identitycrisis

I suppose this is a possibility... but what if thats no an option, these kinds of things are so ridiculous, hopefully they wont go through...

__________________
Laptop: Toshiba Qosmio F55-Q502

My old Opty 165 @ 3006mhz

Evostance

I doubt this will happen to be honest.

They want to move forward with media. Companies such as Netflix let you stream, you can rent films from iTunes, buy game downloads, download music etc etc all legally.

If they do this they are just crippling the advancement of media distribution

__________________

Redmist

Exactly.
They're trying to cash in now that they see how much we're using the internet. It isn't like Netflix and Steam are in cohorts with ISPs, the ISPs want to make extra money from people whom use the internet for most of their entertainment, as most people do nowadays.

__________________

Twinnuke

Welcome to the united states, we still use the imperial measurement system. We are not the same, and should never be.

__________________
Currently Wanting:
Bad Company 2
Mass Effect 2
FFXIII
My new RiG!

Mysterygoogle just sent me "a pterydactyl just touched me inappropiately"

R.I.P. Rocky the Ferret 3/27/08 =(

Phalanx1

Then you have a bunch of DVD's lying around which you wouldn't have if the ISP's didn't cap you.

In reality, I don’t think this will happen. It will piss off a lot of people. The wireless providers were smart to charge a boatload for texting (which uses barely any resources compared to voice calls) from the beginning whereas when the ISP’s try to slap on pricier services, people will take bigger notice.

__________________

0rion

Just downloading steam games would make me angry, because at a 5gb limit FOR A MONTH I would burn through in a few hours. I bought X3: Terran Conflict last week. It cost me $30 through steam, and the file was 7.8gb or something. You would NEED the 40gb plan or more for a LOT of users. It would totally kill sites like hulu which stream content.

@ Vulcan's comment.... Id rep you for it if I could. +1

__________________
Q6600 @ 4.0ghz validation
Best post EVAR

VulcanDragon

Agreed. I'm hopeful that Verizon expands into my city someday so I can get their FIOS offering.

I understand it perfectly, I run the datacenter (including the network) for my agency. I spend a small fortune on networking every year.

Frankly, I'm just tired of hearing it. It's rarely written in a joking manner, and it seems as if multiple people chime in with this little wisdom every time a thread about throttling is posted. It's every bit as annoying as "WoW sucks" in posts about WoW, or "play a real instrument" in Guitar Hero threads.

The "biggie" here is multiple points:

1. Paying for the Internet is not, and never has been, treated like a mobile phone contract. The business model around ISPs in the US has always been, from day one, unlimited usage for a flat rate. That cow was let out of the barn in the early 90s...to try and shove him back inside and expect him not to resist is silly.

2. They continue to advertise "unlimited" bandwidth, but that is not what they are actually selling. This is false advertising, plain and simple; and I can't believe the practice has not been identified as illegal and stopped.

3. They are doing this at a time when bandwidth requirements are actually increasing. Digital distribution is still in its infancy, and low caps have the very real potential to kill it off entirely. Want to download an HD movie to your X360 or PS3? Well, there's 15-20GB of your monthly allowance right there. Even with Comcat's generous cap this would hamper HD downloads, but with Time Warner's test model? Fuhgeddaboutit. If you even paid for the higher 40GB, you just blew half of it for one movie. (And it doesn't take a conspiracy theorist to postulate that companies with media interests, like Time Warner, would actually want digital distribution to fail. They want us to pay them for HD pay-per-view, not pay Microsoft or Sony for that same movie.)

To be clear, I am not against network management, and reasonable, temporary throttling of individuals that are killing overall performance during peak periods makes perfect sense. But I am against round-the-clock throttling whenever someone goes to some arbitrary percentage of their max bandwidth for a few minutes...people pay for higher bandwidth because they intend to do big downloads! If the network is not congested, those people should be able to access their full bandwidth regardless of what their point-in-time usage metric is. If you don't want people using that level of bandwidth, then don't sell that level of bandwidth as a product.

And I am absolutely against any kind of cap over which additional fees are incurred, particularly when the product is advertised as "unlimited"; although a more generous cap like Comcast's is far less likely to get my panties in a bunch.

__________________
Vulcan Dragon
Core i7 920 @ 3.7 GHz
Currently Playing: Galactic Civilizations II (PC); Call of Duty 4 (PC); Halo 3:ODST (X360); Rock Band: Metallica (X360); Dead Rising (X360); Mafia Wars (Facebook...DOH!!!!)
XBox Live Gamertag: Vulcan Draggon

losttsol

All this will do is push new avenues of distribution along quicker. People have options now and the cable companies will suffer a backlash. Competition will kill it.

__________________

gamer11200

Rogers doesn't throttle, that's Bell

__________________
My BOINC stats

Canadian OCN Club

Furai

Just stick with verizon. They don't attempt to pull any bull**** and never have.