dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
6112
share rss forum feed


Matt3
All noise, no signal.
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12

1 edit

1 recommendation

Double-Talk

I also noticed in the article yesterday that the Verizon rep stated they would not impose limits on usage, but then turned around and stated that consumers can use any devices as long as they are willing to pay for usage.

That strongly reeked of "we're going to bill by the byte" to me.
--
Pretty Fly for a White Guy™



FFH
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ
kudos:5

said by Matt3:

I also noticed in the article yesterday that the Verizon rep stated they would not impose limits on usage, but then turned around and stated that consumers can use any devices as long as they are willing to pay for usage.

That strongly reeked of "we're going to bill by the byte" to me.
It is about time that pay-per-byte starts getting used. It solves all problems. It monetarily penalizes bandwidth hogs. It funds infrastructure investment. It avoids the need to throttle content providers, protocols, etc.

If this model flies, then expect to see it start appearing on landline broadband as well.
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page

bbenso1

join:2004-11-28
Baltimore, MD

2 recommendations

said by FFH:

It is about time that pay-per-byte starts getting used. It solves all problems.
Except that pesky problem of having to pay for data you didn't request. If I'm paying by the byte, is my ISP going to filter out all spam on the mail server before it gets downloaded to my email client? Is my ISP going to block unwanted popup ads on any web sites that I might visit? What about annoying, high-bandwidth flash content that I don't want to see? What about windows updates that get downloaded even though I told windows not to download updates?


Jovi
Premium
join:2000-02-24
Mount Joy, PA
reply to FFH

It isn't about being a "bandwidth hog". Some use their connection more than others. Legally I might add. I am on the net more than watching television. That is my preferred entertainment.

But I must strongly say that with the bill by the byte system, it will finally quiet down the folks like you screaming about hog this hog that. The term "You get what you pay for" rings so true here.
--
"Where's my coffee? Oh. I guess it's my turn to make it."



gaforces
United We Stand, Divided We Fall

join:2002-04-07
Santa Cruz, CA

1 edit
reply to Matt3

It'll be a cold day in hell before I pay by the byte.
I will also ridicule anyone I meet who does.
And talk crap about the company's that do it.



adisor19

join:2004-10-11

AMEN!

Adi



Jeffrey
Connoisseur of leisurely things
Premium
join:2002-12-24
Long Island
kudos:3
Reviews:
·voip.ms
·Verizon FiOS
·Vonage
reply to FFH

said by FFH:

said by Matt3:

If this model flies, then expect to see it start appearing on landline broadband as well.
I don't think we'll see that on home broadband. There is too much out there (from an innovative point of view) that requires high bandwidth consumption. If per-byte billing ever occurs at the home level on my Fios, I'm out of there. And I love Fios.
--
And so castles made of sand, slip into the sea, eventually.

I'm the Dude. So that's what you call me. You know, that or, uh, His Dudeness, or uh, Duder, or El Duderino if you're not into the whole brevity thing.

emptywig
Huh? What?
Premium
join:2002-08-05
Pasadena, TX
reply to bbenso1

Damn tootin'...

wig


openbox9
Premium
join:2004-01-26
japan
kudos:2
reply to bbenso1

Everything you mentioned was requested by you or your computer in some manner.

SPAM: IMAP is wonderful

Ads and Flash are relative to the sites that you request

Windows updates? Your OS is requesting them.



hhawkman
Premium
join:2001-02-08
Port Hueneme, CA

1 recommendation

reply to FFH

said by FFH:


It is about time that pay-per-byte starts getting used. It solves all problems. It monetarily penalizes bandwidth hogs. It funds infrastructure investment. It avoids the need to throttle content providers, protocols, etc.

If this model flies, then expect to see it start appearing on landline broadband as well.


I've said it before, and I'll say it again.
THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A "BANDWIDTH HOG"
I Pay for bandwidth, and I use it. To NOT do so would be silly. The term "BANDWIDTH HOG" was created by 'the Syndicate' to cover up the overloaded nodes they created by overselling. PERIOD!

openbox9
Premium
join:2004-01-26
japan
kudos:2

1 recommendation

You pay for a connection to the Internet for average, normal use. You don't pay for 100% of your bandwidth. If you did, your monthly bill would have a couple of extra zeros added to it.


openbox9
Premium
join:2004-01-26
japan
kudos:2

1 edit
reply to gaforces

Do you do the same thing for existing mobile phone users?



