 
battleop
join:2005-09-28
00000 | Thanks bittorrent! So how will the bittorrent crowd get around this one? | |
|
 | |
| 
telcolackey
The Truth? You can't handle the truth
join:2007-04-06
Death Valley, CA
| Re: Thanks bittorrent! hmmm my last counter point got deleted. Kinda proves what I said, but... let me try again.
If you believe that all you can eat services are a good thing for the service (which actually needs to factor in the business aspects of that service), one way to fight the battle is to lobby your information in public forums where you have a heavy control of what is seen and what is not.
--
"Believe only half of what you see and nothing that you hear." - Dinah Craik | |
|
| Madtown
join:2008-04-26
Madera, CA
| I have bittorrent blocked. I use OpenDNS and I have p2p sites that I've know of blocked. I use a 2wire wireless modem, and anyone that is connected to my router will not be able to access p2p sites because I have them blocked, (well 3 of them so far). It's my router, I pay for the Internet connection, and I even paid for the router myself, so therefore I can decide what websites are allowed to be access on my connection and what websites aren't allowed, If I want I can even block myspace.com, that is my rights, correct me if I'm wrong, but that is my rights. | |
|
| | 
FLengineer
Premium
join:2007-06-26
Leesburg, FL | Re: Thanks bittorrent! Sorry but I'm missing the relevance. Please elaborate. | |
|
| | patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
| said by Madtown  :I have bittorrent blocked. Awwww, too bad. You can't block my VPN running over port 80 with HTTP wrapper. | |
|
| | | PDXPLT
join:2003-12-04
Banks, OR
| Don't Like It? Move!! Hey,
Don't like AT&T's caps, and you don't have an alternative where you live? Move someplace else. They've got a business to run, and need to do what makes sense to them.
No one guarantees you a DSL service that fits your desires.
[Or so you city slickers are always telling rural folk that complain about lack of broadband. 'time to eat your own dog food.  ] | |
|
| |
| | 
SLD
Premium
join:2002-04-17
 ·Comcast
| Re: Thanks bittorrent! Funny - you blame the people paying for service, for using the service they pay for. Yeah...it is the users' fault. It couldn't be a money-grab by ISPs.
This will come full-circle when ISP are billing by-the-byte and then one starts offering "unlimited" service, they'll all clamor on the wagon to gain back customers. Happened before, it'll happen again. | |
|
| | | 
ninjatutle
Premium
join:2006-01-02
San Ramon, CA | Re: Thanks bittorrent! for nothing The ISP's aren't there to provide a service for people to steal movies, shows, songs and software. | |
|
| | | | jjaromin
join:2004-09-30
Chesterfield, VA
 ·Verizon FIOS
| Re: Thanks bittorrent! for nothing said by ninjatutle :The ISP's aren't there to provide a service for people to steal movies, shows, songs and software. So you would agree that they are there to provide a service for people to legally download movies, shows, songs and software? | |
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | jjaromin
join:2004-09-30
Chesterfield, VA | Re: Thanks bittorrent! for nothing This is one area to watch closely...
Say AT&T (or any ISP) has a 100GB limit. You happen to subscribe to their Broadband TV package. What do you bet any downloading from this service is not part of the 100GB cap? | |
|
| | | | | | 
Owlbet
Ignite the Ice
Premium,MVM
join:2002-09-24
Palmer, AK
clubs:
 ·MTA Online
| We'll give you a connection just for email and surfing said by ninjatutle :Yes, they provide service for legal use. They even offer music, shows and movies. » www.attblueroom.com My ISP has a 10 GB monthly cap. I'd go over my monthly limit in a day.
What is ironic is my ISP leases their lines from AT&T.
--
Team Discovery
| |
|
| | | | | | 
a333
A hot cup of integrals please
join:2007-06-12
Rego Park, NY
 ·Cingular Wireless
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: Thanks bittorrent! for nothing said by ninjatutle :Yes, they provide service for legal use. They even offer music, shows and movies. » www.attblueroom.com Uh-huh.... that'll count towards your monthly limit as well. BTW, ever heard of AppleTV, Netflix, Joost, Hulu, or any other online video service? | |
|
| | | |
SLD
Premium
join:2002-04-17 | They are providing a service to download whatever YOU want. If you want ISPs determining what YOU should download, head over to Greyjing for the Olympics... | |
|
| | | | | jjaromin
join:2004-09-30
Chesterfield, VA
·Verizon FIOS
1 edit | Re: Thanks bittorrent! for nothing I agree with you... however, what I think this is really about is all the other legal services that are coming online (ie. Netflix, DirecTV on Demand, iTunes, etc..) that eat bandwidth and they want a piece of it.
