|
Title: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: schild on April 01, 2009, 07:09:17 PM Which just outrights fuck me as I'd be labeled a dirty, dirty power-user. And by Power user I mean about 20x what their highest cap is going to be.
The only other options that I know of are: AT&T, which is shit. Grande Communications, which is total shit. Does anyone know of any other providers? Edit: Yes, before anyone makes a wiseass remark. Things can get worse. Edit 2: For the record, I (the apartment - 3 people) pull down somewhere between oh, 500GB and 1TB a month. Obviously I'm way WAY over the average. But COMEON. Really? No options above 100GB? Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Salamok on April 01, 2009, 07:55:27 PM should call TWC and ask about caps on business class (i think it is just under $100), you can get a T for $300 but 1.5 up/down blows these days. I'm thinkin At&T/SWBell/SBC Global (all the same 6mb DSL) for myself but I am not sure I want to lock into a contract and have them follow suit with the caps.
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: ahoythematey on April 01, 2009, 08:00:35 PM there is a crippling amount of rage I'm experiencing concerning this right now, so much that I really have no desire to even try to articulate how angry I am
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: stray on April 01, 2009, 08:02:29 PM I only know those three as well, but I heard that Grande is not so bad. They're sort of local (San Marcos), so maybe you'll get better service out of it. Have you checked Verizon?
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Salamok on April 01, 2009, 08:10:45 PM I don't think grande has it's own lines in the ground they just resell SBC, I've spoke with a few grande reps on the business side I wasn't even aware they had a consumer solution. Right now AT&T seems the most competitive as they are really trying to gain market share (but they are also riding on SBC lines). I'm thinking of just switching it all to AT&T and calling time warner in a year to see what they will do to win me back, those fuckers don't ever do shit for existing clients.
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: schild on April 01, 2009, 08:13:29 PM If Verizon was here, I'd switch tomorrow. Their tech support isn't 24 hours though so I have to call them in the morning. Right now I just want to light a fucking spear on fire and start killing every time warner employee I see. None of them are victims, they're all part of the problem. Fucking fuck.
Edit: Also, I just called TW and asked when the caps were coming, the guy and his supervisor had no clue. He asked why, and I told him I have to know when to cancel my service. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Salamok on April 01, 2009, 08:54:41 PM article says they will be monitoring for april (like they don't monitor this stat all the time) and the caps will be in place this summer (my guess is early summer).
edit: not my situation but WTF do you do if you are in the middle of a contract? Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: schild on April 01, 2009, 08:57:05 PM I'm not even sure we're on a contract. I think we're month to month. I imagine the contract would become nullified if they totally changed the way the entire service operated. Either that or you can fuck them and keep your old service.
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Triforcer on April 01, 2009, 09:13:10 PM Just a question, but I use my computer to play games, surf the net, and watch a few TV shows a week on hulu/megavideo etc. I don't know how much bandwidth that takes.
Are the people in danger of hitting proposed caps downloading thousands of songs a month and calculating missile trajectories for the DOD, or are the standards low enough to catch the average MMO gamer/young Internet user? Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: angry.bob on April 01, 2009, 09:57:14 PM Just a question, but I use my computer to play games, surf the net, and watch a few TV shows a week on hulu/megavideo etc. I don't know how much bandwidth that takes. Are the people in danger of hitting proposed caps downloading thousands of songs a month and calculating missile trajectories for the DOD, or are the standards low enough to catch the average MMO gamer/young Internet user? A 100 gig cap is still pretty big, but not that big. And a buck a gig if you go over is fucking brutal. Just surfing and playing games should be fine. "My movies to watch" folder has 16 movies at 720p in it and it's just shy of 99 gigs. So, anything over aabout 20-24 hours of video would be sort of iffy depending on what else you do. I would be way, way over the limit, probably by the end of the second day of the month. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Trippy on April 01, 2009, 10:04:38 PM Music bandwidth is nothing, it's video that's an issue. You are looking at anywhere from ~350 MB per hour (standard BitTorrent Xvid TV show at 624 x 352) to ~2+ GB per hour (HDTV res H.264 video).
MMORPGs take very little bandwidth. At max (like the entire zone/area population is standing right next to you running around in circles) you are looking at maybe 512 Kbps. Most of the time it's well under 256 Kbps. If you were, say, triple-boxing 8 hours a day, every day, you could potentially hit a bandwidth cap (512 Kbps * 8 hours/day * 30 days = ~50 GB). Edit: I should've mentioned that in comparison to video, 128 Kbps MP3s are ~1 MB/minute so an hour of music is only ~60 MB. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Trippy on April 01, 2009, 10:10:50 PM Which just outrights fuck me as I'd be labeled a dirty, dirty power-user. And by Power user I mean about 20x what their highest cap is going to be. AT&T is pushing U-Verse really aggressively and you might be able to get a no-cap service for a reasonable price. Otherwise like Salamok said you are looking at a "business-class" account (that's probably what I'll end up doing when Comcast tells me I'm exceeding my cap).The only other options that I know of are: AT&T, which is shit. Grande Communications, which is total shit. Does anyone know of any other providers? Edit: Yes, before anyone makes a wiseass remark. Things can get worse. Edit 2: For the record, I (the apartment - 3 people) pull down somewhere between oh, 500GB and 1TB a month. Obviously I'm way WAY over the average. But COMEON. Really? No options above 100GB? Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: pants on April 01, 2009, 10:11:25 PM Those of us who live in countries where 20GB/month is a lot say 'Welcome to our world!'.
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Salamok on April 01, 2009, 10:49:22 PM What gets me is that Austin is supposed to be tech heaven and TWC's top plan is 50gb. I'd probably not be nearly as pissed if they had some $60 a month solution for 250gb or $75 a month for unlimited. Most months I am under 50gb but I doubt I am ever under 10gb and occasionally I load it up and go above 100gb.
On a side note any idea what kind of bandwidth netflix streaming uses? Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Samwise on April 01, 2009, 11:49:51 PM On a side note any idea what kind of bandwidth netflix streaming uses? It's probably going to be pretty similar to downloading a movie of the same size and quality. So, going off Bob's figures, if you're watching Netflix Instant at 720p, you get 24 hours (assuming you do nothing else with your net connection) before you're cut off. When I went shopping for internet at the new house I had two questions for prospective ISPs. The first was "do you have any download caps?" The second was "do you have any plans to introduce them at any point in the future?" The one I'm on passed both questions. Knock on wood. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Sky on April 02, 2009, 06:50:42 AM MMORPGs take very little bandwidth. At max (like the entire zone/area population is standing right next to you running around in circles) you are looking at maybe 512 Kbps. Most of the time it's well under 256 Kbps. If you were, say, triple-boxing 8 hours a day, every day, you could potentially hit a bandwidth cap (512 Kbps * 8 hours/day * 30 days = ~50 GB). I'd be more worried about big patches, and you can forget about downloading clients. Even so, I could probably skate by and even get an occasional Steam title.If not, meh. I've got other things to do, and would probably send them a thank you note for saving me money (by cancelling). Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Wasted on April 02, 2009, 07:22:00 AM Quote from: schild I will never ever get over the lollerificness of a monthly download allowance. Some people were fed some wicked fucking kool-aid somehow and I can't rationalize it. And on that note, in the last 2 days I have used 40GB. here (http://forums.f13.net/index.php?topic=13886.msg494847#msg494847) is where you damn the future of American internet. Not that I want to get all schaudenfreude over it, the cheaper the internet is overseas the better hope we had in Australia of things getting better. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: schild on April 02, 2009, 07:26:40 AM Quote from: schild I will never ever get over the lollerificness of a monthly download allowance. Some people were fed some wicked fucking kool-aid somehow and I can't rationalize it. And on that note, in the last 2 days I have used 40GB. here (http://forums.f13.net/index.php?topic=13886.msg494847#msg494847) is where you damn the future of American internet. Not that I want to get all schaudenfreude over it, the cheaper the internet is overseas the better hope we had in Australia of things getting better. You're still fucked. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Salamok on April 02, 2009, 07:37:24 AM It's insane that this isn't price fixing, TWC is only doing this in markets where they have no competition. Also in their test bed for implementing caps (Beaumont fucking texas) their only semi competitor, AT&T (at 1/3 the speed), is now implementing bandwidth caps as well (20gb and 150gb). Then there is the fact that both of these companies are offering subscriber TV services and it is pretty much not only a "we are gonna milk you till your tits fall off" scenario but we are also going to "cockblock you from getting your subscriber TV content from elsewhere". On top of all that the current no cap plan is already very profitable and it makes me want to join the Luddites.
No wonder they turned down the broadband stimulus money, raping customers is oh so much more profitable and satisfying. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Merusk on April 02, 2009, 09:06:38 AM Yeah it's all about shutting-down Netflix and Hulu, so it makes sense to put a smaller cap on Tech-savvy places like Austin. They're already not using Cable for TV, so get the funds from 'em other ways.
I've been running a bandwith monitor at home for a few months in anticipation of this happening to me. I should check what my useage is to see how screwed I am. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Bandit on April 02, 2009, 11:56:23 AM Ars Technica article on the TWC issue in Texas...."Time Warner rationale for bandwidth caps doesn't add up"
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/04/get-ready-for-metered-broadband-texas.ars (http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/04/get-ready-for-metered-broadband-texas.ars) Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: ahoythematey on April 02, 2009, 01:11:16 PM Anybody who has been a customer of TW knows so without even needing numbers. I've said it to others and I'll say it here: I wouldn't lift a finger to help any and every TW employee were they burning alive. None of them are worth the amount of money their organs would sell for on the black market were they to be harvested.
