EDAboard.com | EDAboard.eu | EDAboard.de | EDAboard.co.uk | RTV forum PL | NewsGroups PL

Ma Bell is coming back and, boy, is sge pissed!

Ask a question - edaboard.com

elektroda.net NewsGroups Forum Index - Electronics Others - Ma Bell is coming back and, boy, is sge pissed!

Garrison Hilliard
Guest

Tue Mar 07, 2006 9:14 pm   



Ma Bell gets her family back together
BARRIE MCKENNA

Globe and Mail Update

WASHINGTON — Okay, let's get this straight. There once was a Ma Bell. She was
huge and she owned everything that had anything to do with telecommunications --
from making black rotary phones to selling local service.

Uncle Sam didn't like that. So he split up Ma Bell, creating a family of Baby
Bell orphans. You might know them today as Verizon, SBC, Qwest and BellSouth.

AT&T remained the jewel. It had the legendary engineering savvy and a keen eye
for the next big thing in technology.

But two decades after the breakup, Ma was growing old and tired. So SBC
(formerly known as Southwest Bell) bought its own mother and they moved in
together.

Now SBC, which recently stole its mother's name, is also taking in one of its
sisters. AT&T, based in San Antonio, Tex., has struck a deal to buy BellSouth
for $67-billion (U.S.) in stock.The family tree is starting to look pretty
weird. Borrowing the title of that old Paul Simon song, Democratic congressman
Ed Markey of Massachusetts has already dubbed the merger a "mother and child
reunion."

That suggests something joyous is going on here. That's not true for all telecom
customers. At the time of AT&T's breakup in 1984, there were seven Baby Bells.
This deal would leave just three.

This is full circle, a reunion, if you like. But it's driven by pure economics.
The natural inclination of big companies is to grow ever-larger, becoming as
monopolistic as antitrust regulators will allow.

And with the pro-business Bush administration having remade the face of the
Justice Department and the Federal Communications Commission, the players know
now is the moment to get some of these big mergers approved.

But just what market is AT&T and its siblings trying to control? It isn't so
much about phone services, such as wireless, local or long distance. It's about
access to the Internet, which is rapidly becoming the common platform for many
of these services.

Verizon and AT&T will control two-thirds of all local phone connections. AT&T
and BellSouth would become a telecom giant with $130-billion a year in sales and
70 million local phone customers in 22 states. AT&T will also own 100 per cent
of wireless provider Cingular -- the largest cellphone company in the United
States. AT&T and BellSouth now jointly own it.

AT&T chief executive officer Edward Whitacre said the deal would speed up the
public's adoption of next-generation technology, integrating both wireless and
traditional wired networks.

"Together we can do it faster than each company could alone," he said.

Maybe so. The local phone providers envisage a day when they'll be able to offer
movies, music, TV and long distance -- all via the Internet.

In a status quo environment, the phone companies are little more than providers
of an increasingly cheap commodity -- broadband access. DSL service, which once
cost $40 to $50 a month, is now selling for less than $20. Customers can buy
broadband from multiple sources, including cable companies.

The danger of doing nothing is problematic for the likes of AT&T and Verizon.
They can stand idly by and watch others hijack their lines to make money, such
as Apple with its iTunes service or Vonage with its Internet long-distance.

So local phone service is the only monopoly card they have to deal. And they are
using it as leverage.

Verizon, for example, now requires customers to take local phone service if they
want its DSL. That is apparently aimed at dissuading users from taking a cheap
DSL deal and then signing up for one of the over-the-Internet phone offerings,
such as Skype or Vonage.

That's just the start. It doesn't take much imagination to see what other
services are coming down the broadband pipe. The phone companies want to bypass
the cable company monopolies to offer TV. On-demand movies are already
available, but the service is clunky and slow. But as broadband expands, that
too will change. Long distance service is already a reality.

And eventually, much of this will go wireless.

AT&T and Verizon are adopting the strategy that if they're really big, customers
won't be able to get around them to do all these wonderful things.

And Mr. Whitacre apparently believes that AT&T, not Vonage or Apple, will be the
one to make money off this plethora of services.

And to do that, the company figures it must be really big -- bigger than Ma Bell
herself.

bmckenna_at_globeandmail.com

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060307.gtibworld07/BNStory/Technology/home

Night Spirit
Guest

Tue Mar 07, 2006 9:42 pm   



Garrison Hilliard Boldly typed:
Quote:
Ma Bell gets her family back together

One Dish Bourbon Chicken
Submitted by: Penelope P.

