dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
1335
share rss forum feed

TurboNerd

join:2013-02-22
Clovis, NM
Reviews:
·Suddenlink

[Rant] What do you think is a REASONABLE CAP

Caps will happen everywhere, I just hope they are reasonable.

I submit to anybody to answer the following

What is a reasonable data cap to you?

I propose the idea that the following are approximately true for the "average" user. examples don't apply to everybody but that is why I used approximate.

1. They work 8 hrs a day (days off work time is for maintenance/religion/hobbies etc)
2. They Sleep 8 hrs a day
3. Personal preparedness, cooking/cleaning/driving to work/shopping etc. of 4 hrs a day

That leaves us 4 hrs of idle time a day

Take 1/3 your internet speed, for 4 hours a day, for 30 days and round it UP to the nearest 50G increment.

Rounded up to reflect the Great American Couch Potato Factor (that turned into Great American Internet Potato, although it's easier to loose track of time on the net)

Is that a reasonable method?

It may result in them not offering Higher speed packages to keep their transit caps down, but its better than what the market is going to turn into as it sits.
Going back to the classic Supply/Demand running the market vs price gouging.

I have gone random "walk about" door knocking and soliciting others for their habits/usage and as it currently stands the caps that are proposed are "enough for now but they too are concerned about later on"

53 households were surveyed today in different parts of town, with different median averages.
and I rounded to my usual % numbers of 10%,15%,25%,33%,50%,66%,75%,85%,100%

But to avoid the details of how many people in household, shared connections (discovered in the low income neighborhoods), and their specific usage

1/3 bust the proposed caps
1/3 are just under the cap and are concerned
1/4 are like us halfway
the rest still break the "average usage"

but I did find 1 Old Lady that was an "average user"

so far it is looking like the average user is the 2%er and the 1%ers are really 33%ers

Upon discussion I got a lot of paraphrased
wow, why don't they just give everybody the maximum speed and sell increments of data.

I have to agree with them either sell the speed, or sell the data, don't double dip.

Although I am of the older mentality of if I have the phone I should be able to talk 24/7 on it, if I get 15mbit I should be able to use it 24/7. If I want more data or less wait time through more speed then I get a higher package.
Resulting in supply and demand situation of the ISP lowering data rates (but they don't want to make it unreasonably slow and scare off people)

SO FAR it is looking the caps are there just for their bottom line.
Make money from people, or save money from them not using it if they don't like it they can go elsewhere.


redxii
Premium,Mod
join:2001-02-26
Sherwood, MI
said by TurboNerd:

SO FAR it is looking the caps are there just for their bottom line.
Make money from people, or save money from them not using it if they don't like it they can go elsewhere.

There is nowhere else to go that is why they do it. If you are within distance for DSL, you'll have to deal with a huge speed hit unless you live within 5 square feet of the telco. They still cap.

Wireless/satellite? Even bigger speed hit. They are even more strapped for bandwidth, they'll throttle and have a ridiculously low cap like 5GB and charge you out the ass for additional gigabytes. 4G LTE is fast but you still pay out the ass with low caps and overages.

Pay out the ass to roll your own fiber connection. Uproot your entire life and move in order to get FiOS or Google fiber. They may not cap now, but count on it.

One problem I have with these caps is ISPs disconnecting users, temporarily or permanently, for violating the arbitrary cap. That is downright wrong. If the objective is money then they should allow the user to purchase more data blocks rather than disconnect paying customers.

But all I ever hear about in this forum is the cap. Like SuddenLink is the inventor of caps. They simply followed everyone else in the industry. I guess I can understand the inaccuracy of the meter, but otherwise, #FirstWorldProblems much?

Let's talk about something else.
--
Moe, I need your advice… See I've got this friend named Joey Joe-Joe... Junior... Shabadoo..

Uplinkpro

join:2008-02-11
Lake Charles, LA

1 edit
reply to TurboNerd
Before I get to the nitty gritty let me state why caps in general are a bad idea.

First, it has been show time and again that the costs of delivering data have been dropping while our bills have only been increasing. Our internet service is the US is horrible and the only reason we're even ranked as high as we are in some studies is due to municipal fiber projects, one of which Suddenlink is trying to crush: »www.muninetworks.org/content/nix···protests . The fact that NO ONE is going to see their bill DECREASE shows that this is purely about making short term gains.