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: CharlieMopps on April 02, 2009, 01:33:07 PM Working for a phone company, I can tell you that capping bandwidth doesn't save us any money. Bandwidth is cheap as hell. Everyone, and I mean everyone, is going to Fiber to the prem as fast as our little trench diggers can get us there. Soon 1TB connections will be standard. We , in fact, have them all over already. It's just a matter of which markets we turn up first. Then you got the Feds giving us money to do even more... DSL/Copper wires cost us so much money in maint a year it's crazy. We install fiber in a market and the device alarms just stop overnight. No matter how much it costs us to install, it pays for itself in a year.
The reason these companies are doing this is to charge you more. plain and simple... they want to get you to pay for the $100/month service AND still nail you for going over. You want to get around their bandwidth cap cheaply? figure out which plan has the best $/GB bundle... get multiple lines + Firewall + load balancing oh... I just read about it... $55/month for 40gig? WoW! yea, you're screwed. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: schild on April 02, 2009, 01:49:42 PM Charlie, do you work for Verizon?
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: JWIV on April 02, 2009, 02:50:28 PM http://www22.verizon.com/residential/fiosinternet/checkbyaddress/ or dslreports is probably the best bet to check for availability or yammering about the construction schedule.
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Trippy on April 02, 2009, 03:00:06 PM I thought Cheddar worked for Verizon.
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Salamok on April 02, 2009, 03:21:43 PM Maybe in 5-10 years FIOS will come to the area but I have a feeling I will more likely move into a FIOS area before FIOS moves into my area.
Instead of creative pricing to make more money one of these providers should get off their ass and actually do something innovative to bring in more $$, they can start by having every subscriber become a node for a wireless mesh network and offer community wide high speed wireless at an additional fee. Fucktards are capping our consumption when the true money is in figuring out how to get us to use more not less. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: schild on April 02, 2009, 03:57:12 PM Yea, I'm fairly certain despite there being green dots on the dslreport fios list that there isn't actually any fios in the area and some morons think AT&T Uverse is FIOS. Blurgh. I'm still fucking angry.
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: schild on April 02, 2009, 07:30:03 PM http://droptimewarnercable.com/
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: schild on April 02, 2009, 07:34:22 PM Embarq does not service my area >_<
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Lt.Dan on April 02, 2009, 08:01:43 PM Australian ISPs have been capping usage for years. The good news is that there is still enough alternatives that you can choose your poison if you go over - per 100Mb charge or download speed throttled to 128k.
As to strategy I'd say it goes something like this. - TW sees househol video on demand and downloading as a huge revenue stream in the future - Currently they have no way to monetise this since all their household internet service is through fixed cost contracts - Step 1 - cap usage to create incentive to use TW (see Step 2) - Step 2 - introduce TW downloads that do not count against cap - hey it's free if you use TW's portal - Step 3 - monetise through advertising, charging content providers to use their network, pay-per-view, and an internet box to enable content direct to your TV, selling TW portal access to non-TW customers Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: fuser on April 02, 2009, 08:36:49 PM While in Canada we get the CRTC starting a month long public forum discussion about Internet access
http://isppractices.econsultation.ca/ There's like two or three or choices where I live. Cable 15Mbit/1.5Mbit max for $57/month with no cap (but DPI), or unmetered DSL with 10Mbit/640kbps. After dealing with my Cable provider's issues I switched to a 5Mbit DSL because honestly the 15mbit down rates only applied to things that were cached on their local network. I really don't understand why even offer the high bandwidth service with low caps well except for marketing. If you do any p2p you will exceed that limit very quickly. I feel your pain man as 40GB/month is insanely low, heck thats like '00 limits when service was picking up steam. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: CharlieMopps on April 02, 2009, 08:37:18 PM Charlie, do you work for Verizon? No, I work for one of the few regional Telcos left. I'm sure AT&T will devour us soon enough with Congress's help. Edit: by the way... if you knew someone that worked there... they could probably help you out. Give you some inside info on how they're billing it. Your bandwidth usage is a pretty arbitrary number. I mean... say you go to www.cnn.com and then I go there like 10 milliseconds later... That page is cached... is it the bandwidth to your house? Or coming from outside the network? So, did that webpage count? And if both of us are downloading the same torrent? I just don't see how they can legitimately charge for bandwidth that's mitigated by proper engineering. Along those same lines, isn't making it profitable for you to use more bandwidth going to just encourage them to design poorer and poorer networks? Efficiency will go out the window. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: MahrinSkel on April 02, 2009, 09:26:46 PM They want to kill video-over-internet from anyone that doesn't cut them in on the action. If they had been able to do it with packet shaping, they would have eventually gone after games, e-commerce, and anything else that makes money, but that would have been opportunism. Video-on-demand is a direct threat to their primary business (because if an 'iTunes for video', including iTunes Video, grabs up a critical mass of content, why would anyone pay for cable TV?), and they are hoping to strangle it in the crib. Right now, if you want to watch high-quality video via the net on your HDTV, you need a rather high level of technical skill. However, AppleTV and other one-box solutions are coming, and if one that is friendly to pirated/free content emerges, they're fucked.
Next step will be offering Silverlight, AppleTV, etc., peering arrangements that don't apply towards the caps. Games will get squeezed a bit, too, although the overall effect is going to be clamping downloadable clients at the 1G or so level (Steam may be fucked). --Dave Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: schild on April 02, 2009, 09:31:35 PM The only thing they're gonna squeeze out of me is this:
Quote Choose from a variety of high-speed internet packages, so your business will run at speeds based on your needs and on our advanced and reliable Fiber network. All HSD packages include, free of charge: o Personal Security Suite o 24/7 free technical support o Local account representation. Monthly prices will go down depending on term length and additional products purchased. Monthly price is estimated and does not include installation rates. Listed price is based on a 1-year term. Placing this item in the Shopping Cart does not mean you will be charged by Time Warner Cable Business Class. Taxes and fees are not included in listed price. A dedicated, local Business Class professional will follow up on your inquiry in less than 1 business day. Show Options | Hide Options Broadband TiersClick for more info Some restrictions apply. Monthly prices will go down depending on term length and additional products purchased. Some restrictions apply. Monthly prices will go down depending on term length and additional products purchased. Listed price is based on a 1-year term of this product. [select 1] Please select exactly 1 option(s). 10MB x 512Kbps ($119.95/mo.) $60 a person for 10MB down? I highly doubt they'll clamp down on business class lines. Also, 10MB down, jesus. Apparently I can get it here too! Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Cheddar on April 03, 2009, 12:20:00 PM Yes, I do work for Verizon (FiOS). And we have 24/7 support.
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: schild on April 03, 2009, 12:33:42 PM Can you check on Austin? My address still doesn't even register but DSL reports says there's some pins like a mile from me.
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Sky on April 03, 2009, 12:38:14 PM Roll that shit down my road while you're at it.
Schild, you're funny with your nearby pin. Time Warner refuses to run cable 400 ft down my mothers road for three houses, claiming it would cost $1000 to do so. 3 times cable + rr + phone times 20+ years (ok, less for phone + rr, but still). It's like they'd rather squeeze money without doing any actual work, even when that little bit of effort would earn them more money for nothing down the road. Sheesh. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Salamok on April 03, 2009, 12:58:03 PM Can i set up LoS repeaters from my work to home!
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Tale on April 03, 2009, 01:03:57 PM Just a question, but I use my computer to play games, surf the net, and watch a few TV shows a week on hulu/megavideo etc. I don't know how much bandwidth that takes. Are the people in danger of hitting proposed caps downloading thousands of songs a month and calculating missile trajectories for the DOD, or are the standards low enough to catch the average MMO gamer/young Internet user? Game playing, netsurfing, and downloading music are irrelevant. None of those consume significant bandwidth (unless all your music is lossless FLAC or something). There are basically three things that will fuck you: downloading video, downloading full game clients, and streaming video (watching lots of YouTube or streamed TV). I live off 25 gigs a month (used to live off 10 gigs). Here's my ISP's pricing scheme in AUD: clicky link (http://www.internode.on.net/residential/internet/home_adsl/naked/pricing/). My ISP also has "data blocks" you can buy for a one-off increase: clicky link (http://www.internode.on.net/products/broadband/data_blocks/). My ISP also has free zones, where you can download terabytes to your heart's content and it won't count. These include a vast up-to-date library (http://games.on.net/filelist.php) of full game clients and patches, local servers for popular games, a full Majorgeeks (http://www.majorgeeks.com/) mirror, and everything from the servers of our BBC-equivalent, the ABC (http://www.abc.net.au/). My ISP's usenet server is a direct line to Giganews, at no charge, but downloads from it count towards your monthly cap. Edit - Oh and they also have a Steam mirror. All Steam downloads are unmetered :-) So limits suck, but I can live with my 25Gb. If not, I buy data blocks. That happened last month when I woke up to discover the LOTRO trial patcher had silently downloaded 10Gb overnight. :ye_gods: The community came up with a neat little tray app: (http://users.on.net/~svandore/pics/internodemum.jpg) Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: stray on April 03, 2009, 01:58:00 PM AT&T is probably going to benefit from this. And when they see how much Time Warner has been fucked, they won't be thinking about caps themselves.
I'll probably sign up around June, just to tie it with my current mobile contract with Sprint expiring. [edit] There are a lot of legitimate things people do with their internet time that'll be affected by this, so I'm not sure what they're trying to prove here. 40GB is insane.. at least the way current trends are moving (and Tale's defense of 25GB is just goofy). Game consoles alone offer downloadable demos all within the 1 or 2GB range. Downloadable movies on PSN/XBL/AppleTV etc get big. Music, either downloadable or streaming can stack up eventually. Even shit like distance education can push you into GB territory. Uploading/Downloading HQ photos, let alone watching Youtube streams as mentioned above. Sharing movies. Perhaps even running some small business related shit gets affected. Downloading software in general. Uploading to backup sites. And finally, Porn. Yes. Good ole porn, staple of the net. Smutty, but still a legit use of internet time. But most importantly, multiple people in a household could be using their time doing all of these things. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Trippy on April 03, 2009, 02:14:52 PM Don't count on it. AT&T is testing bandwidth caps in Texas now too after their initial trial in Nevada. Their caps vary depending on the max bandwidth you are paying for with the 6 Mbps connections having a cap of 150 GB/month. It's kind of amusing that "big bad Comcast" is going to end up being the one with the most generous caps after all this is said and done.
