Confessions Of an Unabashed Bandwidth Hog Price tiers and caps ruin an addict's good time "My name is Leslie, and I'm a Net-a-holic. Not a recovering one, but an active, unabashed bandwidth hog, consuming all the Internet access I can get from the cable wires in my Montgomery County home. Lately I'm worried that my supplier doesn't understand what it means to be an Internet junkie and plans to exploit my addiction." The Washington Post explores the pangs of bandwidth addiction and gluttony (and the tiers and caps being installed by cable companies).
|
 vic102482Premium
join:2002-04-30
Upper Marlboro, MD | OWWWW DAYUM!!! Man I am right in prince georges county I know we probably are next.
I have DSL and I have been waiting to switch to cable for a long time. | |
|  | | |  Never!
| |
| | | OlegK20
join:2002-02-15
Cliffside Park, NJ | Re: Never! WHy do you use ADSL that would have the be the worst dsl possible normal verizon DSL is so much faster then AOl DSL. Cable isn't bad if you take the time to research your area and call the cable company and ask for reports with bandwith this month cable can be much faster then DSL. | |
| | | | | |  Re: Never!
| |
| | | |  philmiamiLive Like This Is Your Last DayPremium
join:2001-07-12
Miami, FL | Re: Never! AOL ADSL-- NO such thing only RESALE
Money can't buy you love, but you can lease it.........
philmiami | |
| | | | |  JoydropA Witty Saying Proves Nothing. -Voltaire
join:2001-07-19
Milliways
| Re: Never! AOL ADSL-- NO such thing only RESALE Err 110 baud you mean (k came about two decades later *smile*)
I still vaguely remember using my father's old accoustic coupler on his Apple IIc at.. You guessed it, 110 baud 
Verizon 1500/128 [1510/136 real world] ADSL Bandwidth hog. Oink Oink.
[text was edited by author 2002-06-27 01:01:38] | |
|
 old_dawg"I Know Noting..."
join:2001-09-22
Westminster, MD |  Hmm, maybe...
speed at tiered prices which includes a QoS (quality of service) contract, I might buy into the scheme. Should the speed drop below this speed then I'd be howling for a refund/rebate. | |
| | | | Re: Hmm, maybe... Sure, why shouldn't you believe them?
They're the cable company; they're here to serve you.
(-:
BTW, ... I've got some ocean front in Kansas for sal... | |
| |  dvd536as Mr. Pink as they comePremium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:4 | said by old_dawg:
Well, if the broadband provider *guarantees* the higher d/l
speed at tiered prices which includes a QoS (quality of service) contract, I might buy into the scheme. Should the speed drop below this speed then I'd be howling for a refund/rebate.
Some services cant even come near their caps. i wouldn't go to a higher tier without a SLA. | |
|
lukaro8
join:2000-12-06
Jacksonville, FL | Tiered pricing isn't anything to really fear..... I wouldn't worry about the tiered pricing plans. Most of all the ones mentioned haven't rasied the price for current speeds too much.. Its the idea of consumption caps that scares the heck out of me... Espeacialy with more and more "broadband" pop ads popping up everywhere. I have long stated I don't mind ads online. Somebody's got to pay for websites but don't make the target customers pay for the ads. | |
| | | | Re: Tiered pricing isn't anything to really fear..... Frog in boiling water scenario:
1.) Put frog in boiling water, frog jumps out and lives.
applied: charge consumer for ever bit of data at 3 times the cost, monthly cable&inet access bills hit $200 amonth (the cable industries target price) cable companies are satisfied (they will never be happy).
effect: all consumers laugh, cry scream and cancel service.
2.) Put the frog in cool water slowly increase heat until frog dies in boiling water.
Applied:
1.) Restrict all comm protocols as much as possible (i.e. when I first got RR I could run a personal web server and... yes a game server, now I can no longer do this even though cust svc sent me an email 3 yrs ago saying it was ok.)
2.) Start limiting connection speeds, harrass customer base if they use more that 5GB month.
3.) Implement tierd pricing with "reasonable rates" to gain acceptance. In progess now.
4.) Massivly increase tiered pricing due to "increased operational cost, government regs making it difficult to operate, balh blah" and all other excuses to gouge customer. *here some lucky people will jump from the pot, but not enough for the cable co to care.
5.) Increase prices to $200 for cable and 56k internet access, additionally charge consumer by the bit&byte & #hours used. Now there are abunch of dead frogs in the pot, but they will leave the heat just low enough that you dont die to give them thier monthly revenue stream. You will accept this becuase you are a stupid consumer who lives for the minute, your are too dumb to realize what are doing ahHAHAHAHAha heh HAHAHAHA
-The $$$$Cable$$$$ company$ | |
| | |  marigoldsGainfully employed, finallyPremium,MVM
join:2002-05-13
Saint Louis, MO
kudos:1 | Re: Tiered pricing isn't anything to really fear..... Since this scenario is also frequently used in Sunday school lessons, the daughter of a friend of my uncle talked her dad into letting her actually do the experiment (this was several decades ago) to see what happened.
