Time Warner Cable: Consumers have no interest in data usage caps

The 90's called. They want their limited internet plans back.

talk about nickel & diming the consumer with the "broadband tax".

I understand wanting to charge 'power users' more for using more bandwidth, but with the faster broadband and all the (legal) online media downloading/streaming and gaming nowadays, it's very easy for everyday people to hit limits under 500GB/mo....esp. w/ multi-user households. I think if there's going to be caps, 400-500GB/mo. should be the minimum w/ maybe a $5-10/100GB overage charge rather than trying to charge by the GB.

These limits are low enough, that they will simply drive consumers right back into the arms of slower DSL. Who can afford $1 per GB, much less the $5 per GB they were trying in their past efforts (with a 1 GB cap!)?!

As soon as any ISP tries this crap with me, they're history. I prefer to pay rent and eat.

Geesh and I though Canada got robbed for bandwidth charges. I pay $1.50/GB when I go over my cap, but my cap is currently set to 275GB /month.

Originally posted by xnonsuchx:

---

I understand wanting to charge 'power users' more for using more bandwidth, but with the faster broadband and all the (legal) online media downloading/streaming and gaming nowadays, it's very easy for everyday people to hit limits under 500GB/mo....esp. w/ multi-user households. I think if there's going to be caps, 400-500GB/mo. should be the minimum w/ maybe a $5-10/100GB overage charge rather than trying to charge by the GB.

---

I absolutely agree with this. Fortunately for me, Comcast dropped their data cap (which had zero options for any overages BTW) over a year ago, but my poor gf has a different cableco who is strict about their 100GB/mo data cap (ALSO with no option for paying overage fees). I bought her a Roku 3 box for her upcoming birthday, but I fear that either we'll constantly have to monitor her data usage so her service isn't cancelled, or end up selling the box altogether. Her cableco is even more archaic than others in this respect, and I keep hoping every day that Comcast will buy them out...speaking of which, wasn't Comcast supposed to purchase TWC, or did that deal fall through and I happened to miss it?

Originally posted by Bozobub:

---

These limits are low enough, that they will simply drive consumers right back into the arms of slower DSL. Who can afford $1 per GB, much less the $5 per GB they were trying in their past efforts (with a 1 GB cap!)?!

As soon as any ISP tries this crap with me, they're history. I prefer to pay rent and eat.

---

Check my reply to xnonsuchx above, Bozo...you'd be gone already if you had my gf's cableco...

I call it: Creative Scam by corporate America !

Crime Warner is the absolute worst. Just raised my internet bill $10 a month a few months ago, and no wiggle room, since they monopolize the lines. My options are horribly slow DSL or mount another dish on the roof.

I miss the days of paying $30 cheaper for double the service from the cross-town monopoly, which was a lot more fair to their customers.

Originally posted by SProdigy:

---

Crime Warner is the absolute worst. Just raised my internet bill $10 a month a few months ago, and no wiggle room, since they monopolize the lines. My options are horribly slow DSL or mount another dish on the roof.

I miss the days of paying $30 cheaper for double the service from the cross-town monopoly, which was a lot more fair to their customers.

---

I don't know if they are the worst...there is Comcast after all. Of course Verizon is nothing but a bunch of terrible scumbags that happily give your info to the NSA...and FiOS is far better than Time Whiner. Most of the USA has broadband/cable monopolies created by government...and the government refuses to rein them in because they "don't want to interfere with the free market". Sadly, most cable companies just want to be slightly better than DSL and 4G cell phones...because that's their only competition (except satellite that has lots of other issues, including needing DSL for upstream).

I love how these internet companies can sell a pipe and a speed and then charge you for the content that comes down that pipe despite the fact that they do not own or have anything to do with that content. They act like they are supplying the content of what is on the internet which they are not. They are just supplying a pipe of a certain size and what the consumer puts through it should be their business.

I would love them to prove that it cost them more money for the consumer that uses less than 5GB per month compared to consumers that use more than 5GB per month. It is not like they are selling a consumable product like water, gas or electricity.

Free Wi-Fi is the way to go:
Update:
http://www.fiercewireless.com/tech/pres...oost-us-economy

Originally posted by KillerBug:

---

I don't know if they are the worst...there is Comcast after all. Of course Verizon is nothing but a bunch of terrible scumbags that happily give your info to the NSA...and FiOS is far better than Time Whiner. Most of the USA has broadband/cable monopolies created by government...and the government refuses to rein them in because they "don't want to interfere with the free market". Sadly, most cable companies just want to be slightly better than DSL and 4G cell phones...because that's their only competition (except satellite that has lots of other issues, including needing DSL for upstream).

---

Actually, 2-way satellite DOES exist (that doesn't need a wired line for the up side), but it's only marginally better than the alternative. Either way, the huge latency and insanely bad data caps of satellite relegates it to the "only if you gotta" category...

The TWC commericals show a family using the neighbors TWC via wifi... I can see the lawssuits now when the neighbors sue the leechers because they got billed for so much overage.

Originally posted by Bozobub:

---

Originally posted by KillerBug:

---

I don't know if they are the worst...there is Comcast after all. Of course Verizon is nothing but a bunch of terrible scumbags that happily give your info to the NSA...and FiOS is far better than Time Whiner. Most of the USA has broadband/cable monopolies created by government...and the government refuses to rein them in because they "don't want to interfere with the free market". Sadly, most cable companies just want to be slightly better than DSL and 4G cell phones...because that's their only competition (except satellite that has lots of other issues, including needing DSL for upstream).

---

Actually, 2-way satellite DOES exist (that doesn't need a wired line for the up side), but it's only marginally better than the alternative. Either way, the huge latency and insanely bad data caps of satellite relegates it to the "only if you gotta" category...

---

Yes, those do exist...but you generally get sub-4G speeds and pay by the MB...and the equipment cost is higher than that of some new cars.

Originally posted by KillerBug:

---

Yes, those do exist...but you generally get sub-4G speeds and pay by the MB...and the equipment cost is higher than that of some new cars.

---

I don't know about other ISPs, but my wife and I are friends with a couple that just recently ditched their 2-way satellite. They didn't have a per-MB charge when under their data cap, but their cap was also ridiculously low, on the order of 2-5 GB a month, or the like. It also wasn't particularly fast. After the cap, they did charge by the MB.

Download a digital copy of a game on xbone or ps4 and you're already 4 to 5x over the limit.

Originally posted by ddp:

---

talk about nickel & diming the consumer with the "broadband tax".

---

Gotta love the central government's "Net Neutrality " program. Definately consumer friendly

</sarcasm>