I can't remember what the codec is as this was in February when i switched over. Take a look over at http://www.dslreports.com/forum/voip.
Phone line charge? Avoidable?
- Thread starter hillsmi
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 65
- Views 9K
The legal way of avoiding the $5.00 charge is by hooking up to a phone line. If there is no phone line in your room, then just buy a Wireless Modem Jack by RCA which works just as well. When you do this, the charge is lifted.
Also, a phone line is used for updates to your system.
Also, a phone line is used for updates to your system.
hall said:
Well I can see how that happens. That is what most people are told. Accuracy has little to do with it.
.A CSR told me that the send out updates via the phone line... said that the system is periodically updated via phone and if I didn't have one hooked up then it would cause my system to stop working. HAHA, I don't think so. The phone line charge sucks for those that are 100% cell. My thought is why do i need a hard-line if I currently never use up my cell minutes.. Sounds like a waste to me.
As far as a lawsuit goes... I would think that someone would take the case based on a class action lawsuit. Class action = huge $$$ for the lawyer. My initial thought is, there may not be much of a case or the class action suit would have already been started.
I am relatively new to this whole dish setup. My thought is the charge is two fold. 1) easier access to PPV means more PPV sales which is highly profitable, 2) Prevents neighbors from sharing service. From my understanding, If you have a RV, you can take your receiver with you (or have an additional receiver) and get service anywhere. If this is the case what keeps someone from having multiple homes (e.g. primary home and lake home) and only paying the $5 extra service charge and have access at both homes. Or the same for friends and neighbors ( I am assuming that this is what is referred to as account stacking). Since the dishes do not upload (send signal out) there is no way for Dish to know its physical location unless its hooked up to a phone line.
A agree with others about big brother. Its a way to track your information. I would not be surprised if they are not collecting information on their customers to target advertisements (commercials) to them. Haha, just wait for that day to come. I guess they could put a gps device in the receivers to track them but I doubt its currently cost effective. One of these days it maybe.
As far as a lawsuit goes... I would think that someone would take the case based on a class action lawsuit. Class action = huge $$$ for the lawyer. My initial thought is, there may not be much of a case or the class action suit would have already been started.
I am relatively new to this whole dish setup. My thought is the charge is two fold. 1) easier access to PPV means more PPV sales which is highly profitable, 2) Prevents neighbors from sharing service. From my understanding, If you have a RV, you can take your receiver with you (or have an additional receiver) and get service anywhere. If this is the case what keeps someone from having multiple homes (e.g. primary home and lake home) and only paying the $5 extra service charge and have access at both homes. Or the same for friends and neighbors ( I am assuming that this is what is referred to as account stacking). Since the dishes do not upload (send signal out) there is no way for Dish to know its physical location unless its hooked up to a phone line.
A agree with others about big brother. Its a way to track your information. I would not be surprised if they are not collecting information on their customers to target advertisements (commercials) to them. Haha, just wait for that day to come. I guess they could put a gps device in the receivers to track them but I doubt its currently cost effective. One of these days it maybe.
Phone lines are not required. The trade-off is the fee.
On the tracking issue...DTV obviously knows what programming each of it's subs it's getting. So that point is moot.
Dish does not require phione lines. Quite often, people with multiple dwellings take areceiver or two with them to their weekend/ vacation homes
IMO if either sat co decided to make it mandatory that seperate account be established for each dwelling, thta deision would cost them customers..How many? who knows..
Yep.. Packet8 doesn't use g711u like other providers do. Switch to another provider that uses g711u like VoicePulse, Vonage, etc, you'll notice a night and day difference in voice quality too.
A few clarifications. Account stacking is any instance where multiple parties are serviced in one dwelling at the same address (family w/ renter) or cases where receivers are in multiple physical locations (vacation home/residence) but all appear on the same account. DISH requires a seperate account for each party utilizing the service (otherwise it's reproduction issue, same as copying DVDs to give to friends, even if you don't "sell" them) and a seperate account for each residence a receiver(s) resides in.
Keep in mind, DISH COULD prosecute if you do any of these things, it's a form of commercial fraud. (But then again so is rebroadcasting PPV boxing matches.) It's more lucrative though to correct the issue by forcing the customer to have multiple accounts. Each account allows a recharge of base programming fees and additional receiver fees, versus just charging an additional $5.00.
Next, some updates are pushed out via phone line (because DISH has decided you do not need to know what does not make the statement any less true.) Not entire software updates, but commands to the receiver, authorization checks, any number of functions can take place via the phone line that would otherwise be inefficient to manage on the satellite uplink. Imagine every CSR sending out commands to receivers and having to funnel that through the satellite. That would bog down the feed, yes? Every activation, every parental lock release, all of it requiring sat bandwidth. It would add up quickly to 13 million customers and probably three times that or more in receiver units.
The reality is if people spent as much time playing by the rules as they do trying to find ways around DISH policies, Charlie might be far more lenient with audits and fee policies. But too many people are trying to take advantage at any given point in time between threatening disconnections (I saw a Usenet article the other night where the CSR transferred and shut off someone who did this. A threat to disconnect is the same as a request to.) insisting on free equipment and misuse of resources (you would think the CEO address would be used for only the worst issues of all, uh, but it's not) I'm not surprised. People don't learn. Charlie learns, he's demonstrated that. And Charlie doesn't like being milked, or being threatened. He's demonstrated that too.
As far as the class action concerns...it's a service. Read the fine print, DISH may do as it sees fit with it's own programming and equipment. All they are required to do is let you know what they're doing, when and sometimes why.
I pay the "penalty" because we have cell phones only. It does suck to have to pay it but thems is the rules.
What Dish really should do is add ethernet ports on the back of their receivers and allow customers to plug into their existing networks at home. Even better would be built in Wireless Network Adapter or a USB port to plug one in to access your existing wireless network. The receivers could then upload and download as much as they would like with greater speed and possibilities and the fee could be waived.
Heck they might even be able to push some programming through a broadband connection, like On Demand stuff, or maybe not but at least it is a thought.
Times have changed, better technology is available and it is time for Dish and Directv to realize that.
What Dish really should do is add ethernet ports on the back of their receivers and allow customers to plug into their existing networks at home. Even better would be built in Wireless Network Adapter or a USB port to plug one in to access your existing wireless network. The receivers could then upload and download as much as they would like with greater speed and possibilities and the fee could be waived.
Heck they might even be able to push some programming through a broadband connection, like On Demand stuff, or maybe not but at least it is a thought.
Times have changed, better technology is available and it is time for Dish and Directv to realize that.
Propaganda !
This paragraph is pure non-science fiction !
Baseless speculation of biased person possibly connected somehow to Dish employment.
This paragraph is pure non-science fiction !
Baseless speculation of biased person possibly connected somehow to Dish employment.
I personally have no issue with having the phone line connected.
We have to have phone service anyway since we have DSL. Basic phone service plus DSL is still cheaper than cable internet.
We have yet to order a PPV. This is why we have Netflix.
We have to have phone service anyway since we have DSL. Basic phone service plus DSL is still cheaper than cable internet.
We have yet to order a PPV. This is why we have Netflix.
This hogwash is tempting me to lock out my receiver by punching in the wrong PIN a few times requiring me to call Dish to unlock it. I will of course disconnect the phone line before calling. Who thinks they'll be able to unlock my receiver ?? I'm confident it will.
Think about this Zero, to do what you suggest would require the receiver to dial in to Dish. Why would it dial in ?? Is my phone going to ring while I'm on the line with the rep and my receiver will answer the call ?? Don't think so.....
Actually, I must retract that part of my post "baseless speculation";
definitely he KNOW or well informed about EMM stream, but falsely insist on mandatory phone line and do misleading thousands members here.
I feel his agenda came from the provider's side.
definitely he KNOW or well informed about EMM stream, but falsely insist on mandatory phone line and do misleading thousands members here.
I feel his agenda came from the provider's side.
