Time Warner/Road Runner

You are currently browsing articles tagged Time Warner/Road Runner.

AP

By PETER SVENSSON, AP Technology Writer
Fri Aug 22, 10:36 AM ET

NEW YORK - Three months ago, Guy Distaffen switched Internet providers, lured from his cable company to his phone company by a year of free service on a two-year contract. But soon the company quietly updated its policies to say it would limit his Internet activity each month.

“We felt that were suckered,” said Distaffen, who lives in the small village of Silver Springs in upstate New York.

The phone company, Frontier Communications Corp., is one of several Internet service providers that are moving to curb the growth of traffic on their networks, or at least make the subscribers who download the most pay more.

This could have consequences not just for consumers — who would have to learn to watch how much data their Internet use entails — but also for companies that hope to make the Internet a conduit for movies and other content that comes in huge files.

Cable companies have been at the forefront of imposing and talking about usage caps, because their lines are shared between households. Frontier’s announcement is noteworthy because it is a phone company — and it is matching a seemingly low ceiling set by a main cable rival: just 5 gigabytes per month, the equivalent of about 3 DVD-quality movies.

“We go through that in a week,” Distaffen said. “If they start enforcing the caps we’re going to have to change service.” Other subscribers on Broadbandreports.com, where the cap was first reported, echoed his feelings.

But since the other option for wired broadband in the village is Time Warner Cable Inc., switching providers isn’t necessarily going to get Distaffen away from a bandwidth cap. The cable company is trying out a 5-gigabyte traffic cap for new users in Beaumont, Texas. Every gigabyte above that costs $1. More expensive plans have higher caps — at $54.90 per month, the allowance is 40 gigabytes. Depending on the results of the trial, Time Warner Cable may apply the same pricing structure elsewhere.

Frontier’s biggest market is in Rochester, N.Y., where it competes with Time Warner Cable.

“This isn’t really an issue that’s just going to be about Frontier,” said Philip Dampier, a Rochester-based technology writer who is campaigning to get Frontier to back off its plans. “Virtually every broadband provider has been suddenly discovering that there’s this so-called `bandwidth crisis’ going on in the United States.”

In a sense, caps on Internet use are no stranger than the limited number of minutes a cell phone subscriber gets each month. Internet use varies hugely from person to person, and service providers argue that the people who use it the most should pay the most. But the industry hasn’t worked out where to set the limits, or how much to charge users who exceed them. Fearing a customer backlash, most providers are setting the limits at levels where very few would bump into them. Comcast Corp. has floated the idea of a 250-gigabyte monthly cap.

Frontier says it plans to start enforcing its 5-gigabyte cap next year. First, it will let customers know how much data they use each month, a figure that most people don’t know how to track on their own (the tech-savvy Distaffen gets it from his Internet router). Then it will offer premium plans with higher caps to those who use more data.

Frontier says most of its 559,300 broadband subscribers consume less than 1.5 gigabytes per month. But in an e-mail to Frontier employees, Chief Executive Maggie Wilderotter said traffic is doubling every year, which means that by the time the caps would be put in place, a lot more users will exceed them. In two years, the average user could be consuming 6 gigabytes of traffic per month if the current growth rate holds up.

The growth of traffic means the company has to invest millions in its network and infrastructure, threatening its profitability, according to the e-mail.

Dampier disagrees, saying the costs of network equipment and connecting to the wider Internet are falling.

“If they continue to make the necessary investments … there’s no reason they can’t keep up” with increasing customer traffic, he said.

Read more…

[Editor's Note: As promised, Stop the Cap! now moves on to expanding coverage of the issue of broadband usage caps by North America's other broadband providers.  In the coming weeks, we'll be reviewing the plans, proposals, and implementation of caps by companies large and small.  We will also continue to report on how this potentially impacts on our national competitiveness, considerations of Net Neutrality issues, and addressing the digital divide by information-have's and have-nots.] 

Beaumont, Texas

Beaumont, Texas

Beaumont, on the eastern border of Texas with Louisiana, is one of America’s mid-sized cities of just over 100,000 people, best known for the Texas Wildcatters, a smattering of oil and gas companies, and the first advance by Time Warner, America’s second largest cable television company, into this year’s issue of bandwidth usage caps.

Company officials first announced the market test in January, impacting only new customers in Road Runner’s Golden Triangle Division with usage caps ranging from 5GB for the Lite Tier plan to 40GB for the Turbo Tier.  The charge for exceeding your plan’s cap is $1 per gigabyte.

Like other companies talking about usage caps, everyone likes to use their own internal definitions of what 1GB of usage represents.  Time Warner’s is:

1GB gets you about 70,000 e-mails, 34 hours of gaming or 1,344 hours of Web browsing; or, it’s the approximate equivalent of downloading 569 photos, 277 music files, 7 hours of low-resolution video (YouTube), 3 hours of standard definition streaming video or 45 minutes of high-definition streaming video.

Again, my own calculations bring some different numbers to the table, and, honestly, does anyone really worry about going over a usage cap from reading e-mail and web browsing alone?

Randomly grabbing 277 MP3 music files consumed 1.56GB of usage.  Downloading 569 photos assumes your collection consists of pictures averaging 1.75MB apiece.  I grabbed some digital photos I took to Walgreens for printing and looked at the files I uploaded to their server.  My pictures, at high resolution (but not extremely high) come closer to 8MB apiece.  One episode of Law & Order (around 42 minutes without the commercials and dropping the stream before the end credits rolled) consumed 360MB at standard definition rates.  As noted earlier, a movie delivered by Akamai can consume 6-9GB for just one 720p high definition film, nearly double that if you choose the 1080 version.

Taking each of these activities into consideration individually, usage caps of 20GB a month (or 40GB) don’t immediately sound alarming.  But people do not use their Internet connections for a single activity, and the more people you bring to the table, such as in a four person household, the easier it is to see just how quickly a family, especially with teenagers, will quickly exceed even these kinds of caps.

Beaumont residents are the first to participate in a Road Runner trial with usage capped.

Beaumont residents are the first to participate in a Road Runner trial with usage capped.

There are users out there who use their connections for little more than basic e-mail and occasional web browsing, and Time Warner offering a plan at a discount for those users is not a problem, assuming they actually promote such plans to potential customers.  The greater issue comes from a service provider charges the same price (or more) for a plan that is now seriously limited by a cap.  And to date, there has been no proposal for retaining an “unlimited” tier in addition to offering a range of capped tiers for those who figure they will use considerably less.

Wireless telephone companies, which historically sold usage in plans with buckets of minutes, are now moving towards offering flat rate options - pay one price, talk all you like, while the broadband industry, which marketed “unlimited, always on” connections for a variety of content they include in their advertising are now headed in the other direction, limiting consumer choice and access.

Time Warner has been complaining about broadband growth as both a content distributor and as a bandwidth provider, which adds an interesting twist to the rationale companies have to implement caps.

Saul Hansell, a reporter and blogger for The NY Times, noted company officials are growing tired of basic cable networks making them pay license fees for content, and then seeing that content being given away on the web.

Speculation that bandwidth caps may also have to do with limiting the amount of streaming video that consumers watch have also been offered as a reason for providers adding caps to their Internet service.

Time Warner’s rationale for bandwidth capping was, according to the company itself, to control what they felt was excessive use of their network.

“This is not targeted at people who download movies from Apple,” Time Warner spokesman Alex Dudley told the NY Times. “This is aimed at people who use peer-to-peer networks and download terabytes.”

And again that brings up the question of how a 20-40GB cap is the most effective way to control a minority of users running a torrent client or server 24/7 and consuming terabytes over an entire month.  That is the equivalent of dropping a nuclear weapon on a pesty moth.  The weapon does get the moth, but it also impacts on a far larger circle of customers that don’t come close to consuming that level of data.  Every ISP has language in their contracts with customers that allow them to cut off the 24/7 torrent addict today.  Some, including Comcast, have enforced these kinds of provisions before without a usage cap.

To date, consumer reaction in Beaumont has been mixed.  Many are convinced the caps are unjustified, too low, or simply too expensive for what you get.  Others object to the excessive rate of $1 per gigabyte for overage fees.  Some don’t like the idea of having to measure everything they do online in fear of exceeding a usage cap.  There are also some that like the idea of paying for what they use, and are willing to consider different plans based on what they actually consume if it also means they get the speeds they were promised in advertising.

Dudley argues that the usage cap issue is not a foregone conclusion at Time Warner.  Dudley told GigaOm that TWC’s experiment in Texas was just that – a test. If consumers don’t want it, the company is going to back away from it. “I think this is a trial and we are going to learn from this trial,” he said.

Stop the Cap! wants the company to learn as well.  If you ask customers if they’d prefer paying the same amount they do today for unlimited access or capped access, there will be little surprise as to the outcome.