This is in response to Tata Teleservices “executive” commenting on my blog on the previous post.

Dear Ms Sangeeta,

Thanks for not “influencing” my thoughts.

I understand that you work for the company that is part of the established oligopoly. I do accept your offer to show me a “demo” which in the real world conditions has no relevance per se.

A one time “burst” of speed or “lightening” fast downloads has no meaning unless your product throws up a consistent performance in real time. I should be aware of the customer service as well as the time taken for any complaint resolution. You should back it up with a responsive team to address the billing issues that may arise during the course of usage.

I find no indication that your Photon Plus would work on my Ubuntu Desktop since I don’t use Windows platform. Even if I have to get a demo, I have no clue whether it would work or not. Your company doesn’t bother to address the Linux users and I couldn’t find any information about the drivers that might be needed to “dial” in your network.

The average user has experienced speeds ranging from 3-70 kbps which is slower than a dial up. While this may depend on “various factors”, I don’t have reason to contest this claim. Reason is that it’s easier for you to claim the “network conditions” and if any one is signing up for the contract, then he/she is at your mercy.

The pre sales is usually very strong with a huge amount of advertisements and tall claims. The after sales, usually, drops to zilch. Nada. There is a resounding and deafening silence.

Interestingly, you chose to leave a comment; you should have emailed me your concern. But then, on a public forum, your company becomes the object of ridicule.

Last but not the least. What is the meaning of “fair usage policy” for “unlimited downloads”. Where the F*** has it come from? What is the meaning of unlimited downloads? If your company is charging a customer for the same, it is at the customers discretion to use the way he/she deems fit. If you feel that your network is liable to be “abused”, why not stick on to metered net access alone?

It is the “considered” decision of almost all the ISP’s to stick on to “fair usage” policies which flies in the face of fair access. Tomorrow, you would be happy to police the Internet to snoop on the websites a customer wishes, all in the name of state security! What gives you the moral right?

The spectrum is public property and you are just adding value to it. You don’t effectively own the spectrum in the sense that till the time your licensce expires, you are most welcome to make profits resulting thereof.

You too are most welcome to your opinion, hence.

Just like Reliance Netconnect, you must exercise extreme caution before you sign up for Tata. I am wary of their claims ever since a certain guy fought the company in the media. It is probably run by the same bunch of people who were behind the Tata’s wireline debacle.

I do fail to understand as to how the wireless would address the “broadband” issues for this country. I am not sure about the latency periods or the ping times and whether or not adding more subscribers would strech this service. But keeping high initial costs means that the early bunch of adopters would be subsidising for the people signing up later.

I find this idea stupid, so as to say, because the morons are trying to cash on in the desperation of the early few in order to milk their set up costs. But, as I understand, the incremental cost of setting up new infrastructure would be minimal in case they have to “re-jig” their existing towers. Plus, these companies should be able to get the brand new equipment over comfortable cost without adding much to the overheads by long term negotiations.

I wouldn’t be surprised if the useless Chinese crap gets a back door entry in the country.

Tatas are not known for their exemplary workmanship nor customer care. I feel that it is the “mill mentality” which pervades; their steel plant would get customers anyway. It is the take it or leave it attitude that pervades and till the time they are hauled over the coals by squeezing their balls black and blue, I doubt whether anyone would be constrained to deliver.

They make the worst Indian cars and trucks; Tata tea addresses majorly the lower end of the market with their “pataka chai” and Tata Indicom needed Virgin mobile because their claims have been deflowered by the prevailing situation. I don’t trust their claims verbatim because there is nothing in black and white in their account books or independent verification for their tall claims about the network superiority.

Photon plus remains another empty promise with awkward tariff plans. Beware, as usual!

There has been a flurry of activity in the blogosphere and a lot of people have bandied together to protest against the assinine policy of Airtel which seeks to limit our choice and control the access to Internet. Screwheads have totally lost out any imagination to spur the Internet access and in this day and age of recession, see no merit in upgrading the existing infrastructure.

Hence, they have bandied together to implement their “fair usage policy”.

Surprisingly and happily, it has found a mention in the mainstream media. Mint has taken up the cudgels on behalf of the existing customers and I truly laud their efforts.

There is no other way except to show a middle finger to the likes of Tatas (are they not always on the wrong end of the stick?), Airtel boffins (why are you screwing up a fantastic service) and Sify (the original buggers who have bastardised the broadband access in India). There are other smaller players who source their bandwidth (in effect work as re-sellers) and would be glad to limit the access accordingly.

Surprisingly, Internet and Mobile Association of India ( a bealagured body that is a rag tag association of the service providers) has spoken out against it’s members. It’s president (or whoever the self proclaimed titular head) has gone on record to say,

“If the service is provided under ‘broadband’ to the customers when they signed in, it cannot be reduced to 128 (kbps) since the government of India definition of broadband is minimum 256 (kbps). This is a violation of government policy as well as short-changing customers if they had signed in for a broadband service.”

Violation of government policy? Really? Which one dude?

For all practical purposes, I request the readers to sign up the petition to protest against the restrictive access. It can be found here.

We are already having a pathetic state of affairs. The frigging morons expect the users to broadband to check email alone. Thats the state of majority of the users.

Who has given them the right to limit our access? Beats me.