|
Fees for heavy Internet use inevitable, says AT&T
|
|
The following comments relate to this news article:
article published on 14 June, 2008
AT&T representative Michael Coe has said the company believes it is "inevitable" that heavy Internet users will eventually have to pay some sort of surcharge for the extra bandwidth demand placed on the network.
The ISP along with other providers have been seeing a huge surge in traffic for its DSL services, which can be attributed to a small group of users. Coe added that only 5 percent ... [ read the full article ]
Please read the original article before posting your comments.
|
Member
1 product review
|
14. June 2008 @ 18:43 |
Link to this message
|
|
Oh f--- these ISP's very much! I'm switching to Verizon FiOS as soon as its available in my area.
If they don't charge these fees, they'll see every penny of my money that I'm willing to pay for 15Mbps Down/15Mbps Up
|
|
Advertisement
|
 |
|
|
|
tripplite
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
14. June 2008 @ 21:05 |
Link to this message
|
|
now i thought we lived in a capitalist society????
so how come there is only one cable provider in my hometown in nj???
how come the entire city of new york has only one cable provider (soon to get two...still not enough!)???
.....and dont give me the utility lines crap......even two providers isn't enough! there isn't ANY competition back home!!!!!
no competition = high price+ BAD service!!!
hate isp's
-tripplite
|
|
SProdigy
Senior Member
5 product reviews
|
14. June 2008 @ 21:54 |
Link to this message
|
|
So $60 a month is not enough for my ISP? Why don't I leave my door open, so you can just come on in and rob me they way it used to be done!
|
|
djgizmo
Member
|
14. June 2008 @ 22:09 |
Link to this message
|
IMO, the isp's should use a 95 percentile usage gauge. Those that go beyond what 95% of all other users should be charged accordingly. remember, not all users are bittorrent users, but there is still tons of IRC / newsgroups out there that trade excessive amounts of files. I'm talking about terabytes worth.
|
Senior Member
|
14. June 2008 @ 22:22 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
The critics do have a point, not everyone is a BitTorrent user.
What do the ISP's care what the bandwidth is being used for? I don't think they really every brought that up. I think it would be completely reasonable to charge those 5% of people extra. They know well who they are and are most likely quite capable of monitoring how much bandwidth they use in a month. ISP's just have to let the customers know what line they can't cross; which has been what the major issue is.
|
|
tin23uk
Junior Member
1 product review
|
14. June 2008 @ 23:35 |
Link to this message
|
what annoys me is the fact that dsl users are paying for unlimeted usage at the speeds the isp provides. so long as you dont figure a way of getting your internet faster then nobody should be punished.
cable put it down the the line in the smallprint that says something like "users are not permitted to carry out any online activity that affects other users online experience" thats all good and well with cable because you sign and agree to all these rules when your cable is installed and uploading or downloading vast amounts may interfere with other users speeds, but dsl isnt cable and using what you are paying for to the maximum extend is not intefering with any other dsl users online experience.
the way i see it is dsl companies heard about cables planned bandwidth caps and thought maybe they could cash in on some overusage fees aswell.
|
|
JRude
Junior Member
1 product review
|
15. June 2008 @ 00:47 |
Link to this message
|
|
It's about $$$! NOT Piracy or ''bandwidth hawgs''...if there's an opportunity to make a buck,you can BET business will pounce on it. With all the content to be provided online, now & future, ya don't think they (ISP's) would miss an opportunity do ya?! It's a way to charge EVERYBODY for the cash cow they think they have.
|
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
15. June 2008 @ 04:32 |
Link to this message
|
God help us when streaming HD VOD comes. At 25 Gb a movie, and a couple of movies each week, are our pocket books gonna get slaughtered !!
"The flimsier the product,the higher the price"
Ferengi 82nd rule of aqusition
 |
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
15. June 2008 @ 12:17 |
Link to this message
|
They don't get it you sale a super fast plan cheap its going to be abused, you need to sale bandwidth at about 2$ every 50KBPS down stream and other 5 for the account.
so 9 for 100KBPS and 55 for 1000KBPS
Take it a further step and make it so the connection is quartered once you hit bandwidth limits 5GB a month per 50KBPS should be reasonable
so a almost 60$ 1000KBPS account would get about 1TB of data "limitations".
