 | | That's not suprising Nobody wants to pay more, or even the idea that they might pay more. | |
|
 |  LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5 | Re: That's not suprising A new survey conducted by International Data Corporation on behalf of Zeugma Systems I wonder how much Zeugma paid to have that study done? If it was more than $5, they were taken to the cleaners.
But at least this explains why they are interested in caps and the monitoring of customer broadband usage:
»www.zeugmasystems.com/default.aspx
Zeugma Systems is a supplier of carrier-grade, open telecommunications systems that allow broadband service providers to identify, monitor, manage, and customize traffic flows on a per-service, per-subscriber level.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page
Ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya punk? | |
|
| |  knightmbEverybody Lies
join:2003-12-01
Franklin, TN | Re: That's not suprising said by Linklist:A new survey conducted by International Data Corporation on behalf of Zeugma Systems I wonder how much Zeugma paid to have that study done? If it was more than $5, they were taken to the cleaners. But at least this explains why they are interested in caps and the monitoring of customer broadband usage: » www.zeugmasystems.com/default.aspxZeugma Systems is a supplier of carrier-grade, open telecommunications systems that allow broadband service providers to identify, monitor, manage, and customize traffic flows on a per-service, per-subscriber level. Paid to have the study done or paid those that were involved in the study? 
--
Fight NebuAD and the like:
Click Here to pollute their data | |
|
| |  Matt3All noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | said by Linklist:I wonder how much Zeugma paid to have that study done? If it was more than $5, they were taken to the cleaners. And why do you say that? Because the study discovered the obvious?
--
Linux Haters Unite! | |
|
| | | fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | Re: That's not suprising I have a way to summarize this summary:
"People hate to pay for anything."
Now.. where do I collect my poll money?
Really,.. the obvious is people would rather not have to pay. However, we have choices.. we can be socialists, we can be communist, or we can be capitalist. What would you prefer? The market works best when there are freedoms. The freedom doesn't mean to have what ever you want, it means you have the freedom to buy what you want in your means. This is the part that people HATE to hear (reality).. not everyone is going to be able to have what others do. Some people make more than others for a variety of reasons and if they made that money legally, so be it.
To think that anyone would believe they are entitled to have what someone else does "to be fare" is simply fantasy. The pure fact is that some people won't be able to have or afford what others do, plain and simple.
So yea.. the obvious is simple - no one wants to be told what they can and can't have with the amount of money available to them. The obvious is that MOST everyone wants to drive nice cars and own nice living spaces.. truth is, .. ain't gonna happen in ANY lifetime. | |
|
| | | |  KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK | Re: That's not suprising Socialist.
Every Government on earth is a Socialist government.
There's no true Capitalist or Communist governments and nor will there be as they are based on ideals that fail when exposed to actual reality.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
| |
|
| Core0000Premium
join:2008-05-04
Somerset, KY Reviews:
 ·Time Warner Cable
| I'd pay more, if I felt like I was getting a good value. And by value I don't mean a bunch of add on crap.
-Solid Reliability (None of this.. on and off connection crap for 30 minutes)
-No Caps
-Symmetrical 3 megs up 3 megs down.
I'd be will to pay 45.00 for that. | |
|
| |  davoice
join:2000-08-12
Saxapahaw, NC | Re: That's not suprising Agreed... I pay more for real value that gives me something more than I have now.
I just paid $30 for the luxury of 4" more legroom on an already reasonably roomy JetBlue flight because I was flying cross country and wanted the extra room to cross my legs.
Most consumers don't mind paying for things that give them a perceived return on their money. (Hello - casinos and bottled water.)
What does get us all bent out of shape is being charged more for the same thing we're already getting. Or even worse being charged more for less than we're already getting.
With caps that's exactly where we are headed - higher bills for less service.
If they're going to go metered or capped, what I would rather see is a fully metered system like we have with most public utilities (water, power, etc.). The cablecos are avoiding that like the plague because it means 1) they would be admitting they have a commodity product, 2) many of their customers would actually see lower bills, and 3) the cablecos would actually have to deploy audited and certified measuring systems like we have w/ power and gas meters today.
I think it would be reasonable to pay a $5/mo base connection charge and then have full access to use the available bits as I see fit. They can then bill me by the GB just like my power company bills me by the kW. If I don't use it, it only costs me $5. If I blow the connection up with Bittorrent traffic, I get a bill commensurate to my usage.
The carriers are loathe to go down that road because it means they will have given into being labeled as dumb pipes.
