dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
   
spc
story category
Verizon 'Clarifies' Comments, Says No Plans to Cap FiOS
by Karl Bode 07:46AM Monday Mar 03 2014
The other day we noted how Verizon CEO Lowell McAdam insisted that the "most important" thing that people needed to understand when talking about net neutrality was that heavy users should pay Verizon more. As we noted at the time, the idea that heavy users must pay more -- or that there's some kind of pay inequity in place despite the fact that everybody pays a lot for bandwidth already -- is the cornerstone of justifying low usage caps and per-byte fees, which until now aren't being imposed on FiOS.

Not helping Verizon's case any, Verizon spokesman Edward S. McFadden told the Huffington Post yesterday that "some who stream a lot of movies and use data-intensive applications may pay a bit more." While I think Verizon was largely talking about recent Netflix peering developments, many took the comments to mean usage caps would be reaching FiOS any day now.

Verizon has since reached out to me to insist they have no intention of imposing usage caps on FiOS for the time being. In addition, McFadden posted a blog entry reiterating that FiOS won't be capped:
quote:
Verizon’s fiber to the home high-speed broadband network, FiOS, doesn’t cap usage in any way. But I noted that, in general, the usage-based pricing model also already is in use nowadays. As an example, I noted: “But as you know, wireless customers already pay for the data they use. Some who stream a lot of movies and use data-intensive applications may pay a bit more, those who don’t pay less.” What was written was, in part, inaccurate.

My quote had nothing to do with wireline broadband customers. Verizon FiOS customers can use our fiber-fueled FiOS network to meet their streaming, gaming or surfing needs at the blazing fast speeds and capacity they want and need.
That's almost technically true. FiOS customers (both residential and small business) can find themselves being warned by the company for excessive usage if they use extreme amounts of bandwidth -- though it takes consuming more than ten terabytes or so monthly to even get on Verizon's radar.


132 comments .. click to read

Recommended comments



C4Xplosive

join:2002-02-21
Vancouver, WA

3 recommendations

reply to mackey

Re: The 10TB thing is getting old

LOL the funny thing is people would immediately jump to "Oh he's obviously downloading mass amounts of pirated content that's the only way you could use more than any cap." When in reality the user we salute doing 10TB+ was literally hosting his own TOR Node lol.


n2jtx

join:2001-01-13
Glen Head, NY

5 recommendations

Gad No!

I am a libertarian and a strong believer in the free market but, frankly, perhaps we need the equivalent of the Interstate Highway System in the form of a nationwide Internet backbone with no peering restrictions or limits. As it is, it appears we are in for a reaming in the next few years that will make electric and water rates look quaint.
--
I support the right to keep and arm bears.


mackey
Premium
join:2007-08-20
kudos:13

4 recommendations

reply to Crookshanks

Re: The 10TB thing is getting old

Yeah, because downloading x-ray images is soooooooo life essential.


DataRiker
Premium
join:2002-05-19
00000

3 recommendations

reply to silbaco
said by silbaco:

said by DataRiker:

Crookshanks, I have clients getting close to 1+ TB usage monthly for years now on SOHO cable accounts.

As I stated earlier, on my old COX Soho account I hit well north of 1 TB regularly.

I can't even begin to describe how pathetic this is.

Verizon doesn't cap to 1TB. What's your point?

Cable is many magnitudes more bandwidth sensitive than Fiber.

Yet, I can still max my small business connection without a peep.

Please do explain!!!


DataRiker
Premium
join:2002-05-19
00000

5 recommendations

reply to Crookshanks
Nobody expects 1:1 contention. Nobody expects the network to never slow down.

Caps have nothing to do with this. Its forced artificial scarcity.

Wilsdom

join:2009-08-06

2 edits

3 recommendations

reply to Crookshanks
There is no way to condone FiOS's monthly fee as normal pricing of a residential connection. Indeed this price-gouging would allow for several profitable ISPs to be encapsulated within the same network. If the bill was $10/month you could be shocked at that level of usage, but of course you're opposed to customers getting a good value for indeterminate reaons


DataRiker
Premium
join:2002-05-19
00000

5 recommendations

reply to Crookshanks
said by Crookshanks:

said by karlmarx:

Well, let's see, I PAY for up to 105mb/sec.

Fixed it for you.

So less than 1% transfer seems excessive to you.

Do you ever laugh at yourself trying to defend this stuff?


DataRiker
Premium
join:2002-05-19
00000

3 recommendations

reply to Mr Guy
said by Mr Guy :

said by karlmarx:

And yet comcast, which considers using 1mb/sec 7x24 considers that to be 'excessive' (1mb/sec = 320GB/month).

Devil's advocate. Any reason why you need a 1 Mbps connection running 24/7?

Because he wants to?

Devil's advocate. Why on earth are you concerned?


DataRiker
Premium
join:2002-05-19
00000

3 edits

7 recommendations

reply to Crookshanks
For one user here it was 4 TB and 10 TB for another.

More disturbing however is in the 4 TB case, the user already switched to Business class FiOS.

And just who the F are you to condone a small business using 4 TB? I know a mom and pop photography company using close to 1 TB on an ADSL2 line. I also have another one man doctor's office using 1+ terabytes on a business class cable modem (sorry can't discuss what they do, privacy concerns).

None to my knowledge have ever heard a peep. And your telling me a 10 TB on a BUSINESS class fiber is somehow crazy????

Crookshanks

join:2008-02-04
Binghamton, NY

5 recommendations

There's no conceivable way that can be condoned as normal usage for any residential or small business connection. That's a sustained 24/7 transfer rate of >30mbit/s.

I could start a small ISP with that sort of bandwidth at my disposal.