For 70-90 a month you can get a pro service that has no data limits and is almost 3 times faster than the normal service,plan setups is the key here not draconian schemes.
|
|
ld55
Newbie
|
15. June 2008 @ 17:11 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by JRude:
It's about $$$! NOT Piracy or ''bandwidth hawgs''...if there's an opportunity to make a buck,you can BET business will pounce on it. With all the content to be provided online, now & future, ya don't think they (ISP's) would miss an opportunity do ya?! It's a way to charge EVERYBODY for the cash cow they think they have.
Wont work anyways, FCC will jump in, That or someone will sue the companies.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
15. June 2008 @ 17:36 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
Originally posted by JRude:
It's about $$$! NOT Piracy or ''bandwidth hawgs''...if there's an opportunity to make a buck,you can BET business will pounce on it. With all the content to be provided online, now & future, ya don't think they (ISP's) would miss an opportunity do ya?! It's a way to charge EVERYBODY for the cash cow they think they have.
Wont work anyways, FCC will jump in, That or someone will sue the companies.
they have not jumped in on install tokens and I doubt they will for this until it gets ridiculous...
|
|
SProdigy
Senior Member
5 product reviews
|
15. June 2008 @ 20:44 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
Originally posted by JRude:
It's about $$$! NOT Piracy or ''bandwidth hawgs''...if there's an opportunity to make a buck,you can BET business will pounce on it. With all the content to be provided online, now & future, ya don't think they (ISP's) would miss an opportunity do ya?! It's a way to charge EVERYBODY for the cash cow they think they have.
Wont work anyways, FCC will jump in, That or someone will sue the companies.
Or hopefully something like FIOS or WiiMax is available to help break up these monopolies. As was the case with cell phone providers charging long distance, roaming, etc. you now see where most of those charges ended up with good competition. I would really hate for it to go this way, because there's only 2 broadband ISP choices here, and I have to have a landline in order to get DSL, so it's still a monopoly.
|
|
JRude
Junior Member
1 product review
|
15. June 2008 @ 23:11 |
Link to this message
|
|
It doesn't matter how many ISP's are in your area. The ISP's have their own agenda, and an association both above and under the table to carry out their interests. Until they are regulated like a UTILITY it will only get worse. Look at the ''triple play'' ploy. If you don't think they collude, I have a bridge I want to sell you... It's NOT just market conditions causing the mess on the internet. It's maximizing shareholder profits at the users expense. ISP's don't own the 'net, but they own the access to it. We just foot their bill and provide the $$$. Soon only media content, email and social networks will remain. I don't think ''social networks'' brings in that much dough...they are next in the line of fire. High BW and volume useage. ;- )
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
15. June 2008 @ 23:18 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by JRude:
It doesn't matter how many ISP's are in your area. The ISP's have their own agenda, and an association both above and under the table to carry out their interests. Until they are regulated like a UTILITY it will only get worse. Look at the ''triple play'' ploy. If you don't think they collude, I have a bridge I want to sell you... It's NOT just market conditions causing the mess on the internet. It's maximizing shareholder profits at the users expense. ISP's don't own the 'net, but they own the access to it. We just foot their bill and provide the $$$. Soon only media content, email and social networks will remain. I don't think ''social networks'' brings in that much dough...they are next in the line of fire. High BW and volume useage. ;- )
Not really I had alot of "fun" using local 4 or 5 dailup providers once upon a time, like with cable TV there should be company's that proived the "service" to the end user through a service distributor, basically like dailup use to be you have a center that that sells the bandwidth to the service vendors unfortunately this way to manage data is not capitalic because the vendor cannot monopolize the service but the consuemr gets the best out of it because of competition....
|
Member
|
16. June 2008 @ 02:12 |
Link to this message
|
|
Well it's the isp's that created this mess with "unlimited" access and now they want everyone else to pay the price. The net based video and music services aren't going to slow and if they do it will be becasue the isp have killed it off. How do you think the media conglomerates will react........
three guesses the first two don't count and here's the third.....
