PDA

View Full Version : Bad news for RDC addicts



pappawheely
June 2nd, 2008, 23:00
Time Warner Cable tries metering Internet use
Monday June 2, 5:37 pm ET
By Peter Svensson, AP Technology Writer Time Warner Cable starts customer trial with metered Internet access in Texas

NEW YORK (AP) -- You're used to paying extra if you use up your cell phone minutes, but will you be willing to pay extra if your home computer goes over its Internet allowance?
Time Warner Cable Inc. customers -- and, later, others -- may have to, if the company's test of metered Internet access is successful.
ADVERTISEMENT
http://ad.doubleclick.net/ad/N5043.yahoocom/B2625737.3;abr=!ie4;abr=!ie5;sz=300x250;ord=121246 8845736174?On Thursday, new Time Warner Cable Internet subscribers in Beaumont, Texas, will have monthly allowances for the amount of data they upload and download. Those who go over will be charged $1 per gigabyte, a Time Warner Cable executive told the Associated Press.
Metered billing is an attempt to deal fairly with Internet usage, which is very uneven among Time Warner Cable's subscribers, said Kevin Leddy, Time Warner Cable's executive vice president of advanced technology.
Just 5 percent of the company's subscribers take up half of the capacity on local cable lines, Leddy said. Other cable Internet service providers report a similar distribution.
"We think it's the fairest way to finance the needed investment in the infrastructure," Leddy said.
Metered usage is common overseas, and other U.S. cable providers are looking at ways to rein in heavy users. Most have download caps, but some keep the caps secret so as not to alarm the majority of users, who come nowhere close to the limits. Time Warner Cable appears to be the first major ISP to charge for going over the limit: Other companies warn, then suspend, those who go over.
Phone companies are less concerned about congestion and are unlikely to impose metered usage on DSL customers, because their networks are structured differently.
Time Warner Cable had said in January that it was planning to conduct the trial in Beaumont, but did not give any details. On Monday, Leddy said its tiers will range from $29.95 a month for relatively slow service at 768 kilobits per second and a 5-gigabyte monthly cap to $54.90 per month for fast downloads at 15 megabits per second and a 40-gigabyte cap. Those prices cover the Internet portion of subscription bundles that include video or phone services. Both downloads and uploads will count toward the monthly cap.
A possible stumbling block for Time Warner Cable is that customers have had little reason so far to pay attention to how much they download from the Internet, or know much traffic makes up a gigabyte. That uncertainty could scare off new subscribers.
Those who mainly do Web surfing or e-mail have little reason to pay attention to the traffic caps: a gigabyte is about 3,000 Web pages, or 15,000 e-mails without attachments. But those who download movies or TV shows will want to pay attention. A standard-definition movie can take up 1.5 gigabytes, and a high-definition movie can be 6 to 8 gigabytes.
Time Warner Cable subscribers will be able to check out their data consumption on a "gas gauge" on the company's Web page.
The company won't apply the gigabyte surcharges for the first two months. It has 90,000 customers in the trial area, but only new subscribers will be part of the trial.
Billing by the hour was common for dial-up service in the U.S. until AOL introduced an unlimited-usage plan in 1996. Flat-rate, unlimited-usage plans have been credited with encouraging consumer Internet use by making billing easy to understand.
"The metered Internet has been tried and tested and rejected by the consumers overwhelmingly since the days of AOL," information-technology consultant George Ou told the Federal Communications Commission at a hearing on ISP practices in April.
Metered billing could also put a crimp in the plans of services like Apple Inc.'s iTunes that use the Internet to deliver video. DVD-by-mail pioneer Netflix Inc. just launched a TV set-top box that receives an unlimited stream of Internet video for as little as $8.99 per month.
Comcast Corp., the country's largest cable company, has suggested that it may cap usage at 250 gigabytes per month. Bend Cable Communications in Bend, Ore., used to have multitier bandwidth allowances, like the ones Time Warner Cable will test, but it abandoned them in favor of an across-the-board 100-gigabyte cap. Bend charges $1.50 per extra gigabyte consumed in a month.
http://www.timewarnercable.com (http://www.timewarnercable.com/)
http://www.bendcable.com (http://www.bendcable.com/)

5racer
June 3rd, 2008, 00:37
i hope these guys choke on there greed .im lucky i dident grow up with computers so i can live with out the internet .

therail
June 3rd, 2008, 07:01
I can't live without the internet, half my courses are online anymore. Hell, even the ones that aren't want you to turn things in online, or take quizzes or something else.

THNKPNK
June 3rd, 2008, 07:25
Thank goodness for Fiber Optic Internet!!! :)

THNKPNK
June 3rd, 2008, 07:25
Or... another thought, just use computers at work? LOL

Vtr_Racing
June 3rd, 2008, 12:19
This will roll out nationally. I dont use Time Warner but other will soon follow Im sure. Like lemmings.

fishd00d
June 3rd, 2008, 12:22
Its all about verizon Fios. Blows cable out of the box!!

pappawheely
June 3rd, 2008, 13:59
I have Time Warner and tried to contact customer service last weekend, You know, when it's convenient for me. Both Saturday and Sunday I was on hold for 40 minutes until the battery died on my cordless without getting through. Pathetic. And they want to charge by the minute. How about a credit for each minute I spent on hold. :mad:

scott-dsms
June 3rd, 2008, 16:10
I have Time Warner and tried to contact customer service last weekend, You know, when it's convenient for me. Both Saturday and Sunday I was on hold for 40 minutes until the battery died on my cordless without getting through. Pathetic. And they want to charge by the minute. How about a credit for each minute I spent on hold. :mad:

No doubt - Customer service is a joke anymore...You have to wade through the endless press 1 for this and 2 for that only to get disconnected or be told that you are speaking with the wrong dept and ''they'll transfer you" to start the sorry process all over again. Didn't mean to get off topic a bit - That struck a nerve.

RE: Having to pay for usage (bandwidth) I guess if you don't download or upload movies, tunes etc...you probably wouldn't go over your allotted 'usage'. I think it said your avg internet surfer wouldn't be affected but, for people like me that work out of their house and have to move large files back and forth etc...it could become a problem. Since I'm self-employed I can't ask for a wage adjustment to cover the added expense, but it's still a write off.

Yet another installment of...Pay More, Get Less - You know...the usual.

DSRTXJ
June 3rd, 2008, 16:12
I'm sorry, but thats one of the most stupid things I have heard in a while....

I wonder how many people will dump Time Warner because of this???

DailyPedal
June 3rd, 2008, 20:31
Time Warner sucks...I once googled "Hate Time Warner" and "Time Warner sucks" and got 400,000 hits...One time I was talking to a customer service rep after my cable went out, as it is prone to doing, and I asked how bad it was to work in Colorado at the customer service facility for such a screwed-up company and she off hand told me it was depressing, stressful and she had over 400 people on hold.
I have no choice in providers. No DSL, or Fios service in my area so fast internet is TW or satellite only.
And just to further mix the pot, the reasons for this "pay-for-what-you-get" philosophy toward the internet is because in the very near future, several software companies will be introducing web based software. Adobe has already announce and others will undoubtedly follow the golden trail. Presumably it is an effort to cut down on piracy but it will more than likely mean millions of dollars and more control and less privacy. Customers will have to log in to use the software only available through the website. Add that to the various web-based movie download sites and then there is the porn industry, well I can hear the cash registers going crazy...

pappawheely
August 3rd, 2008, 18:15
FCC Rules Comcast Violated Internet Access Policy

Friday, August 1, 2008 1:30 PM




WASHINGTON — A divided Federal Communications Commission has ruled that Comcast Corp. violated federal policy when it blocked Internet traffic for some subscribers and has ordered the cable giant to change the way it manages its network.

In a precedent-setting move, the FCC by a 3-2 vote on Friday enforced a policy that guarantees customers open access to the Internet.

The commission did not assess a fine, but ordered the company to stop cutting off transfers of large data files among customers who use a special type of "file-sharing" software.

