Comments on: Time Warner to test metered Web use
Time Warner Cable says it will charge users based on how much data they transfer in an effort to control peer-to-peer traffic on their network, but the new pricing model could scare off customers.
About Webware
Say No to boxed software! The future of applications is online delivery and access. Software is passé. Webware is the new way to get things done.
Add this feed to your online news reader
Webware topics
Most Popular
15 sites that went kaput in 2009
Web sites launch all the time, but they also shut their doors. We highlight 15 that bit the dust this year.
Top 10 news stories of the decade
Let the debate begin: Was the iPhone more important than iTunes? Was anything bigger than Google finding a great business model? CNET offers its list of the 10 most important stories of the '00s.
The fact is this is just a way to limit video services like Netflix, Vongo and now Apple TV.
If this extra bandwidth was so taking on them then why not have a very low price for the casual user that hardly uses any bandwidth. The fact is prices aren't dropping it's all about protecting their cable video offerings.
How to avoid this is to get satellite and show around for another broadband provider, they are a dime a dozen now. It's not just about cable and DSL, there are more options out there.
By the way, when is congress going to wake up with Net Neutrality and enact some legislation. Email your Senator and Congress persons. This aggression will not stand.
Second, higher bandwidth provides a gateway for clients to receive services that the provider already offers, such as phone and television.
My opinion is that all ISP?s be required to contain the necessary resources to provide the advertised bandwidth your paying for or lower their advertised speeds to something they can handle.
No one does this, the telephone companies have limited capacity to deliver calls - exceed that and your call won't go through, cell phone systems get overloaded, even electric service can't do this, most homes are wired with 100 to 300 amp service, what happens when everyone uses all the power at once, the system fails because it can't deliver it.
To build a system where everyone can run the service to the max at all times would be cost prohibitive.
They sold us connections advertised as 24/7 with "UNLIMITED" data at peak speeds of 10gb. Now they wish to change from a buffet to a ala-cart mid way thorough dinner and charge us for that extra helping of mashed potatoes.
But what is too much, and how does that figure in with modern usage. iTunes and Netfix now offering movie rentals on line which should take off this year as they work out the kinks. Some businesses and homes have several people sharing the connection via wifi hubs. Imagine a 4 person family, where both kids are watching youtube, and the adults are vpn'ed into work. How does this affect you if your kid is running a web radio station or producing a daily youtube tv show? Pretty normal stuff for kids now days. All of this really is AVERAGE use for today and will likely be sub average a year from now.
Tell us Time Warner what is too much? Does this figure adjust for "net inflation" where we all use more bandwidth every year due to the continual expansion of the net? Something seems fishy with this model.
It's been interesting reading the comments, since I didn't know how things worked in the States.
In Europe (most part of it, as far as I know), providers have several options based on available bandwidth (download and upload speeds). You pay a monthly fee, but these options always have a GB limit for downloading. These limits distinguish Local and International traffic. Local traffic could be unlimited, but International never is.
Higher bandwidth, means a higher fee but also a higher limit. It could top 100GB for example. If you exceed the limit, you usually pay an average of 15 cents for each additional MB.
This is how it?s always been and for most people it doesn?t cause any problems. We usually complain more about download speeds and quality of service, than of download limits. We simply accept that there?s a limit, so we must respect it. It?s kind of like driving in the highway. :)
Greetings from Portugal.
I live in England, UK and my broadband service provider does not "cap" my broadband usage. Many providers here still do, and an increasing number are moving to unmetered plans.
My provider tries to prevent abuse by having a "fair usage" policy that I must agree to, essentially stating that I will not "abuse" the network by being constantly connecting to a P2P. So, when I do, I do so for 2 or 3 weeks out of 4, or even 3 to 5 days out of 7.
Not everyone here accepts poor service, poor quality and inferior service and many of us seek out providers who meet our needs and expectations as customers. :)
My mom's computer is always getting junkware on it. She is elderly and can't help it. I know this kind of junkware is sapping her bandwidth. I take it off when I get a chance, but thank goodness she has an unlimited plan.
I could only imagine that there will be many people hit with bills that shock them because of spyware and viruses on their computers.
Just because somebody is using more than average bandwidth doesn't make them law breakers.
I was considering putting together a media center type system, perhaps based on MythTV, or a Microsoft product (undecided at this point). One of the things I wanted to do was be able to get my Wife television channels from her country of origin. They're legitimately available via the channel's website.
Of course, that requires data transfer in the form of streaming.
Now I'll basically be penalized (oh, I'm sorry, "METERED") for it?
Are we to assume that if a TW customer goes on vacation for a month and has a "METER" reading 0 bytes, they will NOT be charged for that month?
I doubt it.
I'm sorry, but that is no way to treat customers.
Charles R. Whealton
Charles Whealton @ pleasedontspam.com
This is just a profit play, by another big business, and should be regulated by the Federal government, as in many places, cable is a monopoly.
It's like the oil companies owning gas stations, screwing the public at each "profit center" along the way, profit centers they themselves create.
We need stronger anti-trust laws in the U.S. to stop abuse by companies like Time-Warner. They have a monopoly in many communities, and this "test" is just an example of their rip and rape business tactics.
Then there is MMO's, VPN usage to work, remote software like GotoMyPc, etc. The list goes on as to the legal things I do with my account that doesn't include P2P, and frankly doesn't happen on my home network. Boo!
It's called "supply and demand." Deal with it.
Made all the more finite by the cables they're purposely not using (dark fiber), to limit the supply and increase the demand.
It's called price gouging. YOU deal with it. I shouldn't have to. (Enjoy your $100 Big Mac while you're at it.)
Yes, gamers and realtime apps won't work over this but a lot of users simply use their accounts for email, browsing and some downloading.
Any major downloading could be done at one's work and brought home.
I think there are better ways to discourage bandwidth hoggers like sending them an email indicating what their throughput was for the month. Some users don't even know they have P2P apps on their computers.
- by computer13137 June 13, 2008 10:33 AM PDT
- It's very simple. If my Internet provider ever decided to do this, I would leave them. I would go back to dialup before I'd pay by the gigabyte. There is a simple problem with metering. For one thing, by telling everyone they can use xGB/day or xGB/month, they're CONSENTING that everyone use it... and that might actually cause some user's download levels to increase, if they were holding back before, afraid of some hidden limit. If my ISP told me I only got 4GB/day or something, I'd use it every day, I'd find something to use it up... even though my usage level now is usually only 2GB/day.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
Showing 2 of 3 pages (76 Comments)Secondly, once it's established that it's OK for them to cap, the caps will only get smaller. This is highly counterproductive. Why can't they just spend some more money and upgrade their infrastructure? They surely steal enough from us as it is.
I use a very local wireless provider, and I don't think I have to fear for my network neutrality or for bandwidth caps in the foreseeable future, but this still concerns me deeply. I grew up with the Internet, I spend all my free time gaming, using forums, and other things.
Third, I think this is horrible for business. If they do it, you know someone will start a movement to boycott that company - everyone will move over to an unlimited access company, and bam, Time Warner takes a huge financial hit.
I foresee a future where Comcast, AT&T, and all the larger companies are hurting badly, as independent broadband carriers open up worldwide. No matter how big the metered limit is, there's always going to be a group of people who miss having no limits - so it'd be smart at that point to start an independent ISP.
Call me petty. I pay $59 a month for my service, and it's only about 5 megabits per second. I pay more for my Internet than you do for your cable TV and Internet combined. I'd be the first to be especially angry if my provider started telling me how I can use it, and how much I can use it.
-computer13137