Scenario one Put frog in boiling water
Observations
Frog dies almost instantly upon hitting water
Experiment not repeated.
(Customers search around grasping for alternatives and realize that they do not have any. Those who can afford it, stay)
Scenario two Put frog in cold water and slowly boil
Observations
Frog gets bored. Hops away.
Experiment repeated ten times, same results.
(As prices continue to slowly rachet up, alternative broadband solutions continue to develop. When customers stay on despite ever rising prices in an area, telcos pay attention and decide to grab the consumer's attention. Many cities start considering the Spencer, IA route of developing their own physical plant and saying "Screw you" to the cable, phone, and power companies.)
--
ISCABBS - the oldest and largest BBS on the Internet
telnet://whip.isca.uiowa.edu
or Go to
»isca.whiteboard.net for more information (and java telnet access) | |
| | | |  XBL2009------
join:2001-01-03
Chicago, IL
 ·EarthLink
·AT&T Midwest
| Re: Tiered pricing isn't anything to really fear..... *Cough*
"Take a pot of hot water and a frog. Throw the frog into the pot. What do you think will happen? The obvious, of course: the frog will jump out. Who likes hanging around in a pot of hot water? Now ... [t]ake a pot of cold water, put the frog in it, and place the pot on the stove. Turn on the heat. This time something different will occur. The frog, because of the incremental change in temperature, will not notice that it is slowly being boiled. | |
| | | | | | | Re: Tiered pricing isn't anything to really fear..... quote:
The frog, because of the incremental change in temperature, will not notice that it is slowly being boiled.
The frog may not notice it at first but the frog's body does have a threshold. Sooner or later it will notice. | |
| | | | | |  MashikiBalking The Enemy's Plans
join:2002-02-04
Woodstock, ON
 ·Bright House
·TekSavvy Cable
| Re: Tiered pricing isn't anything to really fear..... said by spenster:
quote:
The frog, because of the incremental change in temperature, will not notice that it is slowly being boiled.
The frog may not notice it at first but the frog's body does have a threshold. Sooner or later it will notice.
Yes, but by the time it notices the damage is done. The muscles are in such poor shape it can't jump out or away. In such, it slowly boils to death. Haven eaten frog out in the middle of the boonies, while I "lived off the land", I can attest that it does happen that way. | |
|
| | | Look, the bottom line is that these guys are over-extended, greedy to the point of insanity, milking their own cow whilst plugging it in the arse, and all have 3 sets of books by which to play "pin the balance sheet on this one" while the customer who is -> (already paying WAY too much for communications services) -> drools at the thought of getting "50 times your dialup speeds" is also going to get the same treatment as the cow--which you *will* in the end. (no pun intended) How else can you explain an industry, that for all intent and purpose, should be perfectly solvent with their business model? What's that you say? They borrowed too much to begin with? Lined their pockets with any available money made with SPE's? Loaned themselves billions in shareholders' money (Adelphia)?
Does this sound like a trustworthy bunch to you?
No sh*t Sherlock.
Tell them all to kiss off and die off.
As soon as people start to realize that the net is a vast wasteland any way, (wonder how long that will take) then all of them are sunk. | |
| |  Hayward K A R - 1 2 0 CPremium
join:2000-07-13
Key West, FL
kudos:1 | said by lukaro:
Its the idea of consumption caps that scares the heck out of me... Espeacialy with more and more "broadband" pop ads popping up everywhere.
A month's of Pop Up ads wouldn't even dent a day or two of non stop Napstering bandwidth consumption wise.... that is the real issue here.
--
»haywardm.com (Hayward's Key West) | |
| | | | | Re: Tiered pricing isn't anything to really fear.. Hayward! I knew if I looked far enough down, I'd see your post in here!
I agree - I don't think most people realize that most pop-up ads are not more than 1kb to 5kb in size...The have to make them small to avoid harassing the 56k crowd.
Any who, another battle, another lost cause...I've considered throwing my hat into the ring on this issue because I've noticed two types on people on this board.
1) The ones that will logically consider one's argument for the tiers, and while they may not agree with the tiers, will agree that it may be necessary to keep paying for the services provided, thus allowing the cable company to continue to offer service and understand how business works. These folks have read their TOS and AUP and understand the conditions of their service; or
2) The ones that think that the cable company is their personal nurse-maid and that the cable company should give then the fastest service, with the biggest pipe, with the lowest price - even if it kills the company and puts them out of business. They refuse to listen to logic, won't take the effort to understand or even read all the information involved. These are also the folks who never read a TOS or any other type of service agreement.
The second class of people are the ones that have made me lose all hope in even trying to get them to see any other point of view.
--
WARNING! Do not look directly into the processed chicken... | |
| | | | | Hayward's hit it on the head. People want (or should I say DEMAND) T-1 performance (bandwidth and through put) for $50...sorry, doesn't exist. The all you can eat bandwidth buffet is closing rapidly.
The connections cost what the connections cost and it's not about how much a particular person is downloading, it's how many people are on the connection at once. By capping, the ISP's lower the number of simultaneous users.