}Davoice | |
|
| | | | | Re: That's not suprising said by davoice:.....I think it would be reasonable to pay a $5/mo base connection charge and then have full access to use the available bits as I see fit. They can then bill me by the GB just like my power company bills me by the kW. If I don't use it, it only costs me $5..... You people kill me!!! Don't you get it? Internet is NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT like a power or gas bill!! Other people from around the world CANNOT surge your power line or use up your gas line! With your internet connection ANYONE FROM AROUND THE WORLD CAN send you unwanted packets of data and USE your connection. What does that mean? YOU PAY for packets you didn't want, and probably don't even know about (blocked by router/firewall).
Get it through your heads people! Internet is NOT the same usage as a utility and CANNOT be billed as such!
Bill-by-the-byte will destroy the internet. Way to go ComCRAP, you just put yourself out of business! | |
|
| | | | Matt3All noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | Re: That's not suprising People can tap your power line or attach to your water spigot. So yes, it is similar.
It's also pretty easy for a utility to see if someone is flooding you with bogus traffic, so I don't think that is a valid argument.
--
Linux Haters Unite! | |
|
| | | | |
1 edit | Re: That's not suprising What do you mean utility?
Your talking about the internet providers?
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
If they were a utility, we wouldn't be having this discussion, let alone the whole news article.
It sure is a lot harder for someone to tap my electricity or my water spigot. For starters, they would have to be my neighbor. Thats one (maybe two) people you have to deal with. And if they really are stealing from you, you have bigger problems to deal with. Edit: Set up a camera; problem solved and your bill stays as it should. Sorry, not the same.
On the other hand, if you make someone pissed off playing your favorite video game or your work competition uses ComCRAP business cable they could write a nice little virus to generate fake traffic to your network. It would be coming from everywhere at random intervals and to the ISP it would only look like an increase of traffic; not a direct attack (by attack I mean by increasing your bill to strain your pocketbook/company finances; not a computer attack/hack/exploit). | |
|
| | | | | | That's funny, because business-class service sometimes has usage charges. | |
|
El GaupoPremium
join:2006-07-15
Buckhorn, NM | Wages They should pay more than McDonalds | |
|
 blackzeroPremium
join:2007-08-16
Trois-Rivieres, QC | Surprising I guess that those 787 polled consumers are often downloading, enough to exceed their montly limit.
1 GB = 1'024MB = 1'048'576KB
those providers who are offering 5gb for download, they're offering nothing.
i have nothing against massive downloaders,but the fact that most of people don't know how to interprete the limits provided by their isps is just surprising.  | |
|
|  TSI GabePremium,VIP
join:2007-01-03
Chatham, ON
kudos:2 | Re: Surprising said by blackzero:1 GB = 1'024MB = 1'048'576KB Actually you have it wrong here, no offense intended. It's a common misconception that bandwidth should be multiplied by 1024. Only memory should be calculated that way, not bandwidth.
1GB = 1000MB = 1,000,000KB
--
TSI Gabe - TekSavvy Solutions Inc.
Authorized TSI employee ( »TekSavvy FAQ »Official support in the forum )
| |
|
| | knightmbEverybody Lies
join:2003-12-01
Franklin, TN | Re: Surprising said by TSI Gabe:said by blackzero:1 GB = 1'024MB = 1'048'576KB Actually you have it wrong here, no offense intended. It's a common misconception that bandwidth should be multiplied by 1024. Only memory should be calculated that way, not bandwidth. 1GB = 1000MB = 1,000,000KB Depends on if you are talking about megabytes or megabits.
If he's referring to Gigabytes, then he's right because it means what it means no matter what the median of transfer. If he's referring to gigabits, then 1 gigabyte is 8 gigabits.
1GB = 8 gb
--
Fight NebuAD and the like:
Click Here to pollute their data | |
|
| | |  Ark
join:2002-06-08
Ada, MI | Re: Surprising Actually, 1 GB = 8.589934592 Gb...
1 GB = 1,073,741,824 Bytes = 8,589,934,592 bits | |
|
| |  Quake110Premium
join:2003-12-20
Ottawa, ON | Wow, I didn't know that. More straightforward than I thought. | |
|
| | | | Actually, bandwidth speed is always rated in bits. The last letter is always lower cased. | |
|
| |  RARPSL
join:1999-12-08
Suffern, NY | said by TSI Gabe:said by blackzero:1 GB = 1'024MB = 1'048'576KB Actually you have it wrong here, no offense intended. It's a common misconception that bandwidth should be multiplied by 1024. Only memory should be calculated that way, not bandwidth. 1GB = 1000MB = 1,000,000KB Technically G/M/K is base 1000. Base 1024 uses (ie: is SUPPOSED to use) Gi/Mi/Ki prefixes (ie: GiB/Gib/etc). As you note, the i-less prefix is often used even when the base 1024 numbers are intended. Can you supply a reference that speeds are supposed to be base 1000 not base 1024? | |
|
|  ropeguruPremium
join:2001-01-25
Mechanicsville, VA | And to confuse matters more, in networking, typically
1 GB = 1'000MB = 1,000,000KB
That little difference could put you over the edge...  | |
|
| blackzeroPremium
join:2007-08-16
Trois-Rivieres, QC | i did a little mistake  | |
|
| | |
| | hmm BEfore cablevision took away there speed caping i thought it was a better way of handling things. INstead of charging people and having a bandwidth limit why not just slow down the peoples connections.
