Charter tells FCC consumers want data caps

[Quinnell]

1 minute ago, Kawaii_Desu said:

Amazon's up coming low orbit satellite [...] We need to end the monopolistic abuse...

In my opinion, Amazon is not a good solution for anti-monopoly goals.  Honestly, I think they should be broken up.  Let Amazon keep its online retail platform but break off the physical stores, AWS, etc components to separate companies.  Just like Google, they're growing far too powerful.

[Izineth]

5 minutes ago, Donut417 said:

I dont think Id ever get that desperate. Sorry but I dont care what they say, its still satellite internet. Maybe not as crapy as Hughsnet and its competitor, but its still satellite internet. I dont see it being as good as 5G, or wired broadband. 

SpaceX claims 25 - 35 ms latency, as long as its 100 or less MS I would consider it a viable option.

  

5 minutes ago, Quinnell said:

In my opinion, Amazon is not a good solution for anti-monopoly goals.  Honestly, I think they should be broken up.  Let Amazon keep its online retail platform but break off the physical stores, AWS, etc components to separate companies.  Just like Google, they're growing far too powerful.

 

As for amazon I can agree with it some what, but at this point I just want viable options I'm sick of the you have one choice or nothing crap.

[Donut417]

2 minutes ago, Kawaii_Desu said:

claims 2

Key word there. CLAIMS. I won't believe it till I see it. 

[Trik'Stari]

*Has built a small shrine to Verizon FiOS box providing unlimited Gigabit internet*

 

I can't go back to slow internet, ever. Gigabit has freaking ruined me.

[Izineth]

3 minutes ago, Trik'Stari said:

*Has built a small shrine to Verizon FiOS box providing unlimited Gigabit internet*

 

I can't go back to slow internet, ever. Gigabit has freaking ruined me.

Charter offers "Gigabit" but its more like 900 down 30 up and it costs $130 per month and a mandatory $199 "install / upgrade" fee even if you do a self install.

100 down 12 up is $69.99 and 400 down 20 up is $89.99 a month with a $49 "install / upgrade" fee.

 

Heck I would be happy with a 50/50 connection as long as it has no caps.

 

It only becomes a even bigger problem as time goes on, 1 hour of netflix at 4K can suck down 7GB of data.

Games are freaking huge, Call Of Duty at this point is near 300GB if you own the whole game.

[Trik'Stari]

Just now, Kawaii_Desu said:

Charter offers "Gigabit" but its more like 900 down 30 up and it costs $130 per month and a mandatory $199 "install / upgrade" fee even if you do a self install.

100 down 12 up is $69.99 and 400 down 20 up is $89.99 a month with a $49 "install / upgrade" fee.

 

Heck I would be happy with a 50/50 connection as long as it has no caps.

 

It only becomes a even bigger problem as time goes on, 1 hour of netflix at 4K can suck down 7GB of data.

Games are freaking huge, Call Of Duty at this point is near 300GB if you own the whole game.

Mine is more like 500 down an 700 up, no caps. 500 down because that's the limit my roommate set on the local router. No line can pull more than half, which is fine by me.

 

I abuse it, regularly. Really the only time it's ever slow is on the far end of whatever I'm pulling up.

 

It kinds sucks though because I want to go back to living in a rural area, but gigabit just does not exist out there and no way in hell am I going to go back to 5 down 3 up.

[shermantanker]

Bullshit...

 

I live in an apartment complex and I have exactly two plans available to me... 100/10 for $70 with spectrum (charter) or 10/2 for $25 with frontier.

[steelo]

We are fortunate that a fiber isp came to town. Not everyone is so lucky. We had spectrum for awhile and service was a bad joke. 50 mbps advertised speeds and we were getting maybe 20 while paying $74 a month. We now have 100 mbps for $10 a month less

 

Spectrum in our area is so awful, the city is currently investigating them. Our former governor knew they were so bad, he spent a ton of money upgrading the states infrastructure to bring in fiber competition.

 

F spectrum.

[Quinnell]

1 minute ago, shermantanker said:

Bullshit...

 

I live in an apartment complex and I have exactly two plans available to me... 100/10 for $70 with spectrum (charter) or 10/2 for $25 with frontier.

Even within the same Provider, prices and speeds vary depending on location.  They adjust them based on competition and cost of living in the area.

[AlexOak]

12 minutes ago, shermantanker said:

Bullshit...

 

I live in an apartment complex and I have exactly two plans available to me... 100/10 for $70 with spectrum (charter) or 10/2 for $25 with frontier.

