Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Telstra Says Freedom (Plan) Has Its Limits

timothy posted more than 12 years ago | from the use-lite-mode dept.

The Internet 233

Toliman writes: "The former national Telecommunications company in Australia, Telstra, announced changes to their flat-rate cable and ADSL Freedom plan yesterday. The following email was sent to all users on the cable and ADSL residential plans -- restricting data download to three gigabytes per month with additional downloading attracting a hefty 35-cent fee per megabyte ($AU). Usage after that 3 gigabyte allowance is limited to the internal network if the customer does not choose to pay the fees for excess traffic." Read on for more.

"Slashdot readers in Australia will remember that Telstra's last pricing plan change was to charge per megabyte of traffic, including email and local network traffic, including paying the costs of receiving spam or unwanted data. During the rollout of optus @home's cable network, telstra implemented a flat-rate 'freedom' plan, offering a capped speed of 512kbit/128kbit with unlimited downloads suject to a flexible AUP, in order to compete with Optus's Network. Now the AUP has been changed to limit usage down to 3GB per month, reducing ADSL and cable users to the speed of a 28.8k modem.

Since the contract includes a reference to the AUP, the new limit is enforceable without express consent, and takes effect next month for all telstra 'Freedom' users. ZDNET australia, broadband.org.au, whirlpool.net.au, ausforums all have links to various stories, even a petition for Telstra to change their minds on this. As of this article, there are 4,300 users on the petition already quite angry, and more who are fed up with Telstra exploiting their monopoly of the internet bandwidth in Australia.

While some are calling this a purge of network 'abusers,' more rational users are asking for reasonable limits to be set up, if the old 'Freedom' plan cannot be reinstated."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered


At that price (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#172673)

It would be cheaper to actually buy the software I download. Imagine that!

Re:Thats not what I can broadband (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#172674)

According to the terms of the Telstra, you are not allowed to have more than one computer connected to the broadband line at one time...

Re:Stop and think for a while... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#172675)

Actually the freedom plan price is the highest. I can't give telstra any more money. If they had an option that was truely unlimited (as this one implied it was) and priced higher then I would of signed up for that instead.

Re:gee... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#172676)

Acutally..that was the CAP a while ago,..it has been increased twice now... it went from 3 to 6 to 8gigs in download, 2 in upload. But the real killer is the 15k limit in uploading. Someone said a old cable modem cannot be counted, wrong...it's the NEW samsung DOCSIS, and starting in July...they can track how much you download...expect to recieve an EMAIL from Videotron soon to confirm this...how do I know.... inside source (plus..I work for Videotron)

Old habits die hard (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#172677)

Telstra (formerly Telecom) has a long and colourful history as a Telecommunications Monopoly in Australia. They always had a well deserved reputation for acting however they liked, giving substandard service and shafting customers. With the derugulation and introduced competition in the very late eighties, they switched their advertising to being "Australian" and being for the people. They are however the same pack of money hungry bastards they always were. If they had a (truthful) motto it would be : "Its always the customers fault" and "F*ck you , we're Telstra"

Australian Broadband (2)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#172678)

I am currently one of the people who use Telstra's Broadband internet and I was quite happy with my service for the year or so I had it since the introduction of the 'Freedom' plan. I had just moved from a string of terrible dial-up isp's that had first been good only to be bought out and have their service go down the drain. I loved broadband with telstra, hey I still love Telstra broadband but for me this is the stick that has broken the camels back so to speak. I work for 10hrs a day 5 days a week and I enjoy coming home to do a bit of surfing and read the BigPond cable newsgroups (this is all I do I am not a heavy downloader) yet to my dismay just these few activites (and perhaps a bit of online gaming) put's me just over the 3gig limit per month. Myself and much of the BPA userbase was shocked with this and absolutely everybody is up in arms about it on the day we recieved the email the Telstra newsgroups were bombarded with more than 3000 new posts about the limit alone. Almost immediately petitions were signed, thousands of users sent emails to Telstra for them to leave their service and various other places (ACCC for instance). However it's only the next day and we are already finding out that Telstra have pretty much covered themselves with this change. They must have had their lawyers going over the changes with a fine tooth comb as from what we are hearing from the consumer watchdog's et al is that basically it's all legal. Telstra has flexed their muscles and we must all take it. The other other broadband company here is Optus@Home which doesn't seem to be in very good condition right now. Telstra have owned a monopoly on broadband services in Australia for quite some time now and they are simply reminding us that there is damn little we can do about it. Even Bill Gates (dare I say it) condemned Telstra for their stiffling of Australian broadband. Well Telstra's decision has forced me to flee to the relative safety of Optus@Home, that is until they decide it would be profitable for them to institute a similar system. So I am stuck having to shell out another AU$500 for that to be installed.

