Time Warner bandwidth caps arrive (updated)

[dahunan]

So wait a minute.. they OWN THE FIBER and all the lines etc?

They are losing money?

Can this happen to Comcast?

HIT THEM WHERE IT HURTS..... BOYCOTT ALL WARNER BROTHERS MOVIES NOW

 

[dahunan]

Get Smart
Star Wars Clone Wars
Speed Racer
Bat Man - Dark Knight

 

[Blayze]

Was debating signing up for TWC earlier in the year when I moved. Glad I stuck with my 6 meg DSL if these caps happen.

 

[spittledip]

Hm.. I have TWC.. if they start capping I will have to take my money elsewhere

 

[JC86]

You try to put a cap on my internet at anything less than 150 GB and i'm switching to someone else for my high speed internet.

 

[Googer]

Originally posted by: Anubis
caps not good, way to low



http://arstechnica.com/news.ar...width-caps-arrive.html

Does anyone know where that article or anandtech forum post is that show ISP's only spend around $2 per month per customer on actual bandwidth?

 

[QueBert]

Originally posted by: Fritzo

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: Special K

Originally posted by: Gothgar
I've been with TWC for a while too, and if this goes live anywhere in California I will be a DTV/ DSL customer over night, fuck that shit.

I probably on average don't even get close to that cap, but it is mostly just principle.

What if all the other ISPs adopt similar plans? Then we're all screwed

This is why we need more competition. Corporate greed and the desire to steal "the other guy's" customers will result in price plans and deals which benefit the consumer a lot especially considering that placing limitations like bandwidth caps gives the competitors a much larger weapon to play with.

ISP is a highly competitive market and most broadband customers have a choice.

You're free to go and start an ISP if you feel the profit margins are so high, because they are not. Mostly because it is so competitive.

In fact it is such a mature market that these innovative pricing models are being tried because there is so little money in the all you can eat model for such a cheap price. Most of the decision makers I talk to in the industry all say the same thing "all you can eat is going away, we just can't keep losing money like this and have to do something."

On average, companies make around $3/DSL account and cable companies make around $6/account. DSL infrastructure is more expensive to maintain and implement. Out of that money, they have to pay employees, health insurance, and maintenence. You're looking at about $1-$1.25 profit per account. The big money is in the service selling, not the connection itself. They make their cash off of extra software, speed upgrades, etc.

So, if you really want to screw your Internet provider, get the lowest priced plan you can get, install any "free" software that comes with the service, and run torrents 24/7. You'll end up costing them money

I don't buy those figures, $3 for what the package AT&T has that's $10.99 a month? I have on neighbor who pays $10.99 and another who pays almost $40, the one who pays $40 obviously gets faster internet but on AT&T's side they're charging for more speed but it cost them nothing more. Unless the faster account person is using more bandwidth, oddly enough he almost never uses his computer so his monthly bandwidth is super low. The $10.99 guy runs Limewire 24/7 but for every person who has the shit account and abuses it there are 20 who have the Elite $39.99 account and hardly ever use it.
$3 might be accurate for the low end, but the neighbor who's paying $34 they're either making 3 times that, or loosing money on the $10.99 customer. Besides isn't the money they make based more on the bandwidth usage?

 

[Eli]

Hmm...

1$/gb for overage doesn't sound very bad... lol

I think the most I've ever done in a month is 27gb, and that was a long time ago.. I don't download like that anymore.

 

[DrPizza]

Originally posted by: JC86
You try to put a cap on my internet at anything less than 150 GB and i'm switching to someone else for my high speed internet.

Like I said before, when all the high bandwidth users leave TW and go to another ISP, that ISP is going to say "wow! Our number of subscribers went up 5%, yet we're using 40% more bandwidth suddenly. Hmmmmm." And then the rest of the ISP's will have caps as well, and you'll be forced to pay for your extreme usage.

 

[Parasitic]

Originally posted by: frostedflakes

Originally posted by: Parasitic
I hate this stupid cap...I just signed up for TWC yesterday and am in the process of dropping Sprint EVDO because they're putting a 5GB cap on it, and now it sounds like TWC is doing a 40GB soon?

I don't think I've downloaded 40GB in a month, but having to meter things really really sucks.

