|
Sucks for Charter customers....I am glad we have many choices here in Tampa, Florida and a little competition between Verizon and Brighthouse and smaller DSL providers. I don't see that happening soon but I am sure we will all be metered within 2 years anyway with small caps and huge overages. | |
|
| fiberguy2My views are my own. Premium Member join:2005-05-20 |
Re: Sucks for Charter customers....What most people don't really get is that under current situations, metered billing is inevitable for everyone on every provider.
This who conversation is going down the same road as the process of grieving. First denial, then anger, ultimately winding up with acceptance. But in this case, people are still holding out that government is going to come in and save the day.
Charter is just the next domino to fall in the line of that process of grieving. Many people think that Verizon will be the saving grace in their area, which is true for now - it benefits Verizon to be the last holdout and I'm sure they will be. They're going to sake advantage of everyone else going metered while they soak up the ability to say "we're not metered, so buy from us!" They may even take the opportunity to increase rates as the last un-metered service just because "its still not capped".. and then eventually when the market position lends for it, they'll cap too. They won't cap because they HAVE to, but because they can.
So the next step is government. They're not going to help... even in their attempt TO help, its still never going to be a win. They've barely ever done anything that worked positive in the consumer's favor anyway. The communications bill back in the 90's raised cable rates. The banking reform is actually harming more people that doing good. And health-care is going to bankrupt this nation while booting a lot of people out of the system today from rising costs due to impending reform.
The people have, believe it or not, asked, no.. DEMANDED metered billing.. well, at lest the 10% of the vocal people that ruin it for the 90% that currently see no problems with what they have today. Those that want to throw everything including the kitchen sink at the internet are basically telling the providers just how important (or in demand) the internet is to them. With that little knowledge, the execs sit back in the board room saying things like "it's not about price,.. it's about the value that our customers get from the internet.. they use it for every aspect of their lives! .. raise rates, they'll pay it"..
Meanwhile, the current phone and cable providers have the upper hand. They have an absolute solid case to make that by not protecting their rates that it would cause the industry to crumble, and the government isn't about to cave to that argument. Local muni's, while sound like a GREAT victory for some of the cheer leaders out there, in the long wrong winds up being a needle in a large haystack. The phrase "one city at a time" while sounds good simply doesn't make an impact in the bigger picture. Besides, if no one has paid attention, there's no money to be had to build out these networks, not in this economy, and won't be for much time.
By the way, the current federal debt is unsustainable and even King Omabam is saying that (at least to say that protects his job, so he's going with it) So, they talk about raising the retirement age to 69 over the coming years, where it really should be, and removing deductions such as home mortgage interest AND (finally) the child tax deduction (which is about time).. I'm sure all those are being done so that there's money to be had to build out a government operated last mile network in your town soon!
Basically, caps are going to happen. Caps, of all things, ARE "adapting" to the times. As consumers (and in today's term I use it loosly) turn to the internet to buy, I mean, seek out free video and music entertainment, those consumers, I mean, internet users, are looking to spend less and the providers are taking note. There isn't going to be a huge reduction, savings, drop in what people pay for entertainment,.. just how and where one pays for it WILL change. If you want a dumb pipe, it won't be an unlimited use I'll bet anyone on that. A "dumb pipe" typically comes with a meter, not a flat rate. | |
|
| | |
Re: Sucks for Charter customers....now now, you can't say that. because it's not true. people don't need nor claim they need or want metered usage. but i agree with you 100%. People asked for it with Comcast and now everyone else to follow. | |
|
| | | fiberguy2My views are my own. Premium Member join:2005-05-20 |
Re: Sucks for Charter customers...... the asking for it was more indirect.. it's late and the term I'm thinking of escapes me. People are not specifically claiming or wanting metered.. but the ACTIONS are what speaks to what the carriers are doing now.. And even then, it's not "the people" rather, it's a small percentage of people that are causing a lot of this mess.