I download quite a few DirecTV on Demand High Def shows. I'm positive this type of downloading would put me over some of the lower caps (5GB) and possibly even some of the higher caps (250GB). | |
|
| | | | | |
SLD
Premium
join:2002-04-17 | Re: Thanks bittorrent! for nothing Me too. I've been enjoying NetFlix' download content and I feel the same concern. | |
|
| | |
battleop
join:2005-09-28
00000 | Re: Thanks bittorrent! BOTH parties are just as guilty as the other. The Torrent crowd is sucking networks bone ass dry and when the ISP tries to manage the traffic they find alternate ways to get around the management. So the cat and mouse game has lead to this. | |
|
| | | | |
| | | | hottboiinnc
ME
join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH | yep so the simple way to do it is put a flat limit on everything.
It started with people crying over the Comcast invisible limit. They wanted a hard limit so now everyone is working on one.
And next FiOS will see one as well. | |
|
| | 
pspcrazy
Anime Freak
join:2008-02-06
San Diego, CA
·DSL EXTREME
1 edit | The only one that is at fault is the ISP
s need and want to control what users watch and do on the web in order to promote their Video on Demand Services. Since when was using your internet the way you want wrong? This isn't communist russia I thought we had something called freedom of CHOICE?
Stop Blaming the wrong people and fight against the true problem creators, the ISP's. | |
|
| | |
ninjatutle
Premium
join:2006-01-02
San Ramon, CA | Re: Thanks bittorrent! I point correctly.
Quit stealing movies you thieves. Freedom of choice doesnt mean free range to pirate and steal. | |
|
| | | | tiger9
join:2005-08-01
Ont,Canada | Re: Thanks bittorrent! BitTorrent, although it CAN be used for illegal uses, has MANY legal uses too.
Ex -> pots can be used to KILL people, but they have a legal use (cooking).
So shut up about BT users being all thieves, troll. | |
|
| | | | |
ninjatutle
Premium
join:2006-01-02
San Ramon, CA | Re: Thanks bittorrent! I'm sure those who consume 100GB worth of *stuff* on torrents are using it for legal means.
Just like strippers who say they're doing it for college tuition money. | |
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | tiger9
join:2005-08-01
Ont,Canada
·Bell Sympatico
| Re: Thanks bittorrent! Feel sorry for you, man. Thank God I Live in Canada, though 
My main point is though, BT has legal uses, and besides, HTTP and other services use much more bandwidth than P2P nowadays.
Personally, though, if you want to know, I don't use BT, since there is nothing good to download anyways. | |
|
| | | |
pspcrazy
Anime Freak
join:2008-02-06
San Diego, CA
·DSL EXTREME
| What does your reply have to do with my comment whatsoever? I feel like the people on this board have been getting less and less intelligent over the last few months almost as if the internet companies are flooding their minions to proove their point. | |
|
| | | |
| | | patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
| said by pspcrazy :This isn't communist russia I thought we had something called freedom of CHOICE? Yes it is. A 2 party system is very close to a 1 party system. | |
|
| | patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
| said by ninjatutle :And quit trying to defend your 100GB torrent uses on linux distros. You need to download the same distro day after day? Yes. I download blu-ray nightlies of 20 distros each day. | |
|
| | Fishie
join:2003-01-14
Riverside, CA
| Yeah, we should thank all of those robbers for the high cost of vehicles.  Yeah, we should thank beer manufacturers for drunk driving deaths.