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: stray on April 03, 2009, 02:37:32 PM Actually, speaking of movie services, perhaps there is a conflict of interest involved here. I mean, they are a media company. Maybe they're trying to get as much cash out of the idea of movie delivery as they can.. even in indirect ways. Or maybe they're just plain trying to rake in cash... as wealthy entities seem to like doing anyhow.
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Tale on April 03, 2009, 02:38:20 PM 40GB is insane.. at least the way current trends are moving (and Tale's defense of 25GB is just goofy). I didn't mean to defend it. I hate it. I was showing how I live within it, for when it happens to you. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: stray on April 03, 2009, 02:42:36 PM Ah, I see. :)
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Ookii on April 03, 2009, 03:52:50 PM It's insane to me that AT&T sees their competition put caps in place and they decide to do the exact same thing. Starting in the same place and around the same time as their competition as well.
Seems a bit fishy to me. I bet all of these guys are golfing buddies. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Cheddar on April 03, 2009, 04:28:08 PM Can you check on Austin? My address still doesn't even register but DSL reports says there's some pins like a mile from me. Message me your address and I will check it out. I did the same for Trippy; unfortunately the answer was not good. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: schild on April 03, 2009, 05:14:48 PM Done.
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Cheddar on April 03, 2009, 05:16:56 PM Will check it out on Monday. My bro is in town and I am under orders not to even think about work!
If its not avail yet I will get ahold of Engineering there and see when/if it is gonna get deployed. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: schild on April 03, 2009, 05:19:19 PM I honestly have no clue why they haven't expanded into Austin yet. What with it being tech fucking central and their only real competition being TW which is universally despised - even more so now. Seems like quite the opportunity.
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Xerapis on April 03, 2009, 06:55:05 PM I love Korea.
I mentioned this issue to one of my students who works for SK Networks. It was actually difficult to explain the concept of a download cap even though his English is quite good. When he finally understood, he said "Why would we ever do that? We would lose all of our customers." Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Cheddar on April 03, 2009, 07:07:54 PM I honestly have no clue why they haven't expanded into Austin yet. What with it being tech fucking central and their only real competition being TW which is universally despised - even more so now. Seems like quite the opportunity. Generally its due to franchise agreements (we sorta stopped spreading in none cable optional areas due to cost). When we do roll into areas its... not good for the competition. Cannot really say more, but its interesting some of the tactics adopted by our competitors. Does not seem to hurt our market penetration, though. :grin: Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Ozzu on April 04, 2009, 07:51:43 AM No TW caps where I live yet (suburbs of Dallas), but it's only a matter of time. Before my last move, we had FIOS and we literally moved to an apt complex across the street and it's no longer available. I was :heartbreak:
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: UnSub on April 04, 2009, 09:06:53 AM 40GB is insane.. at least the way current trends are moving (and Tale's defense of 25GB is just goofy). I didn't mean to defend it. I hate it. I was showing how I live within it, for when it happens to you. I have a 20GB cap as well - different ISP (Optus). Arguably it is because a pseudo-private organisation controls almost all the internet backbone in Australia and sets the prices to less than customer friendly levels, then resells to other ISPs. On the other hand, "pay for what you use" or fixed plans are pretty standard in lots of industries. But then I've lived with it, so it's what I know. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Strazos on April 04, 2009, 11:07:50 AM Comcast gave me a courtsey call yesterday, asking how I felt about the service and how it could be improved.
I just told them more speed, get rid of the 250gb cap, and don't do packet shaping because there's perfectly legitimate uses for torrenting. :grin: I've been using BitMeter for the for almost a year now (set to launch at start-up so it doesn't miss anything). The most I've used is 30gb, and that happened to have been last month. I don't do NEARLY as much torrenting as I did back in 07 or 06, and I don't use youtube or hulu a whole lot. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Tale on April 04, 2009, 02:24:39 PM usenet > torrents
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Salamok on April 04, 2009, 04:09:23 PM usenet > torrents TWC shut theirs down it used to be pretty good. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Cheddar on April 04, 2009, 04:45:50 PM I am trying to get my brother backup copies of some of the stuff I have (series/movies) to take back to Iraq, but cannot seem to get it right.
I am epic fail :( Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Salamok on April 06, 2009, 10:30:21 AM Someone givin it to a road runner rep (http://forums.nycap.rr.com/index.php?PHPSESSID=t4vqutk8uis3m5f3kide379h34&topic=190.15) I like how they use the granny defense on how poor lil ol' grandma shouldn't have to pay for your internet abuse (of course they aren't actually dropping any prices so instead she just gives her money to TWC). Can someone run the numbers on how much bandwidth is consumed if poor lil ole granny leaves her digital TV on 24/7? Isn't that a similar cost/consumption of bandwidth on an hourly basis as an internet user grabbing a cached hulu/youtube vid that has been requested a thousand times by other TWC users?
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: schild on April 06, 2009, 10:33:43 AM Wow, the administrator at the board is an amazing idiot.
Edit: I'm fine with $75 unlimited. Tiered shit makes sense (from an easy economical viewpoint on how to leverage customers in a tangible way), the problem is TWs plans don't make sense. There is no unlimited plan - and it *should* be a decent value, particularly considering competition. And yet, there isn't. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Salamok on April 06, 2009, 10:45:39 AM Also the douchbag admin compares their business model to a webhost selling space/bandwidth on a server in a datacenter, then proceeds to bring up the costs for the various subscriber lines (T3/DS3, OC3, OC48). Last I looked none of these types of connection has a bandwidth cap (why they are expensive) and a web host is charging for metered bandwidth does so because the data center in which they reside has a T3/DS3, OC3 or OC48 that they are reselling to thousands of clients (why they are cheap).
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Cheddar on April 06, 2009, 12:31:04 PM Can someone run the numbers on how much bandwidth is consumed if poor lil ole granny leaves her digital TV on 24/7? Isn't that a similar cost/consumption of bandwidth on an hourly basis as an internet user grabbing a cached hulu/youtube vid that has been requested a thousand times by other TWC users? Apples and oranges. Minus the new AT&T experiment (U Verse) all cable is broadcast based. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Trippy on April 06, 2009, 02:54:40 PM That Elminst guy is :uhrr:
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Salamok on April 06, 2009, 05:09:01 PM That Elminst guy is :uhrr: I think his job description must be kool aid salesman Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: schild on April 06, 2009, 05:09:43 PM That Elminst guy is :uhrr: I think his job description must be kool aid salesmanTitle: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: naum on April 07, 2009, 01:12:24 PM Does this mean net neutrality is now dead?
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Righ on April 07, 2009, 01:19:04 PM No, this is a reaction to net neutrality being alive. If net neutrality were dead, the providers wouldn't care about this issue, because they could just levy rates and set packet priorities based upon what you want to access. Want to download movies from a partner business? Full speed ahead. Want to download certain non-profit archives that are easy to mirror? Have a decent rate. Want to download stuff from your own server or some other backwater that providers no compensation to your provider? Enjoy the wait.
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: naum on April 07, 2009, 01:54:39 PM No, this is a reaction to net neutrality being alive. If net neutrality were dead, the providers wouldn't care about this issue, because they could just levy rates and set packet priorities based upon what you want to access. Want to download movies from a partner business? Full speed ahead. Want to download certain non-profit archives that are easy to mirror? Have a decent rate. Want to download stuff from your own server or some other backwater that providers no compensation to your provider? Enjoy the wait. It's pretty obvious that this is a telco collaborative response to video downloads — entities that have a vested interest in thwarting (or ensuring that users pay the piper) folks unplugging cable TV and plugging in Netflix boxtops, Boxee, Apple TV, etc.… …and this is the first salvo in that playbook — then you will see, in addition to tiered service agreements, exclusive deals where "preferred content providers" are discounted (or do not tally against the cap), and general herding to "approved" distributors (to keep the internets safe for the children too!), etc.… Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Broughden on April 07, 2009, 10:00:06 PM I honestly have no clue why they haven't expanded into Austin yet. What with it being tech fucking central and their only real competition being TW which is universally despised - even more so now. Seems like quite the opportunity. Whats happening with Verizon that is so good? Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Trippy on April 07, 2009, 10:13:26 PM schild wants their fiber optic service. They actually drag a fiber optic line to your house and install the special equipment needed to connect standard media devices (TV, computer, phone) to it.
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Cheddar on April 08, 2009, 03:55:41 AM I honestly have no clue why they haven't expanded into Austin yet. What with it being tech fucking central and their only real competition being TW which is universally despised - even more so now. Seems like quite the opportunity. Whats happening with Verizon that is so good? FiOS. This is BIG. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: AutomaticZen on April 08, 2009, 07:45:36 AM It hurts, because as I was moving out of my apartment complex, FIOS was coming in, and in the new place? No FIOS.
Be nice to know if there's even the possibility of FIOS in my future. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: bhodi on April 08, 2009, 09:14:52 AM FIOS internet is awesome, the TV is still unspectacular and you really need to fire whoever designs the internal operating system for your DVRs because it's utter garbage. Just fucking license TIVO already. It gets worse every revision and I'm going to cancel it as soon as my roommate leaves. God I hope they interview me and ask why because I've got a list of shit. #1 is lack of responsiveness.