This is a superb, easy dish. The slight sweetness of the bourbon mixes
deliciously with the garlic and onion. Serve with rice, if desired.
The
sauce goes wonderfully with rice or pasta.
Servings: 4

Ingredients:
1 tablespoon butter
2 tablespoons olive oil
1 clove garlic, minced
1 onion, chopped
4 skinless, boneless chicken breasts
2 tablespoons chicken stock
2 tablespoons bourbon
salt and pepper to taste

Directions:
1. In a large skillet, melt butter or margarine and add olive oil.
Saute
garlic and onion until translucent. Remove garlic and onion from
skillet
with a slotted spoon.
2. Add chicken breast halves to skillet and brown on both sides.
Return
garlic and onion to skillet. Add broth and bourbon and stir all
together.
Cover and let simmer over very low heat for 20 to 25 minutes, or until
chicken is tender and done (chicken juices run clear).

--
So Say We All,
Dale

The world wide web at my finger tips and I can't find anything
interesting.

http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/RivertonCommonRecipeBulletinBoard/

the other Eric
Guest

Tue Mar 07, 2006 9:49 pm   



Well of course she will be pissed. All this time she has been dreaming
of the day when she can be with Baltar again and when she finally sees
him he will be in bed with her twin sister Gina.

Quote:
The family tree is starting to look pretty
weird.

Oh Cylons don't care about that sort of thing.

Ken Taylor
Guest

Tue Mar 07, 2006 9:58 pm   



the other Eric wrote:
Quote:
Well of course she will be pissed. All this time she has been dreaming
of the day when she can be with Baltar again and when she finally sees
him he will be in bed with her twin sister Gina.


The family tree is starting to look pretty
weird.


Oh Cylons don't care about that sort of thing.

I doubt that.


Don Bowey
Guest

Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:31 am   



On 3/7/06 1:14 PM, in article 0mtr02tce2afe1lbg5k4cl0v6e8nmbq5h2_at_4ax.com,
"Garrison Hilliard" <garrison_at_efn.org> wrote:

Quote:
Ma Bell gets her family back together
BARRIE MCKENNA

Globe and Mail Update

WASHINGTON — Okay, let's get this straight. There once was a Ma Bell. She was
huge and she owned everything that had anything to do with telecommunications

Okay, let's get this right; The Bell companies NEVER owned everything
having to do with telecommunications. There were always many independent
companies.

Quote:
--
from making black rotary phones to selling local service.

Uncle Sam didn't like that. So he split up Ma Bell, creating a family of Baby
Bell orphans. You might know them today as Verizon, SBC, Qwest and BellSouth.

Verizon is not a Baby Bell. Verizon is and was, a very large non-Bell
company.


Quote:

AT&T remained the jewel. It had the legendary engineering savvy and a keen eye
for the next big thing in technology.

But two decades after the breakup, Ma was growing old and tired. So SBC
(formerly known as Southwest Bell) bought its own mother and they moved in
together.

Now SBC, which recently stole its mother's name, is also taking in one of its

Looky here, idiot, SBC bought the right to use the AT&T name.


Quote:
sisters. AT&T, based in San Antonio, Tex., has struck a deal to buy BellSouth
for $67-billion (U.S.) in stock.The family tree is starting to look pretty
weird. Borrowing the title of that old Paul Simon song, Democratic congressman
Ed Markey of Massachusetts has already dubbed the merger a "mother and child
reunion."

If you buy that you are an even bigger idiot than I already perceived. Ma
Bell died a long time ago. Ma Bell is no longer a name with substance.


Quote:

That suggests something joyous is going on here. That's not true for all
telecom
customers. At the time of AT&T's breakup in 1984, there were seven Baby Bells.
This deal would leave just three.

This is full circle, a reunion, if you like. But it's driven by pure
economics.
The natural inclination of big companies is to grow ever-larger, becoming as
monopolistic as antitrust regulators will allow.

And with the pro-business Bush administration having remade the face of the
Justice Department and the Federal Communications Commission, the players know
now is the moment to get some of these big mergers approved.

But just what market is AT&T and its siblings trying to control? It isn't so
much about phone services, such as wireless, local or long distance. It's
about
access to the Internet, which is rapidly becoming the common platform for many
of these services.