Second, Suddenlink's service is already piss poor. All you have to do is go to Twitter and search for Suddenlink »twitter.com/search/realtime?q=su···src=typd to see how many people are already upset with their service. Pissing off customers even more is just throwing good money after bad.

Third, and this one is strongly connected to the previous two, these caps will only piss off your customers. This will affect customer loyalty and, as can be seen in the twitter, will cause more people to jump ship to another available carrier as fast as possible. This, of course, is greatly hindered by the lack of competition and blatant collusion of the ISPs in the US, but that's why you see a lot more muni projects starting up.

Fourth, all the caps do is try to make short term profits rather than going for the long term. In the short term SL might make a few more dollars, but due to already low customer satisfaction that will only brought lower their profit margins will grow less and less until eventually they'll wither and die. People have breaking points, hence why they cut cords and build out public ISPs such as in Lafayette, LA. Adding caps will, of course, only make people reach these points faster.

Fifth, caps strictly inhibit innovation. People are less likely to come out with new and broad ideas in situations where people have to count bytes like a dieter has to count carbs and Calories. this also plays into the whole Netflix SuperHD (which SL is a part of) and digital game sells where, as shown in another thread, a single (free) game can sometimes be 40GB, not to mention 4K movies come down the pipeline.

Sixth, data caps don't take into account how many people are living within the household. This one's straight forward - more people living together and using the internet means you'll reach your cap quicker.

Now, taking all of that into consideration, a "reasonable cap" in and of itself is an absurd idea, but if we have to be capped the bare minimum should be 1TB. This takes into account many possible, legitimate uses of an internet connection, factors in multiple people in the household, and takes into account the ever growing increase in data usage for at least the next three years. In three years time I can easily see 1TB being too little a month since the PS4 will be well on its way, 4K videos will probably start being released (if not even sooner), computer games will only increase in size, as well as the ever increasing size of websites. Add in internet only TV and movies as well as general software patches and you'll see a lot of data consumption in the very near future.

Also Suddenlink, don't give me that "average user" bullshit. your so called "average user" you derive those paltry numbers from are people that probably only have the internet in name and don't know how to make good use of their connections. As more people become enlightened to the usage of their connections average usage will only skyrocket, especially with the advent of new technologies.

Edit: @redxii Yes "first world problems", as you put it. There are developing (or third world if you want the less Pc term) countries in Africa where the ISPs that have a legitimate reason to have caps (think single satellite connection for a whole town) and yet even THEY are moving away from caps. Think about that for just a moment. Our so called first world (developed) country's ISPs see a need to cap themselves while nearly everywhere else in the world they're removing caps. Hell, look at how China has mandated fiber to be installed in every new house, yet we're having caps? This is simply preposterous for the so called creators of the internet to be blatantly mediocre in its provision.


Cabal
Premium
join:2007-01-21
reply to TurboNerd
5x the average user's consumption would be reasonable.
--
If you can't open it, you don't own it.

TurboNerd

join:2013-02-22
Clovis, NM
Reviews:
·Suddenlink

3 edits
reply to TurboNerd
@SuddenLink generalized for others
Concerning Allowable use statements
I don't appreciate bringing other utilities into your wording with comparing yourselves to watts/gallons.
YOU DON'T GENERATE+DISTRIBUTE(with infrastructure) OR MINE/PUMP+DISTRIBUTE(with infrastructure) DATA

DATA IS JUST INHERENT WITHIN YOUR INFRASTRUCTURE AND YOU ARE JUST THE DISTRIBUTOR OF DATA GENERATED BY US/OTHERS.

Ultimately why cap when you can Throttle peoples connections.
(not wanting to make a lot of people mad with slow connections)
SuddenLink already throttles 20+ markets and you have the lovely legal mumbo jumbo that allows you to use it.
That same mumbo jumbo attempts to explain how you may tell us how to use the internet.
WHY DON'T YOU USE MUMBO JUMBO WHEN EXPLAINING YOUR CAPS

I like how you mislead people with large numbers on that false table and making people think they can do a lot since they see big numbers (most don't even know a Byte to a Bite, Just faster is better since speed is what they notice)

I believe that page is just there for when the people who do hit it now or close to hitting it accept your figures thinking the probably false statement of "average user" is true and they must be doing something wrong.

