Talk:Bright House Networks

Please keep your discussion neat!
Also please sign your name!

Bandwidth Throttling/Trafic Shaping?

Bandwidth throttling is a huge issue right now for consumers and a lot of ISPs are doing it by restricting applications and limiting bandwidth for others, such as bittorrent traffic. If anyone has any information on whether Bright House does it or not, it should be posted. My personal experience is that it appears that Bright House may be doing it (in comparison to my use of Comcast and other ISPs), but I don't have solid info. Jamie 20:52, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As a Brighthouse Networks Employee and subscriber I can tell you that we do not participate in Traffic Shaping. Charles 01:08, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Brighthouse might not limit traffic but they have many issues with their service that I believe need to be mentioned. Multiple times a week their internet service will go down. Also, the quality of thier digital tv service is terrible. I have been to many customers houses, and have not seen one decent picture quality on screen (for both SDTVs and HDTVs). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dvferret (talk • contribs) 00:57, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree and believe you may be making a hasty generalization. The quality of all the services is, at the very least, similar to the other major cable/phone/internet provider, in my opinion superior. Not to mention multiple J.D. Power and Associates' Awards and the fact that Bright House Networks provides internet to almost every counties' school system and government in Tampa Bay. Also, weigh the abundant negative press the other major carrier has received in local media, most notably, Tampa Tribune. Charles 07:26, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hate to tell you, but you are wrong. My cousin still has bright house and has many of the issues I had. I switched over too ATT DSL and have had hardly any problems with them. JD Power means nothing. The internet at the schools here (in Orlando)...thats a joke. Problems with it all the time and usually pretty slow. I dont know about thier service in Tampa, but atleast in Orange/Brevard county, its pretty lousy.Dvferret (talk) 17:08, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

While it is possible that your cousin made have had service issues, they were not related to Bandwidth Throttling/Trafic Shaping. Charles 08:54, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I never said they were related to throttling issues. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dvferret (talk • contribs) 01:06, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Bright house.JPG

Image:Bright house.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 16:40, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Updated the logo to reflect current logo. Filled out the required fair use descriptions or new file.HCDean 20:37, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Employee Number

Hi, I see that the ref page says 100 employees, which I think is wrong, I see their fleet of trucks ALL the time, the numbers on their truck's range from 1-450(highest I have seen), how do they have a huge fleet? and 100 employees, we need better research on the employee number. AntiVanMan (talk) 01:50, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I also noticed the Employee number. That is way off. Being an employee in the Bakersfield division (the smallest division) I can tell you there's at least 100 just here. We have Installers, Contractors, Service Techs, PM Techs, Construction, locators, auditors, engineers, ect. This list doesn't even include all the departments in the office which also has its own call center. So yes the 100 definetly needs to be updated.

-Cableguy —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.85.225.224 (talk) 04:33, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Problem is that Yahoo! is reporting "placeholder" information that is probably just pulled out of some financial "bot"'s rear end. This is because Bright House is privately held. If you just do a projection of their number of employees and revenue (another figure that can't be right), based on a pro-rate of Comcast and Time Warner, you'd have to imagine that they have $2.5 billion revenue, $250 million in EBITDA profit, and 8,000 employees. Just educated guesses. But, since this is Wikipedia, nobody will actually change the article here, since it's quoting a "reliable source" and there aren't other verifiable sources to supplant the bot-filled placeholder data. - John Russ Finley (talk) 20:36, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Someone really should do something about these numbers as they are absurd. I tried to replace them both with 'Unknown' but I relizied I would screw up the page if I made the changes. I love Johns 'reliable source' quote above. I assume this means that if a 'reliable source' says the moon is made from green cheese, then from henceforth in the Wikipedia world it is made of green cheese. And the PTB wonder why Wikipedia has a credibility problem. 67.9.37.187 (talk) 11:47, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

News service discontinued

On Monday, June 23, 2008, Bright House discontinued their newsgroup service. Worth a mention? 72.189.248.245 (talk) 15:15, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not really because they had been using newshosting for a while anyway. On June the 23 their use of newshosting just became a lot more explicit. 97.96.59.27 (talk) 23:32, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

News service clarification

To clarify this issue, Bright House Networks continues to provide their Road Runner customers with newsgroup access at no additional charge through Newshosting.com right here http://www.newshosting.com/bhn-en/. 70.126.196.118 (talk) 23:03, 30 October 2008 (UTC)BHN Insider[reply]

FSFlorida

Fox Sports Network should be included in Bright House's carriage controversy because they refused to air the channel causing Fox to remove the channel from most Cable providers in Orlando since they are the biggest Cable provider in Orlando. I think this should be included in the carriage controversy too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Darkquest21 (talk • contribs) 04:52, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Add it and provide source(s). Dvferret (talk) 16:57, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Another carriage dispute in the making- with the News Corporation networks/stations

well Bright House Networks and Time Warner Cable seems to be facing a possible carriage disputer with the News Corporation owned cable networks and TV stations. this will start on January 1, 2010. in fact Fox has started a campaign to demand there viewers to make Time Warner Cable & Bright House Networks not pull the News Corporation Cable channels and FOX and MyNetworkTV O&O Stations off of Time Warner Cable and Bright House Networks. in fact here's that site: http://www.keepfoxon.com--Boutitbenza 69 9 (talk) 21:22, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

More sources: Orlando Sentinel post Jerr (talk) 00:03, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This happens to all carriers all the time. It does not seem encyclopedic. If you surf to http://www.keepfoxon.com its geared towards Cablevision subscribers. The idea is to scare consumers into calling their provider when the provider is trying to negotiate lower prices on behalf of the subscriber. In other words, Fox wants more money and in the end subscribers will have to pay for any increases. Charles 04:18, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]