en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
 ·RoadRunner Cable
 ·DSL EXTREME
| reply to DaMaGeINC
Re: Ehh
This is where 'tiered caps' will start to come into effect.
Assume the following were true for these new packages:
768kbps - 10GB
12/2Mbps - 40GB
16/2Mbps - 150GB
22/5Mbps - 250GB
50/10Mbps - 500GB
Same pricing... but capped. Now which would most pick ?
--
Canada = Hollywood North |
|
banditws6
Shrinking Time and Distance
join:2001-08-18
Naples, FL
·Comcast
| Interesting point. I'd be more than happy with 12/2, but if they broke down the bandwidth caps this way, I'd have to upgrade to 16/2 out of necessity alone. 
--
"I'll follow the law until it's just stupid." -Ted Nugent |
|
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
·RoadRunner Cable
·DSL EXTREME
| Its what was done in Canada (Rogers, I believe) to sway the average user into a specific tier.
For the AVERAGE user, there's CURRENTLY very little to be gained by going from 6Mbps to anything higher.
When I say AVERAGE, I mean those the do Google search, Youtube, email, iTunes, etc., and not those running BT, downloading Oracle 10g / Fedora Core distros, hosting email, etc.
The 'new' incentive is caps - bottom tier is one they _really_ don't want you to use, so price is cheap, but has puny cap, and shouldn't be used for much besides searches and email.
Since there's little (relative) difference in speed between 12Mbps and 16Mbps (and none on the upload), why would anyone pay $10/month more ? I can only expect that there's some small print, such as caps.
--
Canada = Hollywood North |
|
funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Washington, DC
·Verizon Online DSL
 ·Skype
1 edit | reply to en102
said by en102  :This is where 'tiered caps' will start to come into effect. Assume the following were true for these new packages: 768kbps - 10GB 12/2Mbps - 40GB 16/2Mbps - 150GB 22/5Mbps - 250GB 50/10Mbps - 500GB Same pricing... but capped. Now which would most pick ? Here's the thing, and, as usual, nobody is listening to me.
80% (WAG) don't need a cap.
There are 20% that -might- benefit the entire network by having a cap, and in that number, probably only 10% that probably exceed all reasonableness in the opinion of some made-up fake jury somewhere. It's a tiny, tiny number.
They need a cap, maybe, but they need education and some methods of control. There are some tools for control now, some tools for control that the IETF is talking about. Let them use bandwidth, but let them use it in ways that won't interfere with the neighborhood and is fair to the ISP.
ISPs need to put away the scarcity and the scare tactics and become part of the Internet community -- one that looks at consumers and service providers not as money-sources and competitors, but as partners.
robb
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
More features, more fun, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...
|
|
tmh
@qwest.net
 from:
funchords
johndoe303
| reply to en102
said by en102 :Same pricing... but capped. Now which would most pick ? FIOS |
|
KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
·AT&T Yahoo
·AT&T DSL Service
·Cox HSI
·AT&T Southwest
| reply to en102
Isn't it disgusting.
They'll use caps as a way of forcing people to buy services they don't want... or making the services people want crippled to the point of uselessness.
It's great being in an unregulated, non-competing environment.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
|
|
Paul928
join:2000-05-06
Haverhill, MA
·Comcast
| reply to en102
said by en102 :This is where 'tiered caps' will start to come into effect. Assume the following were true for these new packages: 768kbps - 10GB 12/2Mbps - 40GB 16/2Mbps - 150GB 22/5Mbps - 250GB 50/10Mbps - 500GB Same pricing... but capped. Now which would most pick ? Maybe I'm reading the posted story different than you, and I'm not sure if you meant that the caps that you posted would indeed be in effect....but I quote from the story. "For the time being, you can assume that all tiers will come with Comcast's new 250GB monthly cap." The part that scares me most though is "For the time being." |
|
RARPSL
join:1999-12-08
Suffern, NY
| reply to en102
said by en102 :This is where 'tiered caps' will start to come into effect. Assume the following were true for these new packages: 768kbps - 10GB 12/2Mbps - 40GB 16/2Mbps - 150GB 22/5Mbps - 250GB 50/10Mbps - 500GB Same pricing... but capped. Now which would most pick ? If I did more than 40GB a month and my overage penalty was more than $10 the 16/2 tier would be a better deal. In fact, they could add a $10 overage cap to the 12/2 tier. IOW: In any month that I exceed the 40GB cap, I will be charged the lesser of the overage fee or $10 and then be allowed to go up to 150GB. This is the best of both tiers for both sides since they only need to provision for 12 while getting the extra $10 that 16/2 costs. Those who need/want the extra 4Mbps download speed would go for the 16/2 tier while the 12/2 tier would get the extra 110GB when needed for the extra cost of the 16/2 tier. |
|
moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
·Verizon Online DSL
| reply to funchords
said by funchords :They need a cap, maybe, but they need education and some methods of control. There are some tools for control now, some tools for control that the IETF is talking about. Let them use bandwidth, but let them use it in ways that won't interfere with the neighborhood and is fair to the ISP. ISPs need to put away the scarcity and the scare tactics and become part of the Internet community -- one that looks at consumers and service providers not as money-sources and competitors, but as partners. robb While I mostly agree with you, what they need to do is be honest and put into place "useful" tools.
One that might be of some benefit is a tool this very site uses. In the upper right corner, there is a meter that shows the load of the site. If ISPs had some sort of tool that showed the load of the local node, AND WAS HONEST ABOUT IT, then people might be a little more cognitive of their usage. |
|
Froggy
@bell.ca | reply to en102
I wouldn't pay more than half a yard (50 bucks for the ignorant people) for half a terabyte. |
|
