Caps: Innovation Killer?Paper: killing off power users not a great idea... 04:08PM Tuesday Sep 30 2008 by Karl Bodetags: bandwidth · cable · capsWith Comcast's new 250GB monthly cap going live tomorrow, industry journalist Om Malik drops us a line to note he's published a new white paper exploring how Comcast's decision will "become the symbol of a new Internet era." Malik is no friend to caps, previously arguing that a shift away from flat-rate pricing and toward caps and overages is the enemy of innovation. The white paper, co-written by former Bell Labs employee Muayyad Al-Chalabi, argues that carriers should spend more time improving their offerings, and less time making power users angry. Carriers are better off simplifying the pricing schemes based on value provided to customers; such value can be demonstrated through higher access speed, local availability of content, and consistent quality of service. The current path of shifting from unlimited usage to a usage-based pricing scheme is shortsighted since it does not account for the total value of content delivery. Today, it targets heavy users, while tomorrow it will affect all users. The gist? About the only thing caps and overage charges are going to provide is higher prices for consumers. Using Time Warner Cable's current trial in Beaumont, Texas as a starting point (40GB cap and $1 per GB overages on the fastest tier), the paper explores how their pricing quickly becomes unreasonable: If we take Ciscos traffic usage numbers for an average household of 200 Gbytes per month by 2012, then the monthly household bill will be $214.95 ($54.95 fixed with limit of 40 Gbytes plus $1 per Gybte above the limit). Todays high-speed Internet access ARPU is around $42 per month; 5X todays plans Not only is today's power user tomorrow's average user, but, the paper argues, they're an essential part of the content innovation and delivery hub. It argues that ISPs are better off embracing these users, and potentially caching hot (and obviously legal) content on the ISP head end. The problem is a lot of the hot content is pirated, and caching legit content often runs afoul of Hollywood, as IP Democracy points out. Believe me, most broadband providers would love to do this. One tiny problem, however, is that copyright owners (in the case of, say, Hollywood films) or application providers (in the case of, say, Skype) would want their share of any revenues generated by the broadband providers that flow from the "increased value" offering. Of course the argument to cap or significantly reconfigure content distribution assumes that we can't just leave the existing flat-rate uncapped model in place. The current combination of flat-rate pricing, sensible upgrades and intelligent (and hopefully transparent) network management seems to be treating most ISPs' bottom lines rather well. But while carrier execs argue that looming congestion has made the current pricing paradigm irrelevant, others, like Andrew Odlyzko, argue said congestion is manageable with just a few modest capacity upgrades. Related:- Long Awaited Japanese Caps Arrive: 930GB Per Month
- Time Warner Cable: Caps 'Make Your Internet Experience Better'
- Comcast Flips, Flops Way Around Throttling Lawsuit
- Comcast Expands New Throttling Tests
- Monday Morning Links
- Tuesday Evening Links
- Virgin Launches 50Mbps Service
- New Comcast Throttling System 100% Online
|
page: 1 · 2  |
 majortom1029
join:2006-10-19 Lindenhurst, NY | hmm Why is it that cablevision removed their capping and that comcast added some kind of caps.
Is comcasts network that much worse then cablevisions? | |
|  |   jt4
@comcast.net | Re: hmm that answer would be know. the funny thing is cisco say people will use 200 gb per month by 2012. well if comcast cap is 250gb. there should not be anything to worry about right? | |
|  |  |  pandora Premium join:2001-06-01 Outland
·Comcast
| Re: hmm To get around the Comcast caps, we need to purchase a Comcast business account which costs about $60 a month for a starter plan. This is close to what the unbundled price for residential Comcast internet service is. It is about $20 more per month than bundled basic Comcast HSI.
Any user who needs more than 250GB per month, has the option of paying $20 additional or less every month. -- "People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use." | |
|  |  |  |  I pos rep
join:2008-08-22
| Re: hmm said by pandora :To get around the Comcast caps, we need to purchase a Comcast business account which costs about $60 a month for a starter plan. This is close to what the unbundled price for residential Comcast internet service is. It is about $20 more per month than bundled basic Comcast HSI. Any user who needs more than 250GB per month, has the option of paying $20 additional or less every month. Wrong, an official Comcast representative or some official guy from Comcast.net either way has said that it all applies to Business accounts as well. Either way, his credibility on stuff about Comcast is clearly above yours and he says you are wrong. | |
|  |  |  |  |  pandora Premium join:2001-06-01 Outland
·Comcast
| Re: hmm
said by I pos rep :Wrong, an official Comcast representative or some official guy from Comcast.net either way has said that it all applies to Business accounts as well. Either way, his credibility on stuff about Comcast is clearly above yours and he says you are wrong. Here is the problem, I have heard from "comcast representatives" who tell me business accounts aren't covered by the residential cap. When I read the Comcast new TOS, it refers to residential accounts.