Why not explain in it that high % of utilization time/data people also purchase a faster class.

I utilize in data what faster class plans utilize on your "average" and may soon double that average.
I purchase the speed based on what speed I need to utilize for buffered streaming speeds and that has always been the SLOWEST PACKAGE. For downloads I just wait for the download to finish whether it be web page/pics/documents/etc that are not streamed. When I need 30 I will get 30, when I need 50 I will get 50 but for now the need only constitutes 5-7.5 but will soon turn to 10-15 with NetFlix, and maybe more as others in the household utilize it or other things.
In the prior post the math for my 15Mbit plan is this market
results in 300 of course you will say just get the 350 cap plan or pay the ten bux.

My idea was initially biased with only 2 accounts to monitor 1 SuddenLink Parents household/and mine Phone+4GData/Verizon (soon will be PlateauTel's 20 symmetrical Fiber and cell phone when that Grandfathered UNLIMITED plan runs out) Don't want to have to worry about it when my needs change like if I decide to download games and become a gamer again or if there is a new member in the household)

But I am obtaining more, bias has become a little less and will become even less as I engage the public on their usage (don't consider people that already know what's happening as "the public") I need their unbiased ignorance vs preying on their ignorance. People are lazy when it comes to the fine print information. (similar to companies telling people who save xxx money by switching insurance companies is playing on peoples ignorance that if you don't save you don't switch or making them afraid to switch to others thinking they already are saving money)

Plateau also engineers their network to handle twice the sold capacity so everybody can utilize it 100% 24/7 That's why 20Mbit symmetrical is the highest (although it can handle Gigabit speeds) and is priced at 70 bux.
Supply/Demand resulting in the higher Cost of GOOD service no need for fancy network management mumbo jumbo like you guys use. Just paying an initial fee to assist them in the cost of laying it out. Cox used to charge for laying cable to a single rural customer and posted the entire cost to that customer.
But unlike cox where they charge you and share that line with others without charging them to run the cable, the more people that attach to Plateau's cable, They reimburse your fair share of the costs by charging others until 50% of the population are attached and have matrix tables.

They do throttle P2P/Unknown traffic for the shared MegaNet wireless connection to 1/16 your purchased speed
They consider P2P Client is still a server that serves data to the public with requests from users(a lot of people that you don't personally know) maybe you can use that in your MUMBO JUMBO.
Instead of threatening my connection for my occasional HOBBY FTP/HTTP:8080/Intranet POP3/SMTP server that ONLY I UTILIZE (personal/household use) only after turning it them on remotely and was just a learning platform not for daily use.
And lost a customer account after I gave up that hobby and dropped your service. Parental unit's house is not my account and why I am here.

Perhaps you should look into their business model. And they are MOM AND POP. In business for way longer than you (that they choose to remain MOM AND POP shows they care more about customers than $$$$) not BIG NAME BRAND that inevitably ends by getting sold out/bought out (because of the $$$$ or just going out of business entirely because of the lack of $$$$)
WITH PLATEAUTEL TV COMING SOON DO SOMTHING TO KEEP ALL YOUR CUSTOMERS HAPPY HERE IN CLOVIS SO YOU CAN KEEP THEM
This town is 100 Miles in the middle of nowhere with large stretches of nothingness. We got local dial up in 1997 and DSL/cable modems around 9 years ago 1.5Mbit was the fastest plan for close to $100 bux.
Clovis has mostly been 10-15 years behind the "norm" but that disparity has reduced greatly recently.

@ EVERYONE I may not word things correctly and misunderstandings are easy with me so discussion may be necessary, not an English major sorry.

@redxii
I am assuming you mean the teleco's probably cap.
Of our 3 teleco's only one does Centurylink (Big Name Brand, looks like caps do have another thing in common other than their reasons for it)
That statement was the ISP line of thinking when it comes to going elsewhere so thanks for affirming my statement/point.
There is always somewhere else to go, but as you said price inhibits it for some.
As stated in previous post, caps are coming and I accept it just do not trust their line of thought. As you probably don't trust mine.
Freedom to talk about whatever is what a Forum is all about if we don't like it then don't have to read it and "go elsewhere" to another post or physical location like the third world and give up your freedoms and possible ability to use the internet.