Caps came about largely because of the people who were clearly suckin' down the GBs and crying foul wanting a cap defined.. I called that one for a LONG time.. and it came. A SMALL group of people raised hell and ruined it for everyone in the process. | |
|
| | KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little Guy Premium Member join:2000-01-17 Tulsa, OK Netgear WNDR3700v2 Zoom 5341J
|
to fiberguy2
Greed always wins.
The desire for massive profits will make sure this is a reality.
It will be even better then printing your own money. For them. For everyone else, it will be the beginning of the end of the great promise the Internet could have been or will be.... elsewhere. | |
|
| | SnakeoilIgnore Button. The coward's feature. Premium Member join:2000-08-05 united state |
to fiberguy2
I agree. As more Broadband users cut the cord and start watching streaming media, the more media companies and subscriber TV services will want to protect their revenue. Which means setting up a cap limit and arranging hefty fees for going over it. | |
|
wdoa join:2001-10-16 Spencer, MA
1 recommendation |
wdoa
Member
2010-Nov-11 9:28 am
translation......take that cord cutters or possible cord cutters. We will be screwing you over now matter what... Thank God that there is next to no competition! | |
|
| jmn1207 Premium Member join:2000-07-19 Sterling, VA |
jmn1207
Premium Member
2010-Nov-11 11:03 am
Re: translation...Caps are only part of the equation. What is even more worrisome for cord cutters is the possibility for the ESPN 3 business model to find it's way into every legitimate streaming method. To make things even more frustrating, it would not surprise me to see the content distributors in cahoots, and blocking access to these sites to customers not subscribing to video content. In short, our cable companies will have to pay enormous fees to be able to provide customer access to the online video sites, in the same manner that ESPN 3 works now. Also, each customer will probably have to subscribe to video service in order to be able to get access to the online content. What a fun ride, huh? | |
|
| | |
Re: translation...enourmous fees for ESPN3? 25cents is enourmous? yah sure it is. | |
|
| | | jmn1207 Premium Member join:2000-07-19 Sterling, VA |
jmn1207
Premium Member
2010-Nov-13 1:37 pm
Re: translation...Where do you get your numbers from, guessing? Show me a link that allows me to sign up for ESPN 3 for a quarter per day, month, year, or whatever you can find. | |
|
| | | | |
Re: translation...every provider pays differnet. Their site tells you that as well. The old site used to tell you the lowest price. But you can't tell me that ATT is paying more than $3 per customer per month for ESPN3. There is no way they'd do that and not pass it on. VZ either.
One WISP on here even said that his cost was based upon his customers (Brent from WY). And you can't sign up. Only ISPs are allowed to do that; due to the cost is based upon how many customers they have that they can push to that service. | |
|
|
No More UltraIf this is true then i will be dropping Ultra. The speed is great, but i liked it being said to be "unlimited" even with the "soft caps". I dont think it would be worth the extra cost for only an extra 250gb. | |
|
| 88615298 (banned) join:2004-07-28 West Tenness
1 recommendation |
88615298 (banned)
Member
2010-Nov-11 9:41 am
Re: No More Ultrasaid by cooldude9919:If this is true then i will be dropping Ultra. The speed is great, but i liked it being said to be "unlimited" even with the "soft caps". I dont think it would be worth the extra cost for only an extra 250gb. OK honestly if you're not illegally downloading stuff how are you using over 500 GB? Not to mention you can actually violate the caps TWICE. If 500 GB is not enough then how is the 250 GB cap going to be enough? You response doesn't make sense. | |
|
| | |
Re: No More Ultrasaid by 88615298:said by cooldude9919:If this is true then i will be dropping Ultra. The speed is great, but i liked it being said to be "unlimited" even with the "soft caps". I dont think it would be worth the extra cost for only an extra 250gb. OK honestly if you're not illegally downloading stuff how are you using over 500 GB? Not to mention you can actually violate the caps TWICE. If 500 GB is not enough then how is the 250 GB cap going to be enough? You response doesn't make sense. Ive never used over around 270gb. Most months are a good amount less than that. My thought process being not having to worry at all about caps on the ultra since you pay a premium for it. I just upgraded less than a month ago so i am still on the fence if the speed is worth the extra cost to go from 25mb to 60mb. Given that i could make 250gb be enough for me, and the fact that i would still have caps on the ultra, at least for me that wouldnt be worth it. | |
