 wifi4milezBig Russ, 1918 to 2008. Rest in Peace
join:2004-08-07
New York, NY | Perhaps if they offered a two tiered model..... The ISP's should continue to offer standard, flat rate service. However, they should also offer a cheaper metered rate "option" to those who want it. Furthermore, they should automatically force/switch over any user who goes beyond the normal caps to the metered tier. This would give people with normal usage the ability to use the internet without issue, and would force the bandwidth hogs to pay by the byte. People with very low usage could also opt for the metered plan to save money each month. Its a win-win situation in my opinion.
--
я люблю Денди! |
|
|
|
| Not when we have big system updates that have to be download all the time. Vista sp1 may max out at 1gb. Also M$ killed off auto patcher so we not need to download the update on each system useing auto update / Microsoft update or set up a WSUS sever with is to much for a few system in a home And is just for you OS. Games and other apps now days have lots of big updates that you also need to download.
So this may push people to hold off on updates to keep under there bandwidth limits. |
|
| Yeah it's typical for metered pricing to be higher than reasonable... especially for wireless data.
$5 per megabyte.
Download 1GB in Windows Updates, that'll only cost you $5000.
DSL ISPs that have metered plans are usually more like $10 per gigabyte with a base price of say $20... so that 1GB of Windows Updates comes to $30... but if you have 3 machines: $50 plus whatever other bandwidth you use. Many users would regularly see bills over $100 for something that used to cost $30-40... and even grandma would incur extra costs because of updates, etc. that she doesn't even know is happening... which brings up botnets... so the power users would pay a lot because they are actively using the net, and the clueless users would pay a lot because THE NET is actively using THEM. |
|
Warez_ZealotRural land of the rising sun
join:2006-04-19
japan | reply to wifi4milez
Internet isn't a phone line. The only reason there were long distance charges was because they were monopolies. If they try to do that format here, they would loose business. I for one would rather get unlimited dial up and a second phone line than pay double or triple for metered inet.
Only something like metered internet could happen in a backwards country like the USA. |
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
kudos:2 | I love ignorant comments. How do you think ISPs buy bandwidth access in the first place? |
|
wifi4milezBig Russ, 1918 to 2008. Rest in Peace
join:2004-08-07
New York, NY | reply to Warez_Zealot
said by Warez_Zealot:Only something like metered internet could happen in a backwards country like the USA. Yeah, clearly you have never heard of such backwards countries as the UK, New Zeland, Argentina, and countless others who have been charging metered rates for years now. Ahh yes, idiocy at its best folks!
--
я люблю Денди! |
|
| reply to Warez_Zealot
much like Canada as well. Many providers up there; charge per byte or after a certain amount of gigs its charged as overage. |
|
 Jerm
join:2000-04-10
Richland, WA
kudos:2
1 edit | reply to Warez_Zealot
Providers cost per GB? Try $0.10 per GB! Here's the real problem with Metered Internet:
When ISPs buy in bulk, they get good per GB pricing. Common estimates range from $0.10-$0.20 per GB for the bigger ISPs. (cost from their upstream provider)
How much bandwidth does the *average* consumer use per month? You might be surprised - a large amount of $50/month highspeed users are pulling LESS than 1GB per month! The overall average has been reported in the past to be between 2-5GB per month (from cable ISPs with high speeds).
That's why unlimited internet works. The few users who do use 30-50GB a month are subsidised by the many who do much less. And the very rare > 100GB/month user probably does lose them $$, but this game is all about the numbers.
Why should we NOT go to metered 'net? Because there's no way ISPs would charge a reasonable (ie $0.50/GB) rate and quite simply - despite all the whining here on BBR, most of the time UNLIMITED INTERNET WORKS JUST FINE THE WAY IT IS! |
|
Warez_ZealotRural land of the rising sun
join:2006-04-19
japan | reply to wifi4milez
Re: Perhaps if they offered a two tiered model..... Well they are secluded countries w/ relatively low populations where most of their fibre is run underwater.. What's the USA's excuse? |
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
kudos:2 | What does that have to do with your comment about backwards countries and metered Internet access? |
|
wifi4milezBig Russ, 1918 to 2008. Rest in Peace
join:2004-08-07
New York, NY | reply to Warez_Zealot
said by Warez_Zealot:Well they are secluded countries w/ relatively low populations where most of their fibre is run underwater.. What's the USA's excuse? The UK is a secluded country with a low population??? Thanks for the laughs this evening, and dont let me stop you from digging yourself further into that hole!
