Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Net Users Vent Frustration At Time Warner
news-record.com ^ | April 5, 2009 | Joe Killian

Posted on 04/06/2009 6:40:15 PM PDT by Reaganwuzthebest

Sue Polinsky had the first cable modem in Greensboro.

Back in the late 1990s, when the Web designer found she needed more Internet speed than a telephone or DSL line could provide, she was happy to pay a premium. She’s been a Time Warner Cable customer ever since — even upgrading to the business-class service to run her company, Tech Triad, from home.

But when she got wind of Time Warner’s plan to begin monitoring and capping how much data its Greensboro customers use, she said it could be summed up in one word.

“Greed,” Polinsky said. “That’s all it is.”

Time Warner has chosen the Triad area as one of four test markets for its new tiered pricing system. In the fall, new customers and those at the end of their contracts will get new plans that treat their Internet use much like cell-phone use. The company will begin charging users for all the data transmitted over their cable lines — everything from Web pages to photos, songs and videos.

The plans range from $29.95 to $54.90 a month and will limit usage to five, 10, 20 or 40 gigabytes of data per month. Going over those caps will cost $1 for each gigabyte.

“Even the highest cap of 40 gigs is just ridiculous,” Polinsky said. “They’re designed so that customers will go over.”

(Excerpt) Read more at news-record.com ...


TOPICS: Extended News
KEYWORDS: roadrunner; timewarner

1 posted on 04/06/2009 6:40:15 PM PDT by Reaganwuzthebest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Reaganwuzthebest

If TW goes with this nationally or in my area I’m gone. After eight years as a loyal customer I will not be told that my internet use is going be rationed in the future.


2 posted on 04/06/2009 6:40:33 PM PDT by Reaganwuzthebest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reaganwuzthebest

>After eight years as a loyal customer I will not be told that my internet use is going be rationed in the future.

Hmmm, maybe Ford and GM should adopt a similar charge-by-the-mile plan, that sounds great, right?


3 posted on 04/06/2009 6:43:47 PM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark

Wow...
Cap-and-Trade for the Internet...

Whooda thunk?


4 posted on 04/06/2009 6:46:50 PM PDT by DragonMarine (Capitalism works, but it has to be paid for. (From the halls of Montezuma...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: DragonMarine

>Cap-and-Trade for the Internet...
>
>Whooda thunk?

Obama.


5 posted on 04/06/2009 6:47:25 PM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark
maybe Ford and GM should adopt a similar charge-by-the-mile plan, that sounds great, right?

Get a load of this lame reply from a one Landel Hobbs:

long reply

When you go to lunch with a friend, do you split the bill in half if he gets the steak and you have a salad?

With ridiculous comments like that I'd say Landel is most likely looking for a job at General Motors. It sounds like he'd fit right in.

6 posted on 04/06/2009 6:51:39 PM PDT by Reaganwuzthebest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Reaganwuzthebest

Time Warner has, in essence, a monopoly. You could go with satellite internet, which is an alternative until it rains or snows, and you lose signal. Not to mention the initial cost of the modem. Or drop back to dial-up, which is only good for email anymore. :-(


7 posted on 04/06/2009 6:55:38 PM PDT by doc1019 (Idiocy is as Obama does)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Reaganwuzthebest

Well, “net neutrality” has something to do with it, too, in terms of the “plan” by some of these big companies supplying the ISP services, squeezing out the “Internet 1” — in place of “Internet 2”

Death of the Internet
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/june2008/120608_a_death.htm

And you can see some more information on “net neutrality”, on this thread where it was “beat to death”... LOL...

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2222481/posts?page=19#19

Here are some links to Net Neutrality, which has been argued about long before Obama. I’ve thought that the absence of “net neutrality” is what would *control* the Internet, rather than the current maintaining of it.

From Tim Berners-Lee (invented the World-wide Web in 1989)
http://dig.csail.mit.edu/breadcrumbs/node/144

Daniel J. Weitzner, Principal Research Scientist
MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory
The Neutral Internet: An Information Architecture for Open Societies
http://dig.csail.mit.edu/2006/06/neutralnet.html

General Wikipedia article on it...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_neutrality

A Net Neutrality FAQ
http://www.timwu.org/network_neutrality.html

A Google company statement on it...
http://www.google.com/help/netneutrality.html

Brief Wall Street Journal article on it...
http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20090402-713158.html

An older CNN article — Keep the Internet neutral, fair and free
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/06/09/newmark.internet/

That’s sort of a starter on it... LOL...

Without “net neutrality” you’re going to see more of this, and the squeezing out of the “first Internet” (that first link in this post) in place of the new “Internet 2” (which has been a work in progress for over a decade or more).

And also, without “net neutrality”, you’ll probably see site like this (i.e., Free Republic) squeezed out, too, eventually (not something happening very quickly, because of this, but eventually...).


8 posted on 04/06/2009 6:58:23 PM PDT by Star Traveler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: doc1019

We’ve got Verizon in the area and FiOs is on the way so that means for us the switch shouldn’t be too much of a problem. I do feel for those in Rochester and other cities where’s little competition.


9 posted on 04/06/2009 7:00:42 PM PDT by Reaganwuzthebest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Reaganwuzthebest

My guess is that she’s moving back to DSL.


