Verizon CTO: Broadband Throttling is Inevitable

[exfileme]

Verizon's CTO spoke words of doom earlier today, claiming that ISPs will eventually throttle the Internet

Verizon CTO: Broadband Throttling is Inevitable : Read more

 

[jacobdrj]

This blows.

 

[michaelahess]

Bunch of bs is you ask me. If these management types weren't so greedy to begin with, and put the profits where they belong, into the company and not their pockets, there would be no problem supporting expanding bandwidth. Especially since it keeps getting cheaper.

 

[burnley14]

We need more internets!

 

[mdillenbeck]

Sure, throttle broadband. However don't charge me on a flow rate if you are capping me on a quantity - charge me by the quantity instead. After all, that is what they do with cell phone usage - they charge me for the quantity of minutes I use, not the speed of the connection I get.

 

[Guest]

The ISP's declined stimulus moneys that could be used for this purpose.

http/www.crunchgear.com/2009/08/14/guess-why-the-big-isps-have-refused-broadband-stimulus-money/

 

[frozenlead]

I want to see hard data on how increased usage generates more costs for them.

 

[Rancifer7]

So where does all that money I pay each month go?

Apparently GD nowhere!

 

[battousai831]

Sounds like FIOS isn't the savior everyone thought it was (Including me)

Too bad, I was looking forward to FIOS availability in my area, I guess it doesn't really matter if FIOS wants to go the timewarner and comcast way.

 

[Montezuma]

They are simply "buttering" people up for their new bullshit pricing plans. Their 5 GB caps on their wireless broadband(of which I am sadly a customer) are shit horrible and overpriced. It is wrong to charge customer $20 more each month for a small fraction on the bandwidth their wired customers get.

Eventually, cellular phone pricing will change to a flat fee-based, instead of per-minute plans and ISPs will go from flat fee-based pricing to per-minute or per-kilobyte or megabyte micro-payments. This might sound good, but it will end up increasing customer cost significantly.

One technology will progress and another will regress. I am all for capitalism, but this is where it goes wrong.

 

[martin33w20]

WE are already being charged for the internet in service charges and access fees. The companies are charging more than enough to continue improving the service that we are paying for. Sounds like they are getting greedy.

 

[Montezuma]

[citation][nom]frozenlead[/nom]I want to see hard data on how increased usage generates more costs for them.[/citation]

I would not hold my breath, if I were you. Even if you got to see some "hard data", how could you be sure it was trustworthy? I am with you, I would like to see how it increases their cost, but I am sure we all know the answer to that question. If we do not, let me assist you with it.

When looking at a customer by customer basis, a little more traffic flow does not increase cost. It is like a cellular customer talking a few minutes past their allotted plan minutes. A few minutes for that one customer does not hurt them, as it is just extra airtime and minutes cost the companies nothing to make.

The problem comes when you look at entire markets or total company customer bases. You can only fit so much data down one pipe before it gets log-jammed and you have to improve your network. Of course, I do not believe that ISPs have reached a saturation point, but I do believe they have looked at the data and believe they will lose profits due to their procrastination on improving their networks. Due to this, we(the customers) are made to suffer.

Time will tell and we will just have to wait and see what happens in the near future. My guess is, sadly, that this issue will only get worse. I would like to be proved wrong, but I doubt I will.

 

[Guest]

But I was only half way done... HALF WAY!!! WAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHH!

Not playin around here, give us back or pron!!!

Haha lol couldn't resist

 

[skit75]

[citation][nom]El_Capitan[/nom]I'm serious, get rid of porn on the internet, and there will be enough traffic flow for everyone.[/citation]

I'll do ya one better. Start charging... ohh say a penny per email sent. Lets clear the nets of spam first. Keep your hands off my porn please!

 

[koga73]

...instead of throttling to "ration" bandwidth, expand your network.

 

[Supertrek32]

If they put revenue toward improving and expanding infrastructure instead of pocketing it, we'd never encounter this problem. It's because these systems are outdated and failing that these problems are starting to arise. With the amount of profit most of these companies make, they could easily redo their entire system over the course of a few years and accomodate all the bandiwidth needed for the next 20. Why haven't they? Greed.

 

[naterandrews]

Business 101-

Take care of customers, and they'll take care of you.
You CAN grow your profits, Verizon- by taking care of us customers!
Make us happy, we will refer your service. This is something you'd expect on AT&T's part..

 

[Supertrek32]

Another interesting fact showing what total crap this is:

A 100 MILE fiber-optic cable can transfer 1.75TERABYTES PER SECOND. To put that in perspective, a 2 hour 1080p video is about 7 gigs. That means you could send 250 copies of a high-def movie PER SECOND.

Oh... and the stuff the cables are made out of (glass) is cheaper than copper. The cables also won't corrode and take up less space than the huge amounts of traditional cables, as well as being easier to maintain and isolate problems. The only down-side is production costs, which is mainly from a lack of supply. Major ISPs investing would solve this very quickly.

Too bad upgrading your infrastructure to the 21st century would mean losing profits today (even if it means more tomorrow). We want our money now. So we'll just up the price instead.

 

[mr_tuel]

[citation][nom]supertrek32[/nom]Another interesting fact showing what total crap this is:A 100 MILE fiber-optic cable can transfer 1.75TERABYTES PER SECOND. To put that in perspective, a 2 hour 1080p video is about 7 gigs. That means you could send 250 copies of a high-def movie PER SECOND.Oh... and the stuff the cables are made out of (glass) is cheaper than copper. The cables also won't corrode and take up less space than the huge amounts of traditional cables, as well as being easier to maintain and isolate problems. The only down-side is production costs, which is mainly from a lack of supply. Major ISPs investing would solve this very quickly.Too bad upgrading your infrastructure to the 21st century would mean losing profits today (even if it means more tomorrow). We want our money now. So we'll just up the price instead.[/citation]

To Verizon's defense, FiOS has cost them BILLIONS upon billions of dollars. It is Verizon who got the ball rolling on FTTH (or FTTP), and they are ahead in service quality, availability, and customer service.

 

[Guest]

"That makes sense: taxpayers are ultimately flipping the bill for wider roads and new extensions, and broadband surfers may have to apply that same concept to the ever-growing Internet."

Last time I checked my local city did not charge me a monthly fee based on how many times I drove down the road.