Somewhere along the line, personal responsibility should come into play. All the companies have to do is enforce the existing TOS on the users who violate it and leave the rest of us alone. | |
|
| | |
| 
SHABAZZ
join:2008-07-13
Seattle, WA
| This isn’t bittorrent’s fault. This is just another way for ISPs to get more money from their customers. When you have been making money by “over selling” for years and your forced to deliver what you advertise, you’re in for a reality shock. The internet’s “bottle neck” isn’t torrent users; it’s providers that purchase the smallest amount of bandwidth that is allowable to operate a network. P2P is a natural progression of internet usage. | |
|
| |
battleop
join:2005-09-28
00000 | Re: Thanks bittorrent! The oversell is what made it affordable to begin with. You are asking for 1:1 bandwidth at a 50:1 price. | |
|
| | |
SHABAZZ
join:2008-07-13
Seattle, WA
| Re: Thanks bittorrent! I’m not asking for 1:1, but at least 50% that will provide optimal service and prevent most peak hour congestion. The government gives tax breaks & grants for a lot of things. They should consider incentives to encourage, Covad, Level3, AboveNet and others to upgrade info structure. That would bring down the price and raise the quality of service. We’re so far behind Japan because the focus is solely on profits and not on innovation. | |
|
| | | | wentlanc
You Can't Fix Dumb..
join:2003-07-30
Maineville, OH
| Re: Thanks bittorrent! That is not where the issue is. The issue is with bandwidth TO the last mile, which lands squarely in the ISP's lap. And here's food for thought. ISP's are screaming that there is a bandwidth crunch. If they can sell it to you, then there is no crunch. They just want to make even more money off of it.
cw | |
|
| 
dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
| said by battleop :So how will the bittorrent crowd get around this one? buy their music, movies and toss T to the curb.
--
When I gez aju zavateh na nalechoo more new yonooz tonigh molinigh - Ken Lee | |
|
footballdude
Premium
join:2002-08-13
Imperial, MO
| connection I don't see the connection between what Quinn said and usage based pricing. I wouldn't claim that AT&T won't be using usage based pricing at some point, but I don't see how providing service by tiers is some sort of code word for it.
--
It's a trick. Get an axe. - Ash | |
|
| |
|
FLengineer
Premium
join:2007-06-26
Leesburg, FL
1 edit | what pt said.
sorry pt I post the exact same thing at the same time. | |
|
| Enlightener
join:2006-01-28
Cedar Park, TX
·AT&T U-Verse
| I didn't see it either. What I see is a reference to how the tiers overlap. Consider the upgrade problems AT&T always has where the profile needs to be rebuilt. Someone is paying for Pro which is `up to 3.0` and they order Elite which is `up to 6.0` and they stay at 3.0.
Technically the customer is getting what they paid for and I suspect that's been pissing people off. Now they will say that Pro is `1.6 up to 3.0` and Elite is `3.1 up to 6.0` and do a better job of making sure AT&T is delivering what the customer ordered.
That was my take anyways... | |
|
| 
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| said by footballdude :I don't see the connection between what Quinn said and usage based pricing. I wouldn't claim that AT&T won't be using usage based pricing at some point, but I don't see how providing service by tiers is some sort of code word for it. Me either what I read is that they have 768 Kbps, 1.5 Mbps, 3 Mbps and 6 Mbps tiers. And that if you have say the 6 Mbps tier that if you're not getting over 3 Mbps and they can't fix the issue they'll suggest you move down to the 3 Mbps tier and thus save you money. While most ISPs wouldn't give a crap and still charge you for 6 Mbps because they said "up to" in the contract. | |
|
| hottboiinnc
ME
join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH | Karl doesnt need to see it. You should know by now he'll make up what he wants to get everyone on here all pissed off about something. Especially if it is about cap limits.
But it is there that says they can and may do it. | |
|
|
|
See 33 replies to this post |
|
ib50MbSoon
Formerly TwoKDialup
Premium
join:2002-06-07
Coloma, MI
1 edit | Here comes U$ageVer$e! Why would they continue to let you download movies for free when they are now in the TV business and selling movie packages?
--
Comcast has spoiled me rotten! | |
|
| 
Neyland
join:2003-02-04
USA | Re: Here comes U$ageVer$e! Do you feel ATT will count content downloaded from their portals or services as part of your 'consumption'? | |
|
| |
ib50MbSoon
Formerly TwoKDialup
Premium
join:2002-06-07
Coloma, MI
| Re: Here comes U$ageVer$e! said by Neyland :Do you feel ATT will count content downloaded from their portals or services as part of your 'consumption'?
That would be really low but they are the phone company. 
--
Comcast has spoiled me rotten! | |
|
| | | 
KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
·AT&T Yahoo
·AT&T DSL Service
·Cox HSI
·AT&T Southwest
| Re: Here comes U$ageVer$e! said by ib50MbSoon :That would be really low but they are the phone company. Even better, you'll be charged for Spam, ads, viruses, patches, port scans, and all other crap that you don't want but won't have any say in either. Even if you block it so you don't see it, you'll still have to PAY for it.