Verizon and AT&T will control two-thirds of all local phone connections. AT&T
and BellSouth would become a telecom giant with $130-billion a year in sales
and
70 million local phone customers in 22 states. AT&T will also own 100 per cent
of wireless provider Cingular -- the largest cellphone company in the United
States. AT&T and BellSouth now jointly own it.

AT&T chief executive officer Edward Whitacre said the deal would speed up the
public's adoption of next-generation technology, integrating both wireless and
traditional wired networks.

"Together we can do it faster than each company could alone," he said.

Maybe so. The local phone providers envisage a day when they'll be able to
offer
movies, music, TV and long distance -- all via the Internet.

In a status quo environment, the phone companies are little more than
providers
of an increasingly cheap commodity -- broadband access. DSL service, which
once
cost $40 to $50 a month, is now selling for less than $20. Customers can buy
broadband from multiple sources, including cable companies.

The danger of doing nothing is problematic for the likes of AT&T and Verizon.
They can stand idly by and watch others hijack their lines to make money, such
as Apple with its iTunes service or Vonage with its Internet long-distance.

So local phone service is the only monopoly card they have to deal. And they
are
using it as leverage.

Verizon, for example, now requires customers to take local phone service if
they
want its DSL.


You are ignorant of the facts. Verizon's price for DSL is based on it's
using an existing POTS cable pair. If you don't have or want a POTS line,
you will have to pay for a cable pair. If you check the tariffs, you will
probably see that just a cable pair costs about the same as a POTS line.
The reason is that THAT cable pair has no telephone service to help offset
its cost.



Quote:
That is apparently aimed at dissuading users from taking a cheap
DSL deal and then signing up for one of the over-the-Internet phone offerings,
such as Skype or Vonage.

That's just the start. It doesn't take much imagination to see what other
services are coming down the broadband pipe. The phone companies want to
bypass
the cable company monopolies to offer TV. On-demand movies are already
available, but the service is clunky and slow. But as broadband expands, that
too will change. Long distance service is already a reality.

And eventually, much of this will go wireless.

AT&T and Verizon are adopting the strategy that if they're really big,
customers
won't be able to get around them to do all these wonderful things.

And Mr. Whitacre apparently believes that AT&T, not Vonage or Apple, will be
the
one to make money off this plethora of services.


Apple? It is to laugh. At you, that is.


Quote:

And to do that, the company figures it must be really big -- bigger than Ma
Bell
herself.

bmckenna_at_globeandmail.com

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060307.gtibworld07/BNStor
y/Technology/home


You should just put your blogs on you web page so you don't continue to
embarrass yourself.

werdan
Guest

Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:39 am   



"Ken Taylor" <ken123_at_xxxxtra.co.nz> wrote in message news:vmnPf.4633$JZ1.108704_at_news.xtra.co.nz...
Quote:
the other Eric wrote:
Well of course she will be pissed. All this time she has been dreaming
of the day when she can be with Baltar again and when she finally sees
him he will be in bed with her twin sister Gina.


The family tree is starting to look pretty
weird.


Oh Cylons don't care about that sort of thing.

I doubt that.

Procreation is one of God's commandments.

Craig Palme
Guest

Thu Mar 09, 2006 1:02 am   



Good.

"Garrison Hilliard" <garrison_at_efn.org> wrote in message
news:0mtr02tce2afe1lbg5k4cl0v6e8nmbq5h2_at_4ax.com...
Quote:
Ma Bell gets her family back together
BARRIE MCKENNA

Globe and Mail Update

WASHINGTON - Okay, let's get this straight. There once was a Ma Bell. She
was
huge and she owned everything that had anything to do with
telecommunications --
from making black rotary phones to selling local service.

Uncle Sam didn't like that. So he split up Ma Bell, creating a family of
Baby
Bell orphans. You might know them today as Verizon, SBC, Qwest and
BellSouth.

Well, actually ATT, or more importantly Bell Labs was coming up with all

this neet stuff that you take for granted today, but couldn't market it cuz
of the restrictions place on it by the government. SOoooo, they did a study
and it determined that the only way for ATT to survive was to break itself
up. Sooo, the rest is history.

Quote:
AT&T remained the jewel. It had the legendary engineering savvy and a keen
eye
for the next big thing in technology.

But two decades after the breakup, Ma was growing old and tired. So SBC
(formerly known as Southwest Bell) bought its own mother and they moved in
together.