I heard about the Sprint cap, that really sucks. Is Alltel available in your area? I have their EVDO service and use a decent amount of bandwidth every month (probably between 30-40GB) and they don't seem to mind. Of course, with Verizon and Sprint both capping at 5GB now, it may only be a matter of time before Alltel goes with one as well.

Alltel isn't in my srea, and the other only choice for broasband besides EVDO/3G id FIOS but Verizon can't get their billing right :S

Oh well, I think I can manage to cancel without an ETF so I'm waiting on that notice letter.

 

[Anubis]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: spidey07
ISP is a highly competitive market and most broadband customers have a choice.

It isn't "highly competitive" by any means. There are no consumer Internet connections that match the speed of cable modems other than fiber, which is only available in very limited areas of the country right now. There is more competition in DSL, but you have to live close enough to the CO and the speed isn't nearly as good as cable. That's not exactly "highly competitive." And then there is satellite Internet, which doesn't directly compete with cable/DSL/fiber at all.

So for most people who want a truly high speed connection, the only option is cable modem.

That is simply not true mugs. You can get whatever speed connection you want ANYWHERE IN THE COUNTRY. I know, I just had a optical network installed in the middle of nowhere.

The only option they want to pay for is a cheap residential connection. But if you want a high speed connection you can get it anywhere in the country.

no no you cant, hell our summer place untill 2 year ago couldent even get dialup because the lines were so old

 

[Fritzo]

Originally posted by: JC86
You try to put a cap on my internet at anything less than 150 GB and i'm switching to someone else for my high speed internet.

This is a funny way of thinking. If you use that much bandwidth, they actually DON'T WANT YOU. They lose money on you and want you to go to the competition.

 

[Anubis]

Originally posted by: MrDudeMan

Originally posted by: QueBert

Originally posted by: MrDudeMan
Most people don't use nearly 40gb per month.

SNIP

88.11 MB

88.11Mb / 16 hours = 5.5Mb per hour, which seems to be what everyone else is observing.

Therefore, your claim of 650-700Mb is flat out wrong.

MrDudeMan

Last night i played wow for 4 hours
in that time period i downloaded almost 6 gigs of stuff from filefront. mostly wow related, (i really hate muru now), youtube may have been a bad example but anyone who streams/DL HD video (netflix nad the like) will absoutly destroy a 40GB cap in a matter of weeks

as i said way back on page 1, i average ~65Gb a month doing 100% legal things with my internet,

streaming on demand video has been talked about as the wave of things to come, and it is comming, and we are going to get punished for useing it which is just awsome :roll:

 

[Fritzo]

Originally posted by: QueBert

Originally posted by: Fritzo

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: Special K

Originally posted by: Gothgar
I've been with TWC for a while too, and if this goes live anywhere in California I will be a DTV/ DSL customer over night, fuck that shit.

I probably on average don't even get close to that cap, but it is mostly just principle.

What if all the other ISPs adopt similar plans? Then we're all screwed

This is why we need more competition. Corporate greed and the desire to steal "the other guy's" customers will result in price plans and deals which benefit the consumer a lot especially considering that placing limitations like bandwidth caps gives the competitors a much larger weapon to play with.

ISP is a highly competitive market and most broadband customers have a choice.

You're free to go and start an ISP if you feel the profit margins are so high, because they are not. Mostly because it is so competitive.

In fact it is such a mature market that these innovative pricing models are being tried because there is so little money in the all you can eat model for such a cheap price. Most of the decision makers I talk to in the industry all say the same thing "all you can eat is going away, we just can't keep losing money like this and have to do something."

On average, companies make around $3/DSL account and cable companies make around $6/account. DSL infrastructure is more expensive to maintain and implement. Out of that money, they have to pay employees, health insurance, and maintenence. You're looking at about $1-$1.25 profit per account. The big money is in the service selling, not the connection itself. They make their cash off of extra software, speed upgrades, etc.

So, if you really want to screw your Internet provider, get the lowest priced plan you can get, install any "free" software that comes with the service, and run torrents 24/7. You'll end up costing them money

I don't buy those figures, $3 for what the package AT&T has that's $10.99 a month? I have on neighbor who pays $10.99 and another who pays almost $40, the one who pays $40 obviously gets faster internet but on AT&T's side they're charging for more speed but it cost them nothing more. Unless the faster account person is using more bandwidth, oddly enough he almost never uses his computer so his monthly bandwidth is super low. The $10.99 guy runs Limewire 24/7 but for every person who has the shit account and abuses it there are 20 who have the Elite $39.99 account and hardly ever use it.
$3 might be accurate for the low end, but the neighbor who's paying $34 they're either making 3 times that, or loosing money on the $10.99 customer. Besides isn't the money they make based more on the bandwidth usage?

