Log in

No account? Create an account
Time Warner shelving bandwidth caps! - Greg [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]

[ website | gregstoll.com ]
[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

[Links:| * Homepage * Mobile apps (Windows Phone, Win8, Android, webOS) * Pictures * LJBackup * Same-sex marriage map * iTunesAnalysis * Where's lunch? ]

Time Warner shelving bandwidth caps! [Apr. 16th, 2009|03:54 pm]
[Current Mood |impressedimpressed]

According to this statement! Although it sounds like they're still planning on it at some point in the future.

[User Picture]From: onefishclappin
2009-04-16 09:30 pm (UTC)
I'm still planning on leaving them.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: gregstoll
2009-04-16 09:46 pm (UTC)
Can y'all get Grande down there?
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: spamchang
2009-04-16 09:33 pm (UTC)
Austin, for its activist history and tech-savvy population, would be a terrible place to test such a practice. New York City might be a better one, at least, maybe the outskirts. But the notice has been given...TWC is very greedy.
(Reply) (Thread)
From: tehfanboi
2009-04-16 09:45 pm (UTC)
I'm glad it is on the shelf. On the one hand I don't mind the idea of a metered rate, but the numbers thrown around showing them 20x the industry average for metered rates was ridiculous. The shelving buys Jessica and I more time for actual high speed competition to enter our neighborhood. I've heard good thing about U-Verse so hopefully by the time TWC does metered take 2 we'll have actual options.
(Reply) (Thread)
From: taesmar
2009-04-16 11:01 pm (UTC)
I love it how they say that the customers were "misunderstanding" what they were planning to do. Uh, no we weren't. They were going to charge more. It's called math.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: wonderjess
2009-04-17 03:02 am (UTC)
Yay! Especially since if I'm understanding it right, it was going to hit Rochester really soon, and we don't seem to have any real competition for them up here...
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: winocas
2009-04-17 03:05 am (UTC)
Is there something about bandwidth limiting I'm not getting here? I mean, while it sounds bad, it sounds like they'd be guaranteeing that the bandwidth they advertise would be the one you get (and not just in spurts).
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: destroyerj
2009-04-17 05:15 am (UTC)
Bandwidth is a misnomer, since it implies "at a time." The plan was for a total usage cap, such that you could only up/download so many GB before having to pay overage fees for any further use (per month).

And while I'd say such caps shouldn't be implemented at all, at the very least, they shouldn't be implemented in such paltry amounts as Time Warner Cable was planning.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)