bjbrock
join:2002-10-28
Mcalester, OK
| Two things need to be done.
Start charging for the actual bandwidth used. And immediately start shoring up the broadband infrastructure.
Those who use more should pay more. All goods and services work this way.
At the same time, internet traffic is only going to get worse. If those in charge of the infrastructure don't start increasing it size these kind of problems will get out of hand. If they aren't already. |
|
baineschile
2600
Premium
join:2008-05-10
Sterling Heights, MI | I love caps. |
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA | Metering, not capping. Metering aids to support infrastructure capability based on requirements. Capping merely limits capability. |
|
SHABAZZ
join:2008-07-13
Seattle, WA
| reply to bjbrock
The only reason ISPs are crying about usage based charges is because they want to make more money.
Do you really want the pricing to look like cell phone charges?
10/2 connection:
3 gps $50.00
6 gps $65.00
9 gps $75.00
And then you’ll be nickel and dimed to death. And when this is all said and done you will see corporate profits go up and info structure investment stay the same. What really needs to happen is the government should subsidize or give tax brakes to companys to build interstate fiber runs. And if the company takes advantage, the prices they change ISPs to send data down them should be capped. That should keep prices and innovation up. |
|
hayabusa3303
Over 200 mph
Premium
join:2005-06-29
clubs:
 ·QuantumVoice
 ·AT&T Southeast
 ·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to openbox9
said by openbox9  :Metering, not capping. Metering aids to keep the shareholders happy, based there requirements. Capping merely limits your wallet. fix it for ya  |
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
·AT&T Southeast
| said by hayabusa3303 :fix it for ya Nope, I had it right the first time. Thanks for attempting to put words in my mouth though  |
|
nonuser
@comcast.net
| reply to bjbrock
Problem with that is, as soon as you increase the bandwidth, and hit those using thier HOME SERVICE to distribute illegal programs as fast as they can, THEN hit them with the first $500 bill and the get disconnected for non-payment who pays for the infrastructure the company just installed? Everyone else that didn't abuse the bandwidth and left an unpaid bill with the ISP is who.
BTW, ever ISP is going crazy increasing bandwidth. It's getting really OLD when people that don't have a clue what's being done behind the scenes say things like "if they would just increase bandwidth..."
Comcast is spending BILLIONs, that's with a "B", on infrastructure PER YEAR. How much more should they spend?
said by bjbrock :Start charging for the actual bandwidth used. And immediately start shoring up the broadband infrastructure. Those who use more should pay more. All goods and services work this way. At the same time, internet traffic is only going to get worse. If those in charge of the infrastructure don't start increasing it size these kind of problems will get out of hand. If they aren't already. |
|
bjbrock
join:2002-10-28
Mcalester, OK
| I assume you have proof on what they are spending. But the fact is they should spend whatever it takes. If that means raising rates, so be it. The fact is, if they don't increase their infrastructure to handle the loads there will be more and more problems. No one said they weren't trying. But trying and succeeding are two different things.
Every company deserves to make a profit. Broadband providers are no different. But throttling users is not the answer. If broadband providers can't keep up with demand they need to look at trying their hand at another business. People paying for services shouldn't get jerked around. Throttling and the lieing about it is jerking!
I don't care if you do work for comcast. |
|
digitalfreak
join:2005-12-09
49533
| reply to openbox9
You talk out of your mouth? I thought it was an orifice further south... |
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA | Another helpful post. Thanks for your meaningful contribution. |
|
