SydLexia.com - The Forums :: View topic - Three steps backward: ISPs looking to charge for bandwith

Posted: Jun 03 2008 06:31 pm

Barry Levine, newsfactor.com wrote:

On Thursday, Time Warner Cable will begin testing a new pricing plan that caps bandwidth usage. Kevin Leddy, Time Warner Cable's executive vice president, said the plan will be launched as a trial in Beaumont, Texas, and will consist of several tiers. The first tier, at $29.95 monthly, will be a relatively slow 768 kilobits per second with a 5GB monthly cap, while a plan at $54.90 per month will offer 15 megabits per second and a 40GB cap.

Both downloads and uploads count toward the monthly total. Overages will be charged at $1 a gigabyte.

Only New Customers

Time Warner has an estimated 90,000 customers in the area, and only new customers will be offered the tiers. With some users exchanging huge, media-based files like video, some other cable companies have also considered caps. For instance, Comcast, the largest cable company in the United States, has reportedly said it may cap usage at 250 gigabytes per month.

The experiment comes as consumers have grown used to unlimited Internet usage. But Larry Hettick, an analyst with industry research firm Current Analysis, said the current problem for Internet service providers is mostly created by five percent of users, while the rest have usage patterns within expectations. Those five percent, he added, are frequently downloading or uploading huge files.

Hettick noted that providers have previously said, in effect, that their policy is "unlimited, within reason," and then kicked off those few who go unreasonably beyond expected usage. "From a marketing point of view," he said, "it's probably a better approach."

He added that it will be interesting to see how users react to this experiment, as they have become accustomed to unlimited bandwidth, and the phone market is going the other way -- toward unlimited use for a flat price. "Personally," said Hettick, who sometimes works at home and depends on his online connection, "I would not buy a usage-sensitive data plan."

'Probably Enough'

He did note that, for the 95 percent of normal users, a 40GB cap is "probably enough." But addressing the short-term problem of dealing with the five percent of overusers, he added, will not fix the long-term problem, with high-definition home movies being uploaded to YouTube or users downloading high-definition features from iTunes.

"There has to be several parts to the solution," he said. One of these is increasing capacity in the so-called "last mile" to the home, by implementing new technologies such as DOCSIS 3.0 or reducing the number of homes on a given line. "Three years ago," Hettick noted, "a cable company might have served 100 homes in a neighborhood with one access point, but now could be serving 25."

Hettick said another part of the solution is increasing capacity at the central parts of the network. But, even with these adjustments, cable companies and other service providers will still have to come to terms eventually with those ultra-high-bandwidth users.

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nf/20080603/bs_nf/60098&printer=1;_ylt=AnmMPjQ0IqEdHbWiUOX2chHwPDQD

Posted: Jun 03 2008 06:35 pm

This is gay. Hope you don't plan on downloading any games from Steam or GameTap, downloading movies off iTunes, buying lots of MP3s, watching movie trailers, game trailers, or YouTube, or pretty much anything fun on the internet.

The internet market paradigm has been moving towards hi-def and hi-bandwith. For greedy ISPs to attempt to cash in on that is reprehensible. Comcast's consideration of a 250 GB per month limit is somewhat reasonable, but Time Warner's cap of 40 GB is fucking ridiculous.

Posted: Jun 03 2008 07:09 pm

I agree that this is frustrating, but I'd rather have ISPs introduce content independent bandwidth caps than see them abolishing Net Neutrality and getting their money from content suppliers directly by threatening them to restrict access to their services. That might leave those who have the means to buy themselves the support of ISPs with reign over the Internet and reduce customer choice to a minimum.

EDIT: Customers would still have the choice between ISPs, of course, so they'd still have an influence on the issue.

Posted: Jun 03 2008 07:15 pm

Tyop wrote:

I agree that this is frustrating, but I'd rather have ISPs introduce content independent bandwidth caps than see them abolishing Net Neutrality and getting their money from content suppliers directly by threatening them to restrict access to their services. That might leave those who have the means to buy themselves the support of ISPs with reign over the Internet and reduce customer choice to a minimum.

With the "Dish" taking over TV's Cable Companies like Time Warner need to make money somehow. That's fucking gay by the way. "Why didn't you do your research? Well I would have but my dad downloaded a movie and sister uploaded pictures on her myspace, I only had 14kb to search the internet, I got to www.google.com."