Piggie
I Actually use Windstream
Premium
join:2005-11-23
Orange Springs, FL
Reviews:
·Windstream
·HughesNet Satell..
reply to openbox9

Why even debate?

There are so many other choices in most places in the country why would anyone needing data service use Verizon?

They lied for 4 years and didn't stop until a Judge called them on the carpet.

Now they want pay per byte.

Simply remove them from your selection and go on with life.

PS: Most towns have more choices than just switching to GSM also. Sprint and Alltel are in a lot of places and have decent data plans.
--
| Speedstream 4200 Modem - 3m/384 plan | W98-W2KSP4-XPSP2 - All AMD | Buffalo WHR G54S with OpenWRT WR0.9 | 3 downstream switches feeding 6 total clients (no wireless) | Including the Data port on the side of my pork belly |



hhawkman
Premium
join:2001-02-08
Port Hueneme, CA

1 edit

1 recommendation

reply to openbox9

Re: Double-Talk

said by openbox9:

You pay for a connection to the Internet for average, normal use. You don't pay for 100% of your bandwidth. If you did, your monthly bill would have a couple of extra zeros added to it.
No offence my friend... What IS normal use? And who the FRACK gave you that mindset? I pay for X download, and X upload. And I'm damn well gonna use it if I need to. If I can't Use it, I am being defrauded by my provider.


booticon

join:2007-07-31
East Lyme, CT

1 recommendation

So you say "no offence" (sic), but then you trash on the poor guy?

Oh, and have you read your AUP lately? Acceptable use isn't saturating your connection 24/7, whether you think you *need* it or not.



hhawkman
Premium
join:2001-02-08
Port Hueneme, CA

said by booticon:

So you say "no offence" (sic), but then you trash on the poor guy?

Oh, and have you read your AUP lately? Acceptable use isn't saturating your connection 24/7, whether you think you *need* it or not.
Who said anything about saturating it 24/7?
However, I have that right if I so choose.

And again, the jury isn't necessarily out on the "idiot" thing. Go troll somewhere else.


Matt3
All noise, no signal.
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12
reply to FFH

said by FFH:

said by Matt3:

I also noticed in the article yesterday that the Verizon rep stated they would not impose limits on usage, but then turned around and stated that consumers can use any devices as long as they are willing to pay for usage.

That strongly reeked of "we're going to bill by the byte" to me.
It is about time that pay-per-byte starts getting used. It solves all problems. It monetarily penalizes bandwidth hogs. It funds infrastructure investment. It avoids the need to throttle content providers, protocols, etc.

If this model flies, then expect to see it start appearing on landline broadband as well.
Except for the fact people (customers) don't want to keep up with it and it's going to be hard for providers to track it.
--
Pretty Fly for a White Guy™


booticon

join:2007-07-31
East Lyme, CT

1 edit
reply to hhawkman

Did you even read that first question?

Nice, I disagree with you, and that makes me a troll. I believe you are the idiot. And yes, I do mean that in an offensive way.

(Edited to add emphasis)



hhawkman
Premium
join:2001-02-08
Port Hueneme, CA

1 edit

said by booticon:

Did you even read that first question?

Nice, I disagree with you, and that makes me a troll. I believe you are the idiot. And yes, I do mean that in an offensive way.

(Edited to add emphasis)
We all have our opinions.
(edited to show that I don't care about your emphasis)

openbox9
Premium
join:2004-01-26
japan
kudos:2
reply to hhawkman

said by hhawkman:

No offence my friend... What IS normal use?
There's a second word that you conveniently left out...average. Averages are extremely easy to calculate and hence very helpful in defining normal.
said by hhawkman:

I pay for X download, and X upload.
No, you pay for "up to" the capability to peak to X download and Y upload.
said by hhawkman:

If I can't Use it, I am being defrauded by my provider.
There is no fraud in your scenario. If you pay for guaranteed throughput and have the SLA to prove it, then you can claim failure by your service provider. I still wouldn't call it fraud, but you can use whatever semantics that make you happy.

openbox9
Premium
join:2004-01-26
japan
kudos:2
reply to Matt3

Not really. It won't be much different that keeping track of your mobile minutes used. The providers simply need to provide that feedback mechanism for their customers.


