dslreports logo

    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery


how-to block ads

topics flat nest 
Comments on news posted 2009-05-05 10:08:12: Back in 2007, our resident Qwest users noticed that the telco had changed its "excessive use policy," or "EUP". ..

prev · 1 · 2

Chesterton, IN

I woulda been kicked

by now...

70 gig per month on the high side...

12/2meg comcast cable.



Re: I woulda been kicked

said by MalibuMaxx:

by now...

70 gig per month on the high side...

12/2meg comcast cable.
On Qwest not even close with that amount, sorry. CAPS are way higher unless doing something illegal or dumb.



A business strategy to get rid of undesirable customers

This is consistent with the new Qwest business strategy: trade revenues for profit margins.

As Sprint found out earlier, a small minority of the customers consumed the majority of the customer service resources. So they decided to drop those customers. However, they did not account for the negative publicity they received.

This is Qwest's way to tell those resource hogs to get out of its network. The idea is not necessarily bad. But the 3GB number they came up with is huge disconnect between the business strategy and execution. Although most users in most circumstances with today's applications will be within 3GB limit, but it will create wide spread discomfort for most users. If they don't modify the that stupid number, they will far more customers leaving than they have anticipated.

Uhhh, Sir?
Phoenix, AZ

Re: A business strategy to get rid of undesirable customers

said by litewavve :

But the 3GB number they came up with is huge disconnect
"They" did not come up with that number as a cap.

The "cap" is far higher than what the "normal" person will use.

How do I know? The amount that I dl each month.

How many have received warning letters? Been kicked off?

And look! A RUMOR of Qwest throttling youtube? Or "clearly" some kind of network issue? READ THE THREAD. It's happening over multiple networks, not just Qwest.

Karl sure knows how to stir up the natives! Was this FauxNews/sensationalization kind of thing intentional? wink wink

Phoenix, AZ

The Award for Most Outrage over Nothing goes to.....

What is considered “excessive” or “high volume” use?
A very small percentage of Qwest Broadband customers fall into the “excessive” or “high volume” use category. Examples of “excessive” or “high volume” use are as follows:
• 300,000-500,000 photo downloads in one month
• 40,000 to 80,000 typically sized MP3 music downloads in one month
• 15+ million unique e-mails each month
• Online TV video streaming of 1,000-3,000 30-minute shows each month
• 2-5 million Web page visits (approximately one every second, 24 hours per day)

Kansas City, MO


Well there goes the neighborhood..

I remember qwest customers were claiming.. hey at least we don't have invisible caps.. like on comcast.. lol

Now comcast at least has clear numbers.. and qwest is cherry picking.. sweet..

I've got to wonder honestly if this is a sign qwest is going to die as a company.. they already route you on crappy qwest backbone.. maybe they just don't like paying for peering with other providers..

Opa Locka, FL

The good old days are soon to pass. Manhole fee, taxes etc.

[Please excuse my spelling, My belated dad, a Dade County teacher of 30 years slipped my high school principle $100 just to graduate me plus my keyboard sucks on this Everex netbook.

Most of us are aware of what banbdwidth is and how it works.

The majority users are not.

Most if not all web sites that I visit hog more bandwidth per page via advertisements, pop-ups and other effects than the text that I want to read.

I often must click 4 to 6 [next] links in order to read text about back pain treatment that would easily fit on a standard letter size paper.

We get one column text surrounded by advertising to the top, left, right and bottom plus a potential pop-up and other new types of programming that covers the dang text until you click it or wait for it to time out. God only knows how bad it is going to get.

I don't know about you but I miss the days of Windows 3.11 and IE 3.0

In my scenario its unfair to bill via bandwidth. In essense ISPs want us to pay extra for advertising.

There must be a better way such as per clicked link.

I have 4 security cameras that stream data, I have an VOIP phone. I also watch video and listen to audio.

I am sure some remember the days when we used to called a BBS with our "speedy" 300k 2,400k modems and enjoy our ANSI little pages. I thought some of them got creative. Remembver Prodigy? I feel that they had more graphics than anyone.