Posted: Jun 03 2008 07:31 pm

Yeah, Comcast and Time Warner will learn really quick how great this idea is, when everyone dumps them for DSL, or Neighbors all pitch in for a T1/T5/T10 connection.

Posted: Jun 03 2008 07:32 pm

this is despicable. The thing that infuriates me about America is that everyone is just going to take it. We have the money they want we can make the decisions. I for one, will abondon Time Warner if they introduce this policy. If you stick it to them monetarily, they will change their policies real quick. Hopefully alternative companies will introduce themselves and bring some competition into the market. This really is regressive of the company, but I have a nasty feeling they're going to get away with it because complicit Americans will just kind of say Fuck it and shell out the extra cash just like they do with gasoline.

Posted: Jun 03 2008 08:44 pm

lame

Posted: Jun 04 2008 01:34 am

This is bullshit. What are we, back in the 90's where we have to pay for net access on an hourly basis? Their excuse is that they don't have the cash to handle upgrading the network for the increased traffic, and yet if you pay more it's A-OK. It's just like airlines charging extra to check in bags that weigh in heavier than usual. What, does my magic green paper make the suitcase weigh less?

Posted: Jun 04 2008 03:19 am

Knyte wrote:

Yeah, Comcast and Time Warner will learn really quick how great this idea is, when everyone dumps them for DSL, or Neighbors all pitch in for a T1/T5/T10 connection.

and by the way... this would be all sorts of awesome if you could get your whole neighborhood to actually do this.

Posted: Jun 04 2008 06:38 am

The other problem is this: what about schools, universities, and libraries? They would get RAPED on bandwith usage and you can bet they'd pass that cost onto you.

And what about places like McDonald's and Starbucks that offer free wi-fi hotspots? Guess they won't be doing that anymore.

Joined: Dec 06 2007 Location: Connecticut Posts: 11244

Syd Lexia wrote:

The other problem is this: what about schools, universities, and libraries? They would get RAPED on bandwith usage and you can bet they'd pass that cost onto you.

And what about places like McDonald's and Starbucks that offer free wi-fi hotspots? Guess they won't be doing that anymore.

Universities are a mixed bag. Big ones usually are their own ISP and they hop on Internet 2 bandwidth. In other words, they are on their own network and it won't be a problem.

Smaller universities would probably appeal to the Government for an exclusion ruling, my guess is that they would get it.

As far as businesses offering free Wifi... well... they will continue to do so, but expect bandwidth caps. You will get free Wifi as long as you aren't downloading full length films.

Here is what I see happening. ISPs will try to rape the American public just as our oil troubles really start to have a massive impact.

Flights are being grounded, fuel will hit $5/gal for cars... No one will notice the net neutrality related stuff until the rest of the world calms down.

But I do think that there is one company that is going to shine. Google is going to save our asses. They have been buying up physical cables and networking stuff all over the country. Of course they have been doing so silently and haven't ever offered anything with it. As a company that is reliant on bandwidth I would bet that they would fight the other ISPs and even try to bring them to the brink of extinction by offering a better competitive product.

Only time will tell, but my bet is that evil can only win for a short time.

Posted: Jun 04 2008 07:53 am

GPFontaine wrote:

But I do think that there is one company that is going to shine. Google is going to save our asses. They have been buying up physical cables and networking stuff all over the country. Of course they have been doing so silently and haven't ever offered anything with it. As a company that is reliant on bandwidth I would bet that they would fight the other ISPs and even try to bring them to the brink of extinction by offering a better competitive product.

I think they have mostly bought those cable lines because of what I already mentioned in my first post. If Net Neutrality falls, ISPs will be able to restrict certain web services. For example they might charge search engines to get access to their customer base. That would be a huge threat to Google. Google has lots of money but nowhere near as much as Microsoft. Microsoft could pay ISPs to make Live.com the exclusive search engine for their customers. The only way for Google to protect their main source of revenue against such a scenario is to become an ISP themselves.

Posted: Jun 04 2008 08:19 am

yeah, this really is a stupid strat on behalf of cable companies. good thing there are options such as DSL and T1's and satellite etc etc. so, this probably will be another nail in the cable coffin

Posted: Jun 04 2008 11:49 am

Most colleges and universities are in the clear. They are thier own ISP as GPF stated. Even the community college I went to had a DS1 connection. This is only going to hurt two kinds of people:

1. The home user.

2. Companies that offer downloadble products. (Games, movies, music, etc.)

Also, I love the line "a 40GB cap is 'probably enough.'" We are living in a HD content world. If you want a 2 hour movie in full 1080P HD (BluRay,H264) then you are looking at about 12GB a movie. So by the cable guy's own statement, he saying that 3 HD movies a months is all you need.