(Don't hate me just because I'm Anonymous!)

This is quite common. (3)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#172680)

ISP promises unlimited bandwidth, assumes that 99.9% of the customers are never going to use it, then panics when it finds itself losing money.

Bandwidth isn't free, cheap DSL connections only exist because most web users are content to spend vastly more time reading than downloading.

Anyone who uses their cheap connection to shift loads of data is costing the ISP money rather than being ripped off, therefore the ISP doesn't like it.

Sure changing terms of service to exclude anyone who actually tries to collect what they were promised is a pretty underhand thing to do, but IMHO you can expect to see a lot more of it in the future.

Existing Feedback (2)

shogun (657) | more than 12 years ago | (#172682)

Theres an existing interesting Thread [wireplay.com.au] on Wireplay (Telstra's gaming network) about it all. And also a petition [petitiononline.com] you can sign to protest against the move. Furthermore the ACCC [accc.gov.au] (Australian Competition and Consumer Commission) is already investigating [abc.net.au] the matter.

Bandwidth costs, you whinging bastards (1)

Stormie (708) | more than 12 years ago | (#172683)

Your Rights Online? What is this bullshit!?

Bandwidth is not a right, it costs money! Being at the arse-end of nowhere (to quote a former PM), Australian carriers have to pay through the nose for traffic from the USA (and afaik all connectivity to countries elsewhere in the world from Australia goes through the USA?). If you want to use that connectivity to leech more than 3 gig of pr0n and mp3z a month, then you have to pay for it. Quit your whining.

Jesus, this is as much of a "Your Rights Online" issue as crying about your "rights" to copy mp3z being infringed by the big bad RIAA. Fuckin' selfish generation.

Mod down at will, I've got the karma to take whatever abuse the slashbot moderators want to dish out.

Some perspective on Telstra cable plans (1)

The Qube (749) | more than 12 years ago | (#172684)

Telstra is claiming that the changes are meant to provide "improved network performance" because of "severe burden on the network" placed by the "abusers".
However, one needs to look at this with some information about the history - mainly that Telstra had placed a limit on the network speed (50kB/sec) precisely to limit the abuse of the system. And now, on top of that they also limit the volume usage.
What the links fail to mention is that, up until recently, Telstra advertised the service as "broadband, unlimited Internet access". Now, not only is it not "boradband", it is no longer "unlimited" either.
Furthermore, their previous Acceptable Use Policy defined the limit to usage as "reasonable usage". With the limit to 3GB per month, this means that less than 2.5% of the cable connection is useable. How one can go from "reasonable" to 2.5% is beyond me.
And to add salt to the wound, Telstra offers a "Big150" modem dial-up Internet account for $37.5/month for 150 hours. This gives 150hr x 3600sec/hr x 56kbit/sec = 30240000 kbit/month = 3.6GB / month. Cable service is $72.55. So, you pay twice as much and get 15% less service for your money.
Just a quick rant... TPTB couldn't care less...


Can it happen here (1)

SiliconJesus (1407) | more than 12 years ago | (#172687)

Of course it can. Once a company finds out that they are losing money on something, or more likely, that they can charge a customer more money for something, they will. Its how business runs. I'd love to tell @home where they can shove it, but unforunately, for my location, other than getting an ISDN or above (with a hefty payment increase), there really is no choice for me. Until there is competition in the marketplace, there are no options, and companies that see competition on the horizon have two choices, change their policy and product to include services that the consumer would choose over the competition, or squeeze every last penny out of them while they still can. I sure hope that the local telco's / high-speed providers don't get the idea to follow suit.
Secret windows code

Re:28.8kbps Is Generous (1)

JASegler (2913) | more than 12 years ago | (#172689)

They were most likely assuming that no one would ever use the internet for more than 8 hrs a day.