Now SBC, which recently stole its mother's name, is also taking in one of
its
sisters. AT&T, based in San Antonio, Tex., has struck a deal to buy
BellSouth
for $67-billion (U.S.) in stock.The family tree is starting to look pretty
weird. Borrowing the title of that old Paul Simon song, Democratic
congressman
Ed Markey of Massachusetts has already dubbed the merger a "mother and
child
reunion."

That suggests something joyous is going on here. That's not true for all
telecom
customers. At the time of AT&T's breakup in 1984, there were seven Baby
Bells.
This deal would leave just three.

This is full circle, a reunion, if you like. But it's driven by pure
economics.
The natural inclination of big companies is to grow ever-larger, becoming
as
monopolistic as antitrust regulators will allow.

And with the pro-business Bush administration having remade the face of
the
Justice Department and the Federal Communications Commission, the players
know
now is the moment to get some of these big mergers approved.


Yeah no more subsidizes for the second tier phone companies.

Quote:
But just what market is AT&T and its siblings trying to control? It isn't
so
much about phone services, such as wireless, local or long distance. It's
about
access to the Internet, which is rapidly becoming the common platform for
many
of these services.

Verizon and AT&T will control two-thirds of all local phone connections.
AT&T
and BellSouth would become a telecom giant with $130-billion a year in
sales and
70 million local phone customers in 22 states. AT&T will also own 100 per
cent
of wireless provider Cingular -- the largest cellphone company in the
United
States. AT&T and BellSouth now jointly own it.

AT&T chief executive officer Edward Whitacre said the deal would speed up
the
public's adoption of next-generation technology, integrating both wireless
and
traditional wired networks.

"Together we can do it faster than each company could alone," he said.

Maybe so. The local phone providers envisage a day when they'll be able to
offer
movies, music, TV and long distance -- all via the Internet.

In a status quo environment, the phone companies are little more than
providers
of an increasingly cheap commodity -- broadband access. DSL service, which
once
cost $40 to $50 a month, is now selling for less than $20. Customers can
buy
broadband from multiple sources, including cable companies.

The danger of doing nothing is problematic for the likes of AT&T and
Verizon.
They can stand idly by and watch others hijack their lines to make money,
such
as Apple with its iTunes service or Vonage with its Internet
long-distance.

So local phone service is the only monopoly card they have to deal. And
they are
using it as leverage.

Verizon, for example, now requires customers to take local phone service
if they
want its DSL. That is apparently aimed at dissuading users from taking a
cheap
DSL deal and then signing up for one of the over-the-Internet phone
offerings,
such as Skype or Vonage.

That's just the start. It doesn't take much imagination to see what other
services are coming down the broadband pipe. The phone companies want to
bypass
the cable company monopolies to offer TV. On-demand movies are already
available, but the service is clunky and slow. But as broadband expands,
that
too will change. Long distance service is already a reality.

And eventually, much of this will go wireless.

AT&T and Verizon are adopting the strategy that if they're really big,
customers
won't be able to get around them to do all these wonderful things.

And Mr. Whitacre apparently believes that AT&T, not Vonage or Apple, will
be the
one to make money off this plethora of services.

And to do that, the company figures it must be really big -- bigger than
Ma Bell
herself.

bmckenna_at_globeandmail.com

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060307.gtibworld07/BNStory/Technology/home



Guest

Mon Oct 24, 2016 6:24 pm   



On Tuesday, March 7, 2006 at 4:14:57 PM UTC-5, Garrison Hilliard wrote:
Quote:
Ma Bell gets her family back together
BARRIE MCKENNA

Globe and Mail Update

WASHINGTON — Okay, let's get this straight. There once was a Ma Bell. She was
huge and she owned everything that had anything to do with telecommunications --
from making black rotary phones to selling local service.

Uncle Sam didn't like that. So he split up Ma Bell, creating a family of Baby
Bell orphans. You might know them today as Verizon, SBC, Qwest and BellSouth.

AT&T remained the jewel. It had the legendary engineering savvy and a keen eye
for the next big thing in technology.

But two decades after the breakup, Ma was growing old and tired. So SBC
(formerly known as Southwest Bell) bought its own mother and they moved in
together.

Now SBC, which recently stole its mother's name, is also taking in one of its
sisters. AT&T, based in San Antonio, Tex., has struck a deal to buy BellSouth
for $67-billion (U.S.) in stock.The family tree is starting to look pretty
weird. Borrowing the title of that old Paul Simon song, Democratic congressman
Ed Markey of Massachusetts has already dubbed the merger a "mother and child
reunion."