Verizon phones suck balls too. When will they realize that no one wants their shitty OS? Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Broughden on April 08, 2009, 09:16:02 AM I honestly have no clue why they haven't expanded into Austin yet. What with it being tech fucking central and their only real competition being TW which is universally despised - even more so now. Seems like quite the opportunity. Whats happening with Verizon that is so good? FiOS. This is BIG. We dont even have 3G yet with T-Mobile here in Louisville despite our size. Piss ant liitle towns in FL and other places have 3G but not us, the 15th or 16th largest metro area in the US. We probably wont get FiOS for decades. :heartbreak: Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: naum on April 08, 2009, 09:43:10 AM FiOS. This is BIG. What speeds? My parents (Pittsburgh) got FiOS in '07 and when I benchmarked it, it wasn't any faster than my Cox cable connect in Arizona (6M)… Or are they offering Japan/Korea style DL speeds now? Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: JWIV on April 08, 2009, 10:27:01 AM Usual plans are now (all speeds in Mbps)
10/2 20/5 20/20 50/20 Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Salamok on April 08, 2009, 10:32:55 AM doesn't docsis3 bring cable up to the FIOS level? Of course to get docsis3 you have to convince TWC that it isn't a threat to cable TV and I guess that isn't happening anytime soon. At least NY is on the ball (http://stopthecap.com/2009/04/07/breaking-news-rep-eric-massa-d-ny-condemns-time-warner-internet-cap-will-take-lead-role-in-opposition/) (as usual) with talks of new laws and lawsuits. Of course this is most likely just a bunch of constituent pleasing posturing while advertising your availability to the opposing sides special interest $$.
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Lum on April 08, 2009, 12:53:58 PM Yeah, no ISP in the US is upgrading to DOCSIS3, primarily because there's no real competition forcing them to do so. UVerse and FIOS are still in very limited areas and cable outlets have essentially colluded in carving out monopoly fiefdoms.
Meanwhile Australia just said screw this crap, Fiber to EVERYONE, paid for by the government as a stimulus package. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/08/technology/internet/08broadband.html Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: schild on April 08, 2009, 01:04:47 PM Grats to the aussies here! You have a government that isn't just playing with their pud whenever asked about the internet!
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Trippy on April 08, 2009, 03:06:56 PM doesn't docsis3 bring cable up to the FIOS level? No it doesn't. It does boost bandwidth but it doesn't get rid of the architectural disadvantages of DOCSIS compared to Verizon's fiber approach.Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Cheddar on April 08, 2009, 04:24:15 PM No one can touch what FiOS is doing just yet. Perhaps AT&T. Its just too damn expensive and too many companies invested in money hats.
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Trippy on April 08, 2009, 08:51:58 PM In almost all deployments U-Verse is fiber to the neighborhood (aka "fiber to the node" or FTTN) and then VDSL (plain old copper wires) to the home. In some new developments AT&T is in fact just dragging fiber to the new homes since in those cases it's just as easy to do that as dragging in new copper lines. Verizon's FiOS is only fiber to the home (aka "fiber to the premises" or FTTP).
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Salamok on April 09, 2009, 03:00:43 PM At least this issue is starting to pick up steam, sure hope the media doesn't drop the issue until the politicians really get involved.
Ars Article (http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/04/the-price-gouging-premiums-of-time-warner-cables-data-caps.ars) edit - Comcast has docsis3 in chicago! Also the current TWC plans are tiered by speed as it is, I wonder if they are adding caps to the existing speed tiers or upping everyone to 15+mbs and creating cap only tiers. If they are just adding caps to existing speed tiers the granny argument doesn't even work as she is most likely already paying the 5gb cap price for (3mbs speed). Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: tazelbain on April 09, 2009, 03:29:15 PM I want rollover gigs at least.
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: schild on April 09, 2009, 03:30:32 PM I want no cap at all. It's bullshit. There is absolutely, even at my worst in terms of transfer, that this apartment is costing more than the cost of the sub in terms of bandwidth. Money grabs can eat my puckered up browneye.
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Trippy on April 10, 2009, 03:47:54 AM TW unlimited bandwidth for $150 a month :awesome_for_real:
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/04/09/time-warners-unlimited-bandwidth-plan-150-a-month/ http://a.longreply.com/109511 Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Tale on April 10, 2009, 04:29:40 AM Meanwhile Australia just said screw this crap, Fiber to EVERYONE, paid for by the government as a stimulus package. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/08/technology/internet/08broadband.html Gonna take 10 years to build (in a landmass the size of the USA minus Alaska, with a population of only 20 million), gives us more speed not higher download limits, and still leaves us with the giant bottleneck of cables across the Pacific. Most of the stuff people do on the internet involves servers located in the USA. But it should free us from Telstra, the privatised monopoly telco that owns most of the current infrastructure, the wholesale enforcer of download caps by charging its customers based on data volume. I'd bet volume charging remains in some form, but for the sake of making this network a step forward, it simply must get cheaper than it is now. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: CharlieMopps on April 10, 2009, 08:59:37 AM I have an idea... it may be crazy.... But I was seeing adds on TV for a Cellular USB stick. 3G, unlimited downloads. $50/month.
it's only 384Kb, but see if you can get some sort of family plan... 4 of those sticks and you got almost 2MB of service with no download limit. Load balance it... eh? Ok... yea, it's crazy. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Salamok on April 10, 2009, 09:11:24 AM I had a similar idea in 1998 "why can't i plug 24 2000 minutes per month equipped cellphones to my phone system and ditch the T1". I hear most cell unlimited data plans have a hidden cap. Also, I tried putting a cell phone into pcmodem mode with a laptop and while it worked okay it wasn't letting me VPN/Remote Desktop, I am thinking they may block a bunch of ports.
But yes I am eagerly awaiting the next leap in wireless broadband and ditching wired cable entirely. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: schild on April 11, 2009, 10:18:58 AM It should be illegal to charge me $150 for unlimited internet when I already get it for $60. I really don't understand how this isn't price fixing.
Anyway, yea, the unlimited plan is $150 a month. A depression is a great time to introduce this. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: schild on April 11, 2009, 10:25:05 AM http://www.timewarnercable.com/corporate/announcements/cbb.html
Quote Some recent press reports about our four consumption based billing trials planned for later this year were premature and did not tell the full story. With that said, we realize our communication to customers about these trials has been inadequate and we apologize for any frustration we caused. We’ve heard the passionate feedback and we’ve taken action to address our customers’ concerns. With the ever-increasing flood of content on the Internet, bandwidth consumption is growing exponentially. That’s a good thing; however, there are costs associated with this increased Internet usage. Here at Time Warner Cable, consumption among our high-speed Internet subscribers is increasing by about 40% a year. As a facilities based provider, we’ve built a network that must be maintained and upgraded. We have increasing variable costs and we have to continue to invest in the network itself. This is a common problem that all network providers are experiencing and must address. Several other providers have instituted consumption based billing, including all major network providers in Canada and others in the U.K., New Zealand and elsewhere. In the U.S., AT&T has begun two consumption based billing trials and other providers including Comcast, Charter and Cox are using varying methods of monitoring and managing bandwidth consumption. For good reason. Internet demand is rising at a rate that could outpace capacity within a few years. According to industry analysts, the infrastructure may not be able to accommodate the explosion of online content by 2012. This could result in Internet brownouts. It will take a lot of money to fix the problem. Rather than raising prices on all customers or limiting usage, we think the fairest approach is to move to a tiered model in which users pay more if they use more. If we don’t act, consumers’ Internet experience will suffer. Sitting still is not an option. That’s why we’re beginning the consumption based billing trials. It’s important to stress that they are trials. The feedback we’ve received from our customers has been very helpful. We’ve made changes to the terms in our current and upcoming trial markets as follows: * To accommodate lighter Internet users and those who need a lower priced option, we are introducing a 1 GB per month tier offering speeds of 768 KB/128 KB for $15 per month. Overage charges will be $2 per GB per month. Our usage data show that about 30% of our customers use less than 1 GB per month. * We are increasing the bandwidth tier sizes included in all existing packages in the trial markets to 10, 20, 40 and 60 GB for Road Runner Lite, Basic, Standard and Turbo packages, respectively. Package prices will remain the same. Overage charges will be $1 per GB per month. * We will introduce a 100 GB Road Runner Turbo package for $75 per month (offering speeds of 10 MB/1 MB). Overage charges will be $1 per GB per month. * Overage charges will be capped at $75 per month. That means that for $150 per month customers could have virtually unlimited usage at Turbo speeds. * Once we implement this trial, we will not immediately start billing customers for overage. Rather, we will first provide two months of usage data. Then we will provide a one-month grace period in which overages will be noted on customers’ bills, but they will not be charged. So, customers will have an opportunity to assess their usage and right-size their service packages before usage charges are applied. * Trials will begin in Rochester, N.Y., and Greensboro, N.C., in August. We will apply what we learn from these two markets when we launch trials in San Antonio and Austin, Texas, in October, but we will guarantee at least the same level of usage capacity in these trials. * As we launch DOCSIS 3.0 in the trial markets, we plan to offer a 50/5 MB speed tier for $99 per month. The audacity of these chucklefucks is just appalling. Are they actually implying that those <1GB people aren't subsidizing the >150GB people? Do they really think a fucking tech center like Austin won't switch to a much shittier service (UVerse) just to avoid overage. Man, fuck them. That said, I'm going to aim for 500GB+ a month until October. Then call and ask, and say "gotcha fuckers." Edit: Seriously, I'm going to uninstall, reinstall Steam games - ad infinitum - and hope it hurts their entire customer base. I want them to go fucking EXTREME one way or the other. Because either way, I'll be done with them in 5 months. I seriously want to find the most painful disease possible, and inflict them with it. The fact their employees aren't outraged over this publicly is just appalling. YES, I AM RAGEQUITTING AN INTERNET SERVICE. Edit 2: Does anyone have any fucking insight on why they're decreasing the speed of the "turbo" plan? What fucking good does decreasing the speed do? Is it just a totally artificial change that makes it harder to hit the cap (which it doesn't btw, it just makes me download tv and movies slower). I'd have that thing capped out 24/7. Bleh. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: MahrinSkel on April 11, 2009, 10:48:37 AM I saw the writing on the wall when they started the caps in Beaumont (why Beaumont? Because nobody in Beaumont ever complains about getting shafted by the utilities, so they all use that as their regulation-required test market), and switched to AT&T (which Schild mocked me for). Now that AT&T is testing the caps, I'll have to find another solution or find a way to choke off my 14-year-old's bandwidth usage (probably install Linux on the spare box like I've been meaning to, use it for a gateway and configure his MAC address for throttled bandwidth).