|
| | |
BruceAlmghty to 88615298
Anon
2010-Nov-11 1:33 pm
to 88615298
Everyone forgets FAMILIES. | |
|
| | | fiberguy2My views are my own. Premium Member join:2005-05-20 |
Re: No More Ultrasaid by BruceAlmghty :
Everyone forgets FAMILIES. NO they don't - because when you look at it, an average family of 4 doesn't use as much as you'd think. Last year, there were 4 adults in my home - large home too. Two of them work from home. All 4 of them are on Youtube regularly. 2 of those 4 people play games (which isn't a lot of use as many people like to think) One of them works on computers and Windows update is as regular a site as Facebook. Two of the people were on the net from morning to night between work and fun. And one used Hulu to watch all his TV entertainment despite the fact that we have every channel of cable in every room, in HD where possible. A few HD movies per month were streamed from the net too. ... still, no where near a 250gb cap. The family is not forgotten.. and is still no excuse. The fact is that if people are pushing, Comcast's for example, 250gb ceiling, then it's clear they're doing (and lets be honest) EXACTLY what the cable company isn't liking which is streaming all their premium video (movies) over the net from a provider for $10 a month on their $50 internet connection which eats into their video revenue. HONESTLY, if the cable or phone companies who want to cap want to be honest about things, they'd stop the $10 savings bundle discount for taking cable and internet and replace it with making internet service "unlimited" when you bundle with cable TV service packages and metered when it's stand alone. If people want a "dumb pipe, then it comes with a meter... if people want the service which is called an "information service" then it comes with cable TV. I have NO problems if this was where cable and phone wanted to go with their services. And with that, too, I'd also very much welcome the muni deployments to build away! .. for 1) The cost OVERALL COST to the tax payer would be incredible when factored in the monthly bill AND the tax burden that every tax paying citizen. and 2) Those networks would attract every single "I want to download everything from bit-torrent and the internet" and will really give the muni's something to apply their knowledge in network management to. | |
|
| | | | |
Re: No More Ultrathe Munis would wake up in a hurry when they'd find out how much people can download. Especially when they're downloading their TBs of movies and such from BT and other forms of illegal downloads. They'd cap their service in a hurry and do the same as all the other providers; but in the end would most likely close. | |
|
| | |
James FL to 88615298
Anon
2010-Nov-11 2:59 pm
to 88615298
LOL it's possible, download Blu-rays or seasons of a series....Comcast called me and said you are 6 times over the cap, I said which is and the guy said so far this month your at 1.6TB's lol. It's probably not common but it's possible. If your illegally downloading you can't have a cap, downs and up's flex, you can up half your bandwidth waiting on a slow down. I would stop downloading if your getting capped or get a really accurate bandwidth meter on your desktop. Good luck! | |
|
| | | 88615298 (banned) join:2004-07-28 West Tenness
1 recommendation |
88615298 (banned)
Member
2010-Nov-11 3:17 pm
Re: No More Ultrasaid by James FL :
LOL it's possible, download Blu-rays you can't download blu-ray legally. One really can't complain that a cap prevents them from engaging in illegal activities. | |
|
| | | | Geminimind Premium Member join:2003-12-20 Sacramento, CA |
Re: No More UltraOr streaming on netflix. I have the ps3 and I have came close to going over with comcast. | |
|
| | | | DaMaGeINCThe Lan Man Premium Member join:2002-06-08 Greenville, SC |
to 88615298
said by 88615298:said by James FL :
LOL it's possible, download Blu-rays you can't download blu-ray legally. One really can't complain that a cap prevents them from engaging in illegal activities. Does not mean it cant be done... BF69 Dont start in this thread. What users do on their own connection is there business.... | |
|
| | | | | |
Re: No More Ultranot when it comes down to others being affected by the few that decide they want to use their connection for illegal activities and the rest of us getting penalized for it by having a cap as well. So the rest of us do have the right to start. You DO NOT have the write to tell him not to start. The few that don't come near the 250 gigs ALWAYS end up paying for the users going over. Why? Because they're still going at it. Comcast needs to start imposing overage fees just like the cell phone companies. We'd see how many people actually hit that cap then. Or maybe- shut your service off for the remanding of the month.
