Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

QOTD: How Much Would You Pay for Uncapped Net?

By - Source: Tom's Hardware US | B 206 comments

With all the commotion circling around Time Warner Cable and other companies, it's no surprise that customers and enthusiasts are up in arms over connection caps.

Because of the improvements--although slow--we've had over the years, many great services have popped online, and people are doing many things online today then was even thought possible a decade ago. But now, net connection capping threatens to turn back time and put things like streaming, cloud computing, rich media services, game/software publishing and other content into slow motion.

The question of the day is: How much are you willing to pay for an uncapped connection?

Discuss
Display all 206 comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 22 Hide
    cataclymistic100 , April 14, 2009 12:24 AM
    No more than I pay now!
  • 17 Hide
    Anonymous , April 14, 2009 12:24 AM
    I see no reason why I should have to pay any extra than the $50 a month I already pay, frankly. As soon as FIOS comes to my area, I'm upgrading...
  • 11 Hide
    wormy , April 14, 2009 12:44 AM
    I shouldnt have to pay for uncapped...there is NO REASON why I should have to pay...I'm already paying like 89.99 a month for 16mb/1mb so if they arent losing money on me then why should I have to fork over more money when myself using tons of bandwidth r still a profit to them...its like I gave them a cookie...now they want all my cookies just bc they know I dont have a choice but to give it to them...and even if I am cutting their profit margin by being a user who uses tons of bandwidth...they are making it all back bc of the people who pay them 50 bucks a month and check email with it who r the majority of their users

    This is bull$h1t PERIOD!!!
Other Comments
  • 0 Hide
    john_smarty , April 14, 2009 12:16 AM
    60$
  • 0 Hide
    mlcloud , April 14, 2009 12:18 AM
    I lived in Korea for the longest time. ~$35 for 100mbps parallel connection please?

    Haha, returning back to reality, the price really depends on speed, but if there were two packages offering capped and uncapped... it would still depend on how capped the capped package is.

    For example, I wouldn't pay much more for 250gb vs uncapped, whereas 20gb vs uncapped would pull about another thirty $$$ a month from my wallet.
  • 2 Hide
    crisisavatar , April 14, 2009 12:23 AM
    30$ with speeds nearing 3 mbps which is what I currently have and as a gamer is more than enough.

    That aside I don't mind paying around 50$ for higher speeds ( 20 mbps perhaps ? ) if I ever find myself with a need for it.
  • 17 Hide
    Anonymous , April 14, 2009 12:24 AM
    I see no reason why I should have to pay any extra than the $50 a month I already pay, frankly. As soon as FIOS comes to my area, I'm upgrading...
  • 22 Hide
    cataclymistic100 , April 14, 2009 12:24 AM
    No more than I pay now!
  • 2 Hide
    marsax73 , April 14, 2009 12:31 AM
    I'd rather have them slow down the speed rather than restrict the bandwidth cap. We have Comcast in Florida and we have 10 Mbs download. I would go back to 3-6 Mbs and not worry about how much I download.

    But again, we are paying $60/mo and that's not enough??
  • 5 Hide
    cryogenic , April 14, 2009 12:32 AM
    I have uncapped net at 20 Mbit download / 4 Mbit upload for 14 Euro per month (that is 20 bucks for americans ;) ) ... The best part is that I could get it cheaper (around 12 Euro), but I like my ISP because they provide near the limit speeds and no connection drops in games.
  • 2 Hide
    Anonymous , April 14, 2009 12:35 AM
    60bucks is correct
  • 2 Hide
    cadder , April 14, 2009 12:36 AM
    $50/month
  • 0 Hide
    guhland , April 14, 2009 12:37 AM
    $61
  • 0 Hide
    garborg , April 14, 2009 12:37 AM
    I'd pay for uncapped internet if they for go the charge of having the service.
  • 2 Hide
    daship , April 14, 2009 12:40 AM
    Dumb question, it depends on the speed as well. A uncapped dial up connection should be free. I think current market values are pretty fair, before the Caps set into place. "Atleast in America"

    Technology is to strong and grows to fast, these caps wont be able to exist. Hollywood needs to get used to the idea that all movies will be digital streams soon, and it dont matter what kind of deals they cut with ISP's.
  • 2 Hide
    paranoidmage , April 14, 2009 12:41 AM
    I download, but not enough to go over my 60 GB. I wouldn't pay anymore for unlimited. I think they should make it cheaper for people with caps though, not more expensive. I also think they should get up with the rest of the world and offer us decent speeds. They are hindering innovation and development of services that could use faster internet connections.
  • 1 Hide
    69camaroSS , April 14, 2009 12:42 AM
    I pay for what I download.
    I don't feel like I need every movie or song in existence stored on my computer.
    I don't use my computer as a server.

    So I'm not sure I'd ever hit the limits. That they are imposing now. I don't mind companies managing bandwidth, as long as the benefits are passed along to the people who use the I-net normally, and as long as the limits don't start interfering with streaming content like Netflix.

    I already pay too much for internet ($60/month)
  • 6 Hide
    Anonymous , April 14, 2009 12:43 AM
    I will avoid any company that "caps" my bandwidth. I'm not a bandwidth hog by any stretch, but it's the principle of the issue.

    Speed, however, will peak my spending interest. However, I already feel that most providers are overcharging for what piddly bandwidth they currently offer. I think I'm $60/month for 6Mbs? When that number is closer to 20+Mbs, I'll be a little more satisfied with the service at the price.

  • 0 Hide
    danimal_the_animal , April 14, 2009 12:43 AM
    14.95 cheapest plan they got!!!!
  • 11 Hide
    wormy , April 14, 2009 12:44 AM
    I shouldnt have to pay for uncapped...there is NO REASON why I should have to pay...I'm already paying like 89.99 a month for 16mb/1mb so if they arent losing money on me then why should I have to fork over more money when myself using tons of bandwidth r still a profit to them...its like I gave them a cookie...now they want all my cookies just bc they know I dont have a choice but to give it to them...and even if I am cutting their profit margin by being a user who uses tons of bandwidth...they are making it all back bc of the people who pay them 50 bucks a month and check email with it who r the majority of their users

    This is bull$h1t PERIOD!!!
  • 0 Hide
    joex444 , April 14, 2009 12:46 AM
    I had uncapped internet and paid $43/mo ($53/mo for customers without cable TV).

    For a 12Mbps line, which is reasonably fast, this isn't outrageous. $40/mo is fair.

    I still fail to see how the amount of data used costs the Cable ISP any money. I'm assuming that what they do is merely divide up a direct connection to a backbone of some kind. Why on Earth they would have a metered line themselves is beyond me. And if it is unmetered, as it ought to be, then they don't particularly care how much data one customer transfers.

    If they need to implement a system so that one person doesn't spoil the local node for everyone else, then do so my slowing down that one user (just their speed, thats it). Don't do it by capping everyone.
  • 1 Hide
    paranoidmage , April 14, 2009 12:47 AM
    itunes, netflix, thepiratebay and mininova should band together and offer internet with no BS attached. That would help their business and all of us.
Display more comments