Going to be a lot of people with zombies they didn't know they had that get shafted by this. --Dave Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: schild on April 11, 2009, 10:50:00 AM Yea, I thought about the zombie boxes the other day. Poor grandmas everywhere are fucked.
As for switching to AT&T, I'm still mocking you. Also, you already have a 150GB cap, right? At this point, if I don't find a job by October, I'll just move somewhere with Verizon fiber. After that gets capped, I guess it's South Korea or Japan for me. OH WELL. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Lum on April 11, 2009, 10:39:02 PM Uverse isn't shitty. I get better download speed and about 3 times as many HD channels as I did with TWC.
It's not FiOS, but it beats the crap out of giving TWC money. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: schild on April 11, 2009, 10:40:54 PM Your TWC download speed must've been trash then, because I regularly get 3MB (that's MB, so 30Mb down). The fastest UVerse offered was 1.5MB.
Also, I haven't had cable in forever. There's no doubt, I'll have to switch to them, but there's no way they provide the same up/down TWC does right now. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Lum on April 11, 2009, 11:20:03 PM Yeah, you must have been the only guy on your block that actually used Internet. TWC only promises 15Mb and usually I got 5-6Mb (and lost service every night right at prime time). With UVerse I am paying for (and get) right at 6Mb and will jack it up in a month or so to see if I actually get more for paying a higher tier. Plus, hey, voting with dollars.
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: MahrinSkel on April 12, 2009, 12:07:43 AM I never got better than 6.5Mb (800KB/Sec), although I never had the prime-time outages. But my phone that I also paid for didn't work after the first week (according to the AT&T guys who installed my DSL and switched my phone back, the surprising part was that it ever worked at all, and didn't burn down the house), and the only reason I used their crappy DVR was because it could record HD and I didn't want to buy a Generation 3 TiVo. AT&T phone + Internet and DirecTV (separate, I didn't like Dish, wanted to charge me too much for the extra set-tops, use a smaller dish that's even more vulnerable to weather, and didn't have SciFi in HD) combined cost me half as much, and the only downside is a glitchy picture when a thunderstorm is directly overhead. I only get 1.5Mb, but it's steady, doesn't make me reboot the router or the modem at least once every day, and if I wanted to cough up another $40, I could get that back up to 6Mb.
uVerse not available for me yet, dammit. Hopefully will be before they start jacking around with caps on my DSL. Or I upgrade to a business account. But it's slightly surreal having the equivalent of a T-1 line and the other geeks look down on me. --Dave (my first modem required sticking the phone handset on top of it. That made me alpha geek of my school, back in 1983) Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: schild on April 12, 2009, 12:13:40 AM What bothers me is that 600KB down (which is what 6Mb comes out to) will be the worst internet connection I've had since 1999.
No, I am not kidding. Frankly, that's just unacceptable a fucking decade later. Honestly, I'm not even that happy with the average 30Mb down I get now. I expect, demand and need more. Mostly because I'm pissed off we don't have flying cars yet. They'll just have to subsidize my shitty future with decent internet. Yes, I know I'm fucked come this October, unless Verizon gets off their lazy fucking ass and destroys all the competitors in the marketplace. Or we get lucky and get a Docsis 3 rollout - at which point I'd pretty much gladly pay the $150 a month to TWC. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: apocrypha on April 12, 2009, 12:17:45 AM This thread has really brought into focus how shit our broadband is in the UK.
I pay Ł30/month for ADSL capped at 45Gb/month, with a theoretical speed of "up to 8Mb" but which in reality is limited to ~2.5Mb because of the phone line/distance to exchange/phase of the moon. That is expensive even for the UK but it's the only way to get contention ratios of <50:1 here. Most of the cheap broadband in the UK has contention ratios of 200:1 or more and even more restrictive download caps. Frankly, that's just unacceptable a fucking decade later. What, things getting worse for consumers over time under a system that prioritises profit above all else? Who'da thunk it! :grin:Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Falwell on April 12, 2009, 02:59:46 AM This is one of the few things that I'm thankful for living in Indiana for.....
Mediacom: 20 Meg down, 2 Meg up, no cap, 60 a month http://www.mediacomcable.com/internet_max.html Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Broughden on April 12, 2009, 03:16:56 PM This is one of the few things that I'm thankful for living in Indiana for..... Mediacom: 20 Meg down, 2 Meg up, no cap, 60 a month http://www.mediacomcable.com/internet_max.html Hey that makes two F13ers in Indiana! Or you are Jimbo's gimmick account. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: CmdrSlack on April 12, 2009, 07:49:54 PM As the ads clearly state, "There's more than corn in Indiana."
Not much more, but those two increase my overall "people I know from teh intarnets in Indiana" to three. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: rattran on April 12, 2009, 07:52:48 PM That's pretty much all of them! :why_so_serious:
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Sky on April 13, 2009, 06:16:03 AM Another angle to this - public libraries. This issue has finally got some time with the administration, and it's not looking good. We simply can't afford anything more right now, and we definitely can't afford to pay on a sliding scale, we need fixed costs. So this might fuck internet access for the underpriveleged of entire communities across the country, just as it's needed the most. We've seen internet demand skyrocket (though we've been saturated at peak times for years since we can't afford enough computers to meet demand), and laptop users are nearing the demand of our own computers, as people shut off cable at home and come here to use it.
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Numtini on April 13, 2009, 07:09:36 AM Locally COMCAST provides free internet to the schools and public library.
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Sky on April 13, 2009, 07:36:01 AM Locally COMCAST provides free internet to the schools and public library. We get 8 connections free, but we've got a couple dozen computers for the public.Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Salamok on April 13, 2009, 08:08:31 AM Locally COMCAST provides free internet to the schools and public library. We get 8 connections free, but we've got a couple dozen computers for the public.So I take it there is something in that agreement that prevents you from interpreting "8 connections free" as 1 connection shared among 4 library pc's while also serving as a wifi hot spot? Or better yet find a cheap way to load balance the 8 connections into a single resource? Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Sky on April 13, 2009, 08:28:17 AM I can't really get into specifics, sorry.
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: CharlieMopps on April 13, 2009, 08:38:23 AM That's hilarious. They're just flat out lying in that press release. They are talking about capacity and Throughput as if they were the same thing. But they're not. The problems they have with capacity have nothing to do with you downloading at 1MB/Sec at 3am as you pull down a torrent.
When it's time to vote on American idol and 3/4 of their customer base all hit the same website at 8:05pm, THAT'S when they have their capacity issues. People downloading large files over long periods of time are not the problem. This is just a way for them to squeeze money out of people. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: naum on April 13, 2009, 09:28:10 AM Another angle to this - public libraries. This issue has finally got some time with the administration, and it's not looking good. We simply can't afford anything more right now, and we definitely can't afford to pay on a sliding scale, we need fixed costs. So this might fuck internet access for the underpriveleged of entire communities across the country, just as it's needed the most. We've seen internet demand skyrocket (though we've been saturated at peak times for years since we can't afford enough computers to meet demand), and laptop users are nearing the demand of our own computers, as people shut off cable at home and come here to use it. As is, the cost of broadband internet is prohibitive for many who don't live online like some of us do. Granted, we can have the argument that they still pony up for cable TV (though I know many that forgo that leisure expenditure also. So libraries and coffee shops (free if many local spots here, your city/town may not be blessed, but even Starbucks and others is free to those with mobile plans) get frequented (or any place that offers free wifi). It seems that these acts will shoehorn customers into all-in-one plans (TV, phone, net bundled together) — and 2 out of 3 in that group really should be regulated as a utility. I work with a church and already I hear a lot of feedback (especially from elder citizens) about how everything is moving online and how they feel handicapped as many only experience net access at work and are endowed with older (and worm riddled Windows boxes to boot!) machines. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Sky on April 13, 2009, 11:56:50 AM The movement of stuff online is a whole 'nother topic. Frequently patrons come in with no idea at all how to use a pc, and they've got to apply for a job online or download something to send it back, really eats into our CS time, and we're short staffed thanks to every fucking level of government slashing our budget during the busiest time we've ever seen. It's fun, but another topic.
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: shiznitz on April 13, 2009, 12:13:59 PM It should be illegal to charge me $150 for unlimited internet when I already get it for $60. I really don't understand how this isn't price fixing. Anyway, yea, the unlimited plan is $150 a month. A depression is a great time to introduce this. You are a bandwidth hog. You should pay more. Why is this so shocking? I understand why you are upset but I think you need to revisit your rationale. People pay extra to go to less crowded health clubs. People pay extra to get exclusive access to a golf course. Paying a premium for "extra" is quite normal. I have a hard time believeing that your quality of life will be materially impacted by a 40GB limit. Your habits, maybe, but not your QoL. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: ahoythematey on April 13, 2009, 12:35:45 PM Go back and read the rest of the thread before making another reply. The outrage isn't merely about the cap...
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Lum on April 13, 2009, 12:36:00 PM He's said before he doesn't mind paying a premium. I don't either. What's insulting is where the pricing obviously is punitive, out of line with the market and into the realm of price gouging.