--
я люблю Денди! |
|
Warez_ZealotRural land of the rising sun
join:2006-04-19
japan
1 edit | Uh, yeah digging a hole? How many ISP's even have metered inet in Britain? I'm sure they aren't really any ISP's charging by the byte in London, Glasgow, or the other larger cities. I unless they have a ISP monopoly where you have the choice between cable, 1 telco, and a few resellers..
I heard that NZ, AU, and Argentina do, but that's because they are cut off from society, and the cost of running fibre cost a lot, so they charge up the ass to avoid upgrading.
Charging by the byte is going to halt the evolution of the internet in USA, Canada, not develope it quicker. |
|
 redshiftPremium
join:2004-03-23
Beverly Hills, CA | reply to kballs
Having seen metered plans first hand in other countries, usually data like Microsoft updates or Linux distributions or other stuff like that can be placed on the ISPs server, and usually isn't metered. It saves the ISP a lot of bandwidth usage, and the customer some money. |
|
redshiftPremium
join:2004-03-23
Beverly Hills, CA | reply to Warez_Zealot
NZ and Au do charge by the gigabyte, but they have capped plans as well, just not that same as the North American ones. What they do over there is slow your internet down when you exceed your data limit for the month.
Bandwidth costs in Au/NZ are nearly 100X more than what you would pay for it in the US, primarily because of the fact that most of the bandwidth is controlled by a monopoly, or duopoly, and of course the bulk of the data is overseas, and therefore run through expensive underwater fiber/fibre.
That being said though they have access to pretty innovative technology such as ADSL2+/Annex M and most people can get 8Mbps dsl even in rural areas. So it doesn't necessarily halt innovation, but can actually drive it.
Compare that to say a place like the GTA in Canada. You'd be lucky if you could even get 5mbps DSL, with most people syncing at 3mbps...if lucky. And don't even start about the oversold Cable (Rogers) where they throttle everything including torrents,voip, so the extra "bandwidth" is a mute point. Of course they also have invisible caps, which Bell Sympatico also now openly admits (check out their plans). Also no residential FTTH providers like Verizon, so in that respect the US isn't that backwards. |
|
| reply to Jerm
Re: Providers cost per GB? Try $0.10 per GB! the bond issues!
Some isp's fund their growth through bond issues. Stable predictable income is what investors want.
Not a unpredictable revenue stream that only pays in the cold months.
Its not feasible for the reasons you mentioned. Most people don't use their connections so it would probably reduce cash flow except in the coldest months of the year. |
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
kudos:2 | Minimum fee for service which includes a basic amount of traffic per month. Above that, you pay per byte. There would be no reduced income for the ISPs. In fact, they would see an increase in revenue. |
|
wifi4milezBig Russ, 1918 to 2008. Rest in Peace
join:2004-08-07
New York, NY | reply to Warez_Zealot
Re: Perhaps if they offered a two tiered model..... said by Warez_Zealot:I'm sure they aren't really any ISP's charging by the byte in London, Glasgow, or the other larger cities. Yawn. That hole must be so deep by now that you will have a hard time getting out. I think now would be a good time for you to (un)gracefully bow out of this argument.
PlusNet
»www.plus.net/?home=hometop
Bulldog
»www.bulldogbroadband.com/index3.asp
--
я люблю Денди! |
|
Warez_ZealotRural land of the rising sun
join:2006-04-19
japan | Wow, keep trying. The fact is, there is a generation of people from 14-25 who would never go on metered broadband knowing it's a scam unless it was their only option.
If you can't see that, I feel sorry for you.
P.S Are those the only 2 ISP's in all of Britain? lol... I'm sure their clients are the equivalent to that USA AOL subscribers.. |
|
wifi4milezBig Russ, 1918 to 2008. Rest in Peace
join:2004-08-07
New York, NY | said by Warez_Zealot:Wow, keep trying. The fact is, there is a generation of people from 14-25 who would never go on metered broadband knowing it's a scam unless it was their only option. Quick demographic less here pal, most people in that age group aren't buying/paying for their own broadband due to the fact that they live at home. You must be getting close to China now, so keep on digging......
--
я люблю Денди! |
|