--
"Regulatory capitalism is when companies invest in lawyers, lobbyists, and politicians, instead of plant, people, and customer service." - former FCC Chairman William Kennard (A real FCC Chairman, unlike the current Corporate Spokesperson in the job!) | |
|
| | | |
| | Trollhawk
join:2005-05-28
| Anything is possible, but I highly doubt it. They can differentiate between their traffic and other Internet traffic. Plus, their content is cached and routed to their customers, through AT&T's network, instead of having to snake through the Internet and other providers' networks, so it's less costly for AT&T.
If you think about it, this could create an incentive to actually choose AT&T's content over another choice, if AT&T's content doesn't count against your bandwidth usage. | |
|
Madtown
join:2008-04-26
Madera, CA
| I don't care......... I don't care what they do, as long as they don't raise the price too high or put a limit on how much I can use during a month, well they could put a limit on there, as long as I can come here to this site, go to sites like Justin.tv or play Xbox Live upload stupid nonsense videos to youtube and look at girls all month long without having to worry if I'm going over the limit.
I'm not going to panic until I get an official letter or e-mail from AT&T themselves. | |
|
| |
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC |  Nothing to see here ....
Wow, thanks AT&T! | |
|
|
See 8 replies to this post |
|
|
| 
Anonymous_
Anonymous
Premium
join:2004-06-21
127.0.0.1
clubs: | Re: Reasonable there is stell plenty of other isp's in the area | |
|
| | 
sivran
Long Live The Suite
Premium
join:2003-09-15
Arlington, TX
clubs: | Re: Reasonable Not here. TWC/RR or AT&T. Or dialup. DFW != Beaumont, but who's to say those RR caps won't spread? | |
|
DrModem
Premium
join:2006-10-19
USA | Theory? 1. Keep your 3/10/whatever mbps package going at 3/10/whatever mbps instead of half?
2. User gobbles GB faster with their constantly faster connections?
3. Usage based billng?
4. Profit. | |
|
Joe12345678
join:2003-07-22
Des Plaines, IL
| They may make so you speed is at the max the line can go and They may make so you speed is at the max the line can go and you pay for each GB cap level.
They should do in a FAP like system that slows you down when you hit the cap but they also will need to have off peak fap free times with the option to be 100% uncaped all the time with a per GB over the cap fee.
But make the faped speed something like 768k so you can still have a ok speed but not that good of one for big downloads. | |
|
|
Anonymous_
Anonymous
Premium
join:2004-06-21
127.0.0.1
clubs:
·RoadRunner Cable
·Time Warner Cable
 ·Time Warner VOIP
| Re: They may make so you speed is at the max the line can go and said by Joe12345678 :They may make so you speed is at the max the line can go and you pay for each GB cap level. They should do in a FAP like system that slows you down when you hit the cap but they also will need to have off peak fap free times with the option to be 100% uncaped all the time with a per GB over the cap fee. But make the faped speed something like 768k so you can still have a ok speed but not that good of one for big downloads. this is not satellite were there is no bandwidth at all | |
|
| | 
Pashune
Inhaling at 675 KB per sec.
Premium
join:2006-04-14
Gautier, MS | Re: They may make so you speed is at the max the line can go and Cable One does something similar, but it's no where near as harsh. If you download say...1.3 gb of data or so on their 3 mb package during before 12 am, your speeds are cut in half. | |
|
| | Joe12345678
join:2003-07-22
Des Plaines, IL
| said by Anonymous_ :said by Joe12345678 :They may make so you speed is at the max the line can go and you pay for each GB cap level. They should do in a FAP like system that slows you down when you hit the cap but they also will need to have off peak fap free times with the option to be 100% uncaped all the time with a per GB over the cap fee. But make the faped speed something like 768k so you can still have a ok speed but not that good of one for big downloads. this is not satellite were there is no bandwidth at all have a speed cut down is better then paying a high per GB over fee. | |
|
| | |
Anonymous_
Anonymous
Premium
join:2004-06-21
127.0.0.1
clubs: | Re: They may make so you speed is at the max the line can go and yea but there will be an run anyway with the speed cutting hours | |
|
jmn1207
Premium
join:2000-07-19
Reston, VA
·Verizon FIOS
| Great This whole process of implementing a usage-based billing scheme would run much smoother if we simply allowed the conglomerates to openly discuss collaboration on pricing. That is the biggest stall in this inevitable transition.
