Menu

Home › Forums › Other › OT – Download everything now before Time Warner raises unlimited Internet to $150/month

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 56 total)
1 2 3 4
  • Author
    Posts
  • April 10, 2009 at 4:29 PM #15464
    equalizer
    Participant

    Tiered pricing is coming. Makes business sense, why should TW subsidize unlimited Apple HD movie downloads, Google youtube, etc?

    Cox has 150Gb/mo limit, ATT 120Gb limit, but TW is starting out with much lower limits.

    Road Runner Lite, Basic, Standard and Turbo packages will include expanded bandwidth caps to 10, 20, 40 and 60 GB, respectively, for the same price. Overage charges will be $1 per GB per month.

    • A new 100 GB Road Runner Turbo package will be added, offering speeds of 10 MB/1 MB for $75 per month. 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,” Hobbs added.

    http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/04/time-warner-cable-to-press-stop-questioning-our-caps.ars

    April 10, 2009 at 5:36 PM #379030
    an
    Participant

    TW is not subsidizing apple HD, Youtube, etc. We pay TW for the service to access interest at a certain speed. What we do with it shouldn’t be of their concern and it wasn’t until now. They’re only able to do this because of the duopoly that the government let them operate in. This is pure ridiculousness and customers do not have a say in this. What good is a fast internet if you’ll be maxing out your usage all the time and end up paying up the a$$ for extra bandwidth.

    BTW, videos are not the only thing you can download/upload on the internet. There are such things as OS, updates for software, backing up your data to the cloud, etc.

    April 10, 2009 at 5:36 PM #379654
    an
    Participant

    TW is not subsidizing apple HD, Youtube, etc. We pay TW for the service to access interest at a certain speed. What we do with it shouldn’t be of their concern and it wasn’t until now. They’re only able to do this because of the duopoly that the government let them operate in. This is pure ridiculousness and customers do not have a say in this. What good is a fast internet if you’ll be maxing out your usage all the time and end up paying up the a$$ for extra bandwidth.

    BTW, videos are not the only thing you can download/upload on the internet. There are such things as OS, updates for software, backing up your data to the cloud, etc.

    April 10, 2009 at 5:36 PM #379530
    an
    Participant

    TW is not subsidizing apple HD, Youtube, etc. We pay TW for the service to access interest at a certain speed. What we do with it shouldn’t be of their concern and it wasn’t until now. They’re only able to do this because of the duopoly that the government let them operate in. This is pure ridiculousness and customers do not have a say in this. What good is a fast internet if you’ll be maxing out your usage all the time and end up paying up the a$$ for extra bandwidth.

    BTW, videos are not the only thing you can download/upload on the internet. There are such things as OS, updates for software, backing up your data to the cloud, etc.

    April 10, 2009 at 5:36 PM #379486
    an
    Participant

    TW is not subsidizing apple HD, Youtube, etc. We pay TW for the service to access interest at a certain speed. What we do with it shouldn’t be of their concern and it wasn’t until now. They’re only able to do this because of the duopoly that the government let them operate in. This is pure ridiculousness and customers do not have a say in this. What good is a fast internet if you’ll be maxing out your usage all the time and end up paying up the a$$ for extra bandwidth.

    BTW, videos are not the only thing you can download/upload on the internet. There are such things as OS, updates for software, backing up your data to the cloud, etc.

    April 10, 2009 at 5:36 PM #379305
    an
    Participant

    TW is not subsidizing apple HD, Youtube, etc. We pay TW for the service to access interest at a certain speed. What we do with it shouldn’t be of their concern and it wasn’t until now. They’re only able to do this because of the duopoly that the government let them operate in. This is pure ridiculousness and customers do not have a say in this. What good is a fast internet if you’ll be maxing out your usage all the time and end up paying up the a$$ for extra bandwidth.

    BTW, videos are not the only thing you can download/upload on the internet. There are such things as OS, updates for software, backing up your data to the cloud, etc.

    April 10, 2009 at 6:08 PM #379669
    equalizer
    Participant

    [quote=AN]TW is not subsidizing apple HD, Youtube, etc. We pay TW for the service to access interest at a certain speed. What we do with it shouldn’t be of their concern and it wasn’t until now. They’re only able to do this because of the duopoly that the government let them operate in. This is pure ridiculousness and customers do not have a say in this. What good is a fast internet if you’ll be maxing out your usage all the time and end up paying up the a$$ for extra bandwidth.

    BTW, videos are not the only thing you can download/upload on the internet. There are such things as OS, updates for software, backing up your data to the cloud, etc.[/quote]
    The cable monopoly is the problem. Add in the terrible decision (for users) by ATT in San Diego to put in Uverse instead of true fiber to the home like Verizon in Riverside. Wherever TW competes with FIOS, speed has gone up and price as stayed the same.

    However, if data usage keeps growing there could be bottlenecks without upgrades. Should every user pay for that? Should the person reading email using 1Gb/month subsidize some people I know who are downloading 150Gb/month?

    The big problem I see is the low limits proposed by TW compared to Cox.

