That sounds bad!!
Then on the other hand, would it be
1) all bandwidth used
2) only downlink
3) only uplink
If ISP's indeed are going to go this way, I have a gut feeling that
having the variable charge only on the uplink would make more sense and
would be accepted by consumers a bit better. (Consumers whom understand
the difference....) Or am I way off?
Then, when here in US the changes have been favorable to the
customers..... that would be extremely rare...
Petri
Chopin Cusachs wrote:
Maybe a solution is on the way. Time Warner is testing a scheme in
which customers would be billed on the bandwith they use, rather
than a flat fee. See http://tinyurl.com/2bo5av
Seems reasonable to me.
Choppy
At 04:06 PM 1/16/2008, Mat Branyon wrote:
Who is out to get who? I think the big motivator for these companies
would be to conserve bandwidth. Its a known fact that they oversell
their bandwidth (everyone shares the same pipe, no guarantee of the
speed you are paying for). So when it gets popular to share large
files, people might start noticing that they never get anything close
to the service they are paying for.
What they need to do instead of blocking things people want, is fork
up the infrastructure to support what people want.
People want more bandwidth.
If scientists can send dvds of data in seconds, why can't I stream dvd
quality video?
_______________________________________________
General mailing list
General@brlug.net
http://mail.brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/general_brlug.net
_______________________________________________
General mailing list
General@brlug.net
http://mail.brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/general_brlug.net