Hell, the rates TWC announced don't even make any kind of internally consistent sense. It's cheaper to take the 5GB plan and 5GB in overage charges than to take the 10GB plan. It's as if they want to chase off anyone who actually knows anything about Internet access or basic math from their service. Given this response from a TWC rep, that may in fact be the case (http://stopthecap.com/2009/04/08/tell-me-lies-tell-me-sweet-little-lies-customers-complain-about-cap-confusion-at-time-warner-call-centers/): Quote “I called and canceled on Friday. The woman at Time Warner said, “Honey, are you reading those blogger people? All they do is write in their basement and eat Cheetos and they don’t know anything. I work for the company and I am telling you we are not going to charge you more, we are just testing this to see whether people like to pay less for their Internet. This is going to save your money!” Yeah. Fuck you, Time Warner. (munches cheetos) Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Sky on April 13, 2009, 12:45:48 PM Oh, they apparently have kool-aid, too!
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Lum on April 13, 2009, 12:46:50 PM Also, the US Congressman from Rochester NY (another TWC cap testbed) is introducing legislation to stop broadband caps in areas where internet providers have a monopoly (such as... Rochester NY).
http://massa.house.gov/?sectionid=24§iontree=23,24&itemid=208 TWC's response is since Corning Glass is in his district, he's shilling for Verizon because FiOS uses glass fiber. :uhrr: Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: shiznitz on April 13, 2009, 12:54:52 PM Go back and read the rest of the thread before making another reply. The outrage isn't merely about the cap... I read the whole thing. I agree that a price change from 60 to 150/month is > the marginal cost of even the greediest bandwidth hog. Still, if schild cannot afford that, his life won't end on 40GB. His outrage does not match the situation. The hail story on the other hand... Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Salamok on April 13, 2009, 02:27:07 PM If anything TWC used to justify their argument was actually true they would have to implement these rules everywhere in order to make money. The fact that they are profitable and only implementing in markets where they have a monopoly pretty much proves that it is a shameless money grab.
edit - Being a bandwidth hog is just TWC's scapegoat argument and the misdirection here is that bandwidth hog is somehow cutting into TWC's profitability. When in truth the single biggest way they might impact said profitability is by not needing/wanting cable TV. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Segoris on April 14, 2009, 02:58:01 PM Quote <bunch of bullshit snipped> * To accommodate lighter Internet users and those who need a lower priced option, we are introducing a 1 GB per month tier offering speeds of 768 KB/128 KB for $15 per month. Overage charges will be $2 per GB per month. Our usage data show that about 30% of our customers use less than 1 GB per month. * We are increasing the bandwidth tier sizes included in all existing packages in the trial markets to 10, 20, 40 and 60 GB for Road Runner Lite, Basic, Standard and Turbo packages, respectively. Package prices will remain the same. Overage charges will be $1 per GB per month. * We will introduce a 100 GB Road Runner Turbo package for $75 per month (offering speeds of 10 MB/1 MB). Overage charges will be $1 per GB per month. * Overage charges will be capped at $75 per month. That means that for $150 per month customers could have virtually unlimited usage at Turbo speeds. * Once we implement this trial, we will not immediately start billing customers for overage. Rather, we will first provide two months of usage data. Then we will provide a one-month grace period in which overages will be noted on customers’ bills, but they will not be charged. So, customers will have an opportunity to assess their usage and right-size their service packages before usage charges are applied. * Trials will begin in Rochester, N.Y., and Greensboro, N.C., in August. We will apply what we learn from these two markets when we launch trials in San Antonio and Austin, Texas, in October, but we will guarantee at least the same level of usage capacity in these trials. * As we launch DOCSIS 3.0 in the trial markets, we plan to offer a 50/5 MB speed tier for $99 per month. Did I miss a clause somewhere, or is it cheaper to just get the cheapest $15/mo plan and just go over as much as you'd like while capping your payment per month to $90? That announcement just said overage charges are capped at $75/mo and did not limit that cap to the highest of plans, it's just a general cap. Even looking at their website I can't find anything. Normally I'd assume it's in there, but with how, obviously, well thought out they are pricing their tiers I'm not thinking that is an automatically safe assumption. Would be great if those chimps at TWC can't even get price gouging right. If they did include a clause of that sort, and I'm not seeing it, then disregard this. If not, enjoy unlimited usage at $90/mo and hold them to this if they continue to suck at math and price gouging/fixing Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Trippy on April 14, 2009, 03:09:08 PM 768 Kbps is far too slow for those that need "unlimited" bandwidth. That's ~80 KBps which if maxed out 24/7 only comes out to ~200 GB a month. At 10 Mbps you can download that much (assuming maxed out again) in less than 3 days.
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: schild on April 14, 2009, 05:00:45 PM If I was capped at 768k, I would just tether to the 3G network.
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: MahrinSkel on April 14, 2009, 06:54:07 PM If I was capped at 768k, I would just tether to the 3G network. 3G providers don't advertise it, but you're effectively capped at 5GB on them (they'll degrade your connection to less than that of a dialup modem if you go over).--Dave Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Salamok on April 16, 2009, 12:18:17 PM NY wins (http://rochesterturning.com/2009/04/16/breaking-news-time-warner-cap-is-dead/), good for them but it doesn't specifically say that TWC is dropping the plan for caps in Austin as well.
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Lum on April 16, 2009, 12:29:08 PM According to Schumer's office, TWC is indeed dropping the "test plan" in all markets, not just Rochester. Press releases from both Schumer and Time Warner expected shortly.
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Salamok on April 16, 2009, 12:51:14 PM TWC Announcement (http://www.timewarnercable.com/corporate/announcements/cbb.html), canceling trials... for now. Cue the TWC advertising campaign and special interest $$.
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Sky on April 16, 2009, 01:09:58 PM Yes, my take on it is that they're going back into their lair to plot a proper marketing campaign.
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: schild on April 16, 2009, 01:13:36 PM Yesterday I ripped into a woman from TWC and her manager so fucking hard that I thought there would be tears.
There may have been involvement of phrases like "I hope bandwidth caps take away your ability to have children, etc." It was horrible. I imagine other people said worse and it just wasn't worth the headache for them to continue the bullshit charade. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: stray on April 16, 2009, 01:21:03 PM Switching to ATT very soon here.
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: schild on April 16, 2009, 01:21:48 PM Switching to ATT very soon here. Is there a reason?Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Stormwaltz on April 16, 2009, 01:23:02 PM Story on Ars Technica. (http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/04/theyre-gone-after-outcry-time-warner-uncaps-the-tubes.ars)
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: schild on April 16, 2009, 01:23:06 PM Thank god there was a congressman in NY that cared since Texas is too busy seceding.
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: stray on April 16, 2009, 02:01:17 PM At the moment, cheaper, and without the headaches. Probably getting a new phone anyways. Also, dropping TW cable. Just gonna give them the thumbs down entirely. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Sky on April 17, 2009, 08:01:24 AM The owner of the local TWC franchise lives a couple houses away. I've not used this information for nefarious purposes yet. Also, I think his wife is a house slave.
Next month I do the dance where I threaten to drop TWC, my yearly deal is almost up and I'm not paying full package price for that shit (even if they have been adding HD faster than ever). Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Cheddar on April 17, 2009, 07:32:28 PM Yesterday I ripped into a woman from TWC and her manager so fucking hard that I thought there would be tears. There may have been involvement of phrases like "I hope bandwidth caps take away your ability to have children, etc." It was horrible. I imagine other people said worse and it just wasn't worth the headache for them to continue the bullshit charade. ... Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: ahoythematey on April 17, 2009, 07:40:49 PM It may seem harsh, but I really have not met a group of people that could possibly be more intentionally dishonest, rude, and unhelpful than the majority of Time-Warner employees that I've had to deal with over the years. I completely understand where schild is coming from and would probably approve of all of them being forced to look for new jobs in this economic climate. Fuck them and their families.
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: schild on April 17, 2009, 07:43:21 PM Yesterday I ripped into a woman from TWC and her manager so fucking hard that I thought there would be tears. ... There may have been involvement of phrases like "I hope bandwidth caps take away your ability to have children, etc." It was horrible. I imagine other people said worse and it just wasn't worth the headache for them to continue the bullshit charade. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Trippy on April 17, 2009, 08:16:20 PM My guess is Cheddar has FiOS at his place, for free.
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: stray on April 17, 2009, 08:27:02 PM I actually don't deal with TW much, but fuck em anyways. About the furthest I get is basic tech support dudes and they're unhelpful.... But that's to be expected from all tech support everywhere. Even if I was in the same exact position working tech support, I'd consider myself unhelpful. :oh_i_see:
You start fucking with me about money though and I'm gone. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Cheddar on April 18, 2009, 10:14:12 AM Still working on getting firm information on Austin FiOS. I am beginning to wonder if TW has some kind of strangle hold with that city; next step will be to get ahold of the head of engineering down there! :grin:
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: ahoythematey on April 18, 2009, 03:20:28 PM Would it help speed things along if Verizon knew we desperately want to switch over not just because it is a superior service, but also because of spite?
