Anonymous_
Anonymous
Premium
join:2004-06-21
127.0.0.1
clubs:
 ·RoadRunner Cable
·Time Warner Cable
 ·Time Warner VOIP
| metered billing means
metered billing means
Public Utilities Commission regulation
heavy government regulation
heavy taxed (per gigabyte) ( two charges like with the power co)
Guaranteed uptime (i get that with the natural GAS /Power/water Co)(THAT MEANS A Fully WORKING DNS SERVER TOO)
NO UPTO on the speed
i do not get UPTO ON natural GAS do i ? |
|
bgraham
join:2001-03-15
Smithtown, NY
 ·Verizon FIOS
| I know everyone is going to scream but
It depends on the pay as you go price. I jumped from a regular cell to a pay as you go package and saved over $20 a month. See, I am not a big user of cell phones.
If pay as you go internet was decently priced I would go with it. If it's just a way to increase prices, then I have no use for it. |
|
morbo
Complete Your Transaction
join:2002-01-22
00000
clubs: | you don't really expect them to lower prices for anyone, do you? |
|
FiOS LIVE
So fast, it's LIVE
join:2008-11-25
Collegeville, PA
| "Bandwidth Apocalypse"? Please...
The only way a so-called "bandwidth apocalypse" would happen is if the demand for bandwidth increases so fast that the already oversubscribed cable nodes slow to a crawl and under the demand. But that's not really a "bandwidth apocalypse" because only the cable companies refusing to upgrade their network to either less crowded nodes or go FTTH will be affected; the same applies to copper milking DSL telco's.
Interesting how those same companies who fear the "bandwidth apocalypse" are the ones who are going to cause it if it does happen.
--
AT&T + Comcast
Your world. Destroyed.
Throttle and put a cap on it. It's Comcastic! |
|
winsyrstrife
River City Bounce
Premium
join:2002-04-30
Brooklyn, NY
clubs:
1 edit | Keep it Up TW
Keep at it TW...when it's all said and done, you'll be the pioneers of having made government step in and turn your !#% and all other ISPs !#&es into dumb pipes.
said by Karl Bode  :Instead of implementing high caps that targeted just the heaviest users, seemingly detached executives stumbled lustfully for the holy grail of broadband pricing: low caps and high overages that intentionally impact all households, designed to deter and/or monetize competing Internet video delivery. LoL, Karl I think that was your high moment when righting this article. Nice creatvity there. 
--
"Suddenly everything is fainting, falling from a broken ladder's rung. There's a jolt exhilarating from the phone I'm holding...
I hear the words of what I'll become, how eager the hands that reach for love." - Blind Melon - New Life |
|
me1212
join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO
·VOIPo
| Why can't they stop lying....
and treat their costumer like they have a brain? We know they only want to do this to get more money out of us and give us MUCH less, there is no proof that the exaflood is real IF they gave up REAL proof that would be different. If they want to meter why NOT make a real PAYG(we know the answer, money) a $50 for 40GB and 5m and $1 per GB over= fail. If the cablecos must insist that metered billing= the future make it a true PAYG ie $10 for 5m and $0.15(just a random # I thought of) for each GB. |
|
averagedude
join:2002-01-30
Mesa, AZ
·Cox HSI
| reply to bgraham
Re: I know everyone is going to scream but
said by bgraham :It depends on the pay as you go price. I jumped from a regular cell to a pay as you go package and saved over $20 a month. See, I am not a big user of cell phones. If pay as you go internet was decently priced I would go with it. If it's just a way to increase prices, then I have no use for it. The opposite of decently is indecent.
The proposed metering pricing was definitely indecent, unseemly, inappropriate, rude, condescending, patronizing, disdainful, and just down right wrong.
Of course no one would have a problem with reasonable pricing, but that is not what they did thus the fuss. |
|
baineschile
2600
Premium
join:2008-05-10
Sterling Heights, MI
·Comcast
·magicjack.com
 ·Verizon Wireless B..
1 edit | reply to Anonymous_
Re: metered billing means
Way off Karl. A 40 Gig cap does not affect ALL households; as most internet users still are way under that threshold.