Piracy. Welcome to the new age of the internet!
|
Member
|
16. June 2008 @ 10:06 |
Link to this message
|
|
As usual, the reception for this kind of monopolistic fascism breaks down along these lines:
1. The technologically ignorant who are happy with their expensive, slow Internet connections because they don't know any better, don't use the Internet for anything but e-mail and porn, or they work for a large corporation and have a selfish interest.
2. The rest of us.
Gonna start downloading movies from Netflix, huh?
Yeah....might want to find out what charges AT&T is gonna lay on top of that for you.
Moron says "what?"
|
|
lynchGOP
Suspended permanently
|
16. June 2008 @ 13:31 |
Link to this message
|
After thinking long and hard and FAIRLY about this "Cap", I can honestly say that YEAH.........charge those heavy users up the ass for their massive BW consumption. I mean, those are the putzy people just downloading movies simply for the sake of downloading and not even watching what they just jacked. Kind of like kleptomaniacs; they steal just to steal...........not even wanting the stuff. Wasteful downloaders are the same and no better. 250GB is MORE THAN ENOUGH for just about every home user there is. I d/l heavily and don't EVER cross the 20 GB in a month. Only now have I considered getting Simpsons episodes 1-18 at 50 GB.
I could and would only hope that peeps not whine about this as it is 'fair' and if everyone could put themselves in the position of a company owner, what would YOU do?
MIND YOU PEOPLE.......All those complaining about this 250 GB 'Cap' just to complain........You're not even part of the 5% and therefore will truly never go over the 250 GB. IF AND WHEN you do.................well then............wait 'til next month to download the rest of the files you want to steal.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 16. June 2008 @ 13:34
|
|
lynchGOP
Suspended permanently
|
16. June 2008 @ 13:36 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by ZippyDSM:
They don't get it you sale a super fast plan cheap its going to be abused, you need to sale bandwidth at about 2$ every 50KBPS down stream and other 5 for the account.
so 9 for 100KBPS and 55 for 1000KBPS
Take it a further step and make it so the connection is quartered once you hit bandwidth limits 5GB a month per 50KBPS should be reasonable
so a almost 60$ 1000KBPS account would get about 1TB of data "limitations".
For 70-90 a month you can get a pro service that has no data limits and is almost 3 times faster than the normal service,plan setups is the key here not draconian schemes.
I'd like to know where this fictional "pro service" is. I know you're not talking T1s. 350.00 per month at best. DSL, Cable modem, Satellite.............what 'pro service' are you talkin' about?
70-90 bucks a month sounds like you're referring to the DSL/Cable Modem "Static IP" charge which is only that price because of the static IP.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 16. June 2008 @ 13:37
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
16. June 2008 @ 13:39 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by lynchGOP:
After thinking long and hard and FAIRLY about this "Cap", I can honestly say that YEAH.........charge those heavy users up the ass for their massive BW consumption. I mean, those are the putzy people just downloading movies simply for the sake of downloading and not even watching what they just jacked. Kind of like kleptomaniacs; they steal just to steal...........not even wanting the stuff. Wasteful downloaders are the same and no better. 250GB is MORE THAN ENOUGH for just about every home user there is. I d/l heavily and don't EVER cross the 20 GB in a month. Only now have I considered getting Simpsons episodes 1-18 at 50 GB.
I could and would only hope that peeps not whine about this as it is 'fair' and if everyone could put themselves in the position of a company owner, what would YOU do?
MIND YOU PEOPLE.......All those complaining about this 250 GB 'Cap' just to complain........You're not even part of the 5% and therefore will truly never go over the 250 GB. IF AND WHEN you do.................well then............wait 'til next month to download the rest of the files you want to steal.
Funny I am paying 150 a month for DSL and IPTV and phone I watch only 6 channels and generally have the TV off because I prefer to download and watch all the shows I watch, I can do 20-100GB in a week if the speeds are good.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
16. June 2008 @ 13:40 |
Link to this message
|
|
lynchGOP
cable and FIOS can hit 1000KBPS noob.....
its simple most users need a cheap under 20$ 200(give or take 100KBPS) service and they wont miss anything if they hit a 5-15GB cap halving their speeds, for the 20-40 range you get more speed and higher caps, 50-99 they should just back off the caps because people are paying a premium.
