What is Digg?125 Comments
- Wailord, on 10/11/2007, -0/+98http://www.freepress.net/ownership/att_history.jpg
Direct link to the JPEG. - Menso, on 10/11/2007, -1/+45I doubt it will be broken up this time around.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -1/+38Because all the good bells went to Qwest, Verizon, and Taco.
- FoxFaction, on 10/11/2007, -5/+40It's like T-1000 in Terminator 2.
- Binzokun, on 10/11/2007, -0/+31http://colbertondemand.com/videos/The_Colbert_Report/The_new_ATandT
if you want the video version - MeMongo, on 10/11/2007, -0/+26and they are worried aboutthe XM-Sirius merger?
- strangerzero, on 10/11/2007, -0/+16Qwest will be the next.
- Fartag, on 10/11/2007, -3/+19Hey where's AT&T's merger with the NSA? If they route your traffic straight through it then it should be in that diagram there somewhere.
http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2006/04/70619
http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/att/faq.php - pintomp3, on 10/11/2007, -1/+17not until the government stops giving corporations more rights than humans.
- XStatic, on 10/11/2007, -0/+14Some errors...
BellSouth, like Ameritech was created as a holding company. The graphic should show South Central Bell and Southern Bell with a similar layout to the Ameritech-Michigan/Ohio/etc. The Holding company consolidated one year earlier than Ameritech and began doing business as BellSouth in 1992.
Bell Atlantic was created at the breakup and later bought Nynex.It was a holding company that did business as:
The Bell Telephone Company of Pennsylvania
New Jersey Bell Telephone Company
The Diamond State Telephone Company
The Chesapeake and Potomac Telephone Company
The Chesapeake and Potomac Telephone Company of Maryland
The Chesapeake and Potomac Telephone Company of Virginia
The Chesapeake and Potomac Telephone Company of West Virginia
Much more to add! - b3mus3d, on 10/11/2007, -0/+14see http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2004785759717366066 for this comment delivered in a more amusing manner.
- TrueXtremeIcon, on 10/11/2007, -1/+14Except AMD and Intel don't collude with each other and plan out behind closed doors what markets each is going to occupy and not interfere with the business practices of the other. Two companies working together against consumers is the same as one company controlling everything.
- StickyBits, on 10/11/2007, -2/+14I've been looking for a telephone company diagram like this for a while now.
- goyney, on 10/11/2007, -1/+13If AT&T has so many smaller bells merged into what it is presently, how come AT&T sucks?
- egrumling, on 10/11/2007, -0/+9The jester is the only one who can tell the truth to the king (or the truthyness).
- jerbaker, on 10/11/2007, -4/+12But hey, deregulation is best, right?
- JMDupont, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8Or a Verizon customer.
- Durrok, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7Yes but I can go and get an AMD or Intel ordered and shipped to me anywhere in the US. If my ONLY OPTION for phone/internet/cellular service is AT&T or Verizon, how much competition is that really? Also, have you looked at cell phone plans in the US recently? At least in my area Verizon was the most expensive. Sprint and AT&T just raised their rates to match Verizon's AND are offering less features with this raised price. Hm, I'm sure that didn't have anything to do with their being less competition.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -4/+10Comcast is definitely next!
- Scheissen, on 10/11/2007, -4/+10Why do you people continue to digg stupid comments like this?
- dhbanes, on 10/11/2007, -3/+8so?
- eridius, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5cum 1 |koŏm; kəm|
preposition [usu. in combination ]
combined with; also used as (used to describe things with a dual nature or function) : a study-cum-bedroom.
ORIGIN late 19th cent. : Latin. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4yes, coincidence.
- jerbaker, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4"it has resulted in cheaper phone service, more services and upgrades to infrastructure. No more paying $5.00 to $10.00/month to rent a phone."
Be patient. Give AT&T time. Why do you think they oppose 'Net Neutrality. Are you ready to pay your Internet tax to AT&T today? - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5So is the Daily Show...yet it has won the Peabody Award 3 times...2 times consecutively. You know, the Peabody Awards:
"The Peabody Awards are generally regarded as the most prestigious awards honoring distinction and achievement within the fields of broadcast journalism, documentary making, educational programming, children's programming, and entertainment."