Until Broadband becomes a utility, we have to deal with a competitive, capitalistic market; which means that if a company want to do caps and overages, thats what we will have to deal with (or go to a different company)
Also, your claim that it was to deter internet video; if that was the case, why would FiOs even bother having TV service if broadband and IPTV is the future? I will give you that no company has supported data that shows they SHOULD have caps; but that doesnt mean the sole reason is to deter competition. |
|
me1212
join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO
·VOIPo
| reply to FiOS LIVE
Re: "Bandwidth Apocalypse"? Please...
"Interesting how those same companies who fear the "bandwidth apocalypse" are the ones who are going to cause it if it does happen."
Yup, if it happens they will cause it so they can get more money. Why does it seem all they care about is their pocket book? Why must they be out to skrew us? Why can they not treat us like what we are, their life blood if it weren't for us they would die.
If they over subed less it would help, network upgrades(comcast will be ALL docsis 3 by the end of next year), ya know the stuff that would make them *gasp* make money just a bit more slowly. Cable vision and FiOS can go with out caps y can't other ISPs? Heck even the WISP I subscribe to has no cap. |
|
Luminaris
join:2005-12-01
Winchester, VA
 ·HughesNet Satellit..
| reply to baineschile
Re: metered billing means
Well, I think what Karl means is, given a household has a 40 Gig cap per say, that cap is still there. Most households, (at least in my area) have smaller kids that will eventually use their internet which means, more of it used. Plus with the amount of video, ads etc. on each page, people don't realize just how much they actually download.
So in essence, yes, it does effect most or all households in a way. |
|
neowulf
join:2000-10-20
Port Orange, FL
| reply to Anonymous_
I also no longer want to pay for banner ads, or any ads for that matter as I would then now be paying for those ads...
Metered billing would turn the internet into a very boring place, think of all the flash sites, or graphics or innovating that would be killed by having to watch how much bandwidth you consume. Heck I am wasting bandwidth right now by being here!
They are trying to tout this as saving the internet, or they talk about it how grandma is subsidizing the heavy users, and that grandma shouldn't have to pay because you watch hulu.
Yet in the end even TWC plan was to charge grandma what she was paying if she just checked her email, but if she downloaded that video of her grand kids she better be ready to pay more then what she was before she was saved by TWC from those heavy users.
So in the end grandma is going to be paying more then she is now, so who exactly are they helping out here? Don't answer that I already know. |
|
banditws6
Shrinking Time and Distance
join:2001-08-18
Naples, FL
·Comcast
| reply to bgraham
Re: I know everyone is going to scream but
Your story makes sense. My wife recently did the same thing. She hardly ever uses her cell phone, but I want her to at least have one because we ditched our landline and I need the ability to communicate with her while I am out. So she got a TracFone. Honestly, it is perfect.
The problem, though, is that in areas where cable companies has moved to metered billing, I don't often see cheaper plans being offered for those who use less. As far as I can tell, the cable companies only seek to set limits on what we already have and charge above and beyond for usage that, today, is acceptable -- and ignore the other side of the equation, which is offering more cost-effective options to people who use less. If people moving insane amounts of data are impacting the network, I think they should be penalized on an individual basis -- since this is likely to impact the network differently depending on the robustness of the plant in each local area.
I mostly see the metered billing argument not as a "get what you pay for" plan, but as a "pay more when you aren't using your connection the way the ISP thinks you should use it" plan. In most cases, the ISP does not have altruistic intentions behind its definition of how you should use its service. It wants to maximize its profits by, for example, having you use their own video-on-demand service instead of watching online.
Case in point: As a consumer, I have decided that the Scientific Atlanta set-top equipment offered by my cable company is horrendous (it would be hard to disagree, I think) and so I purchased a TiVo. My TiVo does not have VoD capability. Instead, I use Netflix instant streaming. To then be penalized on the bandwidth side effectively because the cable company's hardware offering is terrible rubs me the wrong way. I am grateful that my ISP (Comcast) has set a soft cap with a realistic ceiling, so I am not likely to be adversely affected at this time. By comparison, Time Warner's proposed caps bordered on the criminally insane.