    April 10, 2009 at 6:08 PM #379545
    equalizer
    Participant

    [quote=AN]TW is not subsidizing apple HD, Youtube, etc. We pay TW for the service to access interest at a certain speed. What we do with it shouldn’t be of their concern and it wasn’t until now. They’re only able to do this because of the duopoly that the government let them operate in. This is pure ridiculousness and customers do not have a say in this. What good is a fast internet if you’ll be maxing out your usage all the time and end up paying up the a$$ for extra bandwidth.

    BTW, videos are not the only thing you can download/upload on the internet. There are such things as OS, updates for software, backing up your data to the cloud, etc.[/quote]
    The cable monopoly is the problem. Add in the terrible decision (for users) by ATT in San Diego to put in Uverse instead of true fiber to the home like Verizon in Riverside. Wherever TW competes with FIOS, speed has gone up and price as stayed the same.

    However, if data usage keeps growing there could be bottlenecks without upgrades. Should every user pay for that? Should the person reading email using 1Gb/month subsidize some people I know who are downloading 150Gb/month?

    The big problem I see is the low limits proposed by TW compared to Cox.

    April 10, 2009 at 6:08 PM #379501
    equalizer
    Participant

    [quote=AN]TW is not subsidizing apple HD, Youtube, etc. We pay TW for the service to access interest at a certain speed. What we do with it shouldn’t be of their concern and it wasn’t until now. They’re only able to do this because of the duopoly that the government let them operate in. This is pure ridiculousness and customers do not have a say in this. What good is a fast internet if you’ll be maxing out your usage all the time and end up paying up the a$$ for extra bandwidth.

    BTW, videos are not the only thing you can download/upload on the internet. There are such things as OS, updates for software, backing up your data to the cloud, etc.[/quote]
    The cable monopoly is the problem. Add in the terrible decision (for users) by ATT in San Diego to put in Uverse instead of true fiber to the home like Verizon in Riverside. Wherever TW competes with FIOS, speed has gone up and price as stayed the same.

    However, if data usage keeps growing there could be bottlenecks without upgrades. Should every user pay for that? Should the person reading email using 1Gb/month subsidize some people I know who are downloading 150Gb/month?

    The big problem I see is the low limits proposed by TW compared to Cox.

    April 10, 2009 at 6:08 PM #379045
    equalizer
    Participant

    [quote=AN]TW is not subsidizing apple HD, Youtube, etc. We pay TW for the service to access interest at a certain speed. What we do with it shouldn’t be of their concern and it wasn’t until now. They’re only able to do this because of the duopoly that the government let them operate in. This is pure ridiculousness and customers do not have a say in this. What good is a fast internet if you’ll be maxing out your usage all the time and end up paying up the a$$ for extra bandwidth.

    BTW, videos are not the only thing you can download/upload on the internet. There are such things as OS, updates for software, backing up your data to the cloud, etc.[/quote]
    The cable monopoly is the problem. Add in the terrible decision (for users) by ATT in San Diego to put in Uverse instead of true fiber to the home like Verizon in Riverside. Wherever TW competes with FIOS, speed has gone up and price as stayed the same.

    However, if data usage keeps growing there could be bottlenecks without upgrades. Should every user pay for that? Should the person reading email using 1Gb/month subsidize some people I know who are downloading 150Gb/month?

    The big problem I see is the low limits proposed by TW compared to Cox.

    April 10, 2009 at 6:08 PM #379319
    equalizer
    Participant

    [quote=AN]TW is not subsidizing apple HD, Youtube, etc. We pay TW for the service to access interest at a certain speed. What we do with it shouldn’t be of their concern and it wasn’t until now. They’re only able to do this because of the duopoly that the government let them operate in. This is pure ridiculousness and customers do not have a say in this. What good is a fast internet if you’ll be maxing out your usage all the time and end up paying up the a$$ for extra bandwidth.

    BTW, videos are not the only thing you can download/upload on the internet. There are such things as OS, updates for software, backing up your data to the cloud, etc.[/quote]
    The cable monopoly is the problem. Add in the terrible decision (for users) by ATT in San Diego to put in Uverse instead of true fiber to the home like Verizon in Riverside. Wherever TW competes with FIOS, speed has gone up and price as stayed the same.

    However, if data usage keeps growing there could be bottlenecks without upgrades. Should every user pay for that? Should the person reading email using 1Gb/month subsidize some people I know who are downloading 150Gb/month?

    The big problem I see is the low limits proposed by TW compared to Cox.

    April 10, 2009 at 8:09 PM #379329
    Coronita
    Participant

    Glad I switched to ATT uverse. Time Warner blows. I’ve been pretty happy with my TV service and internet service

    I just have to watch out how much porn I download. Just kidding.

    April 10, 2009 at 8:09 PM #379555
    Coronita
    Participant

    Glad I switched to ATT uverse. Time Warner blows. I’ve been pretty happy with my TV service and internet service

    I just have to watch out how much porn I download. Just kidding.

    April 10, 2009 at 8:09 PM #379511
    Coronita
    Participant

    Glad I switched to ATT uverse. Time Warner blows. I’ve been pretty happy with my TV service and internet service

    I just have to watch out how much porn I download. Just kidding.

    April 10, 2009 at 8:09 PM #379055
    Coronita
    Participant

    Glad I switched to ATT uverse. Time Warner blows. I’ve been pretty happy with my TV service and internet service

    I just have to watch out how much porn I download. Just kidding.

  • Author
    Posts
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 56 total)
1 2 3 4
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.