So, your point is? - toby34a, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Next- the "new" at&t buys Qwest. Left now only with Verizon and at&t. Verizon will control the NE US, at&t everything else. They will collude on everything, and then merge in another few years. FCC does nothing.
- AuroraAlpha, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Nah, they will consume Verizon because they will have to leave at least one company for 'competition'. Since Verizon is currently larger it will be more worthwhile to consume them and then slowly destroy Q-west using its economies of scale.
- penguinofhonor, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4Two things: they forgot Cincinnati bell. That's my cell phone company and I'm pretty sure it's related. And Ma Bell sounds like the line from the Beatles song "Michelle". It goes "Michelle, ma belle, these are words that go together well, my Michelle." Coincidence?
- Sucat, on 10/11/2007, -3/+6Who cares? When MA Bell was everything they controlled communication lines. Now we have faxes, paper, email, cell phones, etc. Also Ma Bell isn't back but split into a few big companies that fight like mad for your dollars. Even a duopoly can provide great competition like Intel/AMD does.
- FatShady, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5So, I'm just curious. How much of the American taxpayer's money did the government trustbusters waste to split up Ma Bell only to allow them to congeal back into one entity? Was it worth it?
- tech42er, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Competition increases efficiency. There's only one government.
- tech42er, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4That's why AT&T sucks. They have no little competition, and therefore little incentive to improve efficiency.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3@FoxFaction: Carlos, is that you? [See above link from b3mus3d]
- BevansDesign, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3I think it's been a few months, actually.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -3/+6They had to do it before this Presidential Administration was over
- ricksite, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3And they don't control the communication lines now? Faxes, email and cell phones all go over the telco lines. Electronic communication is pretty much owned by a few large telcos. Smaller companies just lease space from the larger ones.
- radio1mike, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Uhh. Yeh. Pretty much. It may be confusing, but it has resulted in cheaper phone service, more services and upgrades to infrastructure. No more paying $5.00 to $10.00/month to rent a phone.
The cons are spotty service records and shifty deals and contracts. I remember being a kid and whenever my parents had issues with the phone Ma Bell dealt with them immediately on the phone, or sent a service guy out the same or next business day.
The only people who come close to that particular record are cable, and even they usually are in 72 to 96 hour range. - egrumling, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3You answered your own question. The only thing AT&T was ever good at was finding the right ad agency.
Who could forget such innovations as "Reach out and touch someone" or "You Will... and company that will bring it to you is AT&T." Brilliant.
When AT&T tried to be innovative we got ISDN (it still does nothing!), ATM (useful in a way, but smacks of committee thinking), TrueVoice (compression technology that killed fax machine signals and didn't make sound quality any better). Hell, the only reason they got rid of in band signaling was because of Woz's Blue Boxes.
That, and 25 cent long distance. - yeshuadoom, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Why do some people still call Qwest, Q-west? It's not like US West at all... It's Qwest as in Quest.
- ChromaVita, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Really? Mine's a kitty hanging from a tree. Hang in there little buddy!
- gerryk, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2That's no moon...
- tech42er, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2And their demise brought cell phones, fax machines, and the Internet.
- gregmo, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3I'm almost angry at SBC turning into AT&T simply because the SBC logo was something to behold. Not only did they make it appear as an infinity sign, but also as an SBc galaxy. Someone was thinking on that one - perhaps not that hard, but it was still really cool.
- mcbigham, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Bell Labs was also part of AT&T. They did more than give us ISDN.
http://www.ospmag.com/issues/article/?articleid=00000515 - NCSUGavin, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4http://www.freepress.net/content/atthistory
better "image" you can actually zoom and pan on this one - gerryk, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2digg me down for duping
- tech42er, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2What? The whole point of stock is that it gives you a little bit of control.
- catalysis, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2It will destroy planets?
- nintendomaniac, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2http://freepress.net/ownership/att_history.swf
Or you can link directly to the SWF so that you're not viewing inside that small box - Error601, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2I don't see that as possible. It's nothing like it was during the original breakup. The telephone was the only communication device in the house and even the handset was owned by the phone company.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 124 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 