MrkFrnt join:2000-11-26 Winston Salem, NC |
promising?Screw that, i want it in writing | |
|
| |
Re: promising?A pledge is as useless as the paper it is written on. The issue they will have is network management, monetization is another issue (meaning making ungodly profit).
They can always adjust tiering pricing at their whim to make more profit, but as we all know as these guys start promising 100 or 1000 their networks are not ready so they are going to oversell and underpromise, or what I think they are going to do is drag their a$$es on peering optimizations and blame the content originator for the problem and that will create bottlenecks upstream. | |
|
| | |
Random6969
Anon
2015-Jun-25 7:56 pm
Re: promising?said by elefante72:A pledge is as useless as the paper it is written on. The issue they will have is network management, monetization is another issue (meaning making ungodly profit). Yes why do companies that exist in a country whose economy is based on capitalism think they are entitled to make a profit? Don't they know they should be offering products and services to the proletariat AT COST or even a loss just to be nice? | |
|
| maartenaElmo Premium Member join:2002-05-10 Orange, CA |
to MrkFrnt
said by MrkFrnt:Screw that, i want it in writing And even if it is in writing, the FCC does not have any power to enforce it. Everything Comcast promised with the NBC/Comcast merger was in writing. And as soon as the merger was done, they basically said: screw you, make us! - Which is probably the biggest reason why the FCC denied the TWC/Comcast merger. Charter can play nice for a year or two, and then all over sudden change the terms of service and maybe the speeds.... and oh guess what, implement caps too. And there is NOTHING the FCC can do about it, UNLESS they are willing to ban caps across the board, for every provider. | |
|
| | WhatNow Premium Member join:2009-05-06 Charlotte, NC |
WhatNow
Premium Member
2015-Jun-25 7:15 pm
Re: promising?If it is good for only 3 years they are not offering much. It will take them that long to merger the companies. | |
|
| | IanLee join:2014-11-24 Woodland, WA |
to maartena
I'm on a 250 GB cap right now, and it sucks.
Instead of charging overage fees my ISP just throttles me to dial-up speeds until the next billing cycle, or until I complain that my service is slow. | |
|
| |
Random6969 to MrkFrnt
Anon
2015-Jun-25 7:55 pm
to MrkFrnt
Seriously you said that?
A) I'm pretty sure it would in fact be in writing
B) You're overlooking the fact Charter got rid of caps last November. Last month I used 850 GB. In two other months this year I used 600 GB and 650 GB | |
|
| | SimbaSevenI Void Warranties join:2003-03-24 Billings, MT |
Re: promising?I just got done eating ~1.8TB over a couple months. Had to reinstall my Steam games on my laptop and desktop. | |
|
Trimline Premium Member join:2004-10-24 Windermere, FL |
Trimline
Premium Member
2015-Jun-25 2:44 pm
I didn't realized there was a choice"Charter's pledge (so far) really does appear to be different, in that Charter's promising to adhere to most of the FCC's definition of net neutrality" Adhere to most of the FCC's definition? I wasn't aware any ISP could pick what they liked and what they didn't like. Seems like Charter is hiding something. | |
|
ZyXEL VMG4381
|
Looks like a great condition Charter Communication's is willing to abide byLooks like a great condition Charter Communication's is will to abide by, what other cable company do you know of that would have offered that as a condition. Not to mention that Charter Communication's prices are cheaper than Time Warner Cable from what I can see. If Charter Communications is willing to agree to that in writing to the FCC and their is fines set if Charter Communications violates this agreement then I think this is good for the customers of the companies involved. Not to mention the backlash Charter Communications would get if they even tried to cap customers. Remember when Time Warner Cable tried to cap it's customers and the customer backlash stopped their plans to cap us Charter Communications might want to keep that in mind if they think about placing caps in the future. | |
|
| sraz join:2013-10-28 Tucson, AZ |
sraz
Member
2015-Jun-25 3:21 pm
Re: Looks like a great condition Charter Communication's is willing to abide byExactly, I don't remember Comcast ever offering anything of the sort, because they know their TV service is overpriced dung and upcoming IPTV offerings will probably give them a run for their money. | |
|
|
Not sure if Charter was anticipating this situation or not but...They have actually been advertising "no caps" on their website for some time now, well before the attempt to buy TW.
This was one of the (many) reasons I didn't want to be punted to Comcast, if that merger went through. | |
|
| |
Re: Not sure if Charter was anticipating this situation or not but...said by Chuck_IV:They have actually been advertising "no caps" on their website for some time now, well before the attempt to buy TW.
