how-to block ads
|
|
Share Topic
 |
 |
|
|
 lupiniaPremium
join:2004-08-24
Harrisonburg, VA | reply to zod5000
Re: Law suit time Hmm, good idea, but one problem: What happens when you have a user [like me] who uses services that fall under all the tiers? I have two VOIP lines, I do some gaming, use a lot of "normal" traffic, and occasional P2P downloading (when I need something). Would I be forced to choose one group and deal with either traffic restrictions or inability to connect due to other traffic? Would I get billed per application I use?
In theory, it's a great idea, and probably the most intelligent one in this thread. But in reality, I think it would be far too difficult to implement. | |
Reviews:
 ·Shaw
 ·TELUS
| i don't think tier packages would work for shaw, as they already have shaw-lite, normal, xtreme and then all the business packages.
problem is shaw is trying to cram as many people onto their nodes as possible. placeslike vancouver are really getting the short end of the stick. I don't think charging more for more bandwidth is gonna solve the problem. They gotta take some of the money they're makin and do some upgrades. | |
| reply to lupinia
said by lupinia:Hmm, good idea, but one problem: What happens when you have a user [like me] who uses services that fall under all the tiers? I have two VOIP lines, I do some gaming, use a lot of "normal" traffic, and occasional P2P downloading (when I need something). Would I be forced to choose one group and deal with either traffic restrictions or inability to connect due to other traffic? Would I get billed per application I use? No, I didn't mean that the customer had to choose between those tiers of service, only that the ISP would impose caps, and that those caps (max bandwidth and max transfer per billing period, possibly) would apply on per-tier basis.
So you pay your monthly fee, and you get X online-gaming/VoIP service time, Y web/IRC/e-mail bandwidth, Z FTP/BT downloads, and potentially access to whatever "scrap bandwidth" is available that month, for no additional charge.
There might be overage fees on a per-tier basis too, with higher tiers costing slightly more than lower ones.
said by lupinia:In theory, it's a great idea, and probably the most intelligent one in this thread. But in reality, I think it would be far too difficult to implement. Well, it's going to have to happen sooner or later. Part of the problem is too, those "big routers" with that level of features, probably will cost the ISP half a million dollors or something insane like that, which makes the ISP more willing to simply kick off a few of their higher-bandwidth users, rather than spend the necessary amount to modernize their infrastructure.
PS. Thanks for the compliment. | |
lupiniaPremium
join:2004-08-24
Harrisonburg, VA | Ahh, that clarifies it quite a bit, and it sounds like an even better idea, but I still doubt any ISP would seriously implement it. Still a great idea, though, if only ISPs thought like their customers  | |
|
