[PCWorld]

Post your comments for FCC Urged to Investigate Internet Providers' Netflix Tax--er, Broadband Caps here

[waldojim]

NOW you all get it. It isn't just nerds or 'power users' chewing up bandwidth...

Lets hope it isn't too late to do something about it.

[foolishfish]

The bull-ony reason given bt AT&T was that 2% of users use 90% of the bandwidth.
Now we hear the truth, and it sure wasn't from AT&T.

[WassonC6vep]

Please, As a rural user i have been hoping for an investigation for many years. Thanks for this report!

[PuzantKartachian1a1f]

This really needs to be done.

[AlexHumva]

Thing that people don't take into account is Youtube; Netflix chews through data, yes, but Youtube does it just as well. I have several Let's Plays I watch; they run about twenty minutes each episode, and they get updated daily. I watch a good four-five of them every day, and then end the day with a movie. So not only am I using Netflix, but I'm streaming Youtube as well, which all but doubles my output.

And that's not even taking into account me downloading movies, games, or music -legally, I assure you-. Don't get me wrong, people who download a ton should cost more than people who don't. But that's the thing about bandwidth; does your grampa who reads his e-mail need a fifty megabit connection? No, he can do just fine on a three megabit, which nowadays costs in the area of twenty dollars a month. If you're a massive downloader, you're going get a faster connection, and thus more expensive.

Bandwidth has been working for the last decade; the change to capped data plans is simply laziness on AT&T's part for not keeping with the times and upgrading their cables. Yes, it's expensive, but tell me, if we used that philosophy, why should we ever gone to cable? I mean, we had dial-up, why did we need to lay all that expensive internet cable down? We should all be using a hundred kilobit connection.

Verizon nearly bankrupted themselves laying down fiber, but they did it too fast; other companies did the smart thing and spread the cost out, at a rate that benefited both them and the consumer.

AT&T, though? They're just being plain lazy.

[ChadWatson3w9m]

This is exactly the reason I have been opposed to these limits. They will stifle innovation on the Internet.

I don't really think that Netflix is the problem for these cable companies. The problem is that they don't offer competitive prices. That's the point of the free market. I can watch unlimited movies on Netflix for $8 a month, but if I want to rent a movie on DirectTV, it costs $5 or $6 EACH. After two movies I've already spent more. Perhaps they shouldn't be so greedy and more people would rent movies from them.

[lorax1284]

I don't even object to overage charges... but gouging should be illegal (yes, I mean federally mandated price caps! How communist of me!)

I got an offer for cheap broadband internet... $25 per month for 2 Gigabyte of throughput per month $2.50 per gigabyte over that.

Of course, the throughput limit and price per gigabyte over the limit is in the ultra-fine print. Little old ladies that just want to email their grandkids are going to go over that and pay through the nose.

If it were $1 per 10 gigabytes, I'd be all for pay-what-you-use internet. $10 per month, plus $1 per 10 gigabyte block would be $30 per month for 200 Gigabytes of traffic... $40 for 300 gig and so on.

The carriers are still very profitable with this scheme... just not REVOLTINGLY profitable.

[ginkessler]

Finally!!! People need to be aware that the ISPs are establishing caps now because in the very near future the amount of gigabytes we use online will skyrocket - by implementing caps now they hope to be able to gouge consumers in the near future. And the truth is that not even in the present time they have the infrastructure to accurately measure your consumption. People are getting ready to leave AT&T in droves - cable seems to be a better deal now.

[wildlinux]

Cable has been a better value but the likes of comcast are licking their chops at the chance to rape their customers. We do use more bandwidth now sure files are bigger;and yes Netflix is a service I keep windows around for. So now the companies will say well unlimited does not mean for what you might want but what we say you can have. Their are alternatives....just drop the services get a more flexible carrier and never ever use the offender again. That means your children are the only chance they have to get their filthy foot in your door.You have to play hardball this world offers so much more than even one decade ago. Why get cheated give your gold to the folks who will give you what you pay for.

