Pay-to Play and the Tiered Internet 664
Crash24 writes "According to an article at The Nation, "industry planners are mulling new subscription plans that would further limit the online experience, establishing "platinum," "gold" and "silver" levels of Internet access that would set limits on the number of downloads, media streams or even e-mail messages that could be sent or received." " Tiered internet service may be inevitable folks. Brace yourself.
How things used to be. (Score:5, Informative)
So what's my motivation? (Score:4, Informative)
Ok, the industry goons look at the current model and say "we could make more money if we installed limits."
But wouldn't everyone have to do the same thing on the same day in order to make this work? If my cablemodem suddenly had these idiotic limits put on it I'd move to another service that very day.
How in the world could the industry get paying customers on a less capable model than what we already have? And how could they eliminate every single other alternative?
Internet goes down like Prodigy (Score:2, Informative)
This business model is exactly what killed it, everyone split shortly after the changes were made. You can expect people to not happily go along with it this time either.
I already have this... (Score:3, Informative)
In reality, the sweet spot is still the standard service. If I ever find myself needed an extra two or three Mbps of downstream transfer, it seems appropriate for me to pay an extra $10/month -- I'd obviously cease to be a typical "browsing and emailing" user.
We already have equitable tiered service (Score:5, Informative)
The problem with the proposed schemes is that they want to meter *applications*, not bandwidth and usage. This is just wrong for any application. But it especially burns for email given the spam problem. I just installed an authentication filter for a client with a business class Cox cable account. He was getting 65000+ emails per day per domain for 20 domains, eating 3MB download bandwidth (they were just getting appended to a rotating log file since he couldn't even begin to try to find the legit mail in all the crap). All but 20 emails per day per domain are forgeries (and now get rejected in SMTP envelope thanks to the filter). Imagine the ISP charging per email SYN packet. Talk about unjust. Most of the 20 are still spam, but at least those spammers will say who they are (and so are closer to a "cold call").
Do you mean.... (Score:5, Informative)
Just Like the Mobile Companies (Score:3, Informative)
And video confrencing.... (Score:5, Informative)
*Video confencing still has not taken off. Not because of general bandwidth limitations, but because of upload caps.
*Telecommuting is limited due to blocks, throttleing, or "accidental" outages on ports necessary for telecommuters. (Those of us that do telecommute often pay dramatically more to not have artifical barriers.)
I'm sure others could add to the list. It is the video confrencing that pisses me off. The upload speeds are always so much lower than the download speeds in just about every package that you need a package with way more download speed than necessary just to get sub par upload speeds.
I telecommute, and work on projects that very often require team coding. As in two people sitting together looking at the same screen. Screen sharing works, and we are very productive, but sometimes it would be a whole lot easier if I could see the other coders finger pointing at the screen, or piece of paper.
And, before the trolls come out and tell me I should just move closer to my work, and go into the office, keep in mind. My clients and I are saving money, reducing infrastucture costs, saving air quality, while at the same time improving my quality of life as well as that of my family. I think it is good for me, my son, and society that I get to keep my child home with me most of the time instead of shipping him off to spend more time with a daycare provider than he does with his family. I also have no desire to move myself and my family next to an industrial complex.
Re:Metered internet (Score:2, Informative)
For example, my "Pro" broadband package includes 30GB of combined transfer in a month. If I exceed that, I'm billed for each MB of overage. If I don't come close to using that for a few months in a row, I'll get the "Standard" package, with a 15GB cap, and pay less.
Re:Fight (Score:1, Informative)
Why's that?
Not everyone lives within reach of a DSL capable phone office. Not everyone lives in an area serviced by cable. Not everyone lives in reach of wireless. Hell, my parents have none of the above, and basically have to call long distance by modem, when the phone line is working.
Oh, here in Houston, we have "choice"... we can choose between SBC (motto: "Fiber? Try some metamucil!") and time warner (motto: "your internet must be broken. Please mail back your cable modem and we'll ship you a replacement. Please allow 6 to 8 weeks for delivery"). Both companies have their heads so far up their asses (sbc with absolutely NO network upgrades planned here ever, and twc with the shittiest equipment this side of China) that I'm glad that I can pay per kilobyte to use the internet from a verizon cellphone at 150kbps.
Re:Fight (Score:3, Informative)
So what happens when both companies start doign the same monopolistic grabbings? Under the law, you've got a choice; therefore, you have no leg to stand on.
Not entirely true. There is such a thing as "tacit collusion," which is can be illegal under U.S. anti-trust laws. The classic example is all four gas stations in a small town keeping their prices artificially high, without ever talking to each other about it.
Not that the current U.S. administration is ever going to address this kind of crap.