At east they will still have a conenction and not have to pay more. | |
|
| davidl
join:2008-07-11
Vaudreuil-Dorion, QC | Re: hmm In Japan, they're working on 1 Gbps Upload and Download to people's homes...here we squabble over Mbps/Kbps and ridiculous caps...it's shameful and embarrassing.
The Telcos/Cablecos should be collectively fined out of existence and all their assets seized for deliberately sabotaging our abilities to compete. | |
|
| | | | Re: hmm Yes and they dont have a huge country to get wires across. ITs easier to wire a 300 appartmet complex then to wire 300 individual houses. | |
|
| | | | A little math for you. What's cheaper to wire? An area the size of the United States or an area the size of Montana. | |
|
| | | davidl
join:2008-07-11
Vaudreuil-Dorion, QC | Re: hmm Pffff...they also have 1/3 the population of North America and less than 1/3 of the GDP.
I'd pay $2,000/$3,000 up front for gigabit access to an internet connected network that's not interfered with by the telcos/cablecos and their ulterior motives of trying to charge me by the byte like minutes on a cell phone. | |
|
| | | | | | Re: hmm They also have an urban population density of 12,500 people per square mile where we have 2,900 people per square mile.
In our current economy you try and sell your neighbors on spending $2-3k plus monthly recurring for a connection that they will not even use 10% of. | |
|
| | | | | davidl
join:2008-07-11
Vaudreuil-Dorion, QC | Re: hmm Yeah, until there's some 'gottahaveit' service developed...then there'll be a stampede.
Unfortunately, the 'gottahaveit' service won't get developed because the telcos/cablecos want us to keep watching their crappy TV.
And it's not like it has to be started from scratch...a lot of the infrastructure is already there. | |
|
| | | | | | LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5 |  Re: hmm
said by davidl:Unfortunately, the 'gottahaveit' service won't get developed because the telcos/cablecos want us to keep watching their crappy TV. And exactly what great video is developed FOR the internet that is better than that on "crappy TV"? Nothing I have seen(YouTube uploads by idiot slackers with time on their hands?). The video on the internet that people watch are the same shows that are on TV.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page
Ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya punk? | |
|
| | | | | | |
See 24 replies to this post |
| | | | | | | said by battleop:In our current economy you try and sell your neighbors on spending $2-3k plus monthly recurring for a connection that they will not even use 10% of. LMAO - nice attempt at a specious argument there, but the Japanese aren't paying the Yen equivalent for their BB service. | |
|
| | | |  dvd536as Mr. Pink as they comePremium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:4 | said by davidl:I'd pay $2,000/$3,000 up front for gigabit access to an internet connected network that's not interfered with by the telcos/cablecos and their ulterior motives of trying to charge me by the byte like minutes on a cell phone. Theres seedboxes that are that fast for waaaaay less money.
--
When I gez aju zavateh na nalechoo more new yonooz tonigh molinigh - Ken Lee | |
|
| | | | | davidl
join:2008-07-11
Vaudreuil-Dorion, QC | Re: hmm Seedboxes?...pardon my ignorance...what's a seedbox? | |
|
| | | | | |  funchordsHelloPremium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA
kudos:6 | Re: hmm said by davidl:Seedboxes?...pardon my ignorance...what's a seedbox? A seedbox is a private dedicated server used for the uploading and downloading of digital files.[1] Seedboxes generally make use of the BitTorrent protocol for uploading and downloading, although they have also been used on the eDonkey2000 network. Seedboxes are plugged in to high speed bandwidth networks, often with a throughput of 100 Mbps (~= 12 MB/s or ~=715 MB per minute) or more. Files are uploaded to a seedbox from other BitTorrent users, and from there they can be downloaded at high speeds to a user's personal computer via the HTTP, FTP, SFTP, or rsync protocols. --Seedbox, »en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?tit···41817439 (last visited Oct. 1, 2008).
