said by latez :

---

But I'am not impartial.. I'am not your typical web surfer, I depend on my cable modem for heavy usage.. and before you jump on the YOUR A P2P USER ARENT YOU argument with me, I dont use p2p at all.. But maintaining a Citrix connection to work for weeks at a time is pretty bandwidth consuming.. Maintaining several hundred websites is pretty bandwidth consuming... Enjoying a video webcast of paul van dyk's last set at the Soundgarden while uploading my newest mix to my website is pretty bandwidth consuming also.. for someone to suggest to me that its wrong for me to pay a flat fee is ludacris.. and what of him supposedly running an isp to post that its better that we pay per usage.. you think he's being totally impartial here?

---

said by latez :

---

---

Listen do me a favor... before you act like a pretencious know it all waste that you are try and consider the users on this board who I wouldnt neccessarily call light bandwidth users and what kind of prices they would be paying if the broadband industry suddenly decided to go in the backwards direction and start asking for metered fee's... BUY yourself a clue. then stop with your annoying rants.

---

Did you EVER see ISP's charging by the byte? DUH!, NO! You never saw ISP's charging by the byte. Had ISP's had the comptence in the beginning (most are only now LEARNING how to do this) that is what you would have seen from the beginning.

---

That kind of attitude is what stunted the growth of the internet in the first place, universal access should be just that universal access, flat fee pricing is a wonderful thing. While your neighbor may go online strictly for checking his e-mail and grabbing the latest recipe, you may go one for hours watching music video's and downloading the latest matrix trailer, no one prevents your neighbor for using his bandwidth he just doesnt have a use for it, if he didnt need that sort of bandwidth in the first place he should have stuck with dialup and not be paying the 40 or 50 bucks a month he's paying now, no one twisted his arm, but since he decided to contribute to a DSL system he's also helping pay for the rest of the services that the ISP is providing, there isnt anything unfair about that.

---

AS AN ISP, a long term ISP... My thinking was ALWAYS that charging by the minute of connection time, or the byte of data was the MOST fair type of billing. When I set up my first personal ISP, I set up billing in that manner. If someone only connected to me for ten minutes of an evening, why should I bill them the same amount as the idiot with a redialer? It worked, actually it worked so well that my nearest competitor cracked my system and modified my billing software, not once but twice... While he had ALL his customers paying $23.95 per month for dialup, some of mine paid about $7.00 per month, others paid as much as $20.00 per month. BUT, EVERYONE PAID FOR THE SYSTEM RESOURCES THEY USED... It was fair.

---

Your thinking is flawed. With broadband pricing per byte is going to be a disaster. Why should we all have to switch to by the byte billing when we have unlimited right now? Who is it exactly thats complaining about this sort of pricing scheme? The ISP? well then dont offer services at all, i promise you that if/when cable starts to switch to a by the byte pricing scheme DSL will become the clear winner of the broadband war. The same can be seen with alot of things, unlimited is king. I live in NYC and I am forced to take the train quote often so every month I buy an unlimited monthly metro card, though I may not use it to its fullest potential all the time it still makes sense for me to get it because I can when I want too. People like having the option of unlimited use, give the option to the user and ask them how they would feel.. I am real glad that I was never a subscriber to your isp. When you start charging each user by the time they are connected or how much they've been using it, they're usage of the internet drops therefor certain daily activities that they would usually do like spend hours looking through amazon catalogs of music or buy.com's electronics would most likely be curtailed for fear of a larger bill.. I can see alot of things that metered broadband usage billing would curtail.

---

Well, whatever... I was ahead of my time. This *ABSOLUTELY WILL* eventually come to everyone because of market pressures. If I (as an ISP) want market share, and I want to extract from my existing system maximum profit, I am going to set up such a system. Why? Well because the other guy is going to do it if I don't, and if I do it first, he will do it after I do so he can stay in business.

---

Ahead of your time? You mean you where trapped in a timewarp... the first usage of the internet was metered.. when we where all zipping around on our 9600 baud rate modems, and eventually one smart man came up with a flat fee unmetered usage. And NO this WONT eventually happen simply because of options. If my cable provider OOL decides to start charging me on a metered scale then I will simply switch to verizon dsl or some other dsl provider who wont charge me those kind of rates, and if you believe that DSL will switch over to metered usage its hard for me to believe that every DSL provider in new york will switch over to that. What market pressures..?? where is this push to switch to metered usage.. this is a AU and UK thing, apparently they enjoy limited their citizen's access to the internet.