Teen lamers will roll in saying it doesn't cost the ISP based on how much passes through their connections, gimmie, gimmie, gimmie...but when you have a finite amount of through put per moment in time...the recent rash (say the last 18 months) in popularity of P2P apps is making the $40-$50 not work. The caps are creating a situation of getting less service for more money. For the past 18 months, users have been taking more and more and more bandwidth as online gaming, streaming AV and P2P get more popular.
The connection that used to support 1,000's of customers in 1997-1999 no longer does as those 1,000's of customers now use their connections more often...that is, the percentage of the 1,000's of paying customers that are on at the same time ever increases. And of course the teen lamer argument will be they shouldn't oversell. Well, ALL ISP's OVERSELL...it's how you've gotten 1.5Mb service for $40 while T-1's cost $1,000+ with loop.
It's not just ISP speeds the P2P apps kill either. Kazaa is well known for it's supernode function creating virtual DoS attacks on networks as they receive so many requests...raising latency from the happy days 100ms to 500ms or more making online gaming and other low latency apps crash and burn.
These ISP's would solve their issues by blocking popular P2P ports like 1214 used by Kazaa. Magically the capacity and latency problems fall by the wayside. | |
| | | |  winsyrstrifeRiver City BouncePremium
join:2002-04-30
Brooklyn, NY | Re: Tiered pricing isn't anything to really fear..said by Count Hogula:
These ISP's would solve their issues by blocking popular P2P ports like 1214 used by Kazaa. Magically the capacity and latency problems fall by the wayside.
Until "Kixter" or "WinExcess" comes out, using a different port, sharing more 100-x00 MB movies, apps, and albums.
The ISPs are starting to realized that it's impossible to govern a person's self-control and moral sense.
Bad Joe User: "I don't give a damn, I paid $50 for this, it was advertised as always on, so I'll always use it." Turn on Bearshare, click click click, go to sleep.
Advertising the connection as always on was a mistake. People take things quite literally at times. Anyone who works as a tech for an ISP/help desk understands what I'm saying. Unfortunately, the reigns have to come in somewhere. Caps seems to be the preferred method.
While I can sympathize with someone who doesn't appreciate the idea (I'd be ticked off to if I D/L a 200 MB demo and it sucked, then D/L a 600 MB app that turned out to be corrupted), if it ensures quality and a constant level of service for all, so be it.
--
56K is good. You can benchmark your PC by leaving it all on day trying to D/L something... | |
|
| | | | Oh please. How much bandwidth do YOU use a month Hayward. I do NO (read NONE, ZERO, ZIP) file-sharing and I know that I use close to if not over 10 GB a month. They are placing a 5 GB cap on these lines? How useful and unlimited does this service then become? All it takes is a little surfing, some email, newsgroup browsing (not Binaries either) and some online gaming and one is over the cap. This "Let's blame it all on Napster." crap is for the birds. The question should be, What does the common user ie average of the whole, use and what level becomes excessive? The question should not be at what level (cap) does 95% of of users exceed every month, so that we can charge more.
--
Notme in STL | |
|
winsyrstrifeRiver City BouncePremium
join:2002-04-30
Brooklyn, NY | Time moves on Very interesting read.
I can see it from both ends of the spectrum, considering cable. On a shared connection (cable), with regards to extended long term intensive data-transfer, I believe there should be some kinds of restrictions or deterrents in place to guarantee a basic level of service for all the users of said connection. However, I don't think this is why caps/tiered pricing for cable is being put into effect.
Companies have to make money to stay afloat, otherwise it's all over. We have yet to see what kind of pricing and caps will be put into effect, so I'm not worried. Actually I'm quite interested to see how it all goes down.
--
56K is good. You can benchmark your PC by leaving it all on day trying to D/L something... | |
| | | Tiered Pricing-Not like the world is ending!!! | |
| Reviews:
·AT&T Midwest
·RoadRunner Cable
| Fine by me! If RR wants to raise my rates...$10....even $15 bucks a month...for connection speeds that is ...at WORST...the same that I'm getting now...(2000/384)... and classify me with the "bandwidth hog" label...I'm fine by that! But dont ya dare advertise to me unlimited access and then come at me with download limits. That is when I say.....ADIOS!!! | |
| | dvd536as Mr. Pink as they comePremium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:4 | Re: Fine by me! said by buddasahn:
If RR wants to raise my rates...$10....even $15 bucks a month...for connection speeds that is ...at WORST...the same that I'm getting now...(2000/384)... and classify me with the "bandwidth hog" label...I'm fine by that! But dont ya dare advertise to me unlimited access and then come at me with download limits. That is when I say.....ADIOS!!!
Current subscribers should be grandfathered. that bait and switch is crap. | |
| | | | | Re: Fine by me! Newton's Telecom Dictionary, 16th Edition:
"Access Provider A company, such as a telephone company, that hooks your computer up to the internet."
Sorry folks, the tier's have nothing to do with access. Being in the telecom industry, and working on legal documents all day long, Access is simply the above statement. It is a connection that will allow you to access a network (the internet).
Access is not bandwidth, usage, aggregate amount of data transferred over the access line, etc...
