• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Charter cable to place caps on usage

I'm glad I dropped them a couple months ago. I don't use anywhere near the amount of the coming caps but still hate the idea.


http://www.dslreports.com/show...nfirms-New-Caps-100676
Yesterday we cited an anonymous insider at Charter who informed us that the company would very soon be implementing new caps. Today, Charter's Eric Ketzer confirmed the plans, and informed us that Charter's new, $140 60Mbps tier will not have any limitations. Speeds of 15Mbps or slower will have a 100GB monthly cap, while 15-25Mbps speeds will have a 250GB monthly cap. "In order to continue providing the best possible experience for our Internet customers, later this month we will be updating our Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) to establish monthly residential bandwidth consumption thresholds," Ketzer confirms. "More than 99% of our customers will not be affected by our updated policy, as they consume far less bandwidth than the threshold allows," he says.



Thanks Eos for the update AUP info.
http://www.charter.com/Visitors/Policies.aspx?Policy=6
13. NO EXCESSIVE USE OF BANDWIDTH

Excessive bandwidth is usage beyond a reasonable level for the service subscribed to. Residential service usage will not exceed 100GB of bandwidth per month for Customers subscribing to Services of 15 Mbps or less per month and 250GB of bandwidth per month for Customers subscribing to Service over 15 Mbps and up to 25 Mbps. Charter reserves the right to revise usage limits or to implement additional usage limits. In the event residential usage exceeds the above-described limits Customer will be notified and required to either limit Customer?s bandwidth consumption to permitted levels/limits or subscribe to a Service with a higher monthly bandwidth limit if a higher limit subscription is available. In the event Customer does not limit bandwidth consumption to permitted levels/limits after notice of the same, Charter may determine, in Charter?s sole discretion, that Customer is using an excessive amount of bandwidth over the Charter network infrastructure for Internet access or other functions using public network resources, during any period of time, Charter may thereafter: (a) adjust, suspend or terminate Customer?s account or Service at any time and without notice; or (b) require Customer to upgrade Customer?s service level and pay additional fees in accordance with Charter?s then-current, applicable rates for such Service; (c) cap Customer?s usage or limit aggregate bandwidth available to Customer; (d) implement prioritization of traffic; (e) implement protocol filtering; or (f) use any technology to be chosen by Charter at its sole discretion including, but not limited to, packet-reset and/or other packet management technology, to slow Service to Customer for purposes of conserving bandwidth. Charter may also notify Customer of excessive use and request Customer to employ corrective or self-limiting actions to comply with this provision.
 
I guess Europe has been doing caps for a very long time. At first I was 100% against it, but after using shared DSL lines in my apartment building I would like to see it in place. Someone is eating up ALL the bandwidth and it's pissing me off.
 
this will do more to combat piracy then then stringiest DRMs. Guess paying customers have to go back to buying retail, sucks for steam though.
 
Even though I highly doubt my mom is going to go over that cap it seems like no better time to give Charter the finger!
 
Originally posted by: venkman
this will do more to combat piracy then then stringiest DRMs. Guess paying customers have to go back to buying retail, sucks for steam though.

seriously?

the lowest package gives you 250gbs a month. Lets say you buy 2-3 games a month. That is going to come at what... 15gbs maybe? 30gbs? That leaves at least another 220gbs. I'm pretty sure that will suffice.
 
Originally posted by: AntiFreze
Originally posted by: venkman
this will do more to combat piracy then then stringiest DRMs. Guess paying customers have to go back to buying retail, sucks for steam though.

seriously?

the lowest package gives you 250gbs a month. Lets say you buy 2-3 games a month. That is going to come at what... 15gbs maybe? 30gbs? That leaves at least another 220gbs. I'm pretty sure that will suffice.

Slowest gives you 100GB which is all I would be able to get here as they only offer 10MB.
Luckily I got DSL with no caps and cheaper.
 
100-250 gigs for even the lowest tiers is WAAAAAAAY more desirable than the 40 gigs that Time/Warner was (did?) impose.

That's A LOT of downloaded crap. I haven't spiked over 10 gig a month in over a year and that's even with downloading music from my muisic service and some demos off Xbox Live/PSN.
 
Originally posted by: venkman
this will do more to combat piracy then then stringiest DRMs. Guess paying customers have to go back to buying retail, sucks for steam though.

What are you talking about? You could still get 40-50 pieces of illegally downloaded software on a 250gb cap and 10-20 on the 100gb cap. Do you play that many games?
 
