04-29-2011, 06:37 PM
|
#43
|
|
Need to Shave n Shower, but I CANT STOP POSTING ON RS
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Nanaimo
Posts: 17,694
Thanked 8,569 Times in 4,018 Posts
Failed 1,523 Times in 659 Posts
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soundy
These two goals are contradictory. The argument against the rate hikes is that MAINTAINING the network is cheap... that may be, but UPGRADING it isn't, and OVERHAULING it most definitely isn't.
Ahhh, and see, this is the problem with all the backlash: everyone's whipped into a frenzy over a pay-per-use model rather than a flat-rate model, but getting a rebate for UNUSED bandwidth is ALSO a pay-per-use model.
Frankly, UBB *is* a more equitable system - as it is right now, you're paying the same amount whether you use 100GB or 100MB per month.
Rather than fighting for a flat rate for everyone, OpenMedia should be fighting for a COMPLETELY UBB system... with FAIR rates, not the insane "$1-$2-per-GB" overage rate that's being talked about.
Right now, a 100GB plan runs, what, $50/mo? So just change it to a straight 50c/GB rate. If you use 1GB, you pay 50c. Use 200GB, pay $100. Doesn't get any more fair than that, and the people who do nothing but check their Facebook a couple times a week and email their grandmother aren't subsidizing the gamers and Netflixers and torrent geeks.
|
Shaw claims majority of there users don't go over there cap. So all those users would be paying Shaw less making Shaw less money.
What Shaw is trying to do is make more money and has nothing to do with there backbone of capacity.
__________________
Until the lions have their own historians, the history of the hunt will always glorify the hunter.
|
|
|