NTC approves guidelines for capping the daily volume of data allowed per user

[oisilener1982]

mag strike ta ninyo bai! .. magpaputol ta ninyog internet...

Una lang, sunod ra mi

Luoy katong hilig ug download sa movies, music, etc

[personalmgt]

Did you guys even bother to read between the lines?

Sure, the idea of putting a BW allowance per user is bad. But that is not the point of the guidelines. What the NTC wants to point out here is that telcos should be true to their word about internet speeds and more reliability.

Do you guys know how bad leased lines and business lines even work? Try working in IT Park and disconnect everyones internet for an hour, you guys will see how disappointing and frustrating it is that you can't continue your work.

I dont give a rats ass about your torrenting and patches. This is about reliability and consumer welfare. I support the presented guidelines as long as the BW allowance gap is acceptable - of course there will be a different bracket of BW allowance per purpose. This is for all of us, so telcos can't damn abuse us when they please.

I'd rather have a reliable internet even with a BW cap than a no-BW cap with terrible connectivity.

[poldopunk]

@ OP: can you please post the link as to where you got this article from?
@ Everyone: here's a similar discussion but this one's on the other side. think: abuse.

edit: errr, scroll down a bit for the good parts. it seems the puns were up voted to the top already.

[k!ck@ss]

I'd rather have a reliable internet even with a BW cap than a no-BW cap with terrible connectivity.

as paying customers can't we have both? reliable internet with no cap?

[xirc]

ayay, daghan ra ba mi nag gamit aning smartbro namo..

[oisilener1982]

Did you guys even bother to read between the lines?

Sure, the idea of putting a BW allowance per user is bad. But that is not the point of the guidelines. What the NTC wants to point out here is that telcos should be true to their word about internet speeds and more reliability.

Do you guys know how bad leased lines and business lines even work? Try working in IT Park and disconnect everyones internet for an hour, you guys will see how disappointing and frustrating it is that you can't continue your work.

I dont give a rats ass about your torrenting and patches. This is about reliability and consumer welfare. I support the presented guidelines as long as the BW allowance gap is acceptable - of course there will be a different bracket of BW allowance per purpose. This is for all of us, so telcos can't damn abuse us when they please.

I'd rather have a reliable internet even with a BW cap than a no-BW cap with terrible connectivity.

Corporate ang among account sa pldt...lapas ang actual speed compared sa among subscribed speed and sa past 3 months 100% pa ang uptime. Kaduha na nawagtangan ug internet (whole day) ang mga residential users pero naa gihapon mi connection.

Ang among globe kung pila ang subscribed speed mao ra jud ila ihatag

Happy na unta mi na walay capping

as paying customers can't we have both? reliable internet with no cap?

Pwede ra man unta pero dako ug gasto ang mga Telco kay mahal kaayo ang Fiber Optics. Actually naa naman ni sila pero naa lang sa Makati 10mbps@4k, 100mbps@15k

Happy new year

[Resurgence]

for me, capping bandwith is a violation of my right as a consumer.

i mean, we people pay for them to provide us the service. They don't have any right to tell us "Hey, you should stop your internet for today because you have exceeded your bandwith cap." Their service already stinks, this "capping" will make it stink even more. And for you people who always blame the ISP for any problem with the internet connection, THINK!!! There are a lot of factors that could affect Internet connectivity, not just the ISP.

The local telcos do not have to implement capping right now. THEY NEED TO UPGRADE THEIR EXISTING FACILITIES. I'd agree to bandwith capping if their facilities were at par with those outside the PI, but with what they have right now, then it's a stern NO from me. And believe me, capping will not improve service or enable the ISPs here to deliver a service that is 80% of the time working....despite what they are claiming.

So before you start supporting bandwith capping in order to get fair service or whatever you claim that you need to get, take a look at the phone line outside your home or office. See if you can still remember the date, time or year that phone line was installed there.

[personalmgt]

*snip*

First, please try to understand how BW capping works. When you've reached the limit, it doesn't mean its the end of line for you. It means you have to pay the exceeding GBs. What makes you think that ISPs will block you of internet usage when you go over the limit makes it a fair business practice? I am against BW capping even if I support these guidelines. I do not want to pay $2 for each exceeding GB I use.

Second, this guideline has nothing to do with SOLELY capping our bandwidths, nothing to do with our pirating and stuff. Let me quote a part of my post:

But that is not the point of the guidelines. What the NTC wants to point out here is that telcos should be true to their word about internet speeds and more reliability.

If the point of this bill is all about reliability, sure, why not. But I'd be enraged if this was ALL about bandwidth capping - which is not. Which brings us to my third point and as I agree with you, they do not need to implement capping. Fix the infrastructure before implementing capping. South Korea has the best internet infrastructure, ever bisag naay bandwidth capping which is what the guidelines should shape our ISPs. But internet infrastructures don't fix themselves. So its either mo-mahal ang rates or bandwidth capping is the solution BUT should not be implemented along with the bill. It should be separate.

Sayonan raman mo mo-ingon na you are all against bandwidth capping. Of course, its the spearhead of the internet. But when you have crap tonnes of uncapped bandwidth pero you have terrible pings even to neighboring countries, slow STONE AGE ADSL technology, very-very low upspeeds and intermittent connections which is what businesses rely on and which is what the 622 complaints received by NTC were made of, then you guys should reconsider supporting this bill. It's not about BW capping, its about reliability, again.

[oisilener1982]

Kung reliability ang atong gipangita, ang 1st logical step ana kay Upgrade sa facility. Bisag naay bandwidth capping kung same ra gihapon ang infra, hinay ra gihapon

Ang problem lang ana kay dako ug gasto pero dapat lang cguro mo gasto ang mga Telco kay projected man na mo daghan ang subscribers sa years ahead. Kung tan-awon pud nato, billions man ang ila income so naa gud na sila ika upgrade

[Resurgence]

^

agree...dapat upgrade sa mga facilities...useless ang bandwith capping if same ra ghpn ang infrastructure.