Here here! That's why we've ALWAYS been honest with our customers. We bill per bit not per mbps. Go as fast as your situation will allow but don't get stupid with the connection.

It's worked out so nicely that we're running 300ish broadband customers, 50 of them on 100 meg fiber links (80/20 res/bus or so). Our billing averages under 1.5 megs of average usage for ALL customers throughout the month. (I pay bw based on usage.)

laters,
Marlon
(509) 982-2181                                   Equipment sales
(408) 907-6910 (Vonage)                    Consulting services
42846865 (icq)                                    And I run my own wisp!
64.146.146.12 (net meeting)
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam



----- Original Message ----- From: "Tony Weasler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org>
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2005 1:05 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] NYCwireless Network Neutrality Broadband Challenge


A modern marketing mistake created this mess.  A company started to
sell a product that it was incapable of delivering: unlimited network
access.  Other companies followed suit and assumed that they would
never be compelled to make good on their promise.  Now, instead of
admitting that they were wrong, most providers are trying to redefine
the word 'unlimited' through legal documents that attempt to restrict
their customers' actions.

A far better approach would be to determine what their network can
handle and charge appropriately for the usage of their customers.  If
their network can't provide the customer-demanded services at a fair
price, then they need to update their network, reduce their costs, or
leave the market.  It really can be that simple.

Regulations in this type of system are only necessary to ensure that
providers are disclosing the information necessary for consumers to
choose amongst the competitors.  Micro-managing the various services
running on top of the network only causes the services to route around
the complexity of the regulations and adds unnecessary expense for the
consumers and a barrier to entry for future competitors.

Jeff Pulver wrote a very interesting blog entry on Friday about the
issue of bit-pipes vs. artificially-restricted communications pipes.
It seems that Congress might be more informed than the FCC on this
issue.  Time will tell:
http://pulverblog.pulver.com/archives/003274.html

- Tony

On 11/7/2005 1:51 PM, Charles Wu created:
Electricity, Gas and Water are billed on a usage basis

Competitive market pressures aside, why should Internet be any different?

-Charles
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Reply via email to