dennis@home

"kim" <ntscuser@aol.com> wrote in message
news:gpOdnaQre_3kBdranZ2dnUVZ8s2mnZ2d@giganews.com ...


> The exact same could be said of people who argue in favour of CAPs.

Not really, CAPs are variable and may be infinite.
While not having a CAP is absolute.
So a CAPed service could met the needs of everyone, an un CAPed service only
really meets the needs of a subset.

xpuser

"dennis@home" <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> wrote in message
news:fi7bra$3fm$1@news.datemas.de...
>
>
> "kim" <ntscuser@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:XpudnV_628PWqNvanZ2dnUVZ8hmdnZ2d@giganews.com ...
>> xpuser wrote:
>>> "The Natural Philosopher" <a@b.c> wrote in message
>>> news:1195210077.8024.9@proxy00.news.clara.net...
>>>> Eeyore wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> kim wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Mike wrote:
>>>>>>> Rob Barnes, the head of broadband and mobiles at
>>>>>>> moneysupermarket.com, said: "As most people are only achieving
>>>>>>> half the speed they signed up for, a typical film of 500Mb could
>>>>>>> take up to four hours to download, instead of 60-90 minutes."
>>>>>> If it's 500MB then it's a bootleg and the subscriber has no
>>>>>> business downloading it in the first place.
>>>>>
>>>>> Rubbish. I the last 2 days I just downloaded 2 complete 700+ MB
>>>>> Linux ISO CD
>>>>> image files.
>>>>>
>>>>> There is every need to download files that size.
>>>>>
>>>>> Graham
>>>>>
>>>> Indeed. Remote backup is why I want to UPLOAD 250Mbyte files..
>>>>
>>>> A typical graphics object for a large printed item can be 60Mbyte or
>>>> more. Email again..upload.
>>>>
>>>> As can a few minutes of video.
>>>
>>> The issue here is the advertised speed by an ISP...and all you
>>> muppets can do is argue about the size of legit and illegal
>>> downloads!! The only other valid point made is by Kim, with regards
>>> to the infrastructure in the UK which is crap.
>>>
>>> How about getting back to the point raised by the OP!!
>>>
>>> I personally dont have a problem with the "Up to xMB" speed offered
>>> by ISPs, I am aware that the speed depends on the distance from the
>>> exchange as well as other factors. When I subscribe to an ISP, I
>>> dont for one minute think I will get the advertised speed, it would
>>> be silly of me to think I would.
>>> I am not sure how ISPs would advertise their products in a manner
>>> that was not confusing. If they could not use the "Up to.XMB" line.
>>
>> The article totally ignores the subject of download capping. What is the
>> point of having a fast connection if you can't use it in the evenings or
>> have already hit your download limit?
>
> I would be quite happy with a CAP on a 50M connection.
> I like things to happen quickly when they happen.
> I don't download huge amounts so a reasonable CAP on a fast service for
> less cash is my ideal.
> People that argue against CAPs just haven't thought about what others may
> want and are only concerned about themselves.

Since some people want caps, and some dont...a good compramise would be,
that everyone has a, say 50MB connection speed. You then pay according to
uasage

0 - 5GB - £10
>5GB - 40GB - £20
> 40GB - 100GB - £30
etc

figures for example purposes only, and not what I think should be applied.

This way people pay for what they use. Fairer all round. Maybe you could
also apply the above to different speeds as well. So an ISP would have a
tiered pricing plan for each of the speeds it offers.