You will continue to have unlimited access if your cable modem allows you to access the internet at any time, 24/7/365.
So, drop the "it's bait and switch" whining. It's not. They are providing you exactly what they sold you.
"Unlimited downloads", yes that is questionable. But again, you will be able to make unlimited downloads just as long as you pay for what you use above and beyond the cap.
And this whole grand fathered crap is pointless. According to your TOS, you should have 30 days to cancel your service if a change in the TOS or AUP is not to your liking. They reserve all rights to change the TOS with 30-days notice.
"Grand fathered" is only applicable for service contracts in which you are bound to that contract for a period of time, with no exit clause.
If you don't believe me, go ahead and consult a lawyer. They will tell you the exact same thing.
--
WARNING! Do not look directly into the processed chicken... | |
| | |  morboComplete Your Transaction
join:2002-01-22
00000 | Current subscribers should be grandfathered. that bait and switch is crap. [/QUOTE]
true, but we should think about this as a single unit. | |
|
| | AT&T Broadband's plan
If they do this, they can kiss my a$$ goodbye.
I am tired of getting strong-armed by these companies. I had a really good deal at $36/mo because I bought my own modem. Had I rented, my bill would be $46/mo.
And guess what they did? They lowered the modem rental price to $3, and raised the basic rate $7. I don't see a benefit from the modem rental price reduction, and people who rent modems won't see any change in their total monthly fee. They have nullified the very reason why I bought my modem. The modem would have paid for itself by Feb 2003. Now that has been stretched to April 2003.
They have the ability/balls make all these changes because they suspect we are all "hooked", and won't go through the trouble of switching. You can't get another cable broadband provider. You'll have to get DSL or satellite. And you can't get satellite if you live in an apartment that doesn't allow you to mount a dish, or you don't have the proper vantage point. They don't have to allow any other providers on their lines. They're sitting fat, dumb and happy.
These companies are going to keep squeezing us until we can't/won't take it anymore. | |
| | | | Re: AT&T Broadband's plan said by vknight775:
I am tired of getting strong-armed by these companies.
They're sitting fat, dumb and happy.
These companies are going to keep squeezing us until we can't/won't take it anymore.
They must not be making that much money.. been watching all the telecom and dsl providers stock prices lately? | |
| | | | |  Re: AT&T Broadband's plan
When AT&T had the whole pie things were good, but it is cut so many ways now, no one of them can live. They went on equipment buying sprees, paid too much for things that never made a dime, and have a bunch of dark optic cable.
How some DSL business thought they could rent the local phone company wires, be cheaper the the local phone company, and make money is beond me. Then you have things like Bernie at World Com with 400 million dollar loans, and the the theift at others like Global Crossing, Adelphia, et al it is no wonder share holders are running for the hills. Who was it (Adelphia?) that closed at 17 cents yesterday on news of filling chapter 11 Monday?
--
Direcway SRS 4.0.1.28-A Win XP Pro host/ME clients satmex5 1070 proxy off AMD 2000+ 512ddr | |
|
|  KoolMoeAw ManPremium
join:2001-02-14
Annapolis, MD | Do you have a contract? Can these ISP-flavor companies simply say "we're raising your rates"? Isn't that the POINT of a contract? I have a year contract with SE/Covad. If I can't pull out of the contract without a penalty fee, no way in heck I'd continue the contract if they raised my rates!
But for those on a month-to-month plan, ah, not much you can do about that I guess...
KM | |
| | |  pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | Darth Vader Contracting said by KoolMoe:
Do you have a contract? Can these ISP-flavor companies simply say "we're raising your rates"? Isn't that the POINT of a contract?
HA! Every contract you will ever sign with an ISP contains fine print which says they can do anything they want when they want no matter what without even telling you, and that you must bend over and take it when they tell you to. I call this the "Darth Vader" clause.
"I am altering the deal. Pray that I don't alter it any further." - Vader to Lando, after Lando complains to Vader not keeping up his end of a bargain in The Empire Strikes Back. | |
| | | | | | Re: Darth Vader Contracting Correction...
They have to notify you within 30-days before a service change, and you have an exit clause that allows you to close your account within those 30-days.
This is an open-ended contract for both the provider and the subscriber, and is looked upon as win-win.
If they need to make changes, they can do so within 30 days. If you don't like it, then you pull your account.
They have afforded you every legal right to exit the contract without penalty unlike some DSL providers like Earthlink who reserved the right to increase their service rates, but did not give the user an exit clause.
I was stuck with Earthlink for 8 months after they raised my rates and I couldn't do squat. That, my friends, was a greedy contract arrangement.
--
WARNING! Do not look directly into the processed chicken... | |
|
| JammIT
join:2002-06-20
Allen, TX | I was just as dismayed as other AT&T Broadband customers I believe... I recently received my notice about the rate hike, but I wanted to point out some issues that your everyday "Joe-User/Surfer" may not have realized about the modems they had been renting...
1) Most people don't bother to read the fine print, and at best, they probably would not care about and/or even wish to understand it. I first got the rental plan and was supplied with an RCA cable modem...Fine print states Maximum 3Mbps access speeds, I promptly bought a Toshiba fine print states-11Mbps and proves it. It has proven to be worth every megabit of it.)
IMHO of course., but hey, I've been in the telecom business for years. Pay attention to that "Great Bargain" you get and remember that you usually end up getting what you paid for, a low-priced POS. | |
|
| | intangible, yes? what an interesting gauge of the american condition.
we all live with the "all you can eat" mentality of our society. we gorge ourselves on gasoline, food, clothing, and now internet bandwidth. we're constantly amazed that the buffet actually costs something to supply it, what with trade deficits, dependence on imported oil, etc.
so it comes as no surprise that the companies who provide broadband are suddenly (gasp!) coming back to us that their costs are rising, and a small minority of the users are sucking all of the bandwidth as if it were an all you can eat buffet...i still think the jury is out on whether or not "bandwidth hogs" are really costing them anything, but....
the companies didn't help matters by selling their products with the disclaimer "always on" and didn't impose any kind of caps at the beginning...but c'mon now, there's no such thing as a free lunch. surely even the dimmest of bulbs out there could have seen this coming, right? | |
| |  Pz_
join:2001-03-31
Brownsburg, IN | Re: intangible, yes? I don't think that I gorge myself on bandwidth. I sometimes go several days in a row without even getting on-line. The point is, I don't want to have to worry about a limit. I've got enough to worry about already, I'm not going to ad that to my list.
I'm going to go with the general consensus, if they impose a limit, I will go elsewhere. I will continue doing so until every ISP limits, then go back to dial up. I'm not in the mood to deal with these guys jerking me around anymore than they already have. First they cut the upload, then the download, and finally they pretty much made the newsgroup access useless. (Comcast that is) The whole time charging me the same price. I'm not willing to pay more to go the same speed I did before. I'm already paying the same to go slower. Its just a never ending cycle of paying more for less. | |
| | | lukaro8
join:2000-12-06
Jacksonville, FL | Re: intangible, yes? I'm sorta the same... only online doing speed intesive stuff 2-3 days a week. Rest of the time IM's and email, and of course checking up here.. But dang when I want the speed i need the speed. Don't call me a hog. | |
|
| kaila
join:2000-10-11
Lincolnshire, IL | Dude, but bandwidth prices have been crashing downward for sometime now. The "extra" (tiered) fees they want to build in far outstrip actual costs needed to supply it- and those costs continue to go down. Hell, with AOL doing the routing, RR costs to supply users per gig is less than a nickle. If they want to charge me extra for additional usage, fine, just make it reasonable- something like .50 a gig.
Plus I hate it when ISP's (cable & DSL) try to shift blame. Calling it a "user problem", when in many cases it is really a "provisioning problem".
Our society will continue to demand and use more and more bandwidth as time goes on. Sooner or later some of these companies will have to step aside if they can't provide it reasonably. | |
| | | | | Re: intangible, yes? Ahhh, but the cost on employing people, business operations, and the such have not gone down.
Most people fail to realize that on the other side of their cable modem is not just an internet pipe - It's 20,000+ employees and all the equipment needed to support the service.
That costs money.
--
WARNING! Do not look directly into the processed chicken... | |
|
 jhudson2Copyright Martyr
join:2000-11-07
San Marcos, CA | More excellent customer service.... From the article:
Cable operators also are looking to raise prices for what AT&T Chairman C. Michael Armstrong snidely termed "Net hogs" at a congressional hearing.
End Quote
Another example of the general contempt for customers which exists in the business world today. Pay for service, but if you actually USE it you're a burden to be dispensed with.
| |
| | | | Re: More excellent customer service.... I am currently with Adelphia cable Co. in Charlottesville Va., where I get 250 to 300 KB DL speeds just about all the time.
If, and when, Adelphia pulls the plug I will gladly go back to dial up and say to hell with the broadband/cable TV industry and their deregulated nonsense.
I'll get more done (reading etc,.) and save money to boot.
Besides, the cable TV news pundits are too stupid for words, and the regular programming isn't close to worth the $
If more people spoke with their checkbook instead of their mouth maybe these greedy bastards (and bitches) would learn something. | |
|
| | Cable Companies will dig their own grave! Theres nothing wrong with raising the prises. I'll happy pay $80-90 a month for fast speeds.. Frankly i want what i pay for... I want my low ping, and i want to be able to play my online games when i want and how long i want. And if i have to pay almost $100 dollars a month then i have no problem with it.
Cable companys offer theres for $40-50 a month, it's shared. And all they do is complain about useage, yes they lower the speed and charge more, Now they want to Restrict Bandwith consumption. Restricting Bandwith consumption is just wrong, and not needed. Raise you high speeds to the same as DSL for 60-70, and leave us alone. We want what we pay for, and most of use are willing to pay for it!
