Murdoc49 Premium Member join:2009-02-08 Manitowoc, WI |
Murdoc49
Premium Member
2011-Mar-4 8:59 am
Why?Is it foreign bandwidth? |
|
moko join:2002-12-22 Fayetteville, GA |
moko
Member
2011-Mar-4 9:19 am
graphtheir own made up graph....lol......and yea,their setting us up for money grab |
|
|
rchandraStargate Universe fan Premium Member join:2000-11-09 14225-2105 ARRIS ONT1000GJ4 EnGenius EAP1250
1 recommendation |
rchandra
Premium Member
2011-Mar-4 9:31 am
Fine...bring back the periodic (say weekly or monthly) rptsA friend of mine has been running an Internet connected business for over 15 years. He used to get a usage report from Worldcomm every billing cycle (monthly), and he was charged on the 90th percentile (or was that 95th?) of usage. How about these Internet companies who want to go to UBB emailing a report every billing cycle (or maybe more often to gauge things like monthly Microsoft updates)? Then we'll find out just how much we're using, not just when we're pissing them off. We'll also have some sort of sense of what we're getting for our $45/mo. or whatever.
Also don't forget this is by no means "automatic." Your hard-earned subscription dollars must go into purchasing, testing, and maintaining all this monitoring and additional billing equipment and software, not to mention CSRs and phone systems to handle the inevitable cases of cheesed off customers calling up to dispute their bills. Prima facia, it seems all would be better if they just let their networks run, and keep up reasonably with capacity needs. That way they're monitoring just one point (the uplink to the Internet) instead of hundreds or thousands. |
|
|
They are trying...... to cap you like they are trying to do in Canada, amercians - where's the outrage against this stuff? Here in Canada we are freaking out, and maybe doing some good because of it.
All we hear is jokes from the americans. Do you think it can't happen to you? |
|
FFH5 Premium Member join:2002-03-03 Tavistock NJ |
FFH5
Premium Member
2011-Mar-4 10:26 am
said by EdmundGerber:... to cap you like they are trying to do in Canada, amercians - where's the outrage against this stuff? Here in Canada we are freaking out, and maybe doing some good because of it. Maybe because the caps are much higher. Comcast's is 250GB and then they can but usually don't hammer you unless you are also in the very heaviest users on a node.
|
|
DarkLogixTexan and Proud Premium Member join:2008-10-23 Baytown, TX |
ya I just started monitoring my bandwidth last month er I think I'll throw out that data as some upgrades to my router caused the snmp monitor to bug on 2 sensors
but it looks like I use about 100gb a month when trying to watch alot of 1080p streaming
so inorder to incure the wrath of comcast and get into that top 1% you've got to have a family hitting that internet pipe and use somewhere around 500gb-1tb for comcast to even care |
|
|
HappyAnarchy
Anon
2011-Mar-4 10:59 am
Yeah, the biggest trouble I don't think will be P2P so much as multiple internet connected family members. Kids playing games, parents watching streaming video, possibly individually on their own computers. |
|
|
WOW Suddenlink Suddenly DisconnectedNot surprised they dont have enough bandwidth or they would not be doing this. Bandwidth is a premium on Suddenlink if you use too much they will KICK you off...unless your a spam account. I know this to be true my roommate installed the 4th modem in a spammers residence. Suddenlink Suddenly Disconnected |
|
|
Again...More price gouging for a resource that isn't as limited or as expensive as they want you to believe... |
|
|
to Murdoc49
Re: Why?i dont like this . never have nor will. i can under stand it from a business using them but not to the regular user |
|
|
to buzz_4_20
Re: Again...Again, why isn't the answer to this the decreasing of the maximum speed rather than metered billing or caps? The answer is because the providers want to have it both ways. They want to advertise these great download speeds but don't have the infrastructure for you to actually use them. The flat rate billing has worked for decades -- there's no reason to change it except to gouge the consumer. |
|
|
theWabbit
Anon
2011-Mar-4 2:15 pm
+ 1 |
|
dynodb Premium Member join:2004-04-21 Minneapolis, MN |
to mlcarson
said by mlcarson:Again, why isn't the answer to this the decreasing of the maximum speed rather than metered billing or caps? The answer is because the providers want to have it both ways. They want to advertise these great download speeds but don't have the infrastructure for you to actually use them. The flat rate billing has worked for decades -- there's no reason to change it except to gouge the consumer. "Decades"? Consumer broadband was practically non-existant before the mid-90's. |
|
|
Irritated.If this turns into a metered billing grab, Suddenlink can kiss my business goodbye. -_-# |
|
DarkLogixTexan and Proud Premium Member join:2008-10-23 Baytown, TX |
to HappyAnarchy
Re: They are trying...ya I think its far more likely to hit the large numbers with a family thats streaming digital rentals from xboxlive, netflix streaming, directv vod, itunes, maybe a little skype video
sure p2p can do it but you'd have to be downloading so much that I doubt a single person would get to close to 250gb but a family thats doing all the other stuff plus a little p2p could easily do it |
|
|
*Sigh*Bandwidth caps are evil. |
|
|
to firedrakes
Re: Why?Why not? A residential user pages a LOT less per month than a business customer. They should get more bandwidth per month to consume. They pay at times double if not triple for the same packages as residential customers. |
|
|
MmmmkBandwidth caps....pffft. This is just more gouging by these companies, they make up a "crisis" then charge the crap out of us for the made up "crisis". I call BS. |
|
|
to dynodb
Re: Again...I had ISDN Internet service in 1990. It was a flat rate. I had standard dialup service in the late 80's and that was a standard flat rate. The idea of usage based billing is coming from the telco's because they love that model; it worked so well for them with phone service (both POTS and cellular). It has no place on the Internet. It's just a potential cash cow for them. said by dynodb:"Decades"? Consumer broadband was practically non-existant before the mid-90's. |
|
PashuneCaps stifle innovation Premium Member join:2006-04-14 Gautier, MS |
Pashune
Premium Member
2011-Mar-4 3:49 pm
How sudden.Suddenly, Suddenlink offers users a usage meter. Egad, Suddenlink suddenly disconnected... Their name is pretty fitting to their practices. At least they're honest. |
|
Sammer join:2005-12-22 Canonsburg, PA |
Sammer
Member
2011-Mar-4 4:27 pm
said by Pashune:Egad, Suddenlink suddenly disconnected...
