ravenvii
macrumors 604
Are you ****ing serious? For a cellphone, that cap is fine, but for home broadband?!
If it's 20 GB, I could understand. But 5 GB?
I'd be mad as hell too!
Time-Warner Begins Billing for High Data Use
- Thread starter Aeolius
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Are you ****ing serious? For a cellphone, that cap is fine, but for home broadband?!
If it's 20 GB, I could understand. But 5 GB?
I'd be mad as hell too!
gugy
macrumors 68040
I don't know about you, but I just got a great deal from TWC in San Diego. 2 years lock price for the triple bundle package. That means for two years they can't change their contract on me.
So for the next two years even if they decide to put a cap in my area it won't affect me. If they do it's a breach of contract and people can file a class action lawsuit, so I doubt they will act. I think they are doing a test to see how this whole thing works. I hope they get discourage.
I agreed that this is su-cks, but as more and more content is downloaded over the net, it does not surprise me they will start charging for usage. Su-cks!
So for the next two years even if they decide to put a cap in my area it won't affect me. If they do it's a breach of contract and people can file a class action lawsuit, so I doubt they will act. I think they are doing a test to see how this whole thing works. I hope they get discourage.
I agreed that this is su-cks, but as more and more content is downloaded over the net, it does not surprise me they will start charging for usage. Su-cks!
5G limit for 29.99
up to 40G for 59.99
Rumor is there will introduce a 100 G one.
Pricing isn't available on this yet. All they have said is it will be "significantly more expensive than 59.99.
ATT's 100 GB cap is at 39.99.
No ATT here tho...
...this royally sucks...
How fast is that? Here in NZ, the biggest ISP charges:
US$29 for 10 GB
US$35 for 20 GB
US$46 for 40 GB
Speed varies depending on line quality etc but I believe that it averages around 15 Mb/s downstream.
I don't know about you, but I just got a great deal from TWC in San Diego. 2 years lock price for the triple bundle package. That means for two years they can't change their contract on me.
So for the next two years even if they decide to put a cap in my area it won't affect me. If they do it's a breach of contract and people can file a class action lawsuit, so I doubt they will act. I think they are doing a test to see how this whole thing works. I hope they get discourage.
I agreed that this is su-cks, but as more and more content is downloaded over the net, it does not surprise me they will start charging for usage. Su-cks!
I wouldn't mind it if the caps were fair. They aren't close to fair. This is nothing short of price gouging their markets that have no competition. What the hell do we have laws for in this country anymore. People around here depend on the internet..its not just enterainment for people anymore. How are people to run home businesses anymore?
TWC needs to go to hell...fast
jamesarm97
macrumors 65816
That's crap. I just downloaded a Centos install DVD today that was just over 4GB. That would just about put me over that limit in a few hours into a month.
As fellow ATV users, I'd be more than appreciative of anyone filling out a formal FCC complaint about this (even if you don't have time warner) or sign the many petitions online. Sending notes to the white house or your representatives...anything will help...
This could be you in the future...
This could be you in the future...
First they put a cap in Greensboro, NC for TWC. But I don't live there, and I don't use TWC, so I didn't say anything.
Then they put a cap on DSL, including where I live. But I don't use DSL, so I didn't say anything.
Then they put a cap on Comcast in my area. By then, there was no one left with spare bytes to be able to say anything.
Then they put a cap on DSL, including where I live. But I don't use DSL, so I didn't say anything.
Then they put a cap on Comcast in my area. By then, there was no one left with spare bytes to be able to say anything.
Cynicalone
macrumors 68040
Cox Cable has always had caps you just don't see them talk about it.
http://www.cox.com/policy/limitations.asp
http://www.cox.com/policy/limitations.asp
Billy Boo Bob
macrumors 6502
Nah. Salellite Internet still blows. Most of them use phone line for uplink and downlink is still crap. Not a viable option.
Billy Boo Bob
macrumors 6502
I think the Attorney General would be a good one to get involved.
It would be nice to see if Apple (and others) could throw some weight around about this, too, since it can effect sales of their products... "Sure, you can buy an AppleTV, but you'll only be able to buy two movies and one TV show per month".
Well, if you foresee yourself doing big downloads then you wouldn't sign up for a 5 GB plan. I don't really see what the issue is here; if you want to use a lot of traffic then it's only fair that you pay for it.
Something I haven't seen covered yet is what happens when you exceed the limit. Most ISPs here slow down the connection, others charge for additional usage. Personally I pay 60c/GB and can use as much as I like.
ajthomason
macrumors 6502
I was about to ask if it really was so bad, and if 40GB wouldn't actually be enough for a month - then I decided to check my own usage. This screenshot says it all:
We've gone the opposite here, I remember I used to have a 40GB limit years ago, but now it is unlimited.
I feel your pain...
We've gone the opposite here, I remember I used to have a 40GB limit years ago, but now it is unlimited.
I feel your pain...
TraceyS/FL
macrumors 601
A friend with Sat says they are worse than anyone for downloads. She is regularly bumped down to dial-up speeds for downloading minor non-video stuff.
You can read their fair access policy here: http://go.gethughesnet.com/fapolicy.cfm?hf=0
And their other tiers and pricing here:
http://go.gethughesnet.com/plans.cfm
It will be interesting to see when and where they roll out these caps. Will it only be in the places with no competition? In Cary NC, TWC has their panties in a bunch because ATT is rolling out the UVerse. I don't see how a sudden implementation of bandwidth caps would help TWC in that market.
In Durham I can get DSL, but it's just the 1.5 Mbit variety, not the 7 MBit I get with TWC.
I have earthlink through TWC, and I wonder how the bandwith caps will transfer? I don't think Earthlink will be happy to lose customers because of TWC poor choices.