I'm currently with AT&T BB at the moment, When they were @home, everything was so awesome, 5000/128, it never ran better and i had the best online gaming pings and experience ever. Then they went out of busniess.. Call it their own stupidity,, call it strong arm by other companys. what happened happend.. Now AT&T took over in my area. Not only did they Raise the Rates. They Lower the Speeds to 1.5/128.. Then rasied the rates again. Now just recently they rasie the uploads so now the serivce is 1.5/256 And in the process somehow screwed most of their network... with ping times to their gatewate not at the normal 10-15ms but reacing well over 100ms to over 300ms. Online Gameing is what i do most of the time, and i enjoy it very much with my girlfriend. Not only has thie network gone to crap, but now they want to raise the rates more.
I'm swithing to DSL, i've already ordered it, and instead of paying $50 some dollars, i'm paying almost double at $90. And i'm more then happy to pay this much. Why you ask. Becasue i want what i pay for. the speed are about the same 1.5/356, just a little more uploads,, which i think it great. But people like me, are more then happy to pay extra if well feel it worth it.. And when stupid cable monopolies try to strong arm us. it's just total bullshit, and they need to wake up, becasue the REAL user's like myself will be more then happy to swith to a quality service and pay the extra for the quality,, and for What we want!
Cable companies,, Go ahead and make your Teird speeds,, it will make a lot of people happy. Go any make your Teird Bandwith Consumption and you will lose in the end, becasue us real users know what we want, and will will glady pay for it elsewhere! Sit and that and SPIN! *Spit* =)
My 100 cents... | |
| | KoolMoeAw ManPremium
join:2001-02-14
Annapolis, MD | Re: Cable Companies will dig their own grave! I agree. I went with (S)DSL in the first place cause I needed 'guaranteed' speeds, and I haven't been let down yet. Sure my neighbor has much faster dload speeds than I...about half the time. The other half, he's battling the neighborhood 'hogs' for bandwidth.
Was this their plan all along? "We'll hook the consumer with fast speeds and unlimited usage, then we'll introduce tiers"
Or more likely, were they just short-sighted...
While not a cable net user, I understand tiered services and don't think it's a bad idea - though it sucks for those used to fast/unlimited and the plan reeks of 'bait and switch'.
BUT no DSL/Cable ISP should implement bandwidth caps - that is complete BS. I actually hope one does and rapidly goes out of business as user's panic off that train. Tiers are fine, bandwidth caps are NOT a good idea, for anyone.
KM | |
| | | | Hand-eye coordination beats English language Maybe you should take some time off from the online gaming. You could use some of your free time to go back to school. While there you could brush up on your spelling, and basic English skills. | |
| | | | | Re: Hand-eye coordination beats English language dude don't drop this debate into the gutter please.
stop belittleing people for their beliefs this isn't cuba.
--
I too was a attbi hater but now with this new service my connection is to slow to complain ... | |
| | |  W8ASATieng gi vay?
join:2000-07-31
Dayton, OH | So could you. Check your sentences. | |
|
|  rgwarrenPremium
join:2002-04-25
Stevensville, MI | Re: mabe bandwit cpas arnet that bad a thin! Maybe bandwidth caps aren't such a bad thing.
We could all spend more time learning how to actually write (spelling included) properly. | |
|
mwf
join:2000-11-26
Granite Quarry, NC | Price War? Talk about a new economy. Usually a price war means the prices go down and the consumer gets a deal. The new tier pricing seems to be doing just the opposite; current service levels are now going to cost more and and anyone wanting to actually use their service is going to have to pay more.
It's time to step away from the computer and read a book. | |
| |
See 8 replies to this post | |
 PsiReaperWalk Softly And Carry A Big Mind.
join:1999-08-30
Henderson, NV | Net-a-holic? Do you have a life? Stop living in that PC and go out and get some air.
--
"To lest we forget that our friends...." | |
| | | | | PsiReaperWalk Softly And Carry A Big Mind.
join:1999-08-30
Henderson, NV | Re: Net-a-holic? It doesn't have to be the bar scene. A walk around the park or something. Just go out and get some sun or moon, if you're the nocturnal type.
--
"To lest we forget that our friends...." | |
| | | | | ya me to, i sit in front of the computer all day, to lazy to even get up. theres so many things to do on a pc besides going outside to our basic lives! | |
|
 BrendanWarr Guitar is here
join:2000-07-14
Littleton, CO | I thought... ... We had this Major glut in backbone bandwidth? Wouldn't that dictate sending data across the major part of the Internet shouldn't cost much? I wouldn't think so. They (last mile providers) are trying to have it both ways- trying to gouge us for every bit we use, providing mediocre to poor service in many cases, yet getting backbone connectivity for *their* networks at a windfall discount. There's Something wrong with that.
--
Can you dig it?
*Pleased In Colorado* | |
|  KrispyPremium,VIP
join:2001-12-11
the stix
kudos:1 | Is this about speed or traffic transfer? I find it difficult to understand exactly what she's complaining about...is it the speed caps or the traffic caps??
I also find it somewhat amusing that her article appears on the Washington Post site...a site so littered with banner ads and javascript that I've generally got to change a few settings to see it at all. | |
| | | | Re: Is this about speed or traffic transfer? She is complaining about traffic or Useage Caps! | |
|
 Aramis604I Represent Nobody But Myself.Premium
join:2000-12-15
Poway, CA | I think I understand most of this. Please correct me if I'm wrong. This is how I understand this situation.
