Talk:Naked DSL

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Naked DSL article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Telecommunications Low‑importance

	Telecommunication portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Telecommunications, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Telecommunications on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TelecommunicationsWikipedia:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTemplate:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTelecommunications articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Providers?

We need some comments on who offers it, and why everyone doesn't. I don't know enough about the regulations/options to do it myself :( But if I manage to find out, I'll be back. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.23.223.131 (talk • contribs) 15:05, 14 January 2006

I assume most don't offer it because of the possibility to cut into their profits. Dry loop is a good way to go VoIP, and no Telco want Vonage infringing on their turf. Just my guess, of course. :) True Vox 06:23, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ILEC versus RBOC

I've changed the reference to RBOC to ILEC instead. For the context in which it was used, ILEC seems more appropriate since it is immediately apparent as being the opposite of CLEC. Also, RBOC is a term that is specific to the United States, while ILEC is (at least slightly) more universal. --Miken2005 07:05, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Out of date links

the page linked to is no longer avalible.Pikajedi3 13:46, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

LLU not the same thing?

I dont think LLU is the same as naked DSL —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.36.169.163 (talk • contribs) 14:50, 7 December 2006

Quality of service?

Information about naked DSL of quality of service would be germane. LorenzoB 21:23, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

USA - AT&T's DSL Direct

Rather than try to update the USA section I will add that since the merger of AT&T and BellSouth back in January 2007, AT&T is offering a service called FastAccess DSL Direct not just in Texas if I have my sources right. A trip to the AT&T website has a link down near the bottom that leads to an 800 phone number. Greenbomb101 (talk) 20:19, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not competitively priced?

I had service from Verizon's dry loop for around $23/month. This is to dispute the wiki article item noting that dry loop is not competitively priced and costs more than bundled services. (Despite the low price, I eventually dumped the product because of shoddy customer service.) Cdfield (talk) 14:08, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why?

I'm not entirely clear one why anyone would get Naked DSL over DSL. I think the reason is that with DSL you must also sign up for phone service, but this is not the case with Naked DSL. If someone can confirm that, can we make it more clear in the article? --Daev (talk) 17:54, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you are not forced to pay for a service you don't want. Fabiovh (talk) 07:18, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think another part of it is that the phone service effectively uses some of the bandwidth of the line. A naked line doesn't provide phone service, so its free to use the line to capacity, increasing maximum speeds. 202.173.193.76 (talk) 03:23, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Naked DSL service is also useful where alternatives must pass through a monopolistic corporation that'll throttle competitors. It passes through less local layers then. 66.11.179.30 (talk) 05:14, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On the other hand, I don't understand why anyone would get a non-'naked' DSL. But then again I do live in Finland and land lines are a rarity over here, as are non-'naked' DSL contracts(if they are even available anymore.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.221.149.133 (talk) 16:23, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sources?

Are "Industry sources who wish to remain anonymous" REALLY an appropriate thing to cite? Doesn't that violate WP:VER almost by definition? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.135.32.188 (talk) 21:20, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Singular-plural mismatch “customer” “their” avoidance

Under the heading “Comparison of regular and naked DSL,” is this sentence, copied from the edit screen to preserve wiki text:

Thus the customer will have a dial tone, which allows them to use the telephone line as a regular land line while they are using it to access the Internet on their computer.

There is the singular “customer” and plural pronouns, “them,” “they” and “their.”

Here are my rewrite proposals:

Thus the customer will have a dial tone and can make phone calls over the regular land line and be simultaneously connected by computer to the Internet.

OR:

Thus the customer will have a dial tone, which allows for the use of the telephone line as a regular land line while it is in use to access the Internet with a computer.

The second rewrite more closely resembles the original wording.

These work-arounds may take a little extra thought and effort to make it right, while avoiding the not p.c. “his” and the improper “their.”

I try to avoid the not-politically-correct, but grammatically correct male pronouns for generic singular use, but I refuse to use the plural counterparts with a singular subject, nor will I use the equally abominable “his/her” mishmash. ^[1] Lytzf (talk) 19:14, 21 January 2015 (UTC) [reply]

References

^ Fifth-grade-through-High–school English classes (late 1960’s)

incorrect statement about Verizon

"Verizon stopped permitting Standalone DSL for its own customers in 2014". But they haven't taken mine away yet. (I can well believe they aren't offering it as a new service, and are grandfathering people like me.) —Steve Summit (talk) 17:51, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Naked DSL. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140310134305/http://www.chorus.co.nz/file/42884/Investor-Presentation.pdf to http://www.chorus.co.nz/file/42884/Investor-Presentation.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:12, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Fifth-grade-through-High–school English classes (late 1960’s)

[1]