9.7*3 comes to 29.1k.

Re:I'm suprised that (2)

crisco (4669) | more than 12 years ago | (#172690)

We've always had it with Cox Cable, in theory at least.

Their $50/mo consumer plan used to be 7 .5 or 10 GB, is now 15 GB I believe. Rate capped at 1.5 down, 128 up, used to be 512 down, 128 up (and back in the day was 512 down, 64 up).

Rarely enforced, as their page to check this is usually down. Typically you don't exceed this unless you're a warez/mp3 hound or running a server.

I don't complain though, even under the old rate caps. Cox treated it as just IP connection, with no attempts to regulate what you did with it. None of this @Home garbage of what is and what is not a server.

Chris Cothrun
Curator of Chaos

Why not huge caches? (2)

Alan Shutko (5101) | more than 12 years ago | (#172691)

If I understand correctly, the most expensive bandwidth is the overseas bandwidth... the inter-AU bandwidth shouldn't be that expensive. If that's the case, why doesn't Telstra put up a couple TB web cache and require that people use it?

Or not (2)

TBone (5692) | more than 12 years ago | (#172694)

But this won't happen - the people that will get cut off are the being BEING DDoS'd, not the people performing the DDoS. Any single node in the DDoS attack sends a trivial amount of data - Well, maybe not trivial, but not exactly bandwidth-breaking amounts of data. The beauty of the DDoS is that it's power comes from the number of computers doing small parts to contribute to the larger scope. One computer sending 1K packets every second is no big deal. 1000 computers doing the same just dropped 1M of data onto your link every second.

No, the caps won't stop DDoS's - except that the DDoS's won't be able to hit their targets after the first 1G of data comes in after 10 minutes.

This space for rent. Call 1-800-STEAK4U

The Internet Cartel (2)

amorsen (7485) | more than 12 years ago | (#172698)

One reason bandwidth charges are common outside the US is that the US ISP's charge the rest for peering. I.e., a European ISP has to pay both for the use of the undersea cable between US and Europe, and then by the byte for the traffic going to and from the US part of the Internet.

The US ISP's typically do not pay for the traffic that flows to Europe, or for the lines connecting to Europe. I would imagine that the problem would be worse in Australia. Every few years a new cable is added between Europe and the US; whereas laying cable between the US and Australia might be a bit more expensive.

RE: Australia (OT) (2)

general_re (8883) | more than 12 years ago | (#172706)

Hey, I thought Australia Day was in January...

I used to generally have positive feelings about Australians and Australia in general. Now, I think "Fuck 'em - they'll get what they deserve." I say this after having witnessed the unleashing of an unprecedented horror on the rest of the English-speaking world by Australia, a horror that must be condemned by civilized peoples everywhere, a horror that must not be allowed to stand.

I am, of course, referring to Steve Irwin. "The Crocodile Hunter," as if you needed to be told.

Please, Australia, what did we ever do to you to deserve this? We like you - we like koalas and kangaroos. We don't like being bombarded with the fact that there are 300 species of snakes and spiders in Australia that are SO POISONOUS that people die just by looking at them from a distance.

But it's not all bad. I taped that Fedex commercial; you know, the one where Steve gets bitten by a snake and dies. Whenever I need to relax, I just pull out that tape and watch it. Again and again.

In a heavy Aussie accent:

"Lookit that! Isn't she a beaoooty? But she's REALLY mad! And I don't blame her a bit, 'cause I've got my thumb RIGHT UP HER ARSE!"

Please, no more. Please.

Re:Customers asked for it (1)

hayden (9724) | more than 12 years ago | (#172708)

They who are the bane of the 21st Century. The stupid people.

What's the fuss about? (2)

lar3ry (10905) | more than 12 years ago | (#172713)

The biggest problem with broadband is, as was mentioned in the Freedom letter, a small percentage of the users is responsible for a huge percentage of the pipe.

It is within their rights to come up with an acceptable usage policy, and they seem to be doing it in a responsible way. If they had wanted to do this better, they should provided their customers with the information that they were considering a