| reply to iansltx
Re: More... said by iansltx:As bad as it sounds, that'll be a good thing. Network neutrality will come home even more, to anyone who plays games, and people will start complaining. Loudly. No it won't. More and more ISPs will learn from Comcast. Throttle ALL bandwidth and not be protocol specific. That won't break any current or future network neutrality provisions.
Comcast hasn't taken the next step YET - but it is coming as has been seen with other ISPs. And that is "bill by bytes transferred" billing tiers and overage fees.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page
Ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya punk? |
|
|
|
 Noah VailSon made my AvatarPremium
join:2004-12-10
Lorton, VA
kudos:1
 ·Bright House
 ·Sprint Mobile Br..
| Pricing out both sides of their.... said by fAcEtIOUs:Comcast hasn't taken the next step YET - but it is coming as has been seen with other ISPs. And that is "bill by bytes transferred" billing tiers and overage fees. Billing-by-the-byte for consumption users, of course; with Emma Email and Wilford Webby still paying the same amount for their 1MB/mo.
Amazing how one pricing policy will be 'fair' for one type of consumer while it'll take a different pricing policy to create 'fairness' for another type of consumer.
NV
--
I support Little League RollerBall.
Class Warfare and Perpetual Victimhood: Slavery for the New Millenium |
|
 badtripI heart the East BayPremium
join:2004-03-20
Albany, CA | reply to fAcEtIOUs
Re: More... Bill by bytes is ridiculous. A good portion of the bytes that are transferred to my box are unwanted and unasked for. No offense, but I don't want to pay to view anyone's avatars on this forum and I certainly do not want to pay to view banner and flash ads.
As for overages, these guys are trying to use a drought-time water utility payment model for internet service. |
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
kudos:2 | Then you probably shouldn't visit this site, or sites like this. If you don't want to view avatars, you can always block images, or better yet, use a text-based browser. |
|
 DataDocMy avatar looks like me, if I was 2D.Premium
join:2000-05-14
Greenville, NC
·Suddenlink
| You've missed the point completely. Think of the difference between sites that are text based and those that use Flash for everything possible. You don't know how many bytes you're about to get until you're there. And how many bytes is a Google map? or weather information?
Who knows? Nobody,until you get your bill. |
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
kudos:2 | I got the point very well. Some people want to use a service unfettered with minimal consequences, but they aren't willing to pay appropriately.
How much money does it cost to leave my TV plugged in to an electrical outlet? How much will my water and gas bills rise with a guest staying in the house? The concept of pay for what you use has been around for quite some time and I don't expect to see it go away. |
|
 SSidlovOther Things On My MindPremium
join:2000-03-03
Pompton Lakes, NJ
·Optimum Online
| reply to badtrip
said by badtrip: No offense, but I don't want to pay to view anyone's avatars on this forum and I certainly do not want to pay to view banner and flash ads. Then you will like this article: »www.theregister.co.uk/2008/12/02···g_study/ which reports on a 'green' browsing study and accuses Flash et al, as consuming more wattage on our computers.... |
|
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
Ya... as by the byte model, one size fits all is a good theory. Next time you go to the doctor, don't tell them your ailment. One size fits all. Penicillin will work for your cure all. You might have a major illness. but penicillin is the cure. Trust me. One size fits all by your logic.
Isps would be smart to just offer several tiers, contrary to your lack of every having logic. One for minor users and with caps, one for the moderate users and with caps, and one for the extreme users, and unlimited. Give consumers the choice. Not only can you turn a profit as most people go to the cheapest or moderate tier, and consume less, but you'll be reaping an extra cost from your heavy users.
Logic.. the absence of it in your posts always amazes me. |
|
badtripI heart the East BayPremium
join:2004-03-20
Albany, CA | reply to openbox9
said by openbox9:Then you probably shouldn't visit this site, or sites like this. If you don't want to view avatars, you can always block images, or better yet, use a text-based browser. Just because my browser doesn't render a picture doesn't mean the data needed to render that picture wasn't sent. My point was I come to this forum to share in everyone's views, I'd happily pay for that. A pic of McCain/Palin, not so much. |
|
| reply to openbox9
Another option in a pay by the byte system is to drive someone off the net by constantly hitting their system with data. A normal DOS or DDOS could force someone to leave the Internet just because the of the cost even if that person never did anything more on the Internet than check for email. |
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
kudos:2 | reply to badtrip
said by badtrip:My point was I come to this forum to share in everyone's views, I'd happily pay for that. A pic of McCain/Palin, not so much. That's equivalent to saying that you only want one of the articles on the front page of a news site to be delivered even though you're requesting the whole page. What about the header and footer on each page here at DSLR? Why should you have to pay to receive those bits when you most likely aren't interested in them? |
|
badtripI heart the East BayPremium
join:2004-03-20
Albany, CA | Exactly. |
|
| reply to badtrip
said by badtrip:Just because my browser doesn't render a picture doesn't mean the data needed to render that picture wasn't sent. My point was I come to this forum to share in everyone's views, I'd happily pay for that. A pic of McCain/Palin, not so much. Ah, I don't think you understand how browsers work. They request the picture to be sent. A text browser will not as it does not know how to render it. It will only bring down the IMG tag, not the referenced image. |
|
| reply to SSidlov
stop being conservatives, this is 2008, every house should have 20Mbps+ connections already, unfiltered, uncapped. |
|
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
fAcEtIOUs  ] Comcast hasn't taken the next step YET - but it is coming as has been seen with other ISPs. And that is "bill by bytes transferred" billing tiers and overage fees.
would "bill by kilobytes sent" billing be so bad?
(it simply means that the sender of the data pays but not the receiver.
sound familiar? this is how the postal and telegram works. Bonus! Advertisers might then consider how big their fancy flash ads are) |
|