Now, you and I have heard different things from "comcast representatives". Should I call you wrong, as you have called me? Or should I be smarter than you and indicate we have heard different things from Comcast representatives? -- "People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use." | |
|  |  |  pandora Premium join:2001-06-01 Outland
·Comcast
| Re: Poppycock
I agree with you! It is time to stop the artificial monopoly cable and phone companies have enjoyed. We are now in a media and internet age, a town or city should have as many providers as can find profit running cable. Within the limits of the cable infrastructure to support it. -- "People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use." | |
|  |   skuv
@rr.com
| Competition is already allowed in most states, towns, cities, and counties.
The problem is, there already exists the incumbents.
So who is going to spend their money to come in, build CO's and headends of their own, run their own new fiber and copper infrastructure, just to get a handful of the customers that are willing to switch?
So in a couple of years, they'll find it unprofitable, and sell off their assets to the incumbent that wants it.
There is a reason that it usually comes down to just 2 providers in any given area. And that reason is money.
If there is no money to be made by coming in as the 3rd provider. Why would anyone do it? | |
|  SilverSurfer
join:2007-08-19
| Way To Go! The U.S. has been well on its way to becoming a 3rd world, all things considered- subprime meltdown, unemployment, 50M and climbing people without health insurance, etc.- but present day caps and lack of any meaningful competition in the BB arena all but ensure that status technologically as well. | |
|  |  nasadude
join:2001-10-05 Rockville, MD | Re: Way To Go! my favorite phrase for what the U.S. is becoming is "banana republic with nukes". | |
|  |   NetAdmin
join:2008-05-22
| said by SilverSurfer :...but present day caps and lack of any meaningful competition in the BB arena all but ensure that status technologically as well. Let's not forget to mention that the kids today demonstrate a slimmer and slimmer grasp on mathematics and science concepts. Hell, many of them don't even know how to speak proper English.
[ sarcasm on ]
Y'a know, dog?
[ sarcasm off ]
The movie "Idiocracy" is proving to be frighteningly accurate. -- --- Drilling for more oil is akin to giving a methhead the keys to the meth lab. | |
|   Phil Rojo Sol Premium join:2001-06-11 Camarillo, CA
·DSL EXTREME
| Where is the leadership in this country? I'd really like to see a politician (Obama or McCain perhaps?) stand up for what is best for the consumer and spearhead a campaign for all out net neutrality. Capping on serves to stifle innovation and freedom in what people do with their broadband connection. | |
|  |   sturmvogel Obama '08
join:2008-02-07 Houston, TX
| Re: Where is the leadership in this country? Here it is: »www.barackobama.com/issues/techn···internet
Deploy a Modern Communications Infrastructure Deploy Next-Generation Broadband: Barack Obama believes that America should lead the world in broadband penetration and Internet access. As a country, we have ensured that every American has access to telephone service and electricity, regardless of economic status, and Obama will do likewise for broadband Internet access. Obama and Biden believe we can get true broadband to every community in America through a combination of reform of the Universal Service Fund, better use of the nations wireless spectrum, promotion of next-generation facilities, technologies and applications, and new tax and loan incentives. -- Obama '08. Will help resolve the terrible broadband issues we have that put us so far behind other countries. | |
|  |  |  Lineage
join:2006-10-19 USA | Re: Where is the leadership in this country? While getting rid of the other stuff.
Like free speech and all that.