[Jalek]

Comcast is also charging a transport fee to the carrier on the backend delivering Netflix content, which must be getting passed back to Netflix. So far, Netflix hasn't needed to pass the cost to consumers, but if this persists, expect the rates charged to raise exponentially as there is no competitive influence. It's either pay whatever is demanded or be cut off to all Comcast customers.

This is what the Republicans are arguing is the way it should be, without realizing what their rhetoric means.

[eoraptor2]

Let's face it, the only people who believe that Caps are about anything other than profit are the ISP's and the people who drink the koolaide (or take their money, like congress). The rest of us know it's all about "use our service and only our service, and use it the way we tell you to OR ELSE"

[ChrisGadboiswfiu]

Why do most of you feel entitled to unlimited use of someone else's property? Do you expect your local gas station to provide unlimited gasoline for a monthly fee that you determine? How about the grocery store?

[Horrabin]

ChrisGadboiswfiu, on 07 May 2011 - 04:57 AM, said:

Why do most of you feel entitled to unlimited use of someone else's property? Do you expect your local gas station to provide unlimited gasoline for a monthly fee that you determine? How about the grocery store?

I DO expect all of the above if I pay the grocery store or gas station a set fee for "UNLIMITED use" of their property. Are we back to that old "it depends on what the meaning of 'is' is" doublespeak? There's probably plenty of lawyer fodder in the various EULA's but advertising "unlimited" in plain English should mean exactly that.
If the word only means "unlimited up to a certain point" then that's what the consumer should see in the come-on to sign up.

[AlexHumva]

What I'm really concerned about, though, is what if someone gets a worm? Those things push your internet connection nonestop, 24/7, as well as a few nasty viruses. If someone doesn't have their computer properly safeguarded -guess what, that's most people-, they could easily go over the 250 gigabyte limit in no time.

[frankerin]

For years ATT and others who just couldn't or wouldn't wrap their minds around the internet refused to address the net and broadband, losing all kinds of money, and throttling the user. They are still doing it.

[xvMATTLEEvx]

No it's not just nerds and power users affected by this but it's because of nerds and power users that we got in this situation to begin with. If there were no nerds or power users around, there wouldn't be enough bandwidth taken up for ISPs to put caps on bandwidth.

And really this has more to do with downloading/uploading than anything as too many people do it and it kills bandwidth.

I have AT&T and I rarely have a problem with their internet. But then again I don't use their wireless service either so I wouldn't know the situation with that.

My thing is if AT&T is like this with their wireless you gotta think they'll do the same with T-Mobile if they win T-Mobile. And that is if AT&T allows T-Mobile to stay separate from them.

Currently I have a family plan on T-Mobile and have had since before T-Mobile was Voice Stream. We were thinking about switching to either Verizon or AT&T but as you can see no matter who you choose your gonna get screwed in some way.

So more or less it comes down to which wireless carrier provides you with the best phone and internet service and which screws you over the least. T-Mobile here has horrible phone and internet service and they've tried to screw us over every chance they got. We've heard bad things about both Verizon, AT&T and Sprint as well. The only wireless carrier we haven't heard any bad things about is US Cellular and it's not available in my area.

I myself am leaning toward Verizon due to the call quality, the rest of my family may decide on AT&T. But one thing is for sure, no more Motorola phones and prolly no more Android phones as mine became [censored] after the first year. I guess I could give an HTC phone a chance but I would just prefer going with an iPhone. My iPod Touch 2G had been an amazing device and I feel maybe it's time I give Apple's iPhone a chance. I am after all one who always goes for the best available product, not caring too much about the cost. Quality means more to me than value.

[MarkJ73]

The FCC should look at Comcast, as I have been told their on demand downloads somehow do NOT count towards the cap, seems anti-competitive to me... If bandwidth is really the issue, then it should apply equally or not at all.

[billk11]

If there were no nerds or power users there would be no internet!!

[GeekHillbillygo5l]

When the truth Finally comes out,watch the telecoms run for cover.I for 1 recommend busting their behinds but good