---

Honestly there are people who should be sold DLS at $5.00 per month, and there are others who should have to pay $50.00 per month for dialup.

---

Its just fine the way it is now If you want to pay 5.00$ for your internet connection go grab a real cheap dialup.. i think 5.00 is a little low but i've seen some for 7 bucks somewhere.. Whats the point of a broadband provider to wire you up when they're going to be making 5.00$ off of you? just stick with dialup, when your internet usage becomes so dire as to need DSL then anti up and pay the 50 bucks and quit WHINING.

---

It isn't so much how fast your connection is as it is how much you use when you are online... For the first two years my current employer was in business, he had one dialup user who used AS MUCH BANDWIDTH as ALL THE OTHER USERS ON HIS SYSTEM COMBINED... That situation remained until he broke 400 users... She was online 24x7 and she was streaming audio 24x7...

---

I thought you ran an ISP, now you have an employer? which is it... That one dialup user had the absolute right to use her dialup any goddamn way she pleased because she was paying a flat rate to have UNLIMITED USAGE. Get it through your head, Unlimited is always better then metered.

---

So... unless you know whereof you speak... learn something and come back. I don't bother wasting my time with the clueless, especially in hurricanes.

---

Listen do me a favor... before you act like a pretencious know it all waste that you are try and consider the users on this board who I wouldnt neccessarily call light bandwidth users and what kind of prices they would be paying if the broadband industry suddenly decided to go in the backwards direction and start asking for metered fee's... BUY yourself a clue. then stop with your annoying rants.
--
“The human mind ordinarily operates at only ten percent of its capacity — the rest is overhead for the operating system.” —Nicholas Ambrose]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8009815 Fri, 19 Sep 2003 13:05:21 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8002549 Angrychair :

said by maartena :

---

How about this?

You get a broadbandconnection for a pricecut of $20 ($30 instead of $50 a months) which includes a *FREE* 2 gbyte data transfer for patches, security updates, spam, virii, trojans, popups, lost packets, broken downloads and all other grief you really don't want to pay for. 2 gbyte should be more then plenty for all of that.

Then, on top of that you will be billed $1 for every gigabyte used. If you are downloading less then 22 gbyte a month your broadband bill will actually be cheaper then what you used to pay. If you download more then 22 gbyte then your bill will be higher.

Would such a thing work?

---

It's a nice start, but how about instead of $1 a gig you charge something more reasonable? I'm thinking a fraction of that would be sufficient, probably 20¢ or so. That would put 50 gigs at about $30 a month including your line fee. Personally I think the line fee should possibly just be a little bit more and the bandwidth much less. Maybe $30 for the line and 10-25¢ for the gig, even possibly staggered in costs with a higher charge for use during peak time (6-10pm) and all the heavy downloaders can download all night for 10¢ a gig.

Bandwidth is WAY overpriced. It's either used, or it's wasted. I'd rather see it used.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8002549 Thu, 18 Sep 2003 17:35:16 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7997865 UCT_Slash :

said by ikarus1 :

---

said by apollo80 :

---

-----------------------------------------------------------
Similar objections could have been made when dial-up ISPs charged by the minute, but that did not stop them.
-----------------------------------------------------------

Don't see too many dial up ISP's nowadays still charging by the minute. Most are a flat fee.

They learned their lesson. Broadband p;roviders will potentially learn the same lesson if they do bill by the byte.

---

Did you EVER see ISP's charging by the byte? DUH!, NO! You never saw ISP's charging by the byte. Had ISP's had the comptence in the beginning (most are only now LEARNING how to do this) that is what you would have seen from the beginning.

AS AN ISP, a long term ISP... My thinking was ALWAYS that charging by the minute of connection time, or the byte of data was the MOST fair type of billing. When I set up my first personal ISP, I set up billing in that manner. If someone only connected to me for ten minutes of an evening, why should I bill them the same amount as the idiot with a redialer? It worked, actually it worked so well that my nearest competitor cracked my system and modified my billing software, not once but twice... While he had ALL his customers paying $23.95 per month for dialup, some of mine paid about $7.00 per month, others paid as much as $20.00 per month. BUT, EVERYONE PAID FOR THE SYSTEM RESOURCES THEY USED... It was fair.

Well, whatever... I was ahead of my time. This *ABSOLUTELY WILL* eventually come to everyone because of market pressures. If I (as an ISP) want market share, and I want to extract from my existing system maximum profit, I am going to set up such a system. Why? Well because the other guy is going to do it if I don't, and if I do it first, he will do it after I do so he can stay in business.

