Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ianathuth
Since when has any ISP introduced a cap to reduce illegal use of bandwidth?
|
That was one of the strong, but unproven, rumours when the ntl cap was first started. The British Phongraphic Industry (the UKs equivalent of the RIAA) declined to comment to AntiCap, in reference to a BBC online news article that had implied just such a connection.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Incognitas
Oh has this denigrated to the usual those for a cap because of the nasty people downloading more than their fair share versus those who think that if they are not downloading 24/7 they are being cheated with the online gamers carping from the sidelines because they have too many pingpongs.Why do we end up going down the same road over and over again?
Come on it's nice to have something positive from NTL for once.What ever their reasons for doing so,I for one,am not going to look a gift horse in the mouth.
Just as long as the 'coming soon' really does mean coming soon.As they are trying to keep up with Telewest in this I think there is a good chance that it does.
So lets us  and try to  a little less
Incog  |
As a staunch AntiCapper, I have to agree that in this instance, the cap is not the real issue, although in it's current ntl precsribed form, it does reduce the advantage of the speed increase. Ultimately the free speed increase is an interesting development for the broadband industry, one which the ADSL ISPs may have difficulty in following. The differences between cable and ADSL will now be quite marked in terms of speed, price and use limits, which will make customer choice less than straightforward. Time will tell whether the subscribers whether price or speed is the more important (where customers have a choice).
If ntl cannot implement, this in their "Summer" timescale, they could find themselves without any real advantage, as the ADSL industry will have time to develop it's answer.