No thanks, I don't need internet that badly. | |
|  |  |  |   sturmvogel Obama '08
join:2008-02-07 Houston, TX
| Re: Where is the leadership in this country? If you like Lawrence Lessig here's another great reason to support Obama's campaign: They went directly to Lessig with their technology policy to get his feedback. This strongly suggests that in an Obama administration, Lessig or Lessig-minded people would be in charge of federal technology policy. Us "Internet Culture" people have been wandering in the wilderness this whole time, and in 2009 we could be *running* federal policy. Now that's something to hope for! -- Obama '08. Will help resolve the terrible broadband issues we have that put us so far behind other countries. | |
|  |  |  |  |   trebzon
join:2001-09-03 Grandville, MI | Re: Where is the leadership in this country? Dude I don't believe a word Obama says. His pre-election statements will not mean diddly once he is in office. By the way I feel the same about McCain. Neither of them will do squat to "fix" anything. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |   trebzon
join:2001-09-03 Grandville, MI
·AT&T Yahoo
| Re: Where is the leadership in this country? I don't disagree at all about congress. The Republic Congress was a joke that turned its back on its principles and the Democrat one is no different.
A President leads. He doesn't make law but leads. Bush did some of that but many would argue poorly. I think McCain would do some of that too but I am uncomfortable how. I don't believe Obama will lead squat. He doesn't take a stand unless it is wildly popular. I don't see him leading at all.
Then again look at the choices. What a crappy year. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |   pnh102 Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty Premium join:2002-05-02 Mount Airy, MD
| said by knightmb :So at least it's better to have someone in a position to try than someone in position who just doesn't care or know anything about technology *cough Bush* Broadband deployment is much more widespread now than it was in 2001. -- "At the moment of conception." | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |   Combat Chuck Too Many Cannibals Premium join:2001-11-29 Erie, PA
| Re: Where is the leadership in this country? said by pnh102 :Broadband deployment is much more widespread now than it was in 2001. If anyone wants some indirect proof of that try going dial-up for a couple days. All these new AJAX like technologies that most websites use suck over dial up. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |   Combat Chuck Too Many Cannibals Premium join:2001-11-29 Erie, PA
| said by knightmb :So at least it's better to have someone in a position to try than someone in position who just doesn't care or know anything about technology *cough Bush* Like Obama tried when he was in Congress...you know all those times he tried by voting "present". | |
|  |  |  |  |  fiberguy My views are my own. Premium join:2005-05-20
| This is to assume, as so many do, that the President of the United States is THE one that sets the laws as we live by. SOOO many people forget that the House and Senate are the ones that shape laws in this country, not the President; he simply signs them. Even void of his desire to sign them, with the right amount of votes, as we should know, laws can pass with out the President anyway.
So, when people come here and say "vote for this President because he or she will give us X" I just laugh... When I went to school, I was taught that there are 3 branches of government, not the 1 single one so many people look at.
I hope for an entire government that puts country first over personal agenda or party movements. When ever someone talks about "party".. they are talking about a portion of Americans, not all.
And personally, I don't want a "federal policy" when it comes to broadband.. I'd rather leave it up to the States, where most of "America's Business" needs to be in the first place.. or, simply get rid of the state borders and make this country a single state nation like so many politicians are trying to do. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |   trebzon
join:2001-09-03 Grandville, MI
·AT&T Yahoo
| Re: Where is the leadership in this country? I hear what you say but you must have federal over-site for utility infrastructure from a standards and safety standpoint. I also agree with the states comments to some extent though. What we have now is a federally mandated policy of no policy. Either put a logical policy in place or abdicate and let the states step in. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21 Glen Burnie, MD
·Verizon Online DSL
| You are correct, the President of the United States cannot make laws.
HOWEVER, in this day of partisan politics, he can get a few sympathetic members of either the House or Senate to introduce a law he would like to have.
Another thing to look at is the polls. Most of this country thinks the President is doing a bad job. (Whether or not you agree with this is another matter altogether.) Congress has an even lower approval rating right now. Now, the President is a single person. Congress is an entity of about 535 people so they get to spread that blame and point fingers.
As for broadband policies, while there should be SOME controls, I think providers should be allowed to build in areas that are already serviced by others. | |
|  |  |  |   sturmvogel Obama '08
join:2008-02-07 Houston, TX | Sure. Vote McCain and yet get no Internet and no free speech. | |
|  |  |  |  |   pnh102 Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty Premium join:2002-05-02 Mount Airy, MD
| Re: Where is the leadership in this country? said by sturmvogel :Sure. Vote McCain and yet get no Internet and no free speech. Really?
You mean John McCain is going to turn off the Internet and put us in jail for disagreeing with him? Maybe he can borrow tactics from the Missouri branch of the Hussein Truth Squad.