Honestly there are people who should be sold DLS at $5.00 per month, and there are others who should have to pay $50.00 per month for dialup.

It isn't so much how fast your connection is as it is how much you use when you are online... For the first two years my current employer was in business, he had one dialup user who used AS MUCH BANDWIDTH as ALL THE OTHER USERS ON HIS SYSTEM COMBINED... That situation remained until he broke 400 users... She was online 24x7 and she was streaming audio 24x7...

So... unless you know whereof you speak... learn something and come back. I don't bother wasting my time with the clueless, especially in hurricanes.

-m-

---

For starters why the hell are you referencing dial-up users? They don't download a fraction of what dsl/cable users do so this hardly effects them. And who's going to subscribe to your "hypothetical charge-by-bandwidth ISP" if/when an alternative flat rate ISP exists in the area? Clearly not people who plan on using their connection for downloading media in any way... which make up the majority. Try pushing this bs on consumers used to paying $35-40/m for unlimited broadband.

]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7997865 Thu, 18 Sep 2003 02:52:10 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7996249 moonpuppy :

said by ikarus1 :

---

> I still use 98 but still have to download security >updates.

Oddly enough... there are alternatives... I could care if you need to download a security patch every day... as an ISP I am going to charge you per byte on the patch BECAUSE you run a sub-standard OS...

NOW you are going to remind me that Win2K shipped a week before MS issued a 20Meg patch, and you are going to remind me that XP shipped a week before a 20 Meg patch...

and I am going to say TOUCH SH1T....

AM I SUPPOSED TO CARE THAT YOU CAN'T FIGURE OUT REALITY?

-m-

---

Tell me a good OS then. Linux? HA, still need to get patches for that. Mac OSX? Please. Every single OS has it's problems and vunerabilities.

So you are going to tell people if you run a certain OS, you will pay more? What type of BS is that? And, as an ISP, you might have that many customers tolerant of your policies and soon you'll be left with few customers.

My guess is that you have issues with MS but unfortunatly for you (and some others), it is the most popular OS. WELCOME TO REALITY! ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7996249 Wed, 17 Sep 2003 22:30:58 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7995603 ikarus1 : > I still use 98 but still have to download security >updates.

Oddly enough... there are alternatives... I could care if you need to download a security patch every day... as an ISP I am going to charge you per byte on the patch BECAUSE you run a sub-standard OS...

NOW you are going to remind me that Win2K shipped a week before MS issued a 20Meg patch, and you are going to remind me that XP shipped a week before a 20 Meg patch...

and I am going to say TOUCH SH1T....

AM I SUPPOSED TO CARE THAT YOU CAN'T FIGURE OUT REALITY?

-m-
--
FAVORITE ANSWERED QUESION Q: I want to add an antenna to my wireless device, any suggestions? A: »www.freeantennas.com]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7995603 Wed, 17 Sep 2003 21:26:44 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7994923 moonpuppy :

said by maartena :

---

How about this?

You get a broadbandconnection for a pricecut of $20 ($30 instead of $50 a months) which includes a *FREE* 2 gbyte data transfer for patches, security updates, spam, virii, trojans, popups, lost packets, broken downloads and all other grief you really don't want to pay for. 2 gbyte should be more then plenty for all of that.

Then, on top of that you will be billed $1 for every gigabyte used. If you are downloading less then 22 gbyte a month your broadband bill will actually be cheaper then what you used to pay. If you download more then 22 gbyte then your bill will be higher.

Would such a thing work?

---

Depends on if the ISP can tell the difference. Unless they give you that as a free 2GB for anything or just for patches and virus updates.

Heck, killing spam would save on bandwith. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7994923 Wed, 17 Sep 2003 20:12:33 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7994878 moonpuppy : I have not seen an ISP charge per byte. I have seen services charge per minute.

The problem with charging per minute, is that it was done before and people didn't like it. Compuserve anyone? Not only did they charge per minute for regular connections, they charged extra for "special" services. They even had day and night rates and higher rates for faster modems (300, 1200 and 2400 baud rates.)

Now for a dial up, most people don't stay on for that long as they only do email and mild surfing.

Broadband is a different story. People expect speed and a lot of bandwith to download stuff. They pay about the same amount as a second phone line and monthly subscription to most dial up ISP's. That is a selling point. That is one of the reasons I got it.

Now, I will agree that some people should only pay $5/month for broadband since they use it rarely. However, most of these people would stay with dial up and have no reason to go to broadband.