10 posted on 04/06/2009 7:01:13 PM PDT by Zhang Fei
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reaganwuzthebest

THE sole purpose behind this, IMHO, is to limit file sharing.The only way around it is to purchase a large segment of their pipe, heavily load it with advertising, and open it up for ‘free”


11 posted on 04/06/2009 7:03:34 PM PDT by mo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reaganwuzthebest

I guess I’ll have to research DSL.


12 posted on 04/06/2009 7:04:36 PM PDT by CriticalJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reaganwuzthebest

I’m looking into ATT UVerse. A friend dumped Time Warner and went w/ ATT (2 mos.)and likes it.

Their phone, TV, internet pkg. is about the same price for pretty much identical items.

If you can scale down the internet from 6mbps to 3 or 1.5 the price drops accordingly.

Anyone have ATT UVerse?


13 posted on 04/06/2009 7:09:49 PM PDT by Vinnie (You're Nobody 'Til Somebody Jihads You)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vinnie

Oh, hurry, Mr. O! The government will save us!


14 posted on 04/06/2009 7:17:46 PM PDT by QBFimi (When gunpowder speaks, beasts listen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: mo
THE sole purpose behind this, IMHO, is to limit file sharing.With all due respect I think you are way off base.

What terrifies the telcos and cable companies are things like Hulu and Skype that threaten their lock on entertainment and communications.

The idea of caps is to force you back to TV "packages" available only from your friendly cable company and phone services only from your friendly local telco, both of whom have local government granted monopolies.

File sharing is a fleabite by comparison.

15 posted on 04/06/2009 7:33:37 PM PDT by Notary Sojac (Chains you can believe in...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: doc1019

I’ve had satelite internet for years, no other alternative where I live but it’s gotten progressively suckier. Hughes net has a cap of 425 MB of download a day, after that you have to wait for 24 hrs for the thing to reset. Also, they have severely oversold their broadband capacity so in the mornings the speed is O.K. but after 1:00 or 2:00 P.M. it slows dramatically until late evening. But that’s the trade-off for living in a less populated area. :)


16 posted on 04/06/2009 7:59:28 PM PDT by 05 Mustang GT Rocks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Vinnie
The problem with Uverse, is the pipe to you home. I think for most people it's still a DSL line (copper). I think they might be running, or starting to run, fiber in some of the more populated urban cities, but for most people it's still copper. Given the high bandwidth of HDTV, on top of internet, and phone service, it's a real skinny pipe.

I'm on comcast cable modem. DSL was not really an option for me as I was at the outer limits (too far from the CO) to make it viable.

17 posted on 04/06/2009 8:28:50 PM PDT by AFreeBird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Reaganwuzthebest
Time to start ad and Flash blocking again. If I have to pay per bit, advertisers sure as hell aren't going to be wasting my allotment. (Well, to be honest, I already block Flash when I run Firefox.) Also, Time Warner better have a way so that customers can track their usage during the month so they don't get a surprise in their bills.

This is to mainly stop people from watching video on the web. Even phone usage is relatively low bandwidth. If you download a full DVD from Netflix, Time Warner will charge you an extra $4 if you are over the limit. I bet that is pretty close to their pay-per-view price on the cable.

18 posted on 04/06/2009 8:29:36 PM PDT by KarlInOhio (No free man bows to a foreign king.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KarlInOhio
A good free program to monitor bandwidth usage is NetMeter v113, it's light and doesn't use much resources. In the last month I've personally gone through about 35gbs, which would be under their 40gb cap.

Now consider a family with teenagers and it's easy to see how ludicrous Landel Hobbs's comment was that those consuming over 40gbs monthly are "heavy" internet users. Within a year or two 100gbs will be considered light, that is if TW isn't allowed their rationing plan complete with gas gouges to go forward.

The whole thing is a greed scheme and I believe you to be absolutely correct, it's really about stopping Netflix and other upcoming video streaming competitors while forcing everyone back to traditional tv cable lines.

19 posted on 04/06/2009 8:41:40 PM PDT by Reaganwuzthebest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Reaganwuzthebest

“Greed,” Polinsky said. “That’s all it is.”

Gotta be a liberal. If they don’t give her what she wants for the price she wants, they must be greedy. It’s real simple. If you don’t want to pay what they are asking, then switch to a different provider. I dropped Time Warner like a hot potato when I found their service didn’t match their promises.


20 posted on 04/07/2009 7:24:25 AM PDT by yazoo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yazoo

The answer imo is more competition. The fact that TW is conducting their tests in areas where FiOS isn’t leads me to believe it’s because they know their plan isn’t popular at all.


21 posted on 04/07/2009 6:04:04 PM PDT by Reaganwuzthebest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Reaganwuzthebest

“The answer imo is more competition.”

That is always the solution. When cable first came out their prices were regulated since they had a monopoly on cable tv and I believe that is still the case, although I am not sure about internet through cable. In most cases the alternative to cable internet is DSL or FIOS.


22 posted on 04/08/2009 1:31:23 PM PDT by yazoo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Vinnie

I have it. ATT is very, very good in it’s web connections. I will have to agree with mo’ Freeper that the reason why I stuck with ATT is because they are the ONLY known ISP so far NOT to throttle connections when downloading, unlike Comcast and verizon.


23 posted on 04/25/2009 8:37:50 PM PDT by max americana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: max americana

Thanks. I’m going to check into it.


24 posted on 04/26/2009 5:10:16 AM PDT by Vinnie (You're Nobody 'Til Somebody Jihads You)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson