Clearwire Sued Over Throttling Practices > Their own fault..

Their own fault..

but didn't you know, that wireless broadband is the future?

Sorry, I will take a wireline any day of the week over a wireless connection. I only use wireless when I'm on the go.

At home, I expect a certain level of performance.

On the go, I know I'm on a wireless line, and do not fully use the connection as I would at home, knowing there are limitations to such a connection.

I even mind my net manners when I'm at a hotel.

And yes, I do believe Clear has brought this on itself, as their marketing is giving you the impression that this wireless connection is just as good as a top tier cable or fiber connection (funny on the fiber, I know).

reply to ArrayList
Mobile wireless access to the Internet will be the focus for the next several years and will be where significant portions of capital are invested. However, fixed wireless is not a replacement for wired connections except for difficult/remote locations.

reply to JasonOD

Re: Their own fault..

WTF people actually traded wired broadband for an air card?
I could see someone trading their 5gb capped air card for an uncapped air card but this is insane

Not necessarily swapping for an air card. Clear sells stuff like this:

»www.clear.com/devices/details/id/53

I actually have that modem myself, and use it for backup connectivity for my Comcast cable connection. It doesn't get used very often, but it's priceless when I need it.

reply to openbox9
sorry. lol /sarcasm

I assumed it was sarcasm, but I wanted to distinguish between fixed and mobile. Many people tend to lump all wireless together.

reply to openbox9
Problem is, this company attempts to establish its product as "in line" with wired connections. It even goes so far as to differentiate its "mobile" broadband connection coverage area and its ISP operations area (ie. I plugged in my address. It said I didn't qualify for it's residential ISP router & service, but their mobile 3G/4G hotspot product was A-OK).

I'm all for cellular wireless companies imposing boundaries on their service. However, if you're explicitly competing against offerings of DSL & cable, then your advertised product should actually match up.

reply to JasonOD
I agree that random, roving throttle policies are deceptive. I work for a fixed-location WISP. I feel that if any ISP has a throttle policy or metered over-usage policy then that policy should be applied to all nodes of the network and be clearly stated in the ISP's AUP.

That said, I also don't feel that caps and metered-usage can be directly blamed on the ISP. What we are dealing with right now is that all sorts of content providers (Netflix for instance) are selling their services to our customers and telling them that if the video delivery is substandard then those customers should contact us. That is wrong.

My company is comprised of cable TV veterans. In that model, when a cable network wants to be carried on a cable system a relationship is formed. The network wants to be carried because their advertising will reach more consumers and the cable company wants to carry the cable network to enhance their service offerings which brings more revenue. The typical deal is that that the cable company bills the customers and pays a percentage per subscriber to the cable network and in return gets time for local advertising spots, allowing the cable company to pursue other revenue options.

In the case of Internet content providers, they feel free to jump over the ISP and directly market to consumers and then blame the ISP if they don't have the infrastructure to deliver the service properly. In this case the ISP network must be upgraded to handle the demand; but that has to be payed for somehow. So, since there is no relationship with the third-party content providers, the customer suffers because the ISP can't handle the cost.

Anyway, I know this is a long-winded reply but I hope it helps clarify what IPS are going through right now.

ISPs just need to learn to do math. Previously they banked on average usage just being a few hours of email, websurfing, chat and the occasional video.

What they didn't count on is customers actually using the advertised speeds for 4-5 hours per night to watch TV/movies.

What they need to do is remove "unlimited" packages. Just like voice cell phone services, they need to educate users as to how much they need and sell different tiered usages to customers. The customers then pay for what they need.

Just want web, email, and occasional video? Get the $30 package. Want to watch 4-5 hours of TV/movies per day (and if you have multiple people in the home that is only going to multiply)? Then you need to pay an extra $10 per some GB a month. Shoot, even let people "trail" the service for the $30/month rate to see what their average bandwidth usage is.

Then the market will compete and get the price down as much as they can afford to, and customers will shuffle to where the ISPs can handle them. Things will take a bit to settle out, and as things continue to consume more bandwidth and networks are built out things will continue to self-adjust.

When I can hit my "unlimited" cap in 10 days, something is broken. Another part of the brokenness is that I cannot see my usage on most ISPs that practice this. They need more useful information available.

One thing I'd like to see is more decentralization of the internet and tier 2/3 localized providers that peer directly with each other and keep the traffic local (therefore cheaper).

Further, ISPs need to engage large streaming services to allow them to have rack space at their regional POPs to lighten the load of traffic on their backbones.

It's only going to get worse as more and more content is available online. Once all the major sports are streamed, all the guys at my office will switch off their dish/cable.

reply to JasonOD
I'd modify it by saying it's their fault for selling their wireless service as identical to wireline.

If this were WiMax 2 it wouldn't present the same problem at all, and once their network is upgraded to WiMax 2 (Since it is a software upgrade) it'll go a lot better for them.

What it comes down to is they were disingenuous with customers when they laid out expectations and customers are getting to the point where they're aware they don't have to take that.

reply to ArrayList
I hope you're right all the Canadians are begging for wireless from America. So far satellite internet from America for Canadians is garbage but at least it's far cheaper in price than broadband (wired) in Canada.