Yah there's an idea;! HEY COMCAST and every other provider with a cap! If the EU hits that cap shut their service off! lets see how many people start hitting that cap then! or throttle them down to dial-up speeds! They'll learn! | |
|
| | | | SeleniaGentoo Convert Premium Member join:2006-09-22 Fort Smith, AR |
to 88615298
said by 88615298:said by James FL :
LOL it's possible, download Blu-rays you can't download blu-ray legally. One really can't complain that a cap prevents them from engaging in illegal activities. No, but that's not the only way to use tons of bandwidth With the lack of HD cable and satellite(LoS issues), I am thankful my lousy 2.5 mbit DSL connection from Verizon isn't capped. Try following some legal anime while streaming most other things via Hulu or Netflix, aside of what's on my media server. Then add on something like Steam. Add in high quality internet radio, as well as keeping several Linux boxes running and updated. There is several hundres gigs without any illegal content factored in. I actually usr mostly legal content unless there is that out of print game or TV show that I can't get served to me in HD(or sometimes at all). I'm lucky if that is 2% of my use. | |
|
| | |
| | |
to 88615298
How do you know who's downloading illegally or not? Ray's fan? pfft. | |
|
| | |
to 88615298
have U ever heard of patch Tuesday. or playstation home or how about online gameing in general. netflix online amazon movie through vieracast. videochat, the normal modern household needs alot of data 250gb adds up quick | |
|
| | | |
Re: No More Ultrathen that "modern" household needs to start paying up for what their using. If they don't like it; trim their usage the same as everyone else does. You can easily set up your home network to dowload MSFT patches and send them to everyone in your network. MSFT gives you the directions. NetFlix? HA! doesn't take that much. Amazon- not either. VideoChat? LOL! Yah that takes a lot. Trim your usage or pay overages. | |
|
| |
to cooldude9919
Yeah . . . I like the way they tried to suddenly redefine their unlimited plan to one that is in fact limited, without coming right out and saying so.
There's no way I would pay so much for that plan to begin with. | |
|
| | |
Re: No More Ultrabecause NOTHING! is unlimited. their own AUP/TOS says that it's not. You're also happy to take your business else where. But you shouldn't be posting on here about the company you work for WHILE at work. Do your job! | |
|
shoan join:2006-02-27 Benton, AR |
shoan
Member
2010-Nov-11 9:31 am
will this carry overI wonder if this is going to carry over to the company that is buying them out. Not sure if all markets are going to be sold I forgot the details. But as far as I remember I am in a market that is going to be sold. | |
|
| zpm join:2009-03-23 Columbus, GA |
zpm
Member
2010-Nov-11 9:40 am
Re: will this carry overcharter = the worst cable company on this side of the globe. | |
|
| | •••••••••••
|
baineschile2600 ways to live Premium Member join:2008-05-10 Sterling Heights, MI |
Looking backI posted something like this when TWC originally announced caps. Always assumed there would be a speed/consumption based model » TWC Possible Business Model idea | |
|
88615298 (banned) join:2004-07-28 West Tenness |
88615298 (banned)
Member
2010-Nov-11 9:45 am
Better provide a metercan't enforce caps if customers have no way of knowing how much they are using. | |
|
| |
Re: Better provide a metersaid by 88615298:can't enforce caps if customers have no way of knowing how much they are using. Yep. Comcast spent a long time trying to perfect their meter before going live with it. Wheres charters? | |
|
| |
to 88615298
yah they can- you can call in and get your usage. they'll be able to tell you what you used. | |
|
88615298 (banned) join:2004-07-28 West Tenness |
88615298 (banned)
Member
2010-Nov-11 9:49 am
Irony on websiteOn the 8 Meg tier it says
"Enjoy videos from Hulu and Youtube" and "includes ESPN3"
Now how are you doing that with a 100 GB cap? At this point if I decide to ever downgrade to the 8 Mbps I'm better off going with at&t DSL even though it's 6 Mbps. | |
|
| |
Re: Irony on websiteYou can stream a lot of SD video and have little issue for a PC. However, I use Netflix HD from time to time. In the end I don't see myself exceeding 250GB.