This was one of the (many) reasons I didn't want to be punted to Comcast, if that merger went through. You mean even two years ago in 2013 when they tried to do so? I don't remember that, TWC has been doing it for a while and as I recall Charter started to do it afterward but before they made this bid after Comcast failed to get TWC. | |
|
|
That's like the sun promising to rise tomorrowI know this may be met with some level of skepticism, but Charter can deliver on this. They do not exercise any sort of cap/limiting of service. In this day and age, that's nearly unheard of. But, they've been practicing this since I've had their service. | |
|
| EvergreenerSent By Grocery Clerks join:2001-02-20 Evergreen, CO |
Re: That's like the sun promising to rise tomorrowI wish there was at least the option for pure usage based billing for residential service. | |
|
| | |
ipv6movement
Anon
2015-Jun-28 4:24 am
Re: That's like the sun promising to rise tomorrowsaid by Evergreener:I wish there was at least the option for pure usage based billing for residential service. No ISP will implement that properly as they would then be losing out on "profits". | |
|
BK3 join:2001-04-10 Geneva, IL |
BK3
Member
2015-Jun-25 7:43 pm
Only for three years?It would be far better if the promise was permanent, rather than for just 3 years. | |
|
IowaCowboyLost in the Supermarket Premium Member join:2010-10-16 Springfield, MA |
Not looking forward to being a Charter customerLooking at the possibility of moving to Maine (if things go as planned), I don't like the prospect of being a Charter customer.
I may just use them for Internet and DirecTV for TV. I may go with the wireless Genies so I can put TVs where there are no cable outlets. | |
|
|
-1 recommendation |
okwhatever
Anon
2015-Jun-26 11:22 am
Re: Not looking forward to being a Charter customersaid by IowaCowboy:Looking at the possibility of moving to Maine (if things go as planned), I don't like the prospect of being a Charter customer. Yeah it sucks saving money and no caps | |
|
| | |
travanx
Member
2015-Jun-26 11:34 am
Re: Not looking forward to being a Charter customerI really like Charter. Cheaper, faster, no caps, just works service. Especially compared to when we had TWC in Downtown Los Angeles. Switching over to business was even better. | |
|
| IowaCowboyLost in the Supermarket Premium Member join:2010-10-16 Springfield, MA |
Being in Western Mass, I've heard more complaints from Charter customers than Comcast customers. I'll miss my X1. | |
|
| cork1958Cork Premium Member join:2000-02-26 |
to IowaCowboy
Been a Charter customer since 1997 and have NEVER had an issue with them other than their dumb business practices, at times! My main complaint with them right now is the lack of tiers for intenet. I don't need their 60m speed for $50 anymore as I'm only on computer for a couple hours max, a day doing simple things.
As far as reliability, been 3 outages since 1997 and 2 were weather related (no power here) and 1 was a screwed up maintenance job in another county that messed up everything! That one only lasted a few hours. | |
|
|
provide service?how about requiring them to provide service to the communities they control before allowing the merger. | |
|
|
They'll go back on the there wordShould Charter get what they want then they'll just go back to there old ways afterwards. I don't believe for second they would get rid of usage caps at all. | |
|
|
UploadThey need channel bonding on upload to get us more upload speed. The rest of Charter is fine IMO, even though we all wish they could be cheaper. | |
|
SuntopWolfrider Elf Premium Member join:2000-03-23 Fairfield, MT ·T-Mobile Netgear R6400 Netgear WNR1000 Netgear WNDR3400
|
Suntop
Premium Member
2015-Oct-4 1:19 am
I do nor know why there are caps to begin withI live in a small town. My Telco Co-Op is small and they have fiber with no caps. Granted it is a tad expensive but they have the only service here other than Cell and Sat.(shudder) I used 550GB last month and poised to use more this month with Netflix and they told me that I could use a TB if I wanted to. The cost of delivering content is next to nil. But then again if there was no caps everywhere those who have super fast internet who can download 10s of TB a month would eat into the profit of said isps I guess. The fastest fiber I could have here is 100/100M but that would cost me 1/2 year of my money per month. (aimed at businesses no one has it at all) I would love it if Google came here and installed 1GB service but that is asking a lot and I do not know what Montana laws are pertaining to that.
In all reality 10/10M is what I got and it is fast enough for me for now. I wish I could afford 20/20m But that would almost double my bill. I was at 26/1m I did not use all 26MB so I traded off 16 MB download to add 9 of it to uplooad so when I upload my videos to youtube it will not take an hour. LOL | |
|
|
|