Clearly these businesses wish to make more money while having to utilize fewer resources. I'm sure once my cable company initiates this new billing format that I will be paying more for my services. It's certainly not going to be just the top 1-2% of the heaviest users paying much larger amounts while the rest of us relatively light users see a reduction in our bill total. | |
|
quetwo
That VoIP Guy
Premium
join:2004-09-04
East Lansing, MI | Can't put up toll roads on the highways... ... so you best put them up in front of people's houses! I knew there was more money to be made from this inter-web thing kept talking about! | |
|
|
|
Neyland
join:2003-02-04
USA | Re: Who will monitor it? Yea call in and say you've got slow speeds. Instead of fixing it, they just lower your speed tier and charge you $5/month less. | |
|
|
|
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| Re: Let AT&T PROVE it. said by Dogfather :Let's all laugh like we did when Bell Canada fell on their face. The FCC should stomp AT&T's lying guts out if they try and implement totally unnecessary caps. And what has the FCC done to stop at&t, verizon, sprint etc etc from having measly 5 GB caps on mobile? Verizon charges 25¢ per MB overage if you go over the 5 GB cap. That's $256 per GB. Highway robbery. I see no action on the FCC on that. Cell companies charge 20¢ per txt message even though you could actually send 1,000,000 txt messages if they actually charged you actual cost. Where is the FCC? | |
|
| | 
Dogfather
Premium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA | Re: Let AT&T PROVE it. The FCC is too busy looking for telco jobs for after they're done whoring on behalf of the Administration. | |
|
| | EPS
join:2008-02-13
Hingham, MA
| Cellular data systems have major capacity issues- they depend on their services being massively underused compared to what they provide in order to provide anything halfway decent to most users. (Of course, considering this, it would make sense to promote SMS over data-using IM, but SMS is a cash cow and Wall Street won't let them do anything even if they wanted to) | |
|
claco
join:2002-09-29
Tallmadge, OH | PaLease: It's ATT BIlling Look, this is ATT/SBC billing we're talking about here. They already can't get billing right half the time. If they even tried usage based billing, they would crush under their own weight of billing issues. | |
|
| 
OSUGoose
join:2007-12-27
Columbus, OH
clubs:
·AT&T Midwest
·Cingular Wireless
·Verizon BroadbandA..
·RoadRunner Cable
| Re: PaLease: It's ATT BIlling Or in the case of us in ohio, its still Ohio Bell, just a diffrent name on the door. Nothings ealy has ever changed just the dba names. Next time you download/install any of the att/yahoo stuff, read the fine print you gotta agree to and see what company names are still there, yep ohio bell tel co.
Gee i can rember all the hoopla and the worlds gonna end crap when SBC was talking about "buying" ameritech, and how rates would skyrocket. Funny dont rember having these many billing issues before SBC gobbles us up, must be that darn Texas math of 15 + 3 - 7 + 2 = 20 thing.
I can see the bill now, nothing about overage on one months bill, then the following month a 500.00 bill with numerious late fees, only to get credited the following month when one monkey talks to the outher billing monkey. | |
|
jimbo48
join:2000-11-17
Hayward, CA
·AT&T DSL Service
·EarthLink
| Tiers Caps and other BS AT&T, like all the other Service providers, have yet to give a straight answer that the layman can understand nor will they. That's why they have lawyers -to confuse, hide and otherwise complicate things so that they can say what the regulators want to hear and do what they want in the meantime.
Go to any Website offering from these "service providers" and you'll not get a true disclosure on costs for a service or level of performance.They use subtle little tricks like making the disclosure fonts extremely small and in a very pale grey-scale color that almost blends in with their background. I'd be almost willing to bet that the font legibility would not pass if it were in a hardcopy contract. Call me pessimistic but I don't believe 90% of what these companies say or present on their Websites. Nothing but lies and half truths from them. | |
|
Neyland
join:2003-02-04
USA | FCC I have a question With the new telecom giant in the room now, I was wondering... when does all the competition and lower pricing start? I just want to know for budgeting reasons and all.... | |
|
Gandalf1315
Freelance Philosopher
join:2001-05-23
Indianapolis, IN
·RoadRunner Cable
·Vonage
1 edit | I dont have a problem with usage caps...... .... as long as they are fair.