Spectrum (LA County) :

200/10 $45 (Promotional) then $70 (Who know if this will stick)

400/20 $65 (Promotional) then $90 (^)

 

All of these is due to COVID-19 and not really competition from frontier.

 

Frontier Fios (Fiber) "Not really reliable due to company mishandle and service outages" : 

50/50 29.99 (+9.99 router, 3.99 surge free + tax + install) without the install bs 44.xx

500/500 39.99 (+9.99 router, 3.99 surge free + tax)+ install total price without install bs 54.8x

 

Frontier is the worst offender in this category with all the BS they do in billing and lying to consumers.  

 

 

 

[circeseye]

central valley ,ca

charter 200/12 $75 unlimited
comcast cost more and capped

att cost more and really capped

 

if charter tried to push caps id raise hell. cant cap people that have had unlimited. grandfather clause

[CarlBar]

4 hours ago, Donut417 said:

Still way too much. And Im pretty sure that $30 is just a promo. As $25 used to be a promo before that. 

 

It thats around a 20 meg connection then after conversion that is competitive with UK pricing as of a few years ago, (and that was competitive AFAIK with the rest of europe, most of the rest of europe just had fibre allready)

[Tellos]

6 hours ago, Donut417 said:

Still way too much. And Im pretty sure that $30 is just a promo. As $25 used to be a promo before that. 

its not working at the company I can tell you thats jsut the direction its moving in. Why we went from 1tb to 1.2tb its why they lowered the maximum overage charges the trend is there its not going away. codes for these are not promos their jsut plain codes.

[Kisai]

8 hours ago, spartaman64 said:

source: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/08/charter-tries-to-convince-fcc-that-broadband-customers-want-data-caps/

 

As expected the arguments they provide is a load of bullcrap and as expected the time warner charter merger is going to hurt consumers. Also you know there is no competition when charter has to cite satellite ISPs as competition LUL.

Companies like this are just full of nonsense.

 

Nobody wants data caps, nobody wants a choice between "20GB of unlimited high speed internet and then slow unmetered internet that netflix has to downgrade to 480p" Like this utter garbage the wireless carriers pull and I'm sick of it.

 

Here is what should be happening.

1) All internet access should be unmetered, all you can eat.

2) If there needs to be a distinction between a cheap plan and an expensive plan, it should be based on the actual bandwidth (eg the size of the hose/straw) much like you pay for 100A or 200A electric service. There is no physical difference to your house regardless of what service you have, your appliances all behave the same, just that extra 100A service lets you run a hottub without making the wires to the house get too hot. The same goes for internet. If you want 1gbit service or 10gbit service, then pay for the physical installation once, and you're done, all internet usage after that is based on your 95% percentile bandwidth utilization (eg if you have 10gbit service but only use 1gbit 95% of the time, then you pay for the 1gbit service, despite having 10gbit service available.) If you go on vacation and your PVR decides to record 600 hours of TV shows in 4K, that's still only pulling maybe 50mbits during those 600 hours. It's just fairer to pay for how big the straw is, because that then punishes nobody. It also makes it so that you can have your zero-bandwidth security alarm and 4K-20camera security CCTV using cloud storage able to actually work without being punished for using cloud services.

3) This applies to wireless technology as well. LTE, 5G, and whatever else comes along, should be incentized to actually build their networks and not punish people for using it. Since wireless spectrum is far more limited than wired connections that means the ISP's really do need to build better networks instead of trying to punish everyone by offering them unmetered bandwidth but giving them only enough bandwidth to watch youtube in 144p.

 

[SoulTribunal]

The fact that they have the gall to say consumers enjoy data caps... either they are seriously out of touch with reality or they just as crooked as this paints them to be.

 

No one earnestly enjoys being limited in such a fashion, they make do. Especially considering how the internet is becoming more and more a necessity like water or electricity for a household.

 

Hmm I wonder what a power cap would be like? Could you imagine? The power at home just goes out suddenly and you get a message "You've used your 200kWH for the month, If you wish to be reconnected the rate is $15 for 50kWH".

[suicidalfranco]

Meanwhile somewhere in Europe:

 

Flat data plan (unlimited)

Fiber connection with speed up to 1Gbps

Reaches deep down the country side

At the low, low cost of 20 to 30 euros per month, with no hidden fees

 

US still living like it's 1992 

[SpaceGhostC2C]

"When there's only one candidate, there's only one choice"

- Elaine Marley, 1990.

[Ashley MLP Fangirl]

ok i might sound super uneducated here but are data caps still a thing in the USA? cuz in the netherlands where i live i haven't seen a home internet plan with a data cap ever in my life. ever. 