The people really screwed are the people downloaded porn. | |
|
|
*sigh*So.. does that mean Charter finally has implemented a way to check current usage for customers? Between Netflix, WoW, web browsing, and stuff like Pandora/Slacker... I haven't got a clue what my average monthly use is. Are we to just rely on the 'word' of a CSR telling us we're near/over our 'monthly quota'?
Just when I think Charter is starting to 'get it' (DSLR and Twitter support for example, is awesome)... they start doing this stuff again, and prove they don't.
This just sounds like a way for their business class cable division to try to get more revenue, since their pricing for business class sucks. The price we were quoted for a 25mbit business class line here at the office, was 6x more than a residential line... and yet, they told us they couldn't guarantee uptime any more than they could on their residential.... remind me.. what the point of getting business class is again??
Also.. will this 'enforcement' do something about the latency issues that occur during primetime? I somehow doubt it.
Just when I start to recommend people to sign up for Charter again,(although, I stress to use the support here or on twitter.. since phone support is still a friggen nightmare) they start to climb back into the hole. I sincerely hope this is simply rumour, and nothing more. | |
|
| ••••••••••••••••• |
|
Bunch of crap.......saying people are illegally downloading stuff. Think of a family of 4 where 2 are probably gaming which sucks up a lot of bandwidth especially games like Second Life and stuff. Then you have someone streaming netflix and hulu daily. Think of the person that is listening to music on rhapsody and downloading tunes. Then you have someone working from home and sucking up bandwidth using VPN.
All of that is not illegal downloading and sucks up a ton of data per month.
Not everyone is grandma checking emails. | |
|
| ••••••••••••••••• |
|
Last I heard this was a business and not an entitlementIf a company finds that more usage cost them more, why is it wrong for them to change the service or charge more? Any belief, hope, expectation or complaining about never changing an evolving business is a naive view of the entitled. It does make fun reading however Disclosure: I use between 40 and 80G / month with many Internet services (Netflix, WoW, Xbox, Hulu connected TV, etc). I'm close, and if I need to go over, I am willing to up my tier to pay for the service I need. One thing I DO NOT do is share all my content with everyone on the Internet. | |
|
| •••• |
wdoa join:2001-10-16 Spencer, MA |
wdoa
Member
2010-Nov-11 10:27 am
Who certifies usageThis whole idea of metered bandwidth brings up a major issue of the reliability of the usage reported by the providers. If this is the way the industry wants to move (and this includes wireless providers such as ATT, Verizon, T-Mobile etc.) then we need a 3rd party to certify usage, in much the same way that gas pumps are certified by a "weights and measures" exam. I for one am not ready to trust the Charter's of the world with measuring my bandwidth. There is too much incentive for them to over report bandwidth. At any rate I'm afraid we need some sort of government intervention to keep the providers honest! | |
|
| •••••• |
|
33358088 (banned)
Member
2010-Nov-11 10:34 am
all these capsWHY THE FUCK DO AMERICANS GET BIGGER CAPS
makes me want to hate you all more | |
|
| Ben Premium Member join:2007-06-17 Fort Worth, TX |
Ben
Premium Member
2010-Nov-11 10:49 am
Re: all these capssaid by 33358088:WHY THE FUCK DO AMERICANS GET BIGGER CAPS makes me want to hate you all more Are you Canadian? I have nothing against Canadians in general, although I do think that the ISP situation (and mobile phone plans) there is absolutely horrible. | |
|
| maartenaElmo Premium Member join:2002-05-10 Orange, CA |
to 33358088
Everything is bigger in the USA, including the CAPS. Just you wait and see what kind of caps they get in TEXAS!! | |
|
jeffro join:2007-04-20 Cordova, TN |
jeffro
Member
2010-Nov-11 10:48 am
Oh goody.Can't wait to see the threads pop up for Charter efffing up on the usage meters. If they ever show up. This is Charter after all. Smae company that can't even launch a damn channel on time like they said they would! | |
|
|
sparc
Member
2010-Nov-11 11:19 am
caps are high enough for nowThe caps are high enough that i don't see this being an issue for the next few years. Plus the fact that most people who are using the internet on this kind of cap scale is probably already on a higher tier.