DSL and FIOS as far as I know can limit speeds to accounts/modems this enables the service to sell different levels of plans and thats where the ISPs need to go, offer cheaper plans below 50 that offer a good balance of limits and speeds then above 50 try and remove the limtis and raise the speeds,
It can be done and its better than secretive caps and metered rates....
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 16. June 2008 @ 13:48
|
Member
|
16. June 2008 @ 18:49 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
Originally posted by ZippyDSM:
They don't get it you sale a super fast plan cheap its going to be abused, you need to sale bandwidth at about 2$ every 50KBPS down stream and other 5 for the account.
so 9 for 100KBPS and 55 for 1000KBPS
Take it a further step and make it so the connection is quartered once you hit bandwidth limits 5GB a month per 50KBPS should be reasonable
so a almost 60$ 1000KBPS account would get about 1TB of data "limitations".
For 70-90 a month you can get a pro service that has no data limits and is almost 3 times faster than the normal service,plan setups is the key here not draconian schemes.
I'd like to know where this fictional "pro service" is. I know you're not talking T1s. 350.00 per month at best. DSL, Cable modem, Satellite.............what 'pro service' are you talkin' about?
70-90 bucks a month sounds like you're referring to the DSL/Cable Modem "Static IP" charge which is only that price because of the static IP.
I bet you're right. That's what I meant by people not getting it. They're thinking in cable company terms and language, which slants it in their favor. The truth is we're already not getting what we pay for.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
16. June 2008 @ 19:34 |
Link to this message
|
mspurloc
Not really the way current service and infrastructure is setup there is not enough bandwidth to give everyone a super fast plan with no limits.
A good middle ground is to tackle the problem reasonably be starting with cheap better than dailup plans at dailup prices you then move to cap that their cheap plans meant for lite net use at under 25$ and under 400KBPS caps would be simple halving or quartering of the speeds set to 5-15GB a month.
The next range is for normal net users at about 30-40 a month speeds would be faster than 300KBPS and have caps of 15-30GB a month, premium plans would be 50+ start at about 200-400KBPS with no caps and double the speed every 10$ or so 60$ is 400-800 70$ is 400-1600 .
The point with this is to charge competitive rates for a REAL unlimited service and make the limited services cheap so that thos that do not download will have something to get online with, with metered rates ideling online can hash GBs of band with they can charge you for, the only way meter rates would work is if they would halve prices as much as 80% start plans with a 20GB cap and charge 50 cents a GB and even they they have to much room to over charge you over.
The cheap super fast net services will become a thing of the past in some places because like satlitle internet they do not have the infrastructure to meet the demand and the end result is a costly craptactuler service.
|
|
llongtheD
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
16. June 2008 @ 20:43 |
Link to this message
|
"Although DSL is switch-based unlike cable Internet access Coe says the highly disproportionate use is still affecting other users."
So they offer high speeds and unlimited use, for a fee, and now are bit??ing? I guess in a perfect world everyone would pay them the fee's and not use their internet. It seems fairly simple, if you don't have the bandwidth, don't sell it. I wish I could sell an unlimited service that I didn't have, then charge extra when a customer tried to use it.
|
|
llongtheD
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
16. June 2008 @ 20:44 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by llongtheD:
"Although DSL is switch-based unlike cable Internet access Coe says the highly disproportionate use is still affecting other users."
So they offer high speeds and unlimited use, for a fee, and now are bit??ing? I guess in a perfect world everyone would pay them the fee's and not use their internet. It seems fairly simple, if you don't have the bandwidth, don't sell it. I wish I could sell an unlimited service that I didn't have, then charge extra when a customer tried to use it TOO much.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
llongtheD
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
16. June 2008 @ 20:47 |
Link to this message
|
|
apologize, screwed up my edit to my original post, and made a double post.
|
