I don't like it - and with a 56 K line, I run close to 3GiB monthly myself I suspect.
They may be adopting this strategy since it will drive out high-volume users. >From a short-term viewpoint, this probably looks like a good deal to some of the services. Most likely, 20% of their users account for 80% of the bandwidth requirements they have upstream. If they lose a heavy user, they can add several more light users without paying to improve infrastructure. This makes sense for the companies that have inadequate infrastructure and are unwilling to improve it now. As a secondary effect, though, it's going to increase competition in the areas where they implement it. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ian Lalonde @ Roundtable Solutions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, 2002-05-18 06:09 Subject: RE: DSL charges based on monthly traffic > Sympatico Customer Service told me that there will be a higher priced > service shortly... About $70CDN for a max. of 10 Gig. Transfer a month. > > The current package will be $44.95/month, for 5 Gig, and 7.95 per gig > over. I'm already looking at an extra $25 this month... They are going > to charge this in advance also, based on the last 3 month usage! So even > if you stop any extra transfer now, you get charged on June 12 (or your > billing period) anyways. Rogers is sending similar letters out now also. > > It's a week into my billing period, here's my summary of usage: > > Bandwidth Activity Summary: > > 0.2 GB 5.2 GB > Total Upload Total Download > > Activity up to: 16-05-2002 > > Billing Period: 10-05-2002 to 09-06-2002 > Total Activity Over Plan Limit: 0.2 GB > Total Bandwidth Activity Cost: $ 1.59 > > Needless to say, my DSL service is changing Wed. to a local ISP. > > > This Is the letter I received from Bell Sympatico last week: > > Dear Valued Member, > > To keep pace with our customers' evolving Internet usage needs, > Bell Canada, like all Internet service providers, must continually > invest in expanding and upgrading our network. > > Effective June 12, 2002, your monthly rate for Bell Sympatico High > Speed Edition(TM) Internet service will allow 5 Gigabytes (GB) > download and 5 Gigabytes (GB) upload of bandwidth activity. > If your bandwidth activity exceeds either 5 GB download or 5 GB > upload, an additional charge of $7.95 per GB will be applied > to your Sympatico account. Based on your Internet activity > patterns over the past 3 months, this charge will probably not > affect you. > > AN EASY WAY TO MONITOR YOUR BANDWIDTH ACTIVITY > To give you the ability to monitor your monthly upload and > download bandwidth activity, we've created a simple tool: the > Bandwidth Activity Tracker. With this tool, you'll be able > to check how much bandwidth you've used. To get your bandwidth > activity update, just click on the link below. > http://memberservices.sympatico.ca/cgi-bin/hts.exe?Hit:x=5696&y=356&z=29 > 826182 > > Thank you for choosing Bell Sympatico Internet service. > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Jonathan Morton > Sent: Saturday, May 18, 2002 5:01 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: DSL charges based on monthly traffic > > > >Here's some food for thought. In Canada, there is > >news that the Sympatico DSL provider is going to > >charge based on the quantity of data transmitted/ > >received. Apparently, other access providers will > >follow suit in some fashion. > > The way most providers would tend to implement this, it's going to > suck tremendously for anyone who uses broadband because they need > more than a modem (read: almost everyone). My guess is, there'll be > no easy way to keep an eye on how much you're using, and no safeguard > to prevent you going over your limit. IOW, it's a price gouge. > > Now, some might ask how this is different from the "per-minute" > charges that voice telcos put on the line. The difference is that > the telco pre-charges you line rental, but post-charges you for > actual calls, and what's more, the basic pricing structure is made > well-known at sign-up time, and is easily comprehensible by the > average user. > > A typical broadband company is *currently* selling a fixed line > rental and no bandwidth charges - what do they do with their existing > customers? Change the contract? Kick them off and wait for them to > sign up again? How do you expect an average user to monitor how much > bandwidth they're using, when they like to teleconference, > telecommute, and look at movie trailers before they see the real > thing? The first thing they know, they're getting a bill from the > cable company that's several times what they expected, and find > they've been pre-charged the same amount for the following month too. > > I wonder if most people here realise how small 30GB per month > actually is. Most users certainly don't. And 30GB per month is > probably at the high end of what a domestic cable company will want > to offer. I would put it as mid-range for a user's actual needs, > especially given the broadband companies' advertising claims that > would encourage the vision of a "media-enabled" Internet. > > If they bothered to use the traffic-shaping or QoS features they > *should* already have in their network in an intelligent manner, they > could simply start throttling users who are approaching their limits, > effectively preventing them from exceeding the limits, while giving a > cue that this is happening. This would be a great deal fairer on > users, while still having the tiered price structure that I agree is > necessary for them. It would also be a neat solution to the > bandwidth-hog problem. > > >This news sucks for > >those who work from home using interfaces such > >as exceed or vnc. Alot of the data isn't real files > >so much as graphical updates. > > As far as a network is concerned, graphics updates, software files, > pr0n etc. are just packets. Lots of big packets. Online gaming is > lots of small packets too. Don't expect an ISP to differentiate > between them. > > >Just wondering > >what more experienced/knowledgeable users > >think about the end effect on users. > > If broadband wasn't an unregulated monopoly in many areas, they'd > already have implemented a QoS system like the throttling I mentioned > above. It's simply good customer service to protect the many > ordinary users from the few bandwidth-hogs. The technology is most > definitely there, it's just that corporates seem to forget how to use > it. > > If something like this happened over here, we'd be off to the Office > of Fair Trading or the Telecommunications Watchdog in arms. Right > now, we simply have tiers based on line contention and overall > bandwidth caps (set 24/7 at the modem) on most broadband ISPs, which > is fine by me. > > -- > -------------------------------------------------------------- > from: Jonathan "Chromatix" Morton > mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (not for attachments) > website: http://www.chromatix.uklinux.net/ > geekcode: GCS$/E dpu(!) s:- a21 C+++ UL++ P L+++ E W+ N- o? K? w--- O-- > M++$ > V? PS PE- Y+ PGP++ t- 5- X- R !tv b++ DI+++ D G e+ h+ r++ > y+(*) > tagline: The key to knowledge is not to rely on people to teach you it. > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the line: > 'unsubscribe vnc-list' in the message BODY See also: > http://www.uk.research.att.com/vnc/intouch.html > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the line: > 'unsubscribe vnc-list' in the message BODY > See also: http://www.uk.research.att.com/vnc/intouch.html > --------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the line: 'unsubscribe vnc-list' in the message BODY See also: http://www.uk.research.att.com/vnc/intouch.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------