Their name is pretty fitting to their practices. At least they're honest. What is honest about them trying to say 25 GB a month is reasonable when their own usage meter is showing that any cap less than 100 GB a month would be outrageously unreasonable. People who use only 30% above average aren't internet hogs but the ISPs who want low caps and high overage charges sure are greedy about wanting extra turns at the trough. |
|
88615298 (banned) join:2004-07-28 West Tenness |
88615298 (banned)
Member
2011-Mar-4 5:45 pm
At they have a meterBEFORE they put caps into palce. Charter had had caps for 2 years and has now been enforcing them for 4 months now and still no meter. It kind of makes since that if a company wants you to stay below a certain level that they'd give you a tool so you can avoid going over. |
|
tech8 join:2008-03-06 Bishop, CA |
tech8
Member
2011-Mar-4 6:35 pm
bandwidth metersAs usual the biggest users are the ones whining the most. If you drive a Humvee and a Honda up to the gas station should both pay the same? If so...then obviously the Honda driver is paying for the hummer. Bottom line is bandwidth (circuits) cost money. Networks cost money to build, operate, and upgrade. Government built networks just shift the costs to others via tax schemes. Usage based billing is the only fair answer to this. |
|
DHRacerTech Monkey join:2000-10-10 Lake Arrowhead, CA |
If UBB, then I want no ads, no spam emails, etcIf you're going to charge me for every last bit and byte that gets past my modem, then I had better not be paying for all the crap I didn't request to receive like ads on webpages, spam emails and other crap that contributes to my usage total but is something that I can't block until after it gets past my modem where its then too late.
Oh, Suddenlink, you say you're just going to charge me for everything? Then go to hell, Suddenlink. I shouldn't have to stop using the connection I pay for just to avoid paying for stuff I shouldn't be paying for. Stick to flat rate pricing or watch your user base plummet...
P.S. I'm not a Suddenlink customer but I hope it doesn't "infect" my ISP with any dumb ideas... |
|
plk Premium Member join:2002-04-20 united state |
plk
Premium Member
2011-Mar-5 12:38 pm
Where to find itI can't find out where it is on the web site. Anyone know? |
|
|
|
to tech8
Re: bandwidth meterssaid by tech8:As usual the biggest users are the ones whining the most. If you drive a Humvee and a Honda up to the gas station should both pay the same? If so...then obviously the Honda driver is paying for the hummer. Bottom line is bandwidth (circuits) cost money. Networks cost money to build, operate, and upgrade. Government built networks just shift the costs to others via tax schemes. Usage based billing is the only fair answer to this. Well, it's a pathetically stupid idea. Especially when their bandwidth meter has hit the streets with talk right when their premium email service has crapped out. SL is possibly going to have a nasty black eye with the email fiasco for a while. Especially when commercial customers like myself appear to have lost a boatload of very important email. I would not advise raising prices on high bandwidth customers for a while. Otherwise they might have way more bandwidth for the remaining customers than they need. You like the phrase "mass exodus" Gary? |
|
88615298 (banned) join:2004-07-28 West Tenness |
to tech8
said by tech8:As usual the biggest users are the ones whining the most. If you drive a Humvee and a Honda up to the gas station should both pay the same? If so...then obviously the Honda driver is paying for the hummer. Bottom line is bandwidth (circuits) cost money. Networks cost money to build, operate, and upgrade. Government built networks just shift the costs to others via tax schemes. Usage based billing is the only fair answer to this. God you are so ignorant. If you think you ISP bill is going down with usage bade billing you are deluding yourself. Keep drinking the kool-aid buddy. if ISP actually did UBB correctly most people wopuld be paying $10 a month instead of $50 but will that happen? Um no. You'll still pay $50 everyone else will pay more. Oh by the way my $55 a month that I give to Charter goes towards all thse costs you stated. |
|
DaarkenRara Avises Premium Member join:2005-01-12 Southwest LA |
to EdmundGerber
Re: They are trying...I have not found the situation that our neighbors up north is very funny. Its so sad that I actually sent Rocky a message of support and solidarity. |
|
Monie join:2008-08-09 Salisbury, NC |
Monie
Member
2011-Mar-6 2:00 pm
lol 25gb really?I use about 1.3TB a month, but I have fiber so meh. lol |
|
88615298 (banned) join:2004-07-28 West Tenness |
88615298 (banned)
Member
2011-Mar-6 5:58 pm
said by Monie:I use about 1.3TB a month, but I have fiber so meh. lol gee I wonder what you are doing to use that much? |
|