Kearnstd
Space Elf
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
kudos:1
reply to Matt3

normal use is running at 100% sometimes and minimal others imo. i sometimes torrent things(wont discuss it) but then i can go for months where my only transfer is playing MMOs which use less bandwidth then surfing normal web pages(when not counting patches).
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports



Matt3
All noise, no signal.
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12
reply to openbox9

said by openbox9:

Not really. It won't be much different that keeping track of your mobile minutes used. The providers simply need to provide that feedback mechanism for their customers.
It's not quite that simple. What about all the spam email I receive or the phone home traffic of any software or devices I use? What if I piss someone off who decides to DDoS me?

There are methods and models to eliminate all the concerns I listed and to make bill-by-the-byte work, but I don't want my ISP in charge of any of them.
--
Pretty Fly for a White Guy™


gaforces
United We Stand, Divided We Fall

join:2002-04-07
Santa Cruz, CA
reply to openbox9

said by openbox9:

Do you do the same thing for existing mobile phone users?
I'll give it a shot, those mobile phone users, paying by the byte, a new ringtone every week. Texting, pay extra, roaming, pay extra. Want to surf the net? Pay a LOT extra.

It's just a money sucking mini-vacuum hooked to your wallet/purse.

I got more ... next time
--
‘Do ye, quieting in your bosoms your strong hearts,
Who of many good things have had your fill even to surfeit,
With what is moderate nourish your mighty desire; for neither will
We yield, nor shall you have all else as you wish.’
Solon

openbox9
Premium
join:2004-01-26
japan
kudos:2
reply to Matt3

Cost of doing business. If customers aren't willing to own up to being a netizen, then they shouldn't be connected.


openbox9
Premium
join:2004-01-26
japan
kudos:2
reply to gaforces

I was talking about minutes used since I have yet to see a flat-rate, all you can call mobile plan.



FutureMon
Ach Du Lieber
Premium,ExMod 2002-05
join:2000-10-05
Seaside, CA
Reviews:
·Suddenlink
reply to openbox9

said by openbox9:

said by hhawkman:

No offence my friend... What IS normal use?
There's a second word that you conveniently left out...average. Averages are extremely easy to calculate and hence very helpful in defining normal.
said by hhawkman:

I pay for X download, and X upload.
No, you pay for "up to" the capability to peak to X download and Y upload.
said by hhawkman:

If I can't Use it, I am being defrauded by my provider.
There is no fraud in your scenario. If you pay for guaranteed throughput and have the SLA to prove it, then you can claim failure by your service provider. I still wouldn't call it fraud, but you can use whatever semantics that make you happy.
Get business class service and "Acceptable use" should be out the window. That's a case where you can be assured full usage of the bandwidth both up and down that you are paying for. Of course it costs about 4 times as much as residential, but rightly so since presumably you are running a business and require tighter SLA's on your connection.

- FM
--
Undisputed BBR Karaoke Champion! Care to challenge me?

openbox9
Premium
join:2004-01-26
japan
kudos:2

You can get guaranteed full usage of your connection if you have a dedicated connection (not the "$359 Speakeasy Special"), which usually costs more than 4 times as much as a residential connection....and that's assuming only a circuit such as a T-1.

Expand your moderator at work


KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
reply to FFH

Re: Double-Talk

said by FFH:

It is about time that pay-per-byte starts getting used. It solves all problems. It monetarily penalizes bandwidth hogs. It funds infrastructure investment. It avoids the need to throttle content providers, protocols, etc.
Yeah, except for one thing. It will cost consumers more. I'm not talking about bandwidth hogs, but everyday, regular users. They'll be billed for "only what they use" problem is the rates will be 3x higher.
--
"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!)