 danawhitakerSpace...The Final FrontierPremium
join:2002-03-02
Urbandale, IA | reply to openbox9
Re: Time to regulate as a utility..... I'm not saying that each household should be treated differently - I'm pointing out that for a product that everyone in a household uses, the amount of bandwidth should be large enough to *compensate* for that - for all tiers. It shouldn't be based on the concept that there's only one user in a household using one computer. It needs to be balanced somehow. I get frustrated when I see people talking about average usage and it's just an average per person usage - not an average *household* usage. Companies can't market high speed internet to *families* and then give them usage that's only equivalent to what the average "person" uses in a given week. And if you look at the commercials for a lot of these companies, they're all about how the *family* can use high speed internet. Kids downloading music and playing games and dad browsing his websites. As much as I hate Comcast, they're the only ones who've gotten even remotely close to a reasonable cap of all the ISPs I've seen doing capping in the U.S. and Canada.
Time Warner's 5-40 gig tiers aren't viable for a family. Period. Not even a family of non-piraters. There are too many legitimate and legal uses for bandwidth. They need to reanalyze just what the average amount of bandwidth *households* consume every month rather than the average amount a single person does.
--
You're watching Sports Night on CSC so stick around... |
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
kudos:2 | The ISPs know exactly how much the average household consumes each month. They have no real means of determining usage per individual in a household. There appears to be a semantics issue here. Given your more defined viewpoint, I equate individual to household and vice verse for usage statistics and rhetoric regarding capping/metering. |
|