@uplinkpro
Thanks for saving me explaining the supply/demand statements.
Thanks for going into detail about my its about the bottom line statement.
Reasonable cap I don't believe is an absurd idea, its an idea that benefits all for whom feel the need to implement/accept caps. (accepting caps doesn't mean believing in them)
Comparing international markets is a flawed idea in my mind because they are not America, and are not subject to same situation. Those same places in Africa don't allow a particular demographic of people to get online period.
Most other countries Tier3 isp's don't sell per byte for various reasons (mostly through negotiations, but some have legal reasons) Without one the other doesn't exist, and they pass those savings down to the customer. They are free to sell per byte/flat rate/or the common pay past the NEGOTIATED amount, to Tier2, and essentially all Tier1's.
The reasonable cap idea is my attempt at what they do and mutual negotiation because us consumers cannot do that.
They have to pay that way so they try to get us to pay it that way, but I think it is unfair they can negotiate and we cannot.

@cabal
What is the "average user" in your mind.
To some the average user is behind the computer only 1 hour a day utilizing just a couple mins, others the average user is utilizing it to the max for 8 hours.

Edit was to remove profanity that may have been misinterpreted as flaming, It was not directed at a person but at a something which does not constitute flaming but I removed it anyways.


gatorkram
Need for Speed
Premium
join:2002-07-22
Winterville, NC
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Suddenlink
reply to TurboNerd
No cap is reasonable.... Period.

There are no technical justifications for it.

If so few people are going over, the so called %1 punish them not everyone else.
--
What the heck is a GatorKram? »www.gatorkram.com

Uplinkpro

join:2008-02-11
Lake Charles, LA
reply to TurboNerd
On the contrary, I believe NOT comparing our ISPs to those of countries is a fallacy. It shows that, considering the US is the one that created the technology, we're supposed to have the BEST service yet we clearly don't due to the complacency of our ISPs. Due to them wanting to only set short term goals instead of long term goals we're falling behind compared to international markets which causes issues in other possible services we could be developing but lack the bandwidth to provide due to said complacency. In the Netherlands, for example, the populace is complaining 50Mb/s is too slow, yet over here we're just now stating 6Mb/s is the minimum for "broadband." Heck, I still see ads that call 3Mb/s "high-speed" even on this site.

In this day and age, for the extortionate fees we're being charged, we should never be seeing caps. It's not the customer's fault the company is refusing to properly upgrade their networks and overselling them. When the CEO of a company claims it's time to rake in the money and stop building out it shows that all that company cares about is their bottom line in the short term. For those with a selective memory, the last companies that only worried about their short term profits had to get bailed out by the government because they ruined our economy.

TurboNerd

join:2013-02-22
Clovis, NM
Reviews:
·Suddenlink
Toushe' uplinkpro, I see your pov.
But you got to remember another country is beating us out in industrially, and makes/develops/supports a lot of our technology now with our assistance (overseas outsourcing) We also owe them a LOT of money. But at least we have our freedoms concerning the internet and censoring.
You can't have the good without the bad, is what I tell my daughter and it applies in this instance.
Imagine not being able to HATE SuddenLink because of their caps on this forum. Go to France and find out. HATE speech laws make it pretty broad there esp when money is involved.

Concerning the minimum for broadband (for others who don't know about it)
I visit the FCC website every now and again. They can legally still call it high speed, at a particular point, I know 5 years ago it was around 256k (maybe 200k symmetrical) but I call it 256.
And I had that in 2000 here in Podunk 10-15 years behind everybody else. (technology, education, even fashion styles)
So I know there has to be some lobbying so the industry can utilize the term ULTRA HIGH SPEED.

I have a FCC Commission report on the deployment of advanced communications in America
Commonly known as the
BROADBAND REPORT CARD
2010 it was upped to 4Mbit down/1Mbit up
So I would inform that business of it or their customers if they refuse to amend the advertisement.
And remained so even in my 2012 report

Did they already put out this years report card?
Did they up it to 6Mbit this year?

Indeed even here a lot of people say copying a file from one folder to another is tooo slow and we are talking gigabit speeds with them even ATA-6 is included (drive to drive).

I am content with 10-15Mbits and an AthlonXP machine (just wish 3D Netflix codec worked on it but I am content with 3D BLU-RAY on it until I can modify a driver), offline web browsing, etc. but I don't expect to limit other's abilities because of my content-ness.
Which is what caps are also about just replace content with average usage. You can probably agree with that statement.

