QOTD: How Much Would You Pay for Uncapped Net?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
I would really like to see a plan for $10 a month with 10 gb cap (people who wouldnt use it very much at all)
A $20 a month with 30 gp cap
And a 40-50 a month for uncapped.
 
depends how fast... for 1Mbps, no more than 20 usd, for 100Mbps, i'd go about 100 usd, but only because that's all i can afford. i'd actually pay more if i could for a Gbps at home. =/
 
used to pay about 70$ canadian for uncapped with Bell DSL here in Canada
5mbit down, 800kbit up

these ISP caps are complete BS, just a way to get more money out of consumers, i think every time warner customer should disconnect all of their services all on the same day and you will see how fast twc f*cktards get rid of the caps

 
I shouldn't have to pay for a capped service. Caps should really only be put into place if a user is suspected of illegal activities. Granted, charter changed their policy for my internet service to have a 100 gig cap - and that's only if they decide that you're a problem should they enforce it.
 
This happened to be lowest-tier speed I have, in 2x of 56K speed it is fine for streaming TV-quality and drivers occationally, I never hit any limit, if there is one, paid C $25/mo; only thing it is not satisfactory was getting down W7 Public Beta when it was public.

So this is the pricing I would accept unless dramatically increased speed to warrant pricier fee of less than $50 anyway. The numbers of TWC is wholly unacceptable. Or even a pay as you go plan starting $10 or $20 is reasonable.
 
Not a penny more then what I am paying now. Seriously everyone in these test markets should go on a 30 day ban. You can get high speed reliable Internet services at many places. Goto your local library. Find a hot spot. Switch to satellite or G3 cellphone. Go back to DSL. Do anything you can until TWC backs off from being an aggressive bully.
 
$20. It amazes me how people have been beaten by these communication companies into paying high prices for services that lag behind other countries. Japan and most countries in Europe have internet and cell phone services that put American services to shame for the price they charge. I for one will jump ship on any carrier that tries to impose any caps.
 
No more then what I pay TW right now which is $45 for Turbo which is 22Mbps. I want faster speeds to boot now as well other wise kiss my,, money good bye. I will,, drop my service with them at this point for even thinking about trying to fool me and screw me out of my money to begin with. Try making exscuses to me when it is obvious you are whole heartadly lieing. Absolute low life of a CEO.
 
I would pay at most $1.50 per month per Mbit/sec. It sucks that that isn't available in most places now, as it seems a fair price to pay for the service we get. As it is, Charter has the bait-and-switch going, 10Mbit/sec at $40 for 6 mos. then $60 after that. Or $25 for 5Mbit/sec and... $50 per month after that. Tell me that ain't f#%&ed. Especially since AT&T actually offers a halfway decent price on DSL here, except... the service sucks. Unreliable at best. At the very least, I hope we can get Uverse here very soon, and WITHOUT caps. I find it very hard to believe as it is that our government hasn't figured out SOMETHING to stop these regional monopolies. After moving from NJ to TX, we thought all cable companies were the same. Slimeballs the lot of them, but not all that unfair for the reliability of their services. Well, after getting stuck with Charter after being used to Comcast, we learned right quick why everyone has satellite. But they're our only choice for decent broadband.
So it goes.
 
Shouldn't have to pay anything extra for uncapped internet service, it's not 1994 when many dial-up isp's were limited. Being with "Charter" paying 57 a month for a 5mb like 100gb a month capped, It should be 57 a month for unlimited. But Charter jumped on board with the other cable providers to limit one service to force you to either upgrade or opt out of the video craze that is the new forum of television.
 
[citation][nom]Judguh[/nom]I shouldn't have to pay for a capped service. Caps should really only be put into place if a user is suspected of illegal activities. Granted, charter changed their policy for my internet service to have a 100 gig cap - and that's only if they decide that you're a problem should they enforce it.[/citation]

Even if the user is doing illegal activities, it is not up to the isp to punish. They are not the police and it is the police that has to punish em.

I would not pay anything extra for uncapped internet. Like most are saying There is no reason for internet caps, it is just a scam to get more money out of the consumer. If my ISP (comcast) suddenly sprang capped services for my price bracket I would gladly move to a slower and uncapped service on another ISP and refuse to do business with the other ISP again.
 
We don't pay extra for watching too much TV, so why should we pay extra for using the internet too much?

Greed is taking over these companies. They know we can't do much about it, so they think to themselves why not.
 
$29.99 per month for 3 Mbps to 5 Mbps with No Cap.

The Money going towards the Corporate Heads including the CEO could go a long ways toward improving infrastructure if their saleries were kept to a reasonable level.

CEO = $500K
Other Corporate Heads = anywhere from $50K to $150K depending on their position.
 
Well... let's see... my connection isn't capped "yet" so no more than what I'm paying now. If they are going to offer less "service" then it should be cheaper than what I am paying now. So far the best service plan I've seen (although not available to me in my area... yet) is Verizon's lowest tier FIOS (10/mb up 2/mb down with no cap) for $50! I don't see people needing more than this since most home routers only have a 10mb NIC port connecting to the modem. Of course a little more up would be nice... say... 4/mb. But not really needed. A family of 4 gaming online, using VoIP, emailing, chatting, and streaming wouldn't bottle neck at 2/mb.

[citation][nom]DarkMatterBT[/nom]$20. It amazes me how people have been beaten by these communication companies into paying high prices for services that lag behind other countries. Japan and most countries in Europe have internet and cell phone services that put American services to shame for the price they charge. I for one will jump ship on any carrier that tries to impose any caps.[/citation]

I totally agree with this. The US has fallen to 15th or 18th in the world for average download speeds and I don't even want to imagine where we are with up load. A lot of people don't seem to realize that good up load is just important and good download. You typically would like a 5:1 or preferably 4:1 down:up ratio... 1:1 would be nice 😉.
 
[citation][nom]marsax73[/nom]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??[/citation]

Be greatful. Here in Oz I am paying $75 a month for uncapped 512kbps 🙁
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom