Shaw charging overages, Telus is not - on CTV news.
View Single Post
January 27, 2011, 07:58 AM
Join Date: Feb 2007
Originally Posted by
As I have said before, I am completely for UBB but within limits.
Someone here mentioned that with Netflix's supposed 2GB / HD movie, a family would likely burn through their cap within a month. I beg to differ. Even if a movie was rented every second day, they'd hit 30GB per month. Most sensible internet packages I have seen offer 60-80 GB for a relatively reasonable price (under $60) and many also offer optional overage protection (on Bell it is $5/month for 40GB) and EVERY one offers easy, accessible monitoring tools.
I would say I lead a fairly "connected" lifestyle. Actually, make that a VERY connected lifestyle. I use Steam on a regular basis, have access to Hulu and Netflix US (being a member of the press has benefits) which I use quite a bit, my girlfriend uses Skype video streaming with her family every second night, we use a WiFi connected iPad to do a massive number of things, watching Youtube scrapbooking videos is an addiction for the GF, FTP services from manufacturers eat up a fair amount of bandwidth as well, etc, etc.
Looking at my usage last month (the highest within the last six months), we broke the 75GB barrier with 76.44 GB used. How a "normal" or even well connected family would need more than the 100GB packages (on Bell 75GB + 40GB overage protection) is absolutely beyond me. If an individual needs more than 120GB, they should be more than willing to pay the money for one of the ISP's small business services which regularly come with massive (if any) caps and firehose-like speeds.
The way I see this is pretty simple: big companies want to make money off the consumers' backs. That's true. However, a large number of people out there have some sort of entitlement complex that dictates they should be paying less for more. Many of those same people deftly dodge questions about what they are USING massive amounts of bandwidth for as well. ;)
I agree with this, generally. My problem is mostly with pricing plans which don't reflect costs to the company, or usability to the average user, or really anything useful.
I'll quote myself from a different forum on what I think would be a reasonable pricing plan:
Originally Posted by
Well, I'm not a big fan of caps, I think a setup would be nice where you pay a base cost, depending on the speed of your connection, with faster connections getting a better speed/$ cost, maybe as follows:
1mbit = $5
10mbit = $10
100mbit = $20
And then you pay for every gb you download, with each additional gb costing less. Something like Y = 0.75*(X^0.75) where X is the number of GB you download and Y is the dollar amount you pay in addition to the base cost, looks reasonable.
My System Specs
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Mars
Find all posts by Mars