That suggests something joyous is going on here. That's not true for all telecom
customers. At the time of AT&T's breakup in 1984, there were seven Baby Bells.
This deal would leave just three.

This is full circle, a reunion, if you like. But it's driven by pure economics.
The natural inclination of big companies is to grow ever-larger, becoming as
monopolistic as antitrust regulators will allow.

And with the pro-business Bush administration having remade the face of the
Justice Department and the Federal Communications Commission, the players know
now is the moment to get some of these big mergers approved.

But just what market is AT&T and its siblings trying to control? It isn't so
much about phone services, such as wireless, local or long distance. It's about
access to the Internet, which is rapidly becoming the common platform for many
of these services.

Verizon and AT&T will control two-thirds of all local phone connections. AT&T
and BellSouth would become a telecom giant with $130-billion a year in sales and
70 million local phone customers in 22 states. AT&T will also own 100 per cent
of wireless provider Cingular -- the largest cellphone company in the United
States. AT&T and BellSouth now jointly own it.

AT&T chief executive officer Edward Whitacre said the deal would speed up the
public's adoption of next-generation technology, integrating both wireless and
traditional wired networks.

"Together we can do it faster than each company could alone," he said.

Maybe so. The local phone providers envisage a day when they'll be able to offer
movies, music, TV and long distance -- all via the Internet.

In a status quo environment, the phone companies are little more than providers
of an increasingly cheap commodity -- broadband access. DSL service, which once
cost $40 to $50 a month, is now selling for less than $20. Customers can buy
broadband from multiple sources, including cable companies.

The danger of doing nothing is problematic for the likes of AT&T and Verizon.
They can stand idly by and watch others hijack their lines to make money, such
as Apple with its iTunes service or Vonage with its Internet long-distance.

So local phone service is the only monopoly card they have to deal. And they are
using it as leverage.

Verizon, for example, now requires customers to take local phone service if they
want its DSL. That is apparently aimed at dissuading users from taking a cheap
DSL deal and then signing up for one of the over-the-Internet phone offerings,
such as Skype or Vonage.

That's just the start. It doesn't take much imagination to see what other
services are coming down the broadband pipe. The phone companies want to bypass
the cable company monopolies to offer TV. On-demand movies are already
available, but the service is clunky and slow. But as broadband expands, that
too will change. Long distance service is already a reality.

And eventually, much of this will go wireless.

AT&T and Verizon are adopting the strategy that if they're really big, customers
won't be able to get around them to do all these wonderful things.

And Mr. Whitacre apparently believes that AT&T, not Vonage or Apple, will be the
one to make money off this plethora of services.

And to do that, the company figures it must be really big -- bigger than Ma Bell
herself.

bmckenna_at_globeandmail.com

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060307.gtibworld07/BNStory/Technology/home


AT&T To Buy Time Warner And Bring Crappy Cell Coverage To Westeros


Telecom giant AT&T announced that it would buy Time Warner Inc for $85 billion (~ the GDP of Ukraine) to create one of the largest telecom and media companies in the world. AT&T would take over all of Time Warner, including HBO, CNN and Warner Bros. The move is the latest in a series of consolidations and mega-deals: Comcast now owns NBC, Verizon owns Yahoo! and AOL, which includes Tech Crunch and Huffington Post. The deal wasn’t exactly welcomed with open arms, stoking fears of a rising media oligopoly. It even brought Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton together, with Trump saying he would block the deal and both Clinton and Kaine expressing concerns about it.


Timeline: How AT&T Reinvented Itself Over Time

elektroda.net NewsGroups Forum Index - Electronics Others - Ma Bell is coming back and, boy, is sge pissed!

Ask a question - edaboard.com

Arabic versionBulgarian versionCatalan versionCzech versionDanish versionGerman versionGreek versionEnglish versionSpanish versionFinnish versionFrench versionHindi versionCroatian versionIndonesian versionItalian versionHebrew versionJapanese versionKorean versionLithuanian versionLatvian versionDutch versionNorwegian versionPolish versionPortuguese versionRomanian versionRussian versionSlovak versionSlovenian versionSerbian versionSwedish versionTagalog versionUkrainian versionVietnamese versionChinese version
RTV map EDAboard.com map News map EDAboard.eu map EDAboard.de map EDAboard.co.uk map