Now, lets go over what are the selling point of broadband:
1) Speed
2) Content (especially streaming audio and video)
3) Cost (when compared to a second phone line and ISP subscription)
4) Always on

Numbers 1 and 4 are not really relavent to this discussion. However, #2 and #3 are. If I see a flashy commercial saying I can stream cool video and audio from the net, I would hate to find out that it would cost me a few pennys per MB to see it. If I want to listen to an out of town baseball game on streaming audio from a radio station, should I get out my credit card? I can see the people looking for alternatives now or dropping broadband all together. You think a lot of people will keep broadband if it starts costing more than $50/month? The trend is to pull prices down, not up.

Do I deny there are some that use a lot? Nope, nature of the beast. If someone is way over a KNOWN limit, then you should address that. Think of the words of Henry Ford, "The man who uses his skill and constructive imagination to see how much he can give for a dollar instead of how little he can give for a dollar is bound to succeed."

said by joebear29 :

---

You don't have to use Windows XP. You (would hypothetically) pay for bandwidth, if you needed that for Windows updates that is your problem, not the ISPs.

---

Oddly enough, I still use 98 but still have to download security updates. And unless the ISP's don't mind my system being used for DNS attacks, I think they would want me to download the updates (even with a firewall.) Remember, Joe Email and Suzy Spreadsheet don't know much about system security. And, not everyone has the time nor ability to configure a Linux system and many people don't want to buy Macs. Plus, with Linux, you get to download all those add ons online too.

said by joebear29 :

---

Why would you do that? You chose to visit their website, if they want to include a pop-up that is their business. You going to bill them for using extra graphics as well?

Besides, how much bandwidth could the pop-ups really use, especially if you had a blocker? Would it even be remotely material?

---

Depends, some pop-ups are simple and small but what happens in the future when someone gets the bright idea to make pop-ups a full blown Flash extravaganza. And, I have yet to see ANY site advertise the fact they have pop-ups for your pleasure.

What if I want to go to a site to research a product I want to buy? Maybe we need to get warning labels on websites that have large amounts of graphics so we can choose or not to choose to visit them.

said by JTRockville :

---

Are there blockers available that don't download the ad first, before blocking it from being displayed?

If not, perhaps we'll need a "DoNotPop.gov" registry for IP ranges.

---

Not sure on this one.

Donotpop.gov list? Hmmm, potential in that idea. ;)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7994878 Wed, 17 Sep 2003 20:08:48 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7994618 maartena : How about this?

You get a broadbandconnection for a pricecut of $20 ($30 instead of $50 a months) which includes a *FREE* 2 gbyte data transfer for patches, security updates, spam, virii, trojans, popups, lost packets, broken downloads and all other grief you really don't want to pay for. 2 gbyte should be more then plenty for all of that.

Then, on top of that you will be billed $1 for every gigabyte used. If you are downloading less then 22 gbyte a month your broadband bill will actually be cheaper then what you used to pay. If you download more then 22 gbyte then your bill will be higher.

Would such a thing work?
--
»www.deanforamerica.com - You have the power to make a change! Support Howard Dean 2004]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7994618 Wed, 17 Sep 2003 19:45:04 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7993409 ikarus1 :

said by apollo80 :

---

-----------------------------------------------------------
Similar objections could have been made when dial-up ISPs charged by the minute, but that did not stop them.
-----------------------------------------------------------

Don't see too many dial up ISP's nowadays still charging by the minute. Most are a flat fee.

They learned their lesson. Broadband p;roviders will potentially learn the same lesson if they do bill by the byte.

---

Did you EVER see ISP's charging by the byte? DUH!, NO! You never saw ISP's charging by the byte. Had ISP's had the comptence in the beginning (most are only now LEARNING how to do this) that is what you would have seen from the beginning.

AS AN ISP, a long term ISP... My thinking was ALWAYS that charging by the minute of connection time, or the byte of data was the MOST fair type of billing. When I set up my first personal ISP, I set up billing in that manner. If someone only connected to me for ten minutes of an evening, why should I bill them the same amount as the idiot with a redialer? It worked, actually it worked so well that my nearest competitor cracked my system and modified my billing software, not once but twice... While he had ALL his customers paying $23.95 per month for dialup, some of mine paid about $7.00 per month, others paid as much as $20.00 per month. BUT, EVERYONE PAID FOR THE SYSTEM RESOURCES THEY USED... It was fair.