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
More features, more fun, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...
| |
|
| | |  BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | said by battleop:A little math for you. What's cheaper to wire? An area the size of the United States or an area the size of Montana. Explan why the state of Rhode Island can only average 6.7 Mbps then instead of 100 Mbps? Because Rhode Island is 1/150 the size of Japan and has 20% more people per suqare mile. So this whole "the US is big and that's why we don't have the speeds" excuse is crap. We can't even do our smallest state which is in fact smaller than many COUNTIES. | |
|
| | | |
See 6 replies to this post |
|
|
See 7 replies to this post |
|
 pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | Caps Led Me To Drop Mobile Internet Up until recently I had one of the old, original Cingular Media Net plans that advertised "unlimited" bandwidth. I had this plan since I purchased a GPRS phone back in 2003. It cost me $15 a month. My guess is that the data rate on that phone was so slow that they did not care. Since I never renewed my contract as I changed phones (I bought a 3G phone earlier this year) I never changed the plan.
This month, I notice that the plan was capped at 5MB a month. I don't think I ever took less time to cancel something before.
--
"At the moment of conception." | |
|
Reviews:
 ·ooma
·Optimum Online
 ·Verizon FiOS
| these figures still lead to apathy... many consumers don't have a reasonable choice of switching... the broadband footprints outside of major metro areas are not competitive, offer little, if any choice and are at a service disadvantage... speeds as low as 3mbit cablemodem service... on an oversold node, that could equal dialup service, or non-usable service.
the infrastructure needs to improve drastically in some areas... and forced, perhaps subsidized competition in others. this all comes before the monoply powers that be consider playing with data caps. | |
|
| | DUH!!! The thought of overages is enough to scare most people off.
Especially people who have gone over the limit on minutes on a cell phone or long distance.
Or those that remember per-minute usage on dialup.
Consumers live having expeced bills. It makes them feel more secure by knowing what to expect.
If you set $50(example) aside for your net bill and it ends up being $65(again example) that's $15 that got to come from somewhere. | |
|
| davidl
join:2008-07-11
Vaudreuil-Dorion, QC | Re: DUH!!! Yes, and also don't forget all the horror stories we're hearing now about how someone racked up a $20,000.00 bill doing data on his wireless phone. | |
|
| | | | Re: DUH!!! Of course we know that could only happen in Canada or as foreigners call Canada, CanaDUH!!! because our communist system is worst than Russia's. | |
|
Reviews:
·Comcast
| Something is not Right The survey is deeply flawed and should not be used to gage consumer’s sediment. No methodology evidence is given. I want to know who and where. I would get a different result if they went with different demographic. In addition, I want to know the questions asked. Third, 787 too small of a sample to judge consumer sentiment. Worst is 83 percent say that do not know what a gigabyte or have no idea how many gigabytes they use. The result my change if a cap was given for example Comcast 250GB cap. Finally, the survey fails to give the rational for a cap. Would the result be the same if lifting the cap will mean more net congestion. | |
|
beaups
join:2003-08-11
Hilliard, OH | next survey 95% of communters hate speed limits. wtf???? | |
|
 viperpa33sWhy Me?Premium
join:2002-12-20
Bradenton, FL | ISPs will provide a comeback This survey means nothing because your going have a ISP speak out that says people are happy with what they have and the only people that are complaining are the people who are the so called heavy users.Your going to find a survey put out by an ISP like Comcast that will say that people like or have no concern about caps. That people are happy with what they have. | |
|
| | Caps are just an excuse for greed. People are tired of paying more and more, and then not getting what they paid for, or getting branded as an abuser when they do use what they paid for.
If an ISP offers me a package that says I get a 7Mbps bandwidth connection and unlimited download capacity, then I expect to be able use it. Why not? The ISP advertised and sold it to me and I bought it expecting that they would deliver what what they promised.
If it were any other product, the vendor would be in court for false advertising and fraud. | |
|
|
See 6 replies to this post |
|
| | Caps It doesnt matter if the person knows if they use a billion gigabits or 1 gigabit, the perception is that they are being limited. If its not a problem for ther ISP`s network, thatn why Cap? These networks should be solid enough to handle it. They have marketed themselves with "Highspeed" etc but now they want to "limit" the usage. Classic bait and switch IMO. They have a bucnh of people signed up and now want to limit their service. Not a good call. | |
|
| | meh I think caps are useless. | |
|
mmoon6
join:2005-12-03
Marietta, GA | Capping Capping is an unfairly derived moving target that the subscriber cannot see or easily judge. Give me consistent throttled channel and I will be happy. No more capacity problem or sharing problem. I get what I pay for and no B/W problems. Yes it does mean no open channel, no service. No BS bills and threats either. | |
|
| |  LAWL
That's about as shocking as Clay Aiken's recent announcement... | |
|
|
|
·
