Ask DSLReports.com: Will ISPs Bill By The Byte?

said by X_Digit:

"ISPs, who have increasingly struggled with these users, first stopped advertising their services as unlimited (if they were smart)."

Bullshit... we're all already accustomed to the way the internet works now. They start cutting back or billing per byte, I can guarantee a backlash! Look at all the shit Comcast gets now... they start restricting or cutting back too much, people will start to find their own ways around it.

said by S_engineer:

I agree to a certain degree. The customers they lose will then be paid for by the unfortunate customers that are forced to stay. ISPs will always figure out formulas that will elevate your price...your price will never decline!

said by robertfl:

People will not be able to afford Internet if this happens.

said by Quaoar:

Ditto! Anyone downloading over (IMO) 100GB/month cannot rationally defend their practice.

said by Quaoar:

Ditto! Anyone downloading over (IMO) 100GB/month cannot rationally defend their practice.

Frankly, I don't care if it take me six hours to download my chosen Linux distro at 8GB. I do care if I cannot download a 100MB file that I need because some college person elects to swamp my node, and that does happen in my town.

Linux, my rosy red a**! Maybe 50 GB in one month for five or six distros, but we all know that the top downloaders are accessing TV programs, now perhaps in HD.

There is no defense for downloading excessively, none.

Q

said by compton:

It's not necessarily true that someone who down loads 100 gigabytes a month is pirating copyright material. There are a lot of services on the Internet that will eat up bandwidth. Some services that can use a lot of bandwidth are (1) streaming radio (XM, Cirrus, iTunes radio, etc) that is streaming at or above 156 Kbps; (2) down loading legal paid for DVD’s (porn, old movies, etc) at 4 gigs a pop; (3) downloading high quality TV shows from iTunes or other similar services; (4) downloading high quality movies from Netflix or Blockbuster online services; (5) using VOIP, online gaming, watching videos from Youtube, Yahoo, etc.

The day is soon coming where 100 gig usage is normal. We are using the Internet more and more for routine stuf.

said by N10Cities:

Just because someone downloads a lot doesn't necessarily make them a pirate. Linux ISOs for example...download quite a few of them myself....

said by wifi4milez:

HAHAHAHA, I was waiting for someone to say that! Linux ISO's, yeah right! Cant you guys come up with something better??

said by BF69:

If you're not a hog nothing will change for you. If you are one, don't expect pity from me beause you can no longer to aford to download your illegal copies of movies that are still in theaters and music and tv shows you didn't pay for.

said by gattaca:

I would agree with you if it weren't for the fact that there are limited options to acquire such content legally thanks to DRM or other impediments.

I don't feel that it's immoral or unfair of me to download a TV show I like that airs in another country and isn't available for me to purchase legally. I don't feel that it is immoral or unfair for me to download a TV show I missed on TV the night before if the cable service I'm paying for offers its corresponding channel.

Acquiring content online conveniently fills in the huge void left in the marketplace by industries too focus sed on combating piracy rather than offering a compelling legal option. Until they wake up, I don't blame people who casually "pirate" content that isn't available for purchase in the first place.

I pirated music prior to the advent of decent online stores - there was no way I was paying for a full CD full of mostly garbage and 1 or 2 good tracks. Likewise, I'll continue to pirate content if I am not provided with a reasonable way to purchase it legally.

said by BF69:

How did DRM come about? Because people kept stealing crap.

So if the bank turns you down for a loan then it's ok to rob the big evil corporate bank? One could justify breaking any law, rule or code of ethics. Doesn't mean it's ok.

said by gattaca:

If you're honestly defending DRM than there is no way I can possibly have an intelligent conversation with you. DRM is an entirely anti-consumer creation that I will not tolerate in products that I pay for.

The fact that I get a better experience as a consumer by pirating content shows that the industry is remarkably out-of-touch with reality.

And please refrain from using lame analogies that in no way accurately represent the situation. NO ONE lost money because I chose to download episodes of "The IT Crowd" this season as they were released overseas.

said by robertfl:

People will not be able to afford Internet if this happens.

said by robertfl:

If ISP's want to preserve their bandwidth, EDUCATE the end user about internet safety and warn them that a computer can be used without their permission.

said by Maggs:

On cable, I'm on a shared network and the packets pass to each modem, why should I be billed for the search and destroy method of cable. They would have to totally re engineer their networks to accommodate this on a grand scale, and imagine the logs the techs would have to deal with.

said by redshift:

One thing about metering that the ISPs may not like is that if you pay for a certain amount of bandwidth and you have access to how much you consume, you are probably more likely to consume the remaining amount of you bandwidth at the end of the month, because you paid for it. So they will have a lot of the heavy users actually using their excess bandwidth at the end of the month, than perhaps they otherwise would simply because they can.

said by pfsmith:

Really?! It's NOT the same??

Seems to me that bandwidth isn't FREE. If it was, we'd all have INFINITE BANDWIDTH, RIGHT?

Someone, somewhere, has to spend money to provide it to you.

That alone makes it the same as power and water and any other utility.

I ask again... why shouldn't those that use it the most pay the most?

Why should I subsidize a heavier user than me?

If my electric bill paid for other's usage, I'd be pretty unhappy about that... wouldn't you?

said by SLD:

Why would broadband go to a usage-based fee schedule when all other services like cable, phone service, and even many cell plans are heading towards monthly plans? That is somewhat backwards thinking.

said by BF69:

Show me a major cell company that doesn't charge you buy the minute or text or whatever? Sure you can get unlimited minutes adn etxing if you're willing to pay an outrageous amount. That doesn't count.

Last time I checked my electric, natural gas and water bill are all based on per unit usage.