The cable companies are implementing a bandwidth cap in an attempt to give all of their customers quote "equal service." They are claiming that a percentage of users deemed "net hogs" are using up all the available bandwidth and putting excess tax on their overloaded systems. So instead of upgrading their system to support a bigger pool of bandwidth, they want to limit user capacity, without actually (hopefully) loosing customer base. In their idea, the end result is same amount of customers, all getting about the same usage ability. Then implement a tiered pricing to allow users who pay more to "buy" more bandwidth. It is also my understanding that only cable companies are doing this, or actually only they need to do this. Because of the nature of how a cable Internet system works.
That's how I understand it in a nutshell....
Based on that understanding, wouldn't it seem logical that large majorities of people are going to switch to a DSL or if available a Satellite connection, since DSL and satellite are not pooled as cable is. Personally I've always considered DSL to be a superior product over cable; it's just the DSL companies that could use some help. I know very little about satellite so I can't give an opinion there. It seems to me that if cable COs implement any sort of cap, (even if it is pretty large) we'll be seeing a big move away from cable. My question is, I'm sure the cable COs must realize this too... Why go trough with it? Do they feel that customers are truly so stupid as to totally cow down to them? Are that many of us, actually that stupid?
Personally, I'm sticking to my DSL service. | |
| | | | Re: I think I understand most of this. said by DSLemp:
So instead of upgrading their system to support a bigger pool of bandwidth, they want to limit user capacity, without actually (hopefully) loosing customer base.
BUT, to upgrade their equipment cost money, and how do they pay for it? By placing it in the consumer's wallet and raising the rates. I'm sure if you have cable TV, you see it all the time. Every year they raise the TV prices to add five channels you don't watch. I understand they have fees the pay, but sometimes it gets tiresome.
quote:
It seems to me that if cable COs implement any sort of cap, (even if it is pretty large) we'll be seeing a big move away from cable.
I don't know about that. Based on what the ATT chairman said, 1% of their userbase using 14% of the network is probably something around 17,000 users. Maybe the cap will drive 30% of those people away, but the people who just send email and browse web pages won't move away, IMO. | |
| | | Aramis604I Represent Nobody But Myself.Premium
join:2000-12-15
Poway, CA | Re: I think I understand most of this. said by beeman65:
I don't know about that. Based on what the ATT chairman said, 1% of their userbase using 14% of the network is probably something around 17,000 users. Maybe the cap will drive 30% of those people away, but the people who just send email and browse web pages won't move away, IMO.
You're probably right.
I work in a DSL center in CA, and have a unique perspective on what's happening from the consumer side. I've spoken to quite a few customers who say that even though they're probably not going to be effected by a download limit, they'll switch on principal. But then again, the customers that I speak to who already have a broadband provider are generally discontent with them already, else they wouldn't be talking to me. | |
| | |  RARPSL
join:1999-12-08
Suffern, NY | said by beeman65:
I don't know about that. Based on what the ATT chairman said, 1% of their userbase using 14% of the network is probably something around 17,000 users.
You have to think about the situation as opposed to taking it at face value to understand the scam that this represents. They are deliberately misinterpreting the Statistics to push their point. So long as all the users do not consume the same amount of bandwidth, there will ALWAYS be those who use more than the average. All he is doing is saying that if you start at the top users and count their aggregate usage, then when you get to 14% of the TOTAL usage you've only counted 1% of the number of users. This implies that there are a large number of VERY low usage users to balance that 1%. The real question is how much of the AVAILABLE Bandwidth is that 1% using. This is like saying you have a highway that can carry X numbers of cars per hour at a designated Speed. You monitor this Highway for 1 week and there were 42X trips that week (25% of capacity since it could sustain 168X trips). If you count unique cars, you might find that 95% of the cars are only using the highway once while the other 5% are people who use it multiple times daily. Thus these 5% are "Road Hogs" since they use it at a rate that is much higher than the 4.2X trips per car average. In addition, since there are only 25% capacity used, you can sustain a 300% increase in usage (at the current rates) before the Highway can no longer handle the load.
So long as you talk ONLY about usage (as opposed to capacity) you get misleading numbers. | |
|
| KoolMoeAw ManPremium
join:2001-02-14
Annapolis, MD | Almost (if I understand correctly!)
There are two issues: Tiered service and Bandwidth (transferred data) caps.
Tiered service just means you pay for a certain level of service, like DSL offers: 1/1mb, 384/384kb, 1.0/384kb, etc.
I have no problem with tiers. You want the latest Linux ISO? You'll pay more to get it fast. You'll pay less to get it slower. Sounds reasonable. I could pay buckets of $$ to get to California super fast on a private jet, or pay less to go commercial....
But Bandwidth Caps are crap.
Some people drive the highway each day to get to work - their car puts more wear on the road than my once-a-week highway trip. Do the tolls cost the frequent driver more?
My SUV gets horrible gas mileage and puts more pollutants in the air than my neighbors compact Honda. Does gas cost me more per gallon? Do I have to pay extra taxes to clean up the Bay?