»www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1GGL···th+squad -- "At the moment of conception." | |
|  |  |  |  |  fiberguy My views are my own. Premium join:2005-05-20
| said by sturmvogel :Sure. Vote McCain and yet get no Internet and no free speech. FUD anyone?
Can we PLEASE keep politics where it belongs? I'm sure Obama would be very pleased to know you're bringing messages he wants hear to Broadband Report.com. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |   dissapointed
@direcpc.com | yea and vote obama and see him sell this country the rest of the way out,or worse eliminated | |
|  |  |  |  |   dvd536 as Mr. Pink as they come Premium join:2001-04-27 Phoenix, AZ
| said by sturmvogel :Sure. Vote McCain and yet get no Internet and no free speech. McCain has same views as bush. we don't need four more years of that. that said i'm not for obama either. -- When I gez aju zavateh na nalechoo more new yonooz tonigh molinigh - Ken Lee | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |   badtrip East Bay Premium join:2004-03-20 Albany, CA
·Comcast
| said by sturmvogel :Sure. Vote McCain and yet get no Internet and no free speech. Don't fall for the manufactured and false dichotomy. Neither dem or repub candidate is qualified to be president AFAIC. I'm voting 3rd party this year.
Plus, other than my district 9 rep (I believe she is still "for the people"), I am voting all incumbents out of state and federal legislature.
Want proof our "2 party" system doesn't work? Go to google news right now and read about the massive clusterfuck that is going on in congress as we speak. | |
|  |  |  |  redhatnation Premium join:2005-06-02 Woodbridge, VA
·Comcast
·Verizon Online DSL
| said by Lineage :While getting rid of the other stuff. Like free speech and all that. No thanks, I don't need internet that badly. Where are you reading that? | |
|  |  |  |   DaMaGeINC The Lan Man Premium join:2002-06-08 Greenville, SC clubs: | Pure speculation. | |
|  |  |  splat1622
join:2008-09-08 Cave Spring, GA | and how are you going to feel when your taxes go sky high to pay for all of his projects | |
|  |  |  |  See 6 replies to this post | |
 |  |   Phil Rojo Sol Premium join:2001-06-11 Camarillo, CA
·DSL EXTREME
| Unfortunately, the backwardness of caps in particular isn't addressed. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  Core0000 Premium join:2008-05-04 Somerset, KY
·Windstream
| That's one thing about presidential candidates, they talk the talk, but never walk it. They say anything to get elected, and that's that...
Obama talks about broadband, But I doubt he will follow through on it.
Of course, if he is elected, I hope he does follow through on the broadband plan.  | |
|   Matt You can't fix stupid Premium join:2003-07-20 Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
·Corporate Colocation
| Money Grab
This is nothing but a money grab.
If we look at the cell phone industry as an example, we see that people know exactly how long and exactly what a minute is -- yet they still go over their monthly allotment. This is exactly what implementing a cap will accomplish. Ask your neighbor how much their monthly usage is and they'll have absolutely no idea. Much less so if they have children using the internet. So the cable companies can provide less for the same monthly fee and then pop you a few times a year for an extra $15 or $20 in overages.
Along with that, there are the online movie delivery services which are a threat to the bottom line of any of the big companies who also provide Video on Demand. This is a very easy way to nip that little problem called "competition" in the bud before it can gain a foothold. It's no coincidence Time Warner and Comcast - the two largest providers of VoD in this country - are rushing to implement this. The Netflix Roku, XBox Store, XBox/Netflix partnership, PS3 online store, DirecTV Internet Service, plus the Youtube's and Hulu's are not only eating into their VoD business, but driving up their cost of providing your cable modem.
While I think Comcast is being generous at the moment with their cap, as digital distribution of video - especially High Definition Video - becomes more mainstream, the caps need to be reviewed and raised on a regular basis.
Additionally, the prices need to be kept to a reasonable level. Time Warner's assertion that a GB of data needs to carry a 1500% premium over the actual cost of delivery is madness and monopolistic greed at its worst.
While I loathe to mention government regulation at the present time, here is a perfect example of how a little regulation would go a long way to provide assurances that competing video delivery services can sprout among the Comcast and Time Warner redwoods. -- Linux Haters Unite! | |
|  |   trebzon
join:2001-09-03 Grandville, MI
·AT&T Yahoo
| Re: Money Grab I don't generally agree with regulation but I agree that this is a classic case in our utility infrastructure (including internet, TV, etc) were deregulation has failed. We need some regulation to remind everyone that these are licenses for operation granted by the populace.