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Cheddar on April 18, 2009, 03:36:57 PM Would it help speed things along if Verizon knew we desperately want to switch over not just because it is a superior service, but also because of spite? No. Write your Congressman! For serious. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Broughden on April 20, 2009, 07:25:03 AM It should be illegal to charge me $150 for unlimited internet when I already get it for $60. I really don't understand how this isn't price fixing. Anyway, yea, the unlimited plan is $150 a month. A depression is a great time to introduce this. You are a bandwidth hog. You should pay more. Why is this so shocking? I understand why you are upset but I think you need to revisit your rationale. People pay extra to go to less crowded health clubs. People pay extra to get exclusive access to a golf course. Paying a premium for "extra" is quite normal. I have a hard time believeing that your quality of life will be materially impacted by a 40GB limit. Your habits, maybe, but not your QoL. Should people who drive more pay higher road taxes? Or keeping it the realm of cable TV stuff....if you and I get the same package of channels, should you pay more for it because you spend more time watching them? Funny how you dont see TWC trying to implement that. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Triforcer on April 20, 2009, 07:36:43 AM It should be illegal to charge me $150 for unlimited internet when I already get it for $60. I really don't understand how this isn't price fixing. Anyway, yea, the unlimited plan is $150 a month. A depression is a great time to introduce this. You are a bandwidth hog. You should pay more. Why is this so shocking? I understand why you are upset but I think you need to revisit your rationale. People pay extra to go to less crowded health clubs. People pay extra to get exclusive access to a golf course. Paying a premium for "extra" is quite normal. I have a hard time believeing that your quality of life will be materially impacted by a 40GB limit. Your habits, maybe, but not your QoL. Should people who drive more pay higher road taxes? Or keeping it the realm of cable TV stuff....if you and I get the same package of channels, should you pay more for it because you spend more time watching them? Funny how you dont see TWC trying to implement that. I know almost nothing about technology, but even I know enough to know that's a shitty example. You keeping the TV on 24/7 doesn't affect the signal being sent to your house in any way, nor does it affect others with the same service. Do I think capping sucks? From a purely self-centered point of view, of course. But many in this thread are acting like its some constitutional or sacred right to receive unlimited bandwidth. Its not. You are not special, this situation isn't special, its like anything else in business- you use more of a finite resource (which bandwidth is at any given moment, given others in the area and the current pipeline capacity for that area), people will want you to pay more. You can oppose it, and I do oppose it, but pretending there is some sort of larger, divine principle that is being violated is a bit laughable. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Salamok on April 20, 2009, 07:47:05 AM It should be illegal to charge me $150 for unlimited internet when I already get it for $60. I really don't understand how this isn't price fixing. Anyway, yea, the unlimited plan is $150 a month. A depression is a great time to introduce this. You are a bandwidth hog. You should pay more. Why is this so shocking? I understand why you are upset but I think you need to revisit your rationale. People pay extra to go to less crowded health clubs. People pay extra to get exclusive access to a golf course. Paying a premium for "extra" is quite normal. I have a hard time believeing that your quality of life will be materially impacted by a 40GB limit. Your habits, maybe, but not your QoL. Should people who drive more pay higher road taxes? Or keeping it the realm of cable TV stuff....if you and I get the same package of channels, should you pay more for it because you spend more time watching them? Funny how you dont see TWC trying to implement that. You know I actually agree with consumption/usage based pricing. Unfortunately what TWC is doing has nothing to do with that and has everything to do with blocking alternative access to cable TV programming. The current model they have in place is fair and already consumption based and consumption is restricted by speed. Funny how the top plan they offer is the 15mbs plan with an extra gear that allows it to exceed that when bandwidth is available, if schild is consistently exceeding 15mbs then it pretty much proves that his piggyness isn't costing them anything because he is utilizing excess bandwidth that would normally just be dormant/wasted. edit: Quote stuff I know almost nothing about technology, but even I know enough to know that's a shitty example. You keeping the TV on 24/7 doesn't affect the signal being sent to your house in any way, nor does it affect others with the same service.True, but I watch mabe 5% of the channels TWC gives me in my base plan and do not have an HDTV yet my base cable package still costs me $45 a month, I am probably paying an extra $15 a month just to access the interactive TV guide + a shitload of content i don't ever watch. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Broughden on April 20, 2009, 08:10:47 AM It should be illegal to charge me $150 for unlimited internet when I already get it for $60. I really don't understand how this isn't price fixing. Anyway, yea, the unlimited plan is $150 a month. A depression is a great time to introduce this. You are a bandwidth hog. You should pay more. Why is this so shocking? I understand why you are upset but I think you need to revisit your rationale. People pay extra to go to less crowded health clubs. People pay extra to get exclusive access to a golf course. Paying a premium for "extra" is quite normal. I have a hard time believeing that your quality of life will be materially impacted by a 40GB limit. Your habits, maybe, but not your QoL. Should people who drive more pay higher road taxes? Or keeping it the realm of cable TV stuff....if you and I get the same package of channels, should you pay more for it because you spend more time watching them? Funny how you dont see TWC trying to implement that. I know almost nothing about technology, but even I know enough to know that's a shitty example. You keeping the TV on 24/7 doesn't affect the signal being sent to your house in any way, nor does it affect others with the same service. Do I think capping sucks? From a purely self-centered point of view, of course. But many in this thread are acting like its some constitutional or sacred right to receive unlimited bandwidth. Its not. You are not special, this situation isn't special, its like anything else in business- you use more of a finite resource (which bandwidth is at any given moment, given others in the area and the current pipeline capacity for that area), people will want you to pay more. You can oppose it, and I do oppose it, but pretending there is some sort of larger, divine principle that is being violated is a bit laughable. Do you really think the average consumer households are in danger of using up this "finite resource" as you call it? So much so that this plan by TWC is needed or should be instituted? See bolded section? The internet is fast becoming the standard in terms of communications...mail, entertainment and business are all transacted through it. Perhaps it should be regulated just as the airwaves and telephone (early communication means) were before it, so obvious price gouging of this sort doesnt happen. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: schild on April 20, 2009, 08:13:10 AM Take that crap to politics. You two don't know how to argue outside of there.
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: ahoythematey on April 20, 2009, 01:15:51 PM Today, an internet connection is about as essential as a telephone. Bandwidth would never be an issue if the companies in charge of the infrastructure had been doing their fucking job in updating the hardware, instead of trying to sit on their thrones of Scrooge McDuck-esque profit and deign to "educate" us about how they are awesome and consumer-friendly.
I sure would love to find out what type of internet service the upper-management of Time Warner have for personal use. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Salamok on April 20, 2009, 01:32:48 PM I sure would love to find out what type of internet service the upper-management of Time Warner have for personal use. RR turbo I am sure, the 20mbs internet + every channel under the sun for free that all TWC employees get > the FIOS equivalent package at $150+ a month. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: naum on April 20, 2009, 01:44:17 PM Today, an internet connection is about as essential as a telephone. Bandwidth would never be an issue if the companies in charge of the infrastructure had been doing their fucking job in updating the hardware, instead of trying to sit on their thrones of Scrooge McDuck-esque profit and deign to "educate" us about how they are awesome and consumer-friendly. I wonder how much of the broadband market is a monopoly. Where I live, DSL not possible and Cox cable is my only option and thus I pay $50+ a month for a decent connection (not sure about DL speed today, but a few months back, it clocked about ~6M on average). I don't consider satellite an equivalent competitor nor the 3G/wireless cards that are prohibitively expensive for many and as stated in previous posts, silently capped… Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: stray on April 20, 2009, 02:03:08 PM if i was a bandwidth pig, which i am not, i'd still not settle for this shit simply because i wouldn't have to. there are alternative services available that cater to pigs. the whole idea of going along with it is just simply being submissive for the sake of it.
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Salamok on April 20, 2009, 02:15:44 PM I wonder how much of the broadband market is a monopoly. I would say most of the Areas in the US have a speed monopoly type of situation. 3-6mbs DSL isn't a competitor with 15mbs cable and that isn't a competitor with FIOS. Once docsis 3 and FIOS enter the same market the monopoly will be broken for awhile. Not saying docsis 3 >= FIOS but rather both blow what we have out of the water to the extent that who is faster wont matter as much as who is cheaper/dependable. FIOS will also have to overcome some of the install issues (maybe they have already?) sending a team to your residence for 1 or more days to hook you up isn't exactly cost efficient or confidence inspiring. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Cheddar on April 20, 2009, 03:42:53 PM Today, an internet connection is about as essential as a telephone. Bandwidth would never be an issue if the companies in charge of the infrastructure had been doing their fucking job in updating the hardware, instead of trying to sit on their thrones of Scrooge McDuck-esque profit and deign to "educate" us about how they are awesome and consumer-friendly. I sure would love to find out what type of internet service the upper-management of Time Warner have for personal use. :nda: Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Draegan on April 20, 2009, 04:56:43 PM http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/20/business/20isp.html?_r=1&ref=todayspaper
From today's paper. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Broughden on April 21, 2009, 07:54:48 AM http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/20/business/20isp.html?_r=1&ref=todayspaper From today's paper. From that article, specifically for people saying those who use more should pay more. And surprisingly or maybe not from an ISP.... “All of our economics are based on engineering for the peak hour,” said Tony Werner, the chief technical officer of Comcast. “Just because someone consumes more data doesn’t mean they drive more cost.” Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: SnakeCharmer on April 21, 2009, 08:14:13 AM I still can't figure out where to stand on this...
On one hand, it's a service/utility. If I use more of a service/utility (water), I pay more. I get that. But it's been a long time since my internet access was usage based and I've gotten accustomed to a flat rate. Spoiled, I suppose. Then again, I can't wrap my head around how someone downloading a shitton of media costs TW/Comcast/whomever any more money. It's not like there's sweatshop of elves peddling away on some sort of bandwidth producing stationary bike. Sure, it sucks for their neighbors, which sees their speeds plummet when Johnny is downloading the Matrix Trilogy, all the Godfathers all at once, and a couple games for good measure. I'm all for combating piracy in any way possible. But I'm not sure this is the best way to do it. The minute they come out with some digital signature that transmits your name, date of birth, and what you had for breakfast that morning will be made obsolete/hacked by some 12 year old in his room 15 seconds after it's introduced. Part of me thinks its a losing battle and the money would be best spent elsewhere. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Draegan on April 21, 2009, 08:27:29 AM It has nothing to do with Piracy it's all about getting more money.
