This is ridiculous
Considering that the "overage" probably didn't cost the ISP anything, they'd being overly greedy by not offering a complete refund.
They don't have to share the responsibility, because this DIDN'T COST THEM ANYTHING. ISPs pay for capacity, not data transferred. This is an outrage and a good reason to avoid this provider.
said by SpottedCat:
They don't have to share the responsibility, because this DIDN'T COST THEM ANYTHING. ISPs pay for capacity, not data transferred.
Yup, 95th percentile billing is just a figment of our imagination and no one actually uses it
New York, NY
The point of "you get 50 GB" is that it does completely ignore 95th percentile billing, because most of the use that they'll need to worry about happens during peak hours. You can use a lot more in absolute GBs transferred and not touch the 95th percentile use if you're using it opposite everyone else.
The feeling I get from most of the posts here is that the people who will be most affected by the cap are the ones who are streaming Netflix/Hulu/etc and gaming during the peak hours. While it would be nice if they could make off-peak times unmetered, just having flat caps is already too confusing for consumers even without having to worry about what time of day it is.
Not quite...I'm sensitive to caps because we're a family of four who had to deal with Wildblue's FAP, including a 25% usage reduction because they oversold. 7.5G doesn't go very far when you have two teens taking college courses.
I have a grandfathered Alltel wireless account with no cap. I got in before the Verizon shark ate them so I don't have to deal with usage meters. I can't think of too many tasks more onerous, obnoxious or aggravating than babysitting a cap, even if you're just throttled rather than hit with overcharges.
|reply to SpottedCat |
Without caps, a lot of people would use more bandwidth, and the ISP would need more capacity. So maybe this guy's overage didn't directly cost them, but that's an oversimplified way of looking at it.