Talk:Ygnition

message: there was a number of factually incorrect statements on the page that I just removed or updated, and some of your comments below are also incorrect.
First, "they use T1's to bundle cable service from various sources including Direct TV, SBC abd others which in turn eats up 1/3 of the bandwidth" - this is not true. Ygnition for the most part purchases cable content via Echostar/DiSH networks however it's delivered to apartment communities via satellite - not over any circuits coming into the property.
Second, there's a lot of comments about a single T1 being used. Ygnition has very few locations with a single T1 - most have at least 2, some have up to 8, and some locations even have DS3's, OC3's, and 100M ethernet via fiber.
Also, there was a revenue section on the page that I removed - it's wildly inaccurate and assumes every single unit at locations with service available take internet, and take it at full price. While all providers would love to see 100% take rates, this never happens.
Lastly, in comments below - there's no such thing as an OC1 - OC3 is the lowest product available. And the comments about Tut, DOCSIS, etc. - those are end user service delivery - different from the telecom circuits used to bring bandwidth to a property. Ygnition normally uses cable modems to provide data service, but at data-only locations most of the time Tut Systems equipment is used. A handful of locations use ethernet.
no discussion? just deletion? having read articles about other broadband companies I think at least the undisputabe facts should survive. I.e. the difference between actual broadband cable and a 100+ LAN users on a T1. The same individual that blanked this added a link to a Business/investment "advice" article that is favorable to the company. I have left it out of balance, while restoring blanked content. Until an oficial decision I'd appreciate a read and revise rather than outright "blank it" censure. That just smells bad...
I'm not marketing for any competitor, and just explaining how a local LAN network is different from a individual Broadband connection.
:The deletion proposal will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Ygnition. I would encourage you to make your case for retaining the article there, as well as looking at the original research policy and WP:CORP guideline linked in the deletion proposal. --Celithemis 01:02, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  From what I've read about Ygnition, you seem to have a narrow understanding of the company based on your personal experiences. The news item I added to the page indicates that they have a wider array of service profiles than you indicate in the article. None of the sections that I'd tagged requesting a source () have been properly sourced, except for a few items relating to Ygnition's terms of service. OhNoitsJamie Talk 02:08, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: For anyone who doubts the basis of this
http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,11513177Dragongrey 03:43, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  for anyone who doubts there are others... 

message: As an individual who was at one time intimately familiar with Ygnition's inner workings, I have a few items to expand on.
While the basis of their infrastructure for individual properties is the T1 line, and some have single line, some depending on average use, have multiple T1s, up to 5 or 6 T1s. Some larger properties have dedicated T3 lines or OC1.
:The article you posted is part right about them buying up local contracts, but if you read closely to what they provide, they use T1's to bundle cable service from various sources including Direct TV, SBC abd others which in turn eats up 1/3 of the bandwidth on what they sell as broadband cable internet access. You've got to read between the lines.:
The impression that their TV service will impact their usable internet bandwidth would be true if such content was streamed over the T1. The fact is that this content is recieved via satillite directly at the property, often using the property's existing infrastructure and then distributed using a cable head-end. In this way its identicle to any cable provider, except instead of a few regional or city wide head-ends, there is one per property. Information is distributed on the different frequencies allowed on the cable system, some of which are used for television, some for cable internet. Because of this, total bandwidth is not affected by cable television. Ygntion uses DOCSIS like many cable providers, which has an available bandwidth much greater than the T1 Line feeding the property.
Connection exclusivity is not restricted to Ygnition in all areas. Nor is Ygnition the only ISP to block out competition to apartment complexes. Additionally, in most areas where Comcast is the cable internet provider, no other provider of cable internet is generally available.
P2P policy is done on a case my case basis, because of the individuality of every property. Specifically, upstream traffic and seeding is targeted if it is adversly affecting performance as these are the easiest to spot.
Comments on Quality of Service may be true, but are ultimately subjective.
Brainproxy 15:47, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  T1, but that's not the end of the story. 

message: The first paragraph states "Ygnition uses a T1(1.544mbps) to provide service to 1-100+ subscribers onsite over LAN networked apartments interconnected through cable modems." This is not correct. Ygnition uses one of three types of connections. The oldest technology uses equipment from Tut Systems to jump into the existing phone lines. These users receive a Tut Modem, and the customer leg functions similar to DSL over their phone lines. The second type is a direct cat5 connection in complexes that are pre-wired with cat5. Finally, the newest type is the "Cable Internet". On properties where Ygnition is the Cable TV Provider, the T1(s) will be fed onto the cable lines as stated above, and is fully DOCSIS compliant.
:Ygnition also has properties that use DSL technology DSLAM --Brainproxy 15:51, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Errors in Technology Description 

message: I'm removing the entire criticism block, edit here . In reviewing this material, this is standard policy for all ISPs and is not anything unique or notable to this carrier. This seems written by a disgruntled user of the service. There was also a stagnant neutrality tag made over a year ago that was never touched on or explored. Rurik (talk) 16:40, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticisms