Fair usage policy on Unlimited Internet?


#1

I don't understand the Fair usage clause on unlimited internet packages could somebody explain to me please?

how could one be unfair to unlimited package? ain't that common sense if one got 2mbits unlimited package then he/she will only get per month amount of gigabytes what

""2mbits x 60 seconds x 60 minutes x 24 hours x 30 days = total possible megabits per month converted into gigabytes""

and even not one bit or byte more which is actually one got contract with ISP (in real world less than that.)

so when there is no way for one could exceed at all, so how and where the abuse takes place so why ISP need fair usage clause?

and on top some ISP put down 20 gb or 25 gb limit on unlimited package, common sense tell me thats pure and simple "CAPPED" so how it is "UNLIMITED"


#2

Mere play of words.


#3

^ Correct

I heard that "user may use unlimited connection to disribute other friends or neighbours, just like cable net (illegal)" making BTS lazy for other users on that BTS, as all WiMAX connections are already shared.

Dont know is it correct or not?


#4

Hey Dear Poster it mean unlimited within specified amount of data! product sellers are not wrong we actually didn't read carefully terms and conditions below product page


#5

^

my post is already simple and self explanatory and i am seeking answers to those questions, what you have written i have already stated that in my post above so no need to repeat it in other words GAND NA KARO, there is time and place for clowning around.


#6

Here is what google says

define : unlimited

un·lim·it·ed/ˌənˈlimitid/Adjective

1. Not limited or restricted in terms of number, quantity, or extent.

2. (of a company) Not limited.

The simple word actually voids any term ATTACHED


#7

[quote=", post:, topic:"]

"“2mbits x 60 seconds x 60 minutes x 24 hours x 30 days = total possible megabits per month converted into gigabytes”"

and even not one bit or byte more which is actually one got contract with ISP (in real world less than that.)

so when there is no way for one could exceed at all, so how and where the abuse takes place so why ISP need fair usage clause?

and on top some ISP put down 20 gb or 25 gb limit on unlimited package, common sense tell me thats pure and simple “CAPPED” so how it is “UNLIMITED”

[/quote]

That’s very simple… dear :D . They do that because they want to maximize the profits by dividing the same product among more and more ppl by charging everyone for the whole product.

How ?

Suppose with a 1000 Rupees/ month 2mbps connection one can theoretically have a traffic of 632.8 GByte/month. Now you find out that fair usage policy of the ISP says you can’t go higher then 100GB a month. So the ISP is saving 532.8 GB which it, the ISP will resell to 5 more 2mbps-customer connections charging them 1000 each per month.

So the ISP is earning 6000 instead of 1000 by advertising “unlimited” and coining the term “fair usage policy”.

The fair is so unfair my … :D


#8

ISP has to pay for 632.8 GBytes to someone or it's total unlimited without any check n balance?


#9

[quote=", post:, topic:"]

ISP has to pay for 632.8 GBytes to someone or it’s total unlimited without any check n balance?
[/quote]

?


#10

[quote=", post:, topic:"]

ISP has to pay for 632.8 GBytes to someone or it’s total unlimited without any check n balance?
[/quote]

what???

and thats the guy Asad gave me three days for… just unbelievable.


#11

[quote=", post:, topic:"]

what???

and thats the guy Asad gave me three days for… just unbelievable.

[/quote]

stick to topic


#12

^ Don't police the forums. Use the Report feature, if and when necessary.


#13

It's fraud. The old switch-n-bait. No two ways about it.

They are counting on people to take their offer on face

value and hoping that they can con as many people as

possible, before word gets out on the street.

Since you can flout the law with little legal repercussions

in Pakistan, the only way one can get even with such

companies is to go into their office and beat the living

daylights out of their lying staff, or hire a fidayeen to do

a proper job of it.

Maybe that will lessen the hurt of being lied to and the

pain of being defrauded. Maybe.

.

.

.

Sheikh 'Final Solution' Chilli


#14

Dear :D it's mere play of words like Asad said.


#15

Yup, they kind of fraud you by capping it. Regardless of how they cap on, capping on usage is not 'Unlimited'

This is not only limited to ISPs. Even mobile companies provide Unlimited text bundles which do have a limit after all. Not only that they even provide so called 'Free' services which they charge from in another way.