My issue is who will do this? Obama won't. He is interested in class warfare and the how is more important then the result. McCain won't as he and Republicans have shown they are no different then the republicans. We need policy that is driven by sound reason not the crap we hear from lobbyist our the two headed hydra that represent our two sorry excuses for political parties. | |
|   jmn1207 Premium join:2000-07-19 Reston, VA
·Verizon FIOS
| Power User? What is it that a supposed power user is transferring at such a cap-breaking frenzy? If it's games, movies, TV, music, or software; I just don't see that transitioning in the future to the mainstream users amongst us. If Comcast has to send out warnings to 5% of their customers for exceeding the cap limit, maybe they need to increase the limits? If the infrastructure can't handle it, then they need to expand. As it stands now, a very small percentage of Comcast's customers are coming anywhere near the limits that have been set. | |
|  |   funchords Robb Topolski Premium,MVM join:2001-03-11 Hillsboro, OR
·Verizon Online DSL
·Skype
·Comcast
| Re: Power User? said by jmn1207 :What is it that a supposed power user is transferring at such a cap-breaking frenzy? If it's games, movies, TV, music, or software; I just don't see that transitioning in the future to the mainstream users amongst us. How old are you?
I'm 45. I'm no longer in the mainstream. I've never SMS'ed. I don't do much P2P. I'll probably be watching TEE-VEE for a long time. I never go over my wireless minutes.
My kids, however, are in the mainsteam. In 20 years, their kids will be.
We'll never understand, it won't be us. -- Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon More features, more fun, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...
| |
|  |  |   jmn1207 Premium join:2000-07-19 Reston, VA
·Verizon FIOS
| Re: Power User? I understand too well what you are saying with respect to the changing of the generation guard, but I just don't believe the applications are currently out there that would drive most of us to max out our internet connection 12 hours a day every day of the week. Because a few people need or choose to eat 12000 calories a day makes them power eaters in a similar sense. It is certainly not for the mainstream person as things stand right now. The internet is the same for most people, regardless of their age, at least for now. | |
|  |  |  |   funchords Robb Topolski Premium,MVM join:2001-03-11 Hillsboro, OR
·Verizon Online DSL
·Skype
·Comcast
| Re: Power User? To hit Comcast's 250 GB target with its basic 6 Mbps service, you need only run "full blast" for 3 hours every day. But that doesn't change the fact that 6 Mbps is fast or that 250 GB is a lot.
There was a real fight against large web pages back 12-13 years ago. If the page didn't load within 10 seconds on a dial-up connection, marketers believed that surfers lost interest in it. 34K was the 10-second page size limit back then, graphics included, otherwise you'd leave customers in the World-Wide-Wait. Flash wasn't even around.
In 1997, the average page size was 44 KB In 2000, it was 60 KB In 2003, it was 97 KB In 2008, it was 312 KB (»www.pantos.org/atw/35654.html, »www.websiteoptimization.com/spee···eb-page/)
The 312 KB web page would take 90 seconds to load in dial-up.
We had no clue. We still have no clue. But this is progress, and we'd be fools to resist it. -- Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon More features, more fun, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...
| |
|   jcremin
@genesiswireless.us
| People don't understand caps Every time an ISP even mentions caps, the whole community goes nuts about how ridiculous the idea is in the first place. Maybe it's just because nobody explains WHY caps are necessary. I run a small ISP, and here's my explanation, which hopefully helps people understand the purpose of the caps.
First thing that people don't seem to understand is that every piece of equipment has limitations as to how much bandwidth it can handle. In some instances, you may have places where you can only get so much bandwidth to, and once it's used up, it's used up. For instance, say you have a DSLAM (the thing that everyone's DSL modems connect to on the other side of the copper, similar to a modem bank) which is only capable of 10 megabits. The ISP sells 1 megabit connections to 100 people on that DSLAM. That gives you a 10:1 "contention ratio" (see next point below). If you had 5 "power users" that kept torrents downloading 24x7, that only leaves 5 mbps for the other 95 users. Not really fair for them.