Comcast says its practices are reasonable and that the FCC's so-called network-neutrality "principles" are part of a policy statement and are not enforceable rules.

Republican FCC Chairman Kevin Martin proposed the enforcement action and was joined by Democratic commissioners Jonathan Adelstein and Michael Copps in voting for approval. He was opposed by members of his own party, commissioners Robert McDowell and Deborah Taylor Tate, who both issued lengthy dissents.

The commission's authority to act stems from a policy statement adopted in September 2005 that outlined a set of principles meant to ensure that broadband networks are "widely deployed, open, affordable and accessible to all consumers."

The principles are "subject to reasonable network management," a concept the agency has not explicitly defined.

While the FCC action did not include a fine, it does require Comcast to stop its blocking practice by the end of the year. The company must also provide details to the commission on the management techniques it has used and to let consumers know details of its future plans.

Martin was particularly critical of the company's failure to disclose to its customers exactly how it was managing its traffic, saying this action "compounded the harm."

Martin said Comcast managers were not "simply managing their network, they had arbitrarily picked an application and blocked their subscribers' access to it."

Comcast spokeswoman Sena Fitzmaurice said in a prepared statement that the company was "disappointed in the commission's divided conclusion because we believe that our network management choices were reasonable..."

She said the company believes the order "raises significant due process concerns and a variety of substantive legal questions."

The FCC's action means network operators are subject to the FCC's enforcement process and the agency will act on consumer complaints.

Martin told The Associated Press in an interview before the meeting that the agency will consider fines for future violations, but he declined to speculate on how large they would be.

The action is the first test of the agency's network neutrality principles.

The enforceablity of the principles have been questioned by many, including Martin, who said they "do not establish rules nor are they enforceable documents" when the policy statement was adopted in 2005.

Members of Congress, including presumed Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois, have pushed for network neutrality legislation without success.

Large Internet service providers have fought against such regulation, arguing that companies that spend billions on their networks must be free to manage traffic.

Verizon Communications Inc., AT&T Inc. and the U.S. Telecom Association all released statements saying the FCC action proved there was no need for federal network neutrality legislation.




© 2008 Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Brandon_Charley
August 3rd, 2008, 21:43
Not a fan of government agencies enforcing non-laws, but I am glad that the FCC is siding with the people when it comes to net neutrality.

It won't change my opinion on the subject if I am wrong, but don't internet providers, specifically cable ones, use "public" infrastructure, like utility companies?

ndvalium
August 4th, 2008, 09:50
I was reading the fine print for the new "cricket" usb broadband - it has the same thing in the print - 6 gig per month limit.....

blacksideoftheglass
August 4th, 2008, 13:52
Wow. I almost never post here , but felt compelled to do so for this one.

Just a couple of thoughts.....

People with insecure wireless networks = screwed. I can just see people living in apartments receiving a whopper of a bill because everybody is freeloading their wireless.

Pay for web based software? WAJ! Yet another incentive to stick with OSS.

The more they try to regulate the web, the more it gives guys like me incentives to find "workarounds".


Actually, this will not bother me at all because I receive the internet directly beamed into my cranium! :D

BANNEDFROMBAJA
August 5th, 2008, 03:19
im glad my neighbors have a strong wireless network

and that means i have to be nice to them :D:D:D:D:D

wideopendesert.com
August 6th, 2008, 15:44
I few years ago a couple of e-mail providers tried to put a "postage" charge on every e-mail sent. The didn't get to far with that one. Hopefully the same holds true for this.

zetapsi827
August 11th, 2008, 16:01
time warner and virgin are big companies that are spearheading this BS. net neutrality is a very big issue that's quietly being fought underneath the mass media.

nimrod
August 11th, 2008, 17:56
I am pretty dang happy with Cox Communications........

5racer
August 11th, 2008, 18:48
well hopefully people will pick up paper and a pen and write letters ,call on phone ,or go visit someone.and the world wide web falls on its ass.greed will kill everything it has sence day one and will tell the last day.