Originally posted by: Modelworks
Originally posted by: AntiFreze
Originally posted by: venkman
this will do more to combat piracy then then stringiest DRMs. Guess paying customers have to go back to buying retail, sucks for steam though.

seriously?

the lowest package gives you 250gbs a month. Lets say you buy 2-3 games a month. That is going to come at what... 15gbs maybe? 30gbs? That leaves at least another 220gbs. I'm pretty sure that will suffice.

Slowest gives you 100GB which is all I would be able to get here as they only offer 10MB.
Luckily I got DSL with no caps and cheaper.

Even 100 gigs, 15 gigs for 3 games, you have 85 left over.

Not many regular users are going to go over that, even gamers.
 
Originally posted by: Modelworks
Originally posted by: AntiFreze
Originally posted by: venkman
this will do more to combat piracy then then stringiest DRMs. Guess paying customers have to go back to buying retail, sucks for steam though.

seriously?

the lowest package gives you 250gbs a month. Lets say you buy 2-3 games a month. That is going to come at what... 15gbs maybe? 30gbs? That leaves at least another 220gbs. I'm pretty sure that will suffice.

Slowest gives you 100GB which is all I would be able to get here as they only offer 10MB.
Luckily I got DSL with no caps and cheaper.

ah... was just basing it off the quote. Even at 100gb that seems like a lot, but if DSL is cheaper, and no caps then why not switch. Maybe the free market will change Charter's mind.
 
I highly doubt my roommate and I will use over 100GB in a month but I still fucking hate Charter. They fucked up our cable bill recently and just in general they can suck a giant one.
 
Noooooooooooooooo!!!


Fuck I hate Charter but they are the only high speed internet I can even get 🙁

Fuckers! :|
 
140 isn't bad for the unlimited, fios charges 180 i think for the 50/50 package
if it were cheaper i'd get it.
 
Originally posted by: stag3
140 isn't bad for the unlimited, fios charges 180 i think for the 50/50 package
if it were cheaper i'd get it.

Get with a neighbor or two and split the cost, run a cat5 cable between the homes. Yeah, it is against the rules but I doubt they will dig up the yard between houses to check 🙂
 
Get used to it. The only users "inconvenienced" by caps are the bandwidth hogs dowloading through the ears.
 
Originally posted by: Modelworks
Originally posted by: stag3
140 isn't bad for the unlimited, fios charges 180 i think for the 50/50 package
if it were cheaper i'd get it.

Get with a neighbor or two and split the cost, run a cat5 cable between the homes. Yeah, it is against the rules but I doubt they will dig up the yard between houses to check 🙂

you sure? I asked comcast if I could do this legally, and I am now sharing my 50mb connection with 12 units in my condo complex...I am not MAKING money on the deal, but I am getting dirt cheap 50mb connection, and these guys barely use the net anyway!
 
Originally posted by: dud
Get used to it. The only users "inconvenienced" by caps are the bandwidth hogs dowloading through the ears.

We may not have to get used to it for long. There is lots of talk about the government stepping in to stop this garbage love it or hate it.
 
If I hadn't already left Charter a couple years ago, I'd definitely do it now. I was paying ~$50 for a 3mb connection, now I'm on a ~$35 6mb DSL line.
 
Originally posted by: Xavier434
Originally posted by: dud
Get used to it. The only users "inconvenienced" by caps are the bandwidth hogs dowloading through the ears.

We may not have to get used to it for long. There is lots of talk about the government stepping in to stop this garbage love it or hate it.

sources for gov. talk about this?
 
Between the cap, shitty customer service, inconsistent connection quality, and FIOS becoming available my choice is obvious.

Edit: Not to mention their looming bankruptcy - I don't know if that would interrupt my service.
 
I've had Charter since they bought out @home in the late 90s and it's been pretty damn reliable. 100GB a month is also pretty reasonable, I think. I won't get anywhere near that just grabbing TV shows from Usenet and the occasional torrent.

My biggest problem is that thanks to all these bullshit local covenants my only choices for Internet are AT&T DSL (cheap and slow) or Charter Cable (faster but more expensive). If the city or the state were to pull their head outta their ass maybe we could get some actual competition going and I'd have more choices (FIOS, U-Verse, etc.) Get with the times, morons!
 
Originally posted by: AntiFreze
Originally posted by: venkman
this will do more to combat piracy then then stringiest DRMs. Guess paying customers have to go back to buying retail, sucks for steam though.

seriously?

the lowest package gives you 250gbs a month. Lets say you buy 2-3 games a month. That is going to come at what... 15gbs maybe? 30gbs? That leaves at least another 220gbs. I'm pretty sure that will suffice.

no

Speeds of 15Mbps or slower will have a 100GB monthly cap
 
Back
Top