[Tellos]

8 minutes ago, Ashley said:

ok i might sound super uneducated here but are data caps still a thing in the USA? cuz in the netherlands where i live i haven't seen a home internet plan with a data cap ever in my life. ever. 

Yes Cell carriers still have absurd low ones in terms of GBs even on unlimited plans. ISPs are varied I work for one in question we do have them but ways out of them. Also Based on data and the market and what I see internally the company is moving off them in time. Eventually the caps will go up and up until they become pointless.

[maartendc]

8 hours ago, yolosnail said:

Laughs in European. 

 

Our ISPs got rid of data caps over a decade a go, and even when they had them they didn't actually care, you'd just get an email saying 'oi mate, mind not using so much, thx' and that was that. After a year of going over the data cap, they just removed the cap for free. 

 

Since I switched to an unlimited plan on my mobile, I've actually been using less data. When I was on a 30gb plan, I'd actively try and use the whole 30gb each month to get my moneys worth, now I settle around 18-20gb per month (2-3gb during lockdown lol), but I know if I need to download a large file when I'm out and about, I can!

Not every European country.

 

In Belgium, data caps are alive and well. Sadly.

 

This is because we have a duopoly of companies (Proximus and Telenet) who have no real competition. In the past they have been caught doing price-fixing deals to screw consumers over.

 

Their cheaper plans at 30 EUR per month actually have 100 GB data limit, and are only 50 Mbps!! Yes folks, this is western Europe we are talking about. For the "privilege" of getting the "fast plan" 100 Mbps and no data cap, you have to pay 50 a month. Pretty expensive compared to other European countries and the speed is laughable.

[Kisai]

8 minutes ago, Ashley said:

ok i might sound super uneducated here but are data caps still a thing in the USA? cuz in the netherlands where i live i haven't seen a home internet plan with a data cap ever in my life. ever. 

Data caps pretty much ended last year in Canada. After originally introducing them around the collapse of the "@home" network and the rise of rise of file sharing.

 

Just to be completely blunt, file sharing was around before the end of the "@home" network but bandwidth never reached practical usability for it until around 2006. Bandwidth caps came in primarily to punish those using bittorrent because for the first time it was possible to saturate 100% the upstream bandwidth.

 

Data caps are actually going away because it harms being able to use legal streaming services like Netflix and Disney+ , and streaming to youtube, twitch, picarto, etc requires something resembling symmetric bandwidth, and without unmetered bandwidth it discourages using these services entirely.

[Tellos]

5 minutes ago, Kisai said:

Data caps pretty much ended last year in Canada. After originally introducing them around the collapse of the "@home" network and the rise of rise of file sharing.

 

Just to be completely blunt, file sharing was around before the end of the "@home" network but bandwidth never reached practical usability for it until around 2006. Bandwidth caps came in primarily to punish those using bittorrent because for the first time it was possible to saturate 100% the upstream bandwidth.

 

Data caps are actually going away because it harms being able to use legal streaming services like Netflix and Disney+ , and streaming to youtube, twitch, picarto, etc requires something resembling symmetric bandwidth, and without unmetered bandwidth it discourages using these services entirely.

lets also remember every credible industry study points to growing data use speeding UP not slowing down any time soon.  So given the next several years of likely growth keeping lower caps will be for fools.

[Eaglerino]

9 hours ago, startrek03 said:

They not only want to have data caps, but also want to impede net neutrality. Geez. If the FCC allowed this, for one I'd be happy to not live in the US and for another the US would lose their last sympathy points, if there were any left of course.

 

I mean, who the f*** wants a limit enforced on them?! Who?

could just move to another part of the US... there's 57237 internet companies here, it's the crappy monopoly ones in populated cities you always hear about because there's more people to complain about

[Izineth]

8 minutes ago, Eaglerino said:

could just move to another part of the US... there's 57237 internet companies here, it's the crappy monopoly ones in populated cities you always hear about because there's more people to complain about

That is a LOT harder than you would think.  I was doing some research because I thought about moving to the other coast and I did some checking on who is the internet provider in the area I was looking and and you guessed it the only provider in that area was Charter as well.  The major companies are A LOT harder to escape than you'd think.

[maartendc]

13 minutes ago, Eaglerino said:

could just move to another part of the US... there's 57237 internet companies here, it's the crappy monopoly ones in populated cities you always hear about because there's more people to complain about

You realize people have a job, family, house, mortgage, etc. and can't just move on a whim or for something as idiotic as an ISP right?

 

Regulators need to step in. But if the regulators are populated by people from the industry... you got a problem.

 

Like this idiot