookup exactly what's covered? (Their website asks for a phone number, but I don't have a landline by virtue of being in the market for naked dsl!)
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?