SHortly before or during the 33,6 and 56k modems many of us were on the internet. It was so simlpe. NO DANG FEES. Mostly free BBSs. Sure there were some that required a nomiminal fee. Advertising was not the rule but the exception. Look how fast it flip flopped.

TAX TAX TAX, surcharge this charge that, FEE FEE FEE, bla bla bla, All the big corporations including our government (which is nothing more than a corporation in and of itself run by people with less morals than mobsters) are interested in one thing. THE BOTTOM LINE!

I have not doubt that ISP's will figure out more ways to ad cost to our internet access.

I am sure many of you have seen the TV advertisement for DSL for $19.95. They end the add "AND NO HOME PHONE LINE REQUIRED".

I assume many folks are dropping their home POTS lines because it can be cheaper to go with Metro PCS's unlimited cell (and others) than pay for plain old telephone service. When that happens they drop their dial up internet account.

The revenu drops for the POTS provider and the local governemnts loose taxes. If I recall cell phones have federal taxes? One main reason why I feel the government is giving away cell phones [Safelink].

They will make money off the taxes. Few people will stay within the 60 or 70 minute limit that comes with the SAFELINK phone.

Sorry I got off the topic. We are getting taxed to death and charged to death at every angle that the big boys can dream up. Just like a previous poster said what if you want t try 3 flavors of linux. Thats a minmum if 3 gigs (OK in most cases) 90% of my email bandwidth is consumed by advertisement and ISPs want me to pay extra. BULL.

The internet is getting to the point where we may have to join a union type organizatioon and rebell and go on strike and stop paying for inteernetn when they start charging for bandwidth.

But it will never happen. The ublic has become snowball rolling down hill being ladeled with more governement restrictions of our rights and more of a tax slave and slave the big business.

By the time a large population has had the 19.95 dsl installed and no longer have a phone new inovative charged will get tacked on our bills just like our POTS line but worse, all the regular taxes of plain old telephone plus bandwidth and whatever else they can dream up for us consumers.

We cant when. We went wrong somewhere and I dont feel we wil be able to reverse what the future holds.

We have to grin and bear it until someone invents a better cheaper way for us to communicate.

Can you imagine that one day we may be charged by the character. By then we will look back and say Can you remember the good old days when we used to buy bandwidth by the gig?

Guys I know this sounds depressing but when are the Big boys going to realize enough is enough. We cant take any more taxes or surcharges.

We are in an economic situation where the goverment should be lowering traffic tickets, bus fares, eliminating or outlawing cameras at intersections.

If we do not gather and stop them soon it may become mandatory for all future vehicles to contain a gps style transever and said unit will generate us a ticket anywhere in the US. They will know when we are in scool zones and what speed limit the stretch of road ahead is rated at.

I'm sorry to say we have much bigger wories than bandwidth.

In closing it is a bummer to pay for bandwidth.

I realize that POTS land lines have a K limit but surely somebody can design some way to stream 10 MBS over POTS. Csn you imagine?

Maybe we could get back t0 the days of free internet like bbs was.

30 years ago my father told me there would be pay tv. I invisioned a service man comming to my home and instsalling coin operated machine-system where we could drop in a quarter to watch a COMMERCIAL FREE movie.

Now look what happened there. Most of us are paying 50 or 60 bucks a month for BASIC. In essense we are paying to watch commercials.

This stuff is a SLOW process that we learn to put up with.

Just like the seat belt law. I wonder how long it will be before we are all microchiped like our pets and tracked. We already can be tracked via our cell phones.

Most public has no idea that their wife can pay 9.95 a month and catch their husband going to the motel 6 down the road when he is "working late".

You guys get my drift by now. I realize I am mixing constitutional law with Internet regullations but it all boils down to the FEDS.

Local governments are almost broke, they are raising the cost of tickets. Paying officers double their salaries ($100,000.00 overtime for 41 Dade County officers.

Obama is on thr right trac but the government will conspire to eliminate him at least that is my opinion.

O well I will go on forever.

Yea for free non commercial DSL!


Ames, IA

user error

An update on this... looks like the guy was using opendns which was causing him to connect to a different youtube video server. He switched his dns to qwest's dns server and the video worked fine. Hmm.. so there was no cap issue! More or less user error for blaming Qwest.