6 posts • joined Sunday 15th April 2007 02:52 GMT
yeah - right - not....
any major revamp to Government systems has ALWAYS caused chaos/delays/cost over-runs so do we really expect this to be any different?
DVLC and Passports last time are a prime example.
It's no good even having a "penalty clause" built in so the preferred company has to make things right, they will just go bust on Monday and re-open under a different trading name Tuesday, good ol' taxpayer will pick up the difference.....
The money spent on a Nextel Cup Car team probably rivals that of Formula 1, so no - not a poor man's sport....
NASCAR should have no say as to a team's sponsorship logo (unless it is illegal or immoral).
NEXTEL need to rethink their stance (as no doubt they are behind the suit) - it makes them look petty.
techno's are always losers
I gave up long ago chasing the best cpu, graphics card, mboard etc. They never increased my experience of the time/availability of software optimised for it.
The standards body needs to get off it's behind sooner and ratify "something", otherwise we fall into the same thing as vhs and betamax. Betamax was superiour, but vhs had blasted the market by the time they made a decision.It was forced upon them.
Early adopters always take a risk, but...........
Why did it take Verizon so long to invoke patent privalages? Could it be they wanted Vonage to grow so they could recoup money on a concept patent?
Are Verizon doing anything with their Voip patents in terms of providing the service at a reduced price to the consumer? Not that I am aware of.
Are Verizon targeting other new Voip companies who are presumably infringing the same patents? Don't seem to be able to find info on that either, but then they are start-up companies and have no viable income yet.....
IMO, the courts need to look at the fact that if the patent holder does not develop and release a product based on the concept, they don't have a right to try and drive into the ground a company that ran with their concept, especially where that is years after they started.
consumers pay again...
One has to wonder why Verizon took so long to bring the case against Vonage. Should it be acceptable for a company to come up with a base concept, then do nothing with it and only complain when they feel there might be a nice earner in it for their bottom line?
The loser in this case is going to be the consumer once again. If the case is lost, no doubt Vonage will have to increase prices or go out of business. What happens with the new VOIP players who are undercutting/matching Vonage prices?
Without realistic competition, phone and cable companies will continue to charge what they feel like.
An example: - Charter offer on TV a combined phone/cable/internet package for $120. If you go into their office or listen to the radio then the same offer is only $90. That is a $360 SAVING on a 1 year OFFER !!!!!
Guess it pays to listen to radio rather than the higher priced tv advert......
Whilst not an ideal anology (because of size), OFCOM in the UK at least regulate BT's charges and have forced them to open up their networks to other providers...perhaps the US needs to look at this in the interest of the consumer.
As a Brit I'm sorry we inflicted this on you.
I agree though, the winner is pre defined. The phone in nos just allow a recoup of money.
PLEASE stop watching this drivel, if it gets bad viewing figures then the network will drop it....
Oh, but then you watch days of basketball/baseball which are also useless but non-sport people have to put up with that as well.
Conclusion: Yanks are useless at sticking up for themselves.