Well, whatever... I was ahead of my time. This *ABSOLUTELY WILL* eventually come to everyone because of market pressures. If I (as an ISP) want market share, and I want to extract from my existing system maximum profit, I am going to set up such a system. Why? Well because the other guy is going to do it if I don't, and if I do it first, he will do it after I do so he can stay in business.

Honestly there are people who should be sold DLS at $5.00 per month, and there are others who should have to pay $50.00 per month for dialup.

It isn't so much how fast your connection is as it is how much you use when you are online... For the first two years my current employer was in business, he had one dialup user who used AS MUCH BANDWIDTH as ALL THE OTHER USERS ON HIS SYSTEM COMBINED... That situation remained until he broke 400 users... She was online 24x7 and she was streaming audio 24x7...

So... unless you know whereof you speak... learn something and come back. I don't bother wasting my time with the clueless, especially in hurricanes.

-m-
--
FAVORITE ANSWERED QUESION Q: I want to add an antenna to my wireless device, any suggestions? A: »www.freeantennas.com]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7993409 Wed, 17 Sep 2003 17:39:12 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7993169 joebear29 :

said by JTRockville :

---

Not all sites that jam stuff down your pipe when you hit them, are worthless. Many newspapers do it, for example.

I wonder how the ecommerce community feels about such limits?
[text was edited by author 2003-09-17 17:05:37]

---

Sorry, I should have used www.anysite.com. Of course all sites that use pop-ups aren't worthless.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7993169 Wed, 17 Sep 2003 17:10:22 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7993103 JTRockville : Not all sites that jam stuff down your pipe when you hit them, are worthless. Many newspapers do it, for example.

I wonder how the ecommerce community feels about such limits?
[text was edited by author 2003-09-17 17:05:37]
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7993103 Wed, 17 Sep 2003 17:03:59 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7992875 joebear29 :

said by JTRockville :

---

said by joebear29 :

---

Besides, how much bandwidth could the pop-ups really use, especially if you had a blocker? Would it even be remotely material?

---

Are there blockers available that don't download the ad first, before blocking it from being displayed?

If not, perhaps we'll need a "DoNotPop.gov" registry for IP ranges.

---

Well, you're probably right, still, if you get visit www.worthlesssite.com and it pops up an ad, that ad is part of visiting the site, just like the overly large jpg of its logo and the cheesy midi music attempts to play in the background.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7992875 Wed, 17 Sep 2003 16:40:47 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7992847 JTRockville :

said by joebear29 :

---

Besides, how much bandwidth could the pop-ups really use, especially if you had a blocker? Would it even be remotely material?

---

Are there blockers available that don't download the ad first, before blocking it from being displayed?

If not, perhaps we'll need a "DoNotPop.gov" registry for IP ranges.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7992847 Wed, 17 Sep 2003 16:38:38 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7992812 DALarose : »www.geocities.com/matt_byrd/Roge···dex.html]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7992812 Wed, 17 Sep 2003 16:35:19 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7992231 apollo80 : -----------------------------------------------------------
Similar objections could have been made when dial-up ISPs charged by the minute, but that did not stop them.
-----------------------------------------------------------

Don't see too many dial up ISP's nowadays still charging by the minute. Most are a flat fee.

They learned their lesson. Broadband p;roviders will potentially learn the same lesson if they do bill by the byte.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7992231 Wed, 17 Sep 2003 15:31:25 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7991647 joebear29 :

said by moonpuppy :

---

....when I have to download Microsoft's numerous patches and security updates so I don't get attacked by trojans and virii sent out by other users.

---

You don't have to use Windows XP. You (would hypothetically) pay for bandwidth, if you needed that for Windows updates that is your problem, not the ISPs.

quote:

---

Also, how do I bill a website when it tries to open a pop-up window that uses my bandwith?

---

Why would you do that? You chose to visit their website, if they want to include a pop-up that is their business. You going to bill them for using extra graphics as well?

Besides, how much bandwidth could the pop-ups really use, especially if you had a blocker? Would it even be remotely material?

quote:

---

Answer those questions and we'll see if billing by the byte works.

---

Note I do not support billing by the byte, but your objections don't seem to hold much water.

Similar objections could have been made when dial-up ISPs charged by the minute, but that did not stop them.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7991647 Wed, 17 Sep 2003 14:21:24 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7991097 moonpuppy : ....when I have to download Microsoft's numerous patches and security updates so I don't get attacked by trojans and virii sent out by other users.

Also, how do I bill a website when it tries to open a pop-up window that uses my bandwith?

Answer those questions and we'll see if billing by the byte works. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7991097 Wed, 17 Sep 2003 13:01:56 EDT