There are, of course, counter examples (usually, the more you eat, the more you pay), but just to get across the concept...
Maybe if they make bandwidth caps an option:
1. 500/384 w. transfer limit of 5gb = $40 a month
2. 500/384 unlimited = $60 a month
Than MAYBE that would work, as long as they don't price most people out of option #2.
KM | |
| |  Todes
@wchryh01.nj.comcast. | Wait one second.
If I share the pipe with bandwidth hogs, and they pay a higher tier for more bits at a higher rate, don't I suffer lower transfer rates due to the "law of conservation of bandwidth"?
If capacity is fixed on the local end of my cable, are the high-end users able to push be further off the low end of the usage graph?
I have been able to fight back with my checkbook and brain. FE: I've disconnected my Long Distance provider and use calling "cards" from OneSuite (in past BigZoo). There are ways to send a message to the greedy ones. Don't fall into the trap that the Cable Companies caught the SAG/AFTRA Actors in, don't believe what Big Cable tells you.
Or, be dumb and happy.
Your choice America. | |
|
kenyg
join:2001-02-09
Hatboro, PA | re: Bandwidth Hogs Sounds to me like the old 'Bait and Switch' - If you look at their promotional material - it's all about - downloading digital pictures in no time, online gaming is fast and furious.. etc.
At the same time you've got CEO's talking 'gosh, our customers are actually using the bandwidth we've sold to them - who would've thought.. must raise rates.. cash cow.. $$$'
guess we're not supposed to notice. | |
| | | | Re: re: Bandwidth Hogs See my quote above about the bait and switch argument. | |
| | |  palmer_j_rCongenital OptimistPremium
join:2000-06-08
Chicago, IL | Re: re: Bandwidth Hogs achuchma.. as you pointed out people don't want to listen to reason, they are too obsessed with getting something for nothing... oh well..
--
Joey
Living on Life's Little Intangibles... | |
|
 CodyBob Vance, VRPremium
join:2002-05-28
Mukilteo, WA
| BS
IMHO i dont feel like worrying about going over the limit because i want to download.. also, everyone faces slowdowns etc. i dont see why we should have to pay the same/more to stay slow
edit: spelling
--
Join Team Discovery = )
[text was edited by author 2002-06-20 15:01:47] | |
| | | Internet addict and bandwidth hog... | |
| | alubyckNwflvpnguyPremium
join:2002-03-01
Cantonment, FL | Re: Internet addict and bandwidth hog... | |
| | | | Yes, Cox had me screwed up for a while. They got me fixed:) I'm going to get DSL in the next month or so if they can't fix this service because I'm having mini outages now which is annoying. I have to reboot the computer and unplug the cable modem which works sometimes. I wish there was another cable company in this town but there's not, so it's either Cox or rabbit ears.
-Geekgirl | |
|
XBL2009------
join:2001-01-03
Chicago, IL | Duh! quote:
1 percent of its high-speed subscribers account for 16 percent of its network traffic
Doesn't even seem like problem to me, 99% of the users account for 84% of the network traffic.
... | |
| | winsyrstrifeRiver City BouncePremium
join:2002-04-30
Brooklyn, NY |  Re: Duh!
said by JacobNero:
Doesn't even seem like problem to me, 99% of the users account for 84% of the network traffic.
...
I think they're trying to imply that it will graduate to a more severe point, so this is there way of prevention.
--
56K is good. You can benchmark your PC by leaving it all on day trying to D/L something... | |
|
 Rally1
join:2000-06-12
Long Beach, CA | nethoggers i dont think this writer would even fit into a "net hog" tier.
They are after people who fill their pipe all day - all night.
Not some joker who downloads some MP3s and video every night after work.
I fit in the second group, i use the net pretty heavy, but only for short bursts, and not all day (some of us have jobs).
If you use the whole 1.5MB pipe 24/7 then you should pay more, I sure dont want to subsidize your over use, and dont want my rates to go up because you have to download porn all night  . | |
| | | | bmn? ? ?Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus | said by Rally1:
If you use the whole 1.5MB pipe 24/7 then you should pay more, I sure dont want to subsidize your over use, and dont want my rates to go up because you have to download porn all night .
Well, if it actually cost them bundles of money for that type of usage, that type of reasoning would make sense. They are claiming that its costing the providers much more than it actually does based on price per gigabyte figures found around the net (the average was between (updated) $.50 - $1.90).
--
Java?! HA! Real programmers still use C and C++. -- www.fluorine.org
"Yeah, SUV... You know. Slow, Ugly Vehicle..." | |
| | | | | Re: nethoggers
Can you please post the URL where you got these numbers? | |
| | | | bmn? ? ?Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus | Re: nethoggers I'm not going to cater to your LAZINESS. You asked this once before and yet you still haven't looked around. Why don't you do some research on your own time, like most of us have. And like I said, those numbers are an average.
And if you don't like it... Read the tag... I am a BOFH and I'm not one to pick up for lazy people.
--
Java?! HA! Real programmers still use C and C++. -- www.fluorine.org
"Yeah, SUV... You know. Slow, Ugly Vehicle..." | |
|
| |
|
|