Second thing is that ISP's work on an oversubscription model where the assumption is that with "standard" usage, any give customer will only be using the connection so much each day. Like above, the ratio is 10:1. Some ISP's go as high as 50:1 or 100:1. I personally pay $200 per megabit for dedicated wholesale bandwidth, but I only charge $80 to my customers for a 1 megabit connection. If I didn't oversell, I would have to charge closer to $300 per month to cover my bandwidth, equipment, office, vehicle, insurance, and other expenses... otherwise I would go out of business. Obviously nobody wants to pay $300/mo, so we oversell... If we go back to 10:1, you can now see the problem... If one power user maxes out their connection 24x7, I LOSE $120/mo on bandwidth costs alone. This problem isn't quite as drastic for larger ISP's, but it still applies.
The third problem is that "standard" usage is changing over time. 5 years ago, it could be light browsing and email. 2 years ago it could be browsing, email, and streaming audio. Today it could be all of those plus VoIP, and video streams, and tomorrow it could add high def content.
With the current pricing models ISP's use, I think they would all go out of business in the next 5 years without starting to make some changes. So you now have a choice... Raise the price for EVERYONE so the ISP is still profitable, or use caps to limit the most demanding users and keep the service affordable for the other 95% of the population.
Which would you prefer? | |
|  |  See 15 replies to this post | |
 |  |  chronoss2009
join:2008-09-23 | Re: You Can Thank the Politicians actually thank hollywood for intervention and threats to isps and them all saying hey why not get into bed together and GOUGE the crap out of customers MUAHAHAHHAHA we can keep getitng fat YAAAAA | |
|  Corydon Cultivant son jardin Premium join:2008-02-18 Denver, CO clubs:
·Comcast
| Caps aren't necessarily bad... If we take Ciscos traffic usage numbers for an average household of 200 Gbytes per month by 2012, then the monthly household bill will be $214.95 ($54.95 fixed with limit of 40 Gbytes plus $1 per Gybte above the limit). Todays high-speed Internet access ARPU is around $42 per month; 5X todays plans. On the other hand, if we take Comcast's 250 GB monthly cap, then the ARPU stays at $42.95, where it is today and has been for years.
Whether or not I oppose caps largely revolves around where the cutoff is. If the cutoff is only catching the top 0.1% of the user population, then I think they will reform bad behavior (which I define as large-scale copyright infringement or packrats downloading and hoarding data that they are highly unlikely to ever use) without stifling innovation and while preserving what might as well be "all-you-can-eat" for 99.9% of users.
The critical element of this is whether the caps rise as new bandwidth intensive applications become mainstream and ISPs improve their infrastructure. 250 GB is eminently reasonable today, but in five years probably will be more like a 40 GB cap is today.
Comcast's cap is fine in my book as long as it has reasonable escalators that prevent it from ever impacting the 99.9% of its customers it doesn't affect today. In other words (to make an analogy with taxation law-am I geeky or what? ), the cap should never end up like the AMT. -- "Think for yourselves and let others enjoy the privilege to do so too." | |
|  chronoss2009
join:2008-09-23 | all that need be said is look at japan ONE GIGABIT/SEC sychronous ( up and down ) FOR 56USD/month even with a cap of 30GB download and NO CAP uploading thats WAAAAAYYYY more for the value.
aka im paying 200 times more for my 5 megabit then the equivilent in japan. | |
|  |  beaups
join:2003-08-11 Hilliard, OH | Re: all that need be said is look at japan so move to japan | |
|  |  |  joe642
join:2008-08-14 | Re: all that need be said is look at japan thats what I am doing but I am moving to downtown shanghai now I just need my mass army of zombie pcs lol  | |
|  |  |   telcolackey The Truth? You can't handle the truth
join:2007-04-06 Death Valley, CA
| said by beaups :so move to japan I'm too afraid of Godzilla and Rhodan. -- "Believe only half of what you see and nothing that you hear." - Dinah Craik | |
|  |  dynodb Premium,VIP join:2004-04-21 Minneapolis, MN
| said by chronoss2009 :ONE GIGABIT/SEC sychronous ( up and down ) FOR 56USD/month even with a cap of 30GB download and NO CAP uploading thats WAAAAAYYYY more for the value. aka im paying 200 times more for my 5 megabit then the equivilent in japan. And if we had 1Gb/1Gb services available, everyone on this website would be screaming bloody murder about a 30GB cap. | |
|  |  |
|
|