The figures are accurate, and they are average. Everyone thinks "Hey! I'm paying them $39/month! They must make AT LEAST $35 off of me!" After all the fees, taxes, employees, benefits, repair, expansion, software vendors, and bonds are paid, the profit is really poor.

Yes, they do make a bit more on higher speed connections, but they make a bit less on lower speed connections (again, it's an average).

 

[swaytech]

I will also be dumping Time Warner if this is even mentioned in my area.

 

[adairusmc]

Originally posted by: Fritzo

Originally posted by: JC86
You try to put a cap on my internet at anything less than 150 GB and i'm switching to someone else for my high speed internet.

This is a funny way of thinking. If you use that much bandwidth, they actually DON'T WANT YOU. They lose money on you and want you to go to the competition.

If you use that much bandwidth, you should be required to pay for a DS3.

 

[SoulAssassin]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: spidey07
ISP is a highly competitive market and most broadband customers have a choice.

It isn't "highly competitive" by any means. There are no consumer Internet connections that match the speed of cable modems other than fiber, which is only available in very limited areas of the country right now. There is more competition in DSL, but you have to live close enough to the CO and the speed isn't nearly as good as cable. That's not exactly "highly competitive." And then there is satellite Internet, which doesn't directly compete with cable/DSL/fiber at all.

So for most people who want a truly high speed connection, the only option is cable modem.

That is simply not true mugs. You can get whatever speed connection you want ANYWHERE IN THE COUNTRY. I know, I just had a optical network installed in the middle of nowhere.

The only option they want to pay for is a cheap residential connection. But if you want a high speed connection you can get it anywhere in the country.

To say it's highly competitive also implies that the price is competitive. Yes, I can get an OC-google plex almost anywhere in the country but at what cost? In order to stay competitive you have to limit the discussion to residential connections in the $40-60 range per month. You're talking apples and oranges.

 

[KMFJD]

AnalogX has a nice program called NetStat Live that monitors network usage

Analogx Netsat Live

 

[Brovane]

Has anybody actually measured how much they D/L over a month?

 

[Anubis]

Originally posted by: Brovane
Has anybody actually measured how much they D/L over a month?

yes many people i suggest reading the thread

 

[Rubycon]

So I suppose in the (near) future SOHO routers are going to feature bandwidth monitoring and reporting in their featuresets with the ability to send warning/summary emails as needed. The ISP should have this feature but we know how that goes.

Like "hypermiling" that's being discussed (people doing really offbeat things while driving to stretch MPG) folks are going to save bandwidth. Blocking of adverts is probably a good start too.

 

[Genx87]

This does pose an interesting situation.

Movie download services are likely to get hit with this issue more than anybody else. Especially when HD movies become available and are 5+GB a pop. You will run through that cap very fast.

The cable companies all have VOD services. I see a conspiracy here

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: Anubis
ive never had an issue with TWC but 40GB cap on a 15mb connection is to low, and 5GB on the lowest for 35$ thats just moronic

between streaming media (legal) and normal internet use i can do 1 gig a day


this just punishes everyone

perhaps they should reduce the bandwidth too.

IMHO you get what you pay for. There are other options out there...TW is obviously getting bandwidth saturated and is stepping up to prevent loss of quality for the masses that 40GB might be seen in a year.

Most though that need these outrageous caps are pirating music and software. Some are Youtube/porn mongers, and some have legitimate file needs.

 

[Anubis]

Alke there are no other options in my area for high speed internet, its TWC or Dialup

most places in the US do not have a choice of who their provider is

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: Genx87
This does pose an interesting situation.

Movie download services are likely to get hit with this issue more than anybody else. Especially when HD movies become available and are 5+GB a pop. You will run through that cap very fast.

The cable companies all have VOD services. I see a conspiracy here

We have a winner! :laugh:

You can purchase all your content through VOD and not go against your cap, or keep it up and we'll soak you for the extra GBs. That's exactly what the intent is.

Now I should point out that in general I agree with fair use -- if there's a hog using 500GB+ of bandwidth, he should be paying more for it than Joe Blow who doesn't use a gig or two all month long.