Plus, according to that article if I remember correctly, the cost of hardware is decreasing but cost of service is increasing? Money grab. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: HaemishM on April 21, 2009, 11:00:23 AM I still can't figure out where to stand on this... On one hand, it's a service/utility. If I use more of a service/utility (water), I pay more. I get that. But it's NOT a utility like water where they are selling you a physical, tangible thing that is finite in inventory, like say water. Your usage of bandwidth cannot exceed their capacity to provide it - all that happens if you hit the max is that everyone on the network slows down. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Sky on April 21, 2009, 11:22:49 AM Which would actually begin to make a case for metered use, since you're negatively impacting users who may not have the hog needs. So I am playing EQ2, paying the same as you, but I'm getting some packet loss and slow down because you're torrenting a whole pile of shit. As a customer I would want to pay less vs the person who is degrading the whole neighborhood.
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Samwise on April 21, 2009, 11:32:49 AM Which would actually begin to make a case for metered use, since you're negatively impacting users who may not have the hog needs. So I am playing EQ2, paying the same as you, but I'm getting some packet loss and slow down because you're torrenting a whole pile of shit. As a customer I would want to pay less vs the person who is degrading the whole neighborhood. It should take more than one neighbor torrenting a whole pile of shit to affect you, though. As has been pointed out, concurrent usage during peaks is what produces slowdowns. Torrents and similarly intelligent downloading software use most of their bandwidth during non-peak times since they tend to run in the background and throttle themselves down when the computer is in actual use (peak times). Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Salamok on April 21, 2009, 11:35:37 AM Which would actually begin to make a case for metered use, since you're negatively impacting users who may not have the hog needs. So I am playing EQ2, paying the same as you, but I'm getting some packet loss and slow down because you're torrenting a whole pile of shit. As a customer I would want to pay less vs the person who is degrading the whole neighborhood. But it only has a negative impact when you hit the peak. They do throttle bandwidth to the point where a single person isn't going to have a noticeable effect on your entire neighborhood unless they have already oversold the bandwidth in the 1st place. During peak times I am usually (along with everyone else) doing normal web activities, I only turn the torrents on when I am NOT actively using my computer (pretty much non peak times). Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: HaemishM on April 21, 2009, 12:25:28 PM And if they've oversold the bandwidth for that area, the costs seem to be rapidly decreasing to upgrade the bandwidth in that particular area. Yet the consumer price for a Net connection is increasing as our speed increases. In other words, we're getting screwed.
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Trippy on April 25, 2009, 08:00:44 PM Time Warner Shutting Off Austin Accounts For Heavy Usage (http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/04/25/1237215) :awesome_for_real:
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: SnakeCharmer on April 25, 2009, 08:39:09 PM Yikes.
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Cheddar on April 26, 2009, 07:27:22 AM The indication I am getting is that TW pretty much owns Austin. Doesn't look like FiOS will be availible before middle of the next decade (if ever).
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: ahoythematey on April 26, 2009, 08:14:12 AM That settles it. Time for some property damage and vandalism.
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Righ on April 26, 2009, 09:45:51 AM I sure would love to find out what type of internet service the upper-management of Time Warner have for personal use. You're making the mistake of thinking telecoms executives live in the same world that we do. Such concerns do not bother them while they drink gin slings on the deck of their superyacht while moored off the coast of Palma. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Merusk on April 26, 2009, 11:08:01 AM I sure would love to find out what type of internet service the upper-management of Time Warner have for personal use. You're making the mistake of thinking No Board-level executive for any of the home builders I've known or worked for has lived-in a home built by their company. I imagine it's like that for plenty of other industries. They sell stuff to us plebeians, not for their consumption. They're farr to refined for that. :why_so_serious: Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: MahrinSkel on April 26, 2009, 01:51:21 PM Please, explain to me again how foolish I was to change ISP's and dump TWC.
--Dave Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: schild on April 26, 2009, 01:52:17 PM Please, explain to me again how foolish I was to change ISP's and dump TWC. --Dave >_< Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Triforcer on April 26, 2009, 06:05:17 PM Time Warner Shutting Off Austin Accounts For Heavy Usage (http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/04/25/1237215) :awesome_for_real: Heh. What an appropriately pissy response. "They can bully us into not charging you more, but they can't stop us from cutting off your service!" Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: ahoythematey on April 26, 2009, 07:59:50 PM I sure would love to find out what type of internet service the upper-management of Time Warner have for personal use. You're making the mistake of thinking telecoms executives live in the same world that we do. Such concerns do not bother them while they drink gin slings on the deck of their superyacht while moored off the coast of Palma. Well, my thinking was along the lines of, "Boy would it be awesome to find out that you were using a competitor's service despite having your own telecom company offering services in the same area." That would be assuming another company didn't have a stranglehold on the area... Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Cheddar on April 27, 2009, 04:40:57 AM Well, my thinking was along the lines of, "Boy would it be awesome to find out that you were using a competitor's service despite having your own telecom company offering services in the same area." That would be assuming another company didn't have a stranglehold on the area... This happens more often then you think. :) Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Cheddar on April 29, 2009, 06:29:44 AM Quote Time Warner Cable Inc., in its first earnings report since its spinoff from Time Warner, said its profit fell 32% on restructuring costs and other special items compared with a year-ago quarter Hahahahahaha (http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/Time-Warner-Cable-profit-falls/story.aspx?guid=%7B2AD29911-71F5-482F-AD23-0AD4CB294EB5%7D) Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: shiznitz on April 29, 2009, 11:30:42 AM Quote Time Warner Cable Inc., in its first earnings report since its spinoff from Time Warner, said its profit fell 32% on restructuring costs and other special items compared with a year-ago quarter Hahahahahaha (http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/Time-Warner-Cable-profit-falls/story.aspx?guid=%7B2AD29911-71F5-482F-AD23-0AD4CB294EB5%7D) The shares are up 13% today so the execs are laughing with you. Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Samwise on May 01, 2009, 11:05:16 AM (http://www.penny-arcade.com/images/2009/20090501.jpg)
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Sheepherder on May 03, 2009, 11:49:07 AM Methinks politicians are going to wrap their hands around TW's nuts and twist, unless there is a contractual expectation that users not exceed a certain amount of data sent/received.
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: MahrinSkel on May 03, 2009, 08:31:45 PM There is boilerplate in the service contract that basically says that TWC doesn't guarantee a damned thing except that they'll cash your checks, they aren't actually under any obligation to provide you with actual services in exchange, so anything they allow you to do is pure bonus. Where state laws have been found to contradict that waiver, they've long since gotten the laws changed.
--Dave Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: gryeyes on May 03, 2009, 08:49:26 PM So a corporation can receive funds specifically for a service, yet have the contract absolve them of all responsibility in providing that service? I have a vague notion that is not legal.
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: HaemishM on May 04, 2009, 11:06:49 AM It's only not legal if you can afford to challenge it in court.
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: SnakeCharmer on May 04, 2009, 01:39:15 PM So a corporation can receive funds specifically for a service, yet have the contract absolve them of all responsibility in providing that service? I have a vague notion that is not legal. You're in no way obligated to pay for said service...Or rather, the chance the service might actually work as advertised :uhrr: Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Trippy on June 01, 2009, 04:25:39 AM TW changes their ToS to allow them to charge you whatever they fucking feel like (http://stopthecap.com/2009/05/28/theyre-back-time-warner-cable-adds-cap-n-tier-language-to-subscriber-agreements/)
(okay not exactly but it sounded better that way) Quote 6. Special Provisions Regarding HSD Service (a) Description of HSD Service. (i) I acknowledge that each tier or level of the HSD Service has limits on the Maximum Throughput Rate at which I may send and receive data at any time, as set forth in the price list or Terms of Use, and that the Maximum Throughput Rate may be achieved in bursts, but generally will not be sustained on a consistent basis due to the nature of the Internet, the protocols used to transmit data to and from the Internet, and TWC’s facilities. I also understand that the actual Throughput Rate I may experience at any time will vary based on numerous factors, such as the condition of wiring at my location, computer configurations, Internet and TWC network congestion, the time of day at which I use the HSD Service, and the website servers I access, among other factors. Additionally, Throughput Rate may be affected by Network Management Tools, the prioritization of TWC commercial subscriber traffic and network control information, and necessary bandwidth overhead used for protocol and network information. (ii) I agree that TWC or ISP may change the Maximum Throughput Rate of any tier by amending the price list or Terms of Use. My continued use of the HSD Service following such a change will constitute my acceptance of any new Maximum Throughput Rate. If the level or tier of HSD Service to which I subscribe has a specified limit on the amount of bytes that I can use in a given billing cycle, I also agree that TWC may use technical means, including but not limited to suspending or reducing the speed of my HSD Service, to ensure compliance with these limits, and that TWC or ISP may move me to a higher tier of HSD Service (which may result in higher monthly charges) or impose other charges and fees if my use exceeds these limits. (iii) I agree that TWC may use Network Management Tools as it determines appropriate and/or that it may use technical means, including but not limited to suspending or reducing the Throughput Rate of my HSD Service, to ensure compliance with its Terms of Use and to ensure that its service operates efficiently. I further agree that TWC and ISP have the right to monitor my bandwidth usage patterns to facilitate the provision of the HSD Service and to ensure my compliance with the Terms of Use and to efficiently manage their networks and their provision of services. TWC or ISP may take such steps as each may determine appropriate in the event my usage of the HSD Service does not comply with the Terms of Use. I acknowledge that HSD Service does not include other services managed by TWC and delivered over TWC’s shared infrastructure, including Video Service and Digital Phone Service. http://help.twcable.com/html/twc_sub_agreement.html Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: Sky on June 01, 2009, 06:32:47 AM Could get interesting at the library.
Title: Re: Austin Internet Question, RE: TW is capping internet bandwidth in Austin. Post by: schild on June 01, 2009, 12:03:21 PM This explains the (real) mail I got from them offering me the plan I currently have at a lower speed for more money.
|