Time Warner Cable will experiment with a new pricing structure for high-speed Internet access later this year, charging customers based on how much data they download, a company spokesman said Wednesday.
The company, the second-largest cable provider in the United States, will start a trial in Beaumont, Texas, in which it will sell new Internet customers tiered levels of service based on how much data they download per month, rather than the usual fixed-price packages with unlimited downloads.
The company, the second-largest cable provider in the United States, will start a trial in Beaumont, Texas, in which it will sell new Internet customers tiered levels of service based on how much data they download per month, rather than the usual fixed-price packages with unlimited downloads.
Company spokesman Alex Dudley said the trial was aimed at improving the network performance by making it more costly for heavy users of large downloads. Dudley said that a small group of super-heavy users of downloads, around 5 percent of the customer base, can account for up to 50 percent of network capacity.
Dudley said he did not know what the pricing tiers would be nor the download limits. He said the heavy users were likely using the network to download large amounts of video, most likely in high definition.
It was not clear when exactly the trial would begin, but Dudley said it would likely be around the second quarter. The tiered pricing would only affect new customers in Beaumont, not existing ones.
Time Warner Cable is a subsidiary of Time Warner Inc., the world's largest media company.
News source: Yahoo! Finance
We get charged more for making more phone calls. Seems that this falls in line.
Also it will take time to see if the extra money taken from heavy users actually is put towards making the infrastructure better. Or if its taken to pad their wallets.
EDIT: Charter says they plan on doing this eventually, too. I will drop them like a hot potato...
source
Last edited by GreyWolfSC on 18 Jan 2008 - 17:09
EDIT: Charter says they plan on doing this eventually, too. I will drop them like a hot potato...
source
Bye-bye graphical internet. You're nothing but a burdon now.
In Canada every ISP has usage caps now, however they haven't fully implemented the charges yet with Rogers.
In time the excuse will be what the story says for all ISPs or to conserve bandwidth blah blah blah.
In Canada every ISP has usage caps now, however they haven't fully implemented the charges yet with Rogers.
In time the excuse will be what the story says for all ISPs or to conserve bandwidth blah blah blah.
http://www.teksavvy.com/
I hear there sweet
In Canada every ISP has usage caps now, however they haven't fully implemented the charges yet with Rogers.
In time the excuse will be what the story says for all ISPs or to conserve bandwidth blah blah blah.
Then that day would be a black day for the internet.
I left TWC over two years ago and I will never go back for any reason.
And isn't cable shared between customers up to a certain point?
I never could download anywhere NEAR 100GB or more monthly anyhow.
I'd definitely be more willing to use an ISP that scales the fee according to how much has been downloaded, than an ISP that places invisible caps without acknowledging that it does so in an upfront manner.
It'd **** me off, but... Man that makes sense.
Help Charlotte!!!!!
Depending on how they do this, I might just leave for DSL, which is something I never thought I would hear myself say.
Here I was hoping for a speed boost like many other TWC areas are getting...
fact is you just can't transfer hundreds of gigs or terabytes for a generally low price.
try renting a server from a hosting company and observe how if you want essentially unlimited transfer it'll cost many hundreds or thousands of pounds/dollars/whatever per month. not £25/$50 or whatever most home users fork out
fact is you just can't transfer hundreds of gigs or terabytes for a generally low price.
try renting a server from a hosting company and observe how if you want essentially unlimited transfer it'll cost many hundreds or thousands of pounds/dollars/whatever per month. not £25/$50 or whatever most home users fork out
no true, I have unlimmited download bandwidth on my server and pay $7 a month. They think that this is going to be a way to curb people from overutilization of a network they advertise for that doesnt have the capacity they are promising.
The problem is that they are spending so much money on sending techs out for calls like "My internet is slow" when they should be spending that money on upgrading their networks. Cable companies over sell and under deliver, its been that way for years and they are just catching on to the fact that they cannot meet their customers' demands
fact is you just can't transfer hundreds of gigs or terabytes for a generally low price.
try renting a server from a hosting company and observe how if you want essentially unlimited transfer it'll cost many hundreds or thousands of pounds/dollars/whatever per month. not £25/$50 or whatever most home users fork out
no true, I have unlimmited download bandwidth on my server and pay $7 a month. They think that this is going to be a way to curb people from overutilization of a network they advertise for that doesnt have the capacity they are promising.
The problem is that they are spending so much money on sending techs out for calls like "My internet is slow" when they should be spending that money on upgrading their networks. Cable companies over sell and under deliver, its been that way for years and they are just catching on to the fact that they cannot meet their customers' demands
yea...try using it to "unlimited" levels. chances are theres a nicely worked statement somewhere in the terms or a fair usage policy will apply basically meaning it won't be anywhere close to unlimited. fact is it's not sustainable to provide huge amounts of bandwidth for each person on the network. the companies would simply go bust or be forced to charge far higher fees than present and neither of those propositions is that appealing to either the provider or the customer. so you get this half-way house where the fees are kept sensible and the transfers allowed is also, generally, kept sensible too.
would be great if there was a 10 lane motorway all the way from my home to my work as that would mean i'd never get stuck in a jam ever but then it would cost a fortune to build and then maintain it so we just have to make the best of what is already there and plan accordingly. same will apply to networks...they just can't run 24/7 * millions of customers * whatever high speed upgrade they're on this year. instead you make do with the maximum speed in bursts when you need it and get to transfer your piece of the pie. not a whole pie for each person...
'nuff said.
I have a close friend who works at TWC as a top level admin who tells me they have an upgrade in place for roadrunner but it will be 2 years before they implement it.
Another friend who does the house call thing for them says he has seen cable dated 1975 in this area.
Not only does the roadrunner suck but the hi-def sucks too, in the late evening the picture starts looking grainy and scenes with a lot of action get real blocky and sometimes stop altogether for a second or two.
It is absolutely pitiful, the only reason I have stayed with them is due to the fact I get an uncapped cable modem, digital phone service (which sucks just as bad in the evenings) 2 premium channels plus all the digital content and dvr for $89 a month, as soon as the start capping stuff I am pulling the plug, enough is enough.
I have a close friend who works at TWC as a top level admin who tells me they have an upgrade in place for roadrunner but it will be 2 years before they implement it.
Another friend who does the house call thing for them says he has seen cable dated 1975 in this area.
Not only does the roadrunner suck but the hi-def sucks too, in the late evening the picture starts looking grainy and scenes with a lot of action get real blocky and sometimes stop altogether for a second or two.
It is absolutely pitiful, the only reason I have stayed with them is due to the fact I get an uncapped cable modem, digital phone service (which sucks just as bad in the evenings) 2 premium channels plus all the digital content and dvr for $89 a month, as soon as the start capping stuff I am pulling the plug, enough is enough.
really...like 30 year old cable? that's almost shocking...not
the copper cable from BT to my house is from at least 1970 as thats when the house was built.
i've no doubt some of the stuff under the UK's streets is from not long after the war...
And no they dont use this 'extra' money from heavy users to improve the system. As stated only 5% use these amounts so you only get a higher profit from 5% not everyone.
Welcome to the fun of being shaped!!
riiiiight
bad move
They should base it on complaints vs their statistics
What's wrong with speed limited packages? Heavy downloaders will go for the high-speed ones and casual users will always pick the low-speed ones.
What's wrong with speed limited packages?
There is nothing wrong with them. Time Warner doesn't give a flying **** about what's wrong or right, they are only interested in extracting as much $$$ from you as they can get away with.
I don't think there's a singly unlimited plan available at at a decent price.
Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!
Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.