Time Warner shelving bandwidth caps!
Posted on 2009-04-16 15:54:00
According to this statement! Although it sounds like they're still planning on it at some point in the future.
Comment from onefishclappin:
I'm still planning on leaving them.
Comment from gregstoll:
Can y'all get Grande down there?
Comment from spamchang:
Austin, for its activist history and tech-savvy population, would be a terrible place to test such a practice. New York City might be a better one, at least, maybe the outskirts. But the notice has been given...TWC is very greedy.
Comment from tehfanboi:
I'm glad it is on the shelf. On the one hand I don't mind the idea of a metered rate, but the numbers thrown around showing them 20x the industry average for metered rates was ridiculous. The shelving buys Jessica and I more time for actual high speed competition to enter our neighborhood. I've heard good thing about U-Verse so hopefully by the time TWC does metered take 2 we'll have actual options.
Comment from taesmar:
I love it how they say that the customers were "misunderstanding" what they were planning to do. Uh, no we weren't. They were going to charge more. It's called math.
Comment from wonderjess:
Yay! Especially since if I'm understanding it right, it was going to hit Rochester really soon, and we don't seem to have any real competition for them up here...
Comment from winocas:
Is there something about bandwidth limiting I'm not getting here? I mean, while it sounds bad, it sounds like they'd be guaranteeing that the bandwidth they advertise would be the one you get (and not just in spurts).
Comment from destroyerj:
Bandwidth is a misnomer, since it implies "at a time." The plan was for a total usage cap, such that you could only up/download so many GB before having to pay overage fees for any further use (per month).
And while I'd say such caps shouldn't be implemented at all, at the very least, they shouldn't be implemented in such paltry amounts as Time Warner Cable was planning.
This backup was done by LJBackup.