Are there any good tools for monitoring monthly bandwidth? I'm a pretty low end user and wonder if it will effect me right now. Of course, I was also planning to cancel cable TV and just get everything over the air and via download, so it could effect me greatly!
Scott
In Durham I can get DSL, but it's just the 1.5 Mbit variety, not the 7 MBit I get with TWC.
I have earthlink through TWC, and I wonder how the bandwith caps will transfer? I don't think Earthlink will be happy to lose customers because of TWC poor choices.
Are there any good tools for monitoring monthly bandwidth? I'm a pretty low end user and wonder if it will effect me right now. Of course, I was also planning to cancel cable TV and just get everything over the air and via download, so it could effect me greatly!
Scott
This is one of the things that bugs me about these bandwidth caps. They implement them and then give the customer no means of easily tracking their usage.
I had Comcast up until a few months ago (250gig limit) and they kept saying it was "coming soon". I ended up using the bandwidth monitoring feature of the Tomato firmware on my WRT54GL. It's easy to use, but still not at the level of the average cable user.
Now I'm using FiOS (20/20 plan) with no caps and the service is awesome (unlike Verizon itself).
I get the whole concept of trying to deter the "abusers", but let people who use more pay for more, and I don't mean 40 gigs, which to me is an insult.
John
There is a couple major issues here you are not considering:
1. You pay $1 per G over your limit. If you use ATV a lot (I don't have cable TV..which is what TWC is REALLY going after here), for the same service I am receiving now for $40 (and most the rest of the country), my bill will go close to $200 a month.
2. Using a lot a traffic doens't cost the providers anything. This isn't analagous to utilities. Utilites have to distribute and actual product, that has to be refined, mined, generated, prcoesses...etc. This is more analagous to roads. Once they are built, you would be charged extra from driving more miles than someone else.
3. The real hogs on TWC isn't internet, its their HD channels (by far). The internet users will now be subsidizing the HD cable uses (who can watch as many hours as they like, with no caps.
REASONABLE caps are fine. Comcasts 250G is fine. Throttling when you reach you cap is fine. $60 for 40G cap, and instantly charging $1 per G over that amount is ridiculous. And they are only doing this in areas where folks don't have a choice. I have no other options..except dialup, sat or move.
Clearwire has just launched in our area...(shudder) that I am actually considering clearwire now...
I've already contacted Earthlink about this. Since they use TWC's infrastructure their service will be subject to the same caps
Of course it does. Providers all around the world wouldn't be charging per GB if the "pipes" were free. As far as I'm aware, every major bandwidth provider charges per GB. The ISPs then pass these charges onto the users, after all it's the users that actually utilise that bandwidth.
It would be nice if Apple got into deals with ISPs so that your downloads aren't counted towards your usage. TiVo does that in Australia with Internode, and it's rumoured that they'll do the same thing here in NZ by the end of the year (possibly with TelstraClear, which already has some unmetered partners).
Not true at all in the US. Most major fiber trunk lines in the US are leased. ISP's don't pay per GB, they pay per bandwidth. Whether it's utilized or not, the ISP pays the same per their lease contract. (Most people don't realize the railroads are the actual "owners' of most of the fiber trunks in the US)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_fiber
This is why people are still waiting for something big to come out of google, whom started buying up tons of dark fiber a couple of years ago.
As for the Cable network utilized by TWC, That Coax is now owned by TWC, (after it was built with taxpayer money). Another great idea of Government.
jaw04005
macrumors 601
Yup. Not to mention, the "right of way" railroad system which our government gave away a 100 years ago.
Here's an article talking about the railroads owning fiber:
http://news.cnet.com/Railroads-look-to-tap-broadband-boom/2100-1033_3-241978.html
Eventually, I'm sure bandwidth caps will be rolled into the net neutrality debate, considering the largest Internet providers (Time Warner, Comcast, AT&T, Verizon, etc) have a vested interest in preventing customers from receiving competing entertainment services (iTunes, Netflix, etc).
By the way, how many federal taxpayer subsidies have these companies received over just the last 30 years to improve "their" communication networks? And our broadband penetration is still a joke. It's really appalling.
I say declare the Internet as a public works utility (like water, sewage, electricity, etc), and let our local/regional government handle it. For example, then our local governments can decide if it's worth building out that extra 2 miles of line to service 25 people. At least we'll know who to contact to get things done.
theDUB
macrumors 6502a
I support it.
jaw04005
macrumors 601
The 2 mile bit comes from personal experience with AT&T. My mother lives approximately 1.75 miles from where DSL ends in her area. I, along with 20-30 neighbors, tried for years to get AT&T to add a neighborhood gateway.
Finally, one of her neighbors leased a T1 line, and set up a WISP (Wireless Internet Service Provider) tower. Now, everyone in the neighborhood pays him something like $40/month for 2 megabits down (ironically, AT&T only offers 1 megabit down two miles away). Each neighbor has a 802.11 wireless receiver on their roof with an ethernet cable running through their attics to a router.
The guy ended up quitting his "real" job and running the WISP full-time as a small business.
Finally, one of her neighbors leased a T1 line, and set up a WISP (Wireless Internet Service Provider) tower. Now, everyone in the neighborhood pays him something like $40/month for 2 megabits down (ironically, AT&T only offers 1 megabit down two miles away). Each neighbor has a 802.11 wireless receiver on their roof with an ethernet cable running through their attics to a router.
The guy ended up quitting his "real" job and running the WISP full-time as a small business.
theDUB
macrumors 6502a
That is awesome because when your internet goes down, instead of cursing Charter like I do, you could just walk over and knock on his door and ask 'hey, what's up with the internet?'.