Posted: Jun 04 2008 02:27 pm

They are only going to avoiding getting new customers if they charge bandwidth.

Posted: Jun 04 2008 03:10 pm

I'm pretty sure my cable company wouldn't pull this. They already pissed of customers by removing some channels from basic cable, and then added back the channels because a bunch of customers left for satellite. The same thing would happen with this.

Joined: Dec 06 2007 Location: Connecticut Posts: 11244

Knyte wrote:

Also, I love the line "a 40GB cap is 'probably enough.'" We are living in a HD content world. If you want a 2 hour movie in full 1080P HD (BluRay,H264) then you are looking at about 12GB a movie. So by the cable guy's own statement, he saying that 3 HD movies a months is all you need.

LOL When you put it in terms like that, I am no longer worried.

Have faith, the porn industry will never allow such restrictions to exist.

UsaSatsui's Youtube Channel · Posted: Jun 05 2008 12:14 pm

Nobody mentioned this, and this is the part that gets me pissed: "overages will be charged at $1 a gigabyte".

They don't cut you off at 40. They just pile on the charges. And let's face it, does the average person really know how much bandwidth they're using? Can they check their "bandwidth-o-meter" to see what they can browse today?

I think they're trying to nail people who don't keep tabs on this sort of thing. Everyone downloads a few things, Junior spends a few hours on a file sharing network, everyone takes some music for their ipods, and BAM! Your family has run up a $250 internet bill. Things will be like the old days, where you have someone watching the clock because your monthly 6 hours of Compuserve are almost up.

Posted: Jun 05 2008 02:18 pm

GPFontaine wrote:

Have faith, the porn industry will never allow such restrictions to exist.

I forgot all about that. Naughty America won't take this lying down!

Actually they will take it lying down. Then standing up. Then on a couch. Then maybe on a desk. But AFTERWARDS, they'll totally fight this. Amazon and Apple will too.

Joined: Dec 06 2007 Location: Connecticut Posts: 11244

Syd Lexia wrote:

GPFontaine wrote:

Have faith, the porn industry will never allow such restrictions to exist.

I forgot all about that. Naughty America won't take this lying down!

Actually they will take it lying down. Then standing up. Then on a couch. Then maybe on a desk. But AFTERWARDS, they'll totally fight this. Amazon and Apple will too.

So here is my theory. For stock holder purposes, companies must pretend like they are trying to earn more money. Its just the way of capitalism. This is a good way to pretend. They do a "test" with a small population. A test that will fail.

But... wealthy, poor, black, white, male, female, it doesn't matter. Porn is what the Internet is for.

No one wants to have to explain an excessive bill because they downloaded the HD rerelease of Jenna Does Ross Rifle in HD only to realize that they were Rick Rolled.

So in the end, porn will win, because it is embarrassing to discuss in public for executives, and they know they will have to explain to their wives what that extra bandwidth was for.

2010 SLF Tag Champ Joined: Jun 07 2006 Posts: 12294

then the FCC comes in with the free wifi that they were considering, and nobody is allowed to download porn ever again.

Joined: Dec 06 2007 Location: Connecticut Posts: 11244

JEW wrote:

then the FCC comes in with the free wifi that they were considering, and nobody is allowed to download porn ever again.

The FCC better bring the fucking Army too if they are going to shut porn down.

People can deal with not seeing a ripped copy of a movie or break.com during lunch. But I'm not sure if America could survive a porn drought.

2010 SLF Tag Champ Joined: Jun 07 2006 Posts: 12294

it would be prohibition all over again.

UsaSatsui's Youtube Channel · Posted: Jun 05 2008 04:38 pm

Quote:

then the FCC comes in with the free wifi that they were considering, and nobody is allowed to download porn ever again.

Porn is completely legal. There's no reason they'd shut it down, nor any way they legally could.

2010 SLF Tag Champ Joined: Jun 07 2006 Posts: 12294

no.

the fcc is planning on offering free wifi for people.

one of the hooks is that it will be controlled. things like porn won't be available on their free wifi.

people will probably get the free wifi, when they learn that they can't download porn anymore on the isp that they are paying for, due to bandwith caps.