While private companies have every right to make moves like this, customers have every right to dislike it and even see it for what it is: a money grab. And ultimately, they have the right to stop doing business with that company -- although therein lies the rub, thanks to the fact that where broadband exists, there are often few (if any) realistic competitive options.
--
"I'll follow the law until it's just stupid." -Ted Nugent |
|
me1212
join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO
·VOIPo
| reply to neowulf
Re: metered billing means
said by neowulf :I also no longer want to pay for banner ads, or any ads for that matter as I would then now be paying for those ads... Metered billing would turn the internet into a very boring place, think of all the flash sites, or graphics or innovating that would be killed by having to watch how much bandwidth you consume. Heck I am wasting bandwidth right now by being here! They are trying to tout this as saving the internet, or they talk about it how grandma is subsidizing the heavy users, and that grandma shouldn't have to pay because you watch hulu. Yet in the end even TWC plan was to charge grandma what she was paying if she just checked her email, but if she downloaded that video of her grand kids she better be ready to pay more then what she was before she was saved by TWC from those heavy users. So in the end grandma is going to be paying more then she is now, so who exactly are they helping out here? Don't answer that I already know. That is one reason I dislike this metered crap so much. If they want metered may it a real PAYG. |
|
beerbum
Premium
join:2000-05-06
Reading, PA
clubs:
2 edits | reply to FiOS LIVE
Re: "Bandwidth Apocalypse"? Please...
The only "Apocalypse" that exists (in their minds) is those alternate delivery methods of TV and video services - and THAT and that alone is what the cable companies want to stop dead in its tracks.
Bandwidth expenses == are a lie
Hardware costs, upgrades and new == are a lie
Running out of bandwidth == a lie
Every excuse given by any cable company officer / executive is a flat out lie to distract everybody from the one thing they fear..
They fear losing their monopoly on video delivery services - it is the only thing that drives them.
I recall one cable executive - from Comcast - his stated goal when the video on demand was deployed - was to put Blockbuster out of business. Guess what, Blockbuster is on the verge of bankruptcy.
The next fight will be over video delivery - and they will do anything to win. |
|
me1212
join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO
·VOIPo
| reply to banditws6
Re: I know everyone is going to scream but
"thanks to the fact that where broadband exists, there are often few (if any) realistic competitive options."
True we NEED more competition and we NEED to get rid of the monopolies/ duopolies and get said competition. Mostly we need content providers to stop masquerading as internet companies and get some real ISPs that care about their costumer. |
|
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
 ·North State Commun..
| reply to baineschile
Re: metered billing means
said by baineschile :Way off Karl. A 40 Gig cap does not affect ALL households; as most internet users still are way under that threshold. Time Warner's caps were as low as 5GB with a $1 per GB in overage charges. They were taking their unlimited tiers and capping them at 5GB, 10GB, 20GB and 40GB. 40GB (until the backlash) was the highest tier they offered - for a whopping $60 a month.
After the backlash they offered to cap overage charges, which means if you pay $150 a month you can have the same product you have right now for $45 or so. They then offered a 1GB tier with a $2 per GB overage. Nice. |
|
Desdinova
join:2003-01-26
Gaithersburg, MD
| Hmmm...
I still don't get how anyone with a brain can buy into the exaflood thing. The ISP's are warning us that the 'net's about to crash and they don't want that to happen, but the only way it COULD happen is if they continue to oversell their networks so it DOES happen. If such a crash were truely imminent they could just say "Sorry, no more room on the 'net" and stop selling access.
The whole exaflood seems to be like a party being held in a loft with a flimsy floor and the guy at the door hosting the party is on the phone with police screaming, "Hey, the building's about to collapse from too much weight so you better send someone over here to make all the partygoers go on a diet." |
|
RadioDoc
58ef2c0
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11 | The NCTA is the RIAA of cable...
...and you're surprised that McSlarrow is not completely honest and forthcoming?
Really?
 |
|
me1212
join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO | reply to beerbum
Re: "Bandwidth Apocalypse"? Please...
"Bandwidth expenses == are a lie"
Yup it costs about 20% less than it did last year. |
|
hayabusa3303
Over 200 mph
Premium
join:2005-06-29
clubs: | here we go again, round how many now?
subject says it all. |
|