Anything under 250 gig a month (at my current 7 down / 512 up speeds) for the current $40-$50 a month we pay now would not be fair. This is broadband after all. Streaming video and music, voip, gaming, legal downloads (linux, MSDN, software, music), etc, etc. If I cant use my broadband connection like a broadband connection then as a consumer there really is no value in having it.
If they want to add a $20-$30 tier with a 40-50 gig monthly cap then that would be fine too. It would be a great way to get the casual surfer/emailer to sign up and ensure they are still going to make a profit off of cheaper tiers.
I for one am not going to rush to judgment on this one until I see what the industry standard usage tiers actually turn out to be.
--
No man's life, liberty or fortune is safe while our legislature is in session.
--- Benjamin Franklin | |
|
| rogun
join:2001-04-07
Little Rock, AR
·AT&T Southwest
| Re: I dont have a problem with usage caps...... If it were all fair, then there wouldn't be any reason to change anything, unless you actually believe that they're worried about bandwidth. They can't make more money then they currently do if it's fair, so I highly doubt that it will be. And even if it doesn't effect you directly, you can be sure that it will in other ways, since this internet thingie is all about connectiveness.
I remember when the standard was pay-by-usage and I have no interest in going back to those days. I'm also betting that any overage will cost much more then it did back then, when there usually was no overage and you either waited until the following month or upgraded to a higher package to have your service restored.
I do not believe that pay-by-usage is inevitable, but regardless, if AT&T ever changes to that type of plan, then I'll switch to any ISP that offers unlimited data at a respectable price, even if it's at slower rates. Why? Because I don't want the bother of having to constantly check my usage, the problem of being disconnected during a business transaction or having to pay exorbitant fees to guarantee that I don't have to worry.
The bottom line is that a truly competitive market will overcome pay-by-usage, as it has already done once before. So if it's inevitable, then something obviously ain't right. | |
|
LeeWL
join:2002-11-10
Morrisville, NC | I'm sure this will be great for the consumer Just like the ATT Bellsouth merger where they promised to have unified, cheaper pricing. We are still paying more than any other ATT territory with no change in sight. | |
|
raptor1418
Premium
join:2002-12-03
Denver, CO
·magicjack.com
·Mesa Networks
2 edits | Survival of online services If this turns out to be another ISP turning towards usage pricing it won't be long before this practice becomes viral with other ISPs. When big companies start to go down a road it seems to be a black hole that grows ever larger sucking in all the little guys whether they want to do go or not.
I really would like to see how online services such as Xbox live, PS3 @home, netflix's, and others will survive if all ISP's go to usage caps. I have not seen any data to how many house holds subscribe to multiple "pay monthly online" services. It would be interesting to see how a switch to usage based pricing services would effect the number of subscribers and business models of these other "pay monthly online" services. This could have huge implications if the service is a bandwidth hog or if ISPs have unreasonably low caps or high over usage costs.
If anyone has a site with stats for statement above please let me know. | |
|
|
See 6 replies to this post |
|
|
| openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
·AT&T Southeast
| Re: Detailed Billing said by baineschile :With internet caps, will there be a byte by byte ledger? Relatively easy to do, but I'm guessing a vast majority of consumers won't care about, or understand, such a log.said by baineschile :Also, will we have to pay extra for "pop-ups" that consume our caps without our want? Pop-ups consume bandwidth. You request them by visiting certain sites, therefore they should be included in your traffic usage. | |
|
| |
| | 
superht1
join:2001-02-22
Kennesaw, GA | Re: Detailed Billing said by BubbleBoo :Sure. For a fee... My friend
Greed = a sin
let's make everything free
charging fee is man's creation | |
|
|
KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
·AT&T Yahoo
·AT&T DSL Service
·Cox HSI
·AT&T Southwest
| Yes, you will have to pay for: Ads, Spam, virus, DRM, scans, patches, apps that phone home and monitor you, etc etc
Even if you block a lot of it so you never see it, you'll still be billed for all of it.
Even if you don't want any of it. | |
|
| | lucky178
join:2000-11-06
Coshocton, OH
| Here is the answer IF AT&T Put caps in place that are unreasonable cancel your service for say 6 months by that time AT&T would be screaming for customers and we would probably see the 9.99 dsl that a lot of people want.....The biggest problem with this idea is that very few if any would do it. | |
|
|
|
|
·