Concerning the bailout I agree.
It's stuff like that where you elect laws for yourself(your business) instead of your country(citizens) is why other Republics failed and I am afraid to admit the end of the united states will result because of crap like that.

Plateautel, engineers its network on double the end user sold capacity (shared wireless Meganet/3G/4G not included) But it DOESNT CAP it throttles effectively, limits bandwidth for p2p appropriately with what I see is proper network management practices and Modifies it's Tier 3 agreements appropriately.
And they have been around for 55-60 years. Built by farmers for farmers (by the people for the people) and only in 1990 did they incorporate into a business vs Co-Operative.

All of that is the good, here comes the bad it's fastest is 20Mbit. twice the price of 15 with SuddenLink. But you can do ANYTHING you want with it Maxing it out 24*7 if you wish with whatever you want. (non illegal of course)

SuddenLink can only hope to trace it's origins past ten years even then I see them going bankrupt when people flee because the companies that they bought that went bankrupt did the same thing. Thought about $$$ vs the people.

Take care of your people right, and the $$$ will come naturally. Vs trying to take care of your people to make $$$.

TurboNerd

join:2013-02-22
Clovis, NM
Reviews:
·Suddenlink
reply to gatorkram
said by gatorkram:

No cap is reasonable.... Period.

There are no technical justifications for it.

If so few people are going over, the so called %1 punish them not everyone else.

How do you propose they punish them, or was that a sarcastic statement that few might not be 1%?

Would you know any details on?
Your moderator at work
+ Held by system
Link pointing to a JavaScript faq


gatorkram
Need for Speed
Premium
join:2002-07-22
Winterville, NC
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Suddenlink
said by TurboNerd:

said by gatorkram:

No cap is reasonable.... Period.

There are no technical justifications for it.

If so few people are going over, the so called %1 punish them not everyone else.

How do you propose they punish them, or was that a sarcastic statement that few might not be 1%?

Would you know any details on?
Your moderator at work
+ Held by system
Link pointing to a JavaScript faq

If you go over the "soft cap" then you get throttled back to 10mbit if its overloading your node, if its not causing problems, then they should do nothing.

They could have several scales of escalation, depending how far over you are going.

The held by system posts tend to be posts by people who aren't signed into their account, or are simply not members of the site.
--
What the heck is a GatorKram? »www.gatorkram.com

Uplinkpro

join:2008-02-11
Lake Charles, LA
reply to TurboNerd
»Cable Angry About Higher 6 Mbps FCC Broadband Definition

Excuse me, apparently it's not "final" yet but let's be real here, even 6 MB/s is slow.

Also, one of my other reasons for why caps are unreasonable is simply due to it being just another part where there service will fail. They have enough troubles as it is with cable outages and whatnot without adding in an inaccurate meter on top of it.


DN_Mills

@suddenlink.net
reply to TurboNerd
I personally think they should just charge $10 a month and then $1 for every $5.

Let's say I download/upload 250GB per month, my bill will be $60.
If I use only 50GB next month, then my bill drops to $20.

Will never happen...

TurboNerd

join:2013-02-22
Clovis, NM
Reviews:
·Suddenlink
reply to TurboNerd
Dn_Mills
Incremental Billing a good fair idea.
But you are correct about it not happening.
That would require them to offer equal billing for ALL markets.

@uplink,
Yeah 6 is to slow for all but, the basic single person household.
With that in april, looks like it will be final this august when the report comes out. of course thats only for wired connections, i think wireless is still 200k, putting 3g in that category and that's the new dial up.

adamg

join:2013-03-01
Paterson, NJ
reply to TurboNerd
A reasonable cap would allow for 36-48 hours of full usage of your connection each month. I can max 107 meg out for about 7 hours per month, or 15 minutes per day. That's right, if I max my 100+ dollar connection out, I can only do it for 15 minutes per day.

Suddenlinks argument that this is reasonable, is based on the fact that half of the customers they've gained over the last 5 years or so do nothing but use facebook and twitter, or other basic things. Now I'm a "piggie" because SL's advertised speeds have diverged more and more from their network capacity, and the average has been diluted by grandma's using facebook.