They all do this because no action is taken against them. If everyone sues these companies in the court I bet they would get their words corrected for certain.


#16

also in web hosting check almost all brands are offering unlimited web hosting that is not possible.


#17

Fraud schmaud - fear the day when this happens in Pakistan as well :

http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2011/04/att-broadband-caps/

"Come Monday, AT&T will begin restricting more than 16 million broadband users based on the amount of data they use a month. The number-two carrier’s entry into the broadband cap club means that a majority of U.S. broadband users will now be subject to limits on how much they can do online or risk extra charges as ugly as video store late fees.

The new limits — 150 GB for DSL subscribers and 250 GB for UVerse users (a mix of fiber and DSL) — come as users are increasingly turning to online video such as Hulu and Netflix on-demand streaming service instead of paying for cable.

With the change, AT&T joins Comcast and numerous small ISPs in putting a price on a fixed amount of internet usage. It’s a complete abandonment of the unlimited plans which turned the internet into a global behemoth after the slow-growth dial-up days, when customers were charged by the minute and thus accessed the internet as sparingly as possible.

Comcast’s limit, put into place after it got caught secretly throttling peer-to-peer traffic, is 250 GB — which the company says less than 99 percent of users hit. AT&T plans to charge users an extra $10 per month if they cross the cap, a fee that recurs for each 50 GBs a user goes over the cap. And while 150GB and 250GB per month might seem like a lot, if you have a household with kids or roommates, it’s not too difficult to approach those limits using today’s services, even without heavy BitTorrent usage.

And it should noted that U.S. limits are far from the world’s worst: Canada’s recently-imposed restrictions prompted Netflix to give customers there a choice of lower quality streams to keep their usage down since users are charged up to $5 per GB they exceed their cap. Caps are also worse in Australia.

But for the nation which has been key to a wildly expanding internet the changing tide is both a practical and cultural letdown.

The drive to cap usage is ostensibly a way to reduce costs. But in reality, it’s not about the cost of data – bandwidth costs are extremely low and keep falling. Time Warner Cable brought in $1.13 billion in revenue from broadband customers in the first three months of 2011, while spending only $36 million for bandwidth — a mere three percent of the revenue. Time Warner Cable doesn’t currently impose bandwidth caps or metering on its customers — though they have reserved the right to do so — after the company’s disastrous trial of absurdly low limits in 2009 sparked an immediate backlash from customers and from D.C. politicians.

The real problem ISPs want to fix is congestion due to limited infrastructure. Cable customers share what are known as local loops, and the more that your neighbors use their connection, the less bandwidth is available to you — a situation that becomes painfully clear in the evening when cable users see their throughput fall.

The blunt force approach of a bandwidth cap does have the advantage of making users think twice about streaming HD movies from Netflix. That is, perhaps not coincidentally, doubly to the advantage of most big ISPs because they’d rather have you spending money on their video services than a third party. Bandwidth-intense services threaten to turn the likes of Comcast, AT&T and Time Warner Cable into utilities — a dependable business, but not one that has the huge profit margins these companies have come to enjoy.

Indeed, the question of who gets to write the rules about the internet’s pipes is the major bone of contention in the net neutrality debate, both for terrestrial and mobile data networks. When the new net neutrality rules go into effect, ISPs won’t be able to block their online video competition, but there’s no rule against doing that via bandwidth caps or tiered usage pricing.

Moreover, as we all move towards more and more cloud services, whether that’s for backups, music or movies, it’s worrisome that ISPs are more concerned about reining in their most dedicated customers in service of meeting Wall Street’s expectations. Instead, they should be taking the opportunity to dig up the streets to create fiber networks that will make us a nation that’s top in the world’s broadband ranking chart, rather than a laggard.

The real solution is adding infrastructure at the local level, though an interim solution could entail metering data only during peak times, much as mobile phone calling minutes plans apply only during peak hours.

But, that just goes to show, yet again, that what’s good for the Street often doesn’t translate into what’s good for the country."


#18

yar make internet on lan and problem can be solved....