Video demand will begin to eat into this at some point though and require all companies to increase the caps. It just doesn't have to happen right now.
Once you start tracking your own usage, it becomes pretty apparent how big 100GB on the internet is. I rarely break 30 to 40gb and I consider myself a pretty heavy user. | |
|
| •••••••••• |
|
Checking usageHow can I go about tracking my own usage when I have 4 PC's networked off of my connection? | |
|
| •••••• |
|
Needs to be some enforcementIf I run an extension cord to my neighbors house for electricity, that is illegal. If I run a garden hose from there for water, that is also illegal. If I start having to pay for metered billing or have a finite amount of data per month, what happens to the people that send popups and adware? Under the same principle, would that not also be theft of service? | |
|
| •••••• |
RexterLibertas, Aequitas, Veritas join:2002-11-17 cloud 9 |
Rexter
Member
2010-Nov-11 11:59 am
Punish your customers! yay!Since this business model works so well. I think Pepsi should sell their drink on a subscription bases so they can punish those who drink too much also!
Brilliant! | |
|
| swintec Premium Member join:2003-12-19 Alfred, ME |
swintec
Premium Member
2010-Nov-11 12:05 pm
Re: Punish your customers! yay!said by Rexter:Since this business model works so well. I think Pepsi should sell their drink on a subscription bases so they can punish those who drink too much also! That doesnt make any sense. Pepsi already is a consumption based type of product, the more you drink, the more you pay. Now with Charter, the more Gigs you use, the higher your bill. Of course, it isnt TRUE consumption based billing but it is half way there. | |
|
| | RexterLibertas, Aequitas, Veritas join:2002-11-17 cloud 9 1 edit |
Rexter
Member
2010-Nov-11 12:20 pm
Re: Punish your customers! yay!That's exactly my point. Overages are not consumption based charges. They are designed to punish, and discourage usage. It's overtly characterized this way. Cell phone companies do this kind of nonsense too. Caps are based on an idea of fairness. This is an example of how governmental interference has polluted business ideals down to the foundational level. Such decisions do not to promote more revenue, and better service. This is wholly political thinking. The question is not how can we drive more revenue, the question is how can we design a system where the vast majority of people will think it's fair. | |
|
1 edit |
Lets do the MathCorrect me if I am wrong. On a UVERSE 3 HD Stream deployment lets make a few assumptions. 2 Streams of HD used, 4 hours a day. Lets forget about data and longer weekend views. Lets use 6 Mbps on the HD channels as well. Please keep the flames down to a minimum these are not hard numbers.
So for 4 hours or 14400 seconds on two streams with from different channels we have:
172800.00 Mbits = 2.26E+10 bytes = 21600.00 MBytes ~ 21 Gbytes Daily!
Monthly is about 633 Gbytes
Now I am a jerk, because I leave my STB on all day sometimes so this 633 is probably a low estimate.
Yea, I agree with Karl on this one. If cord cutters are not a big "issue" then why are these caps being imposed?
| |
|
| 88615298 (banned) join:2004-07-28 West Tenness |
88615298 (banned)
Member
2010-Nov-11 12:49 pm
Re: Lets do the MathIronically people using internet video instead of cable would be using LESS bandwidth not more. Which would save cable companies money. Someon watching 4 hours a day of HD video online would used about 1/4 the numbers you posted. You'd think saving 450-500 GB a month would be something the cable companies would like. | |
|
| | amungus Premium Member join:2004-11-26 America |
amungus
Premium Member
2010-Nov-11 4:18 pm
Re: Lets do the MathProblem with the example is that it's not actually internet bandwidth being used for video delivery on UVerse.
They (AT&T) take in streams for each channel at the CO (whether that's via fiber, satellite, antenna, or combinations thereof), which costs them the same no matter what. By the time you "tune in" it's only being sent across the relatively local network - across town... and is fairly limited by distance to the CO from what I gather... not across the 'net. Since said data isn't really going across "the internet" it doesn't cost them much, if anything...
...UVerse is still kind of "broadcasting" like cable, though more like "switched digital video" (SDV). Still more efficient than each subscriber requesting a stream from the 'net itself...
If people used the internet for video like they do with cable, you can bet they would be using far more than currently... Current HD channels use a steady stream of bandwidth... and there are lots of them... one little coax cable (on a CABLE system, not UVerse) carries quite a bit of bandwidth, very little of which is used for an internet connection - ONE 6Mhz "channel" unless you're on a DOCSIS 3 network, which bonds several (currently only a few...).
Watching TV for hours would add up to quite a bit of "internet" bandwidth if said material came from outside of the ISP's network. | |
|
|
Why!?What happened since » stopthecap.com/2010/03/0 ··· -speeds/ ?? Charter has from launch of the 60MBIT package (St. Louis area here) said that there would be NO CAPS on this package. I even pay my bill at the corporate office from time to time and they have touted the same thing there. I sure hope that someone changes their minds on a limit. Now, I don't know if I come close to 500GB a month or not, but the no bandwidth caps is pretty much the "do or do not have" 60 Meg Charter reasoning for me. If this is really true and becomes reality then I shall re-think my decision on paying for Charter entirely. A shame really. | |
|
| 88615298 (banned) join:2004-07-28 West Tenness |
88615298 (banned)
Member
2010-Nov-11 12:50 pm
Re: Why!?They to lower the price on the 60 Mbps tier if they have a cap. | |
|
| | |
Re: Why!?I doubt anyone's gonna sign up for 60MB service @ 99.00 with a 500gb cap....... I wouldn't/ | |
|
amungus Premium Member join:2004-11-26 America |
amungus
Premium Member
2010-Nov-11 12:54 pm
math is easyMath is really easy to do. A 6th grader could figure that this is a little restrictive.
Might as well stop with the speed increases right now and catch up to demand. It's also well known that prices keep going down, and MOST people already don't even come close to using the potential of their connection. For those that do, or wish to, this can get very restrictive, and is not about any sense of "entitlement" or other nonsense, it is simple to do the math here. Skip to the end if you want to.
Say a person has 10Mbps service. At full speed: 1.25MB/sec x 60 seconds = 75MB in one minute... 75MB x 60 minutes = 4.5GB in one hour. 4.5 x 24hrs. = 108GB in a day, 3.24TB/mo.
Now cap, and you start to see that you really get the following: 500GB / 30 days = 16.7GB/day. 250GB / 30 days = 8.33GB/day etc...
An "average household" could easily break right past current caps without even thinking about it - today. Not 5 years from now, but today.
Let's say one has the 250GB cap. That breaks down as follows: 8.33GB (for the day) / .347GB an hour (347MB). ...(again, at 10Mbps speed, one can download 4.5GB in that time)
250GB / 30 days = 8.33GB a day.
... At 10Mbps, with a 250GB cap, you can use 1.85 hours of internet per day at full speed. 3.7 hours with a 500GB cap, etc.
Again, most do not use this. What about those who would? The "average household" is approaching what others were doing only a few years ago. It is also quite easy to stream 8.33GB / day if one wanted to (let alone several users in a residence).
A heavy month for me may not add up to anything close to 250GB, but I'm sure I've had days where I've downloaded more than 8.33GB.
We should seriously consider what these caps mean before justifying them blindly, or dismissing them blindly. Right now, it may not be a huge deal for a lot of people, but time will march on, and usage will grow. | |
|
| ••••••••••••••••
|
|
|