goobertek
join:2005-01-27
Baltimore, MD | oh noes!11!!!
broadband plans with rollover bytes! |
|
Guru
join:2005-12-01
Canada
| Uh???
"Any model that allows the consumer to have more control and more choice makes sense to us,"
WOW...
Excuses people cum up with to make money...
Very impressed.  |
|
ShootToThril
Tell The Truth
Premium
join:2004-06-07
Sherman Oaks, CA
clubs: | What?
Why don't they just take the road of offering different tiers and be done with it . Let the user decide the level of service they want and pay accordingly. |
|
Varlik
Without Honor You Will Never Be Free
Premium
join:2002-01-06
Anderson, SC | Killers
These bone heads just don't have a clue. Their tiered net and bill by the byte tactics if employed will kill the net as we know it. |
|
steevio
Saving Lives One Shift At A Time
join:2003-06-22
Valencia, CA
|  What da
Who the heck is runnin' the show up there
Heck, Japan and Korea, and I am sure other east Asian countries, are runnin' wild with 10M/10M, and some with 100M/100M deal, and yet in the States we are debating about charging per/byte  Are these guys serious
Why are we going backwards with this "bandwidth" issue? |
|
PhoenixDown
-- Wants FIOS
Premium
join:2003-06-08
Fresh Meadows, NY
clubs:  | reply to goobertek
Re: oh noes!11!!!
roflmao !!!!!!!! |
|
manfmmd
Premium
join:2003-01-14
Earth
clubs:
| reply to steevio
Re: What da
said by steevio  :Who the heck is runnin' the show up there Heck, Japan and Korea, and I am sure other east Asian countries, are runnin' wild with 10M/10M, and some with 100M/100M deal, and yet in the States we are debating about charging per/byte Are these guys serious Why are we going backwards with this "bandwidth" issue? GREED
--
huh? | AIM | Utopia does not exist. |
|
jpark
join:2005-02-05
Jackson, TN | Control and choice.
Yes. With billing by the byte, consumers can limit their cost by limiting usage. I already do that. I stopped using BellSouth's DSL some time ago. You can drop your payments to BellSouth to zero this way. |
|
gigahurtz
Premium
join:2001-10-20
Palm Coast, FL
clubs:
 ·Earthlink Cable Mo..
 ·VoicePulse
| Exactly why..
This is exactly why I left Bellsouth. It seems those in charge don't care about the consumer but rather how to piss them off. As others have mentioned, take the "tiered" approach and be done with it. Let users choose what speed they want and end it at that. |
|
Dagda1175
join:2001-06-17
Goleta, CA | already done?
is this what some british companies have been doing too? |
|
lvas
join:2001-05-17
Glen Carbon, IL
| reply to steevio
Re: What da
why to folks keep comparing the US market with Japan & Korea both of which are smaller that calif in land mass? of course if your whole country is smaller that one state your cost of putting up infrasture is going to be less. Get a clue folks. if you want those 100m/100m speeds SOMEBODY has to pay for the buildout of the network. and whomever does the buildout has to make a profit or why build it? |
|
superht1
join:2001-02-22
Kennesaw, GA | reply to ShootToThril
Re: What?
This is making me want to puke. I don't have that much money to keep paying more!!! Everything is killing us, we're being buried alive!!! |
|
Varlik
Without Honor You Will Never Be Free
Premium
join:2002-01-06
Anderson, SC
| reply to manfmmd
Re: What da
said by manfmmd :said by steevio :Who the heck is runnin' the show up there Heck, Japan and Korea, and I am sure other east Asian countries, are runnin' wild with 10M/10M, and some with 100M/100M deal, and yet in the States we are debating about charging per/byte Are these guys serious Why are we going backwards with this "bandwidth" issue? GREED NOW, NOW! They're just looking out for their shareholders. And after all they're obligated by law to protect their investors interest. That interest just coincidentally happens to be Money.:D
--
"Sir SIR! We don't use DHCP servers. We only use IBM & Microsoft servers." From there my call to tech support went steadily downhill. |
|
jjoshua
Premium
join:2001-06-01
Scotch Plains, NJ
 ·Verizon FIOS
·Comcast
| Your connection is always on
There is no way to stop the bytes short of turning off your modem or router. Even when you're not using your connection for anything useful, your connection is still in active and the tcp/ip protocol is still processing bytes.
I'm certainly not going to allow my ISP to bill me for bytes generated by every script kiddie probing my IP address. |
|
Anonuser
join:2003-01-03
Milwaukee, WI | I
I will switch back to dial up, or split a T1 with neighbors again before I will pay by the byte.
--
Do the Do! |
|
MxxCon
join:1999-11-19
Brooklyn, NY
clubs:
| reply to Dagda1175
Re: already done?
said by Dagda1175 :is this what some british companies have been doing too? don't know about brits, but i know aussie and kiwi do it all the time
--
[Sig removed by Administrator: Signature can not exceed 20GB] |
|
MxxCon
join:1999-11-19
Brooklyn, NY
clubs:
1 edit | reply to jjoshua
Re: Your connection is always on
if they will bill me by the byte, they better make damm sure i don't get any "stray" packets like random port scans!
and they better have the most extensive account tracking systems! i want bloody breakdowns by each ip! like cellphone bill, prove to me every single minute/byte!
--
[Sig removed by Administrator: Signature can not exceed 20GB] |
|
kamm
join:2001-02-14
Brooklyn, NY | This is nonsense...
... and I hope BS will be fucked completely if they introduce it unilaterally. |
|
PDXPLT
join:2003-12-04
Banks, OR
| "Bellhead" thinking
I'm not suprised. The Telcos hate selling DSL access, the way it is structured now. A flat rate monthly rate for unmetered 24x7 connectivity? That's not how they've traditionally made their money. They've made their money by charging per-minute, per-mile for access.
And by and large, that's how the cable companies have made their money, too: by chopping up their bandwidth into "channels" and charging per-channel-group (or per chunks of Mbytes in the case of PPV).
When telcos talk about rolling out "broadband", they're not talking about rolling out ever-faster unmetered internet access. They're talking about using IP protocol to sell metered content along the lines of the cable company model. They'll only do unmetered internet access because they have to, to be competitive with other SP's (cable cos.) that are offering the same thing.
To me, this is arising out of the same issues that are driving the movement to two-tiered internet access. As access speeds go up, they don't want the unmetered "High Speed Internet" channel that they provide to cannabalize the revenue they expect to receive from their other "broadband" services they plan on deploying. That's already happening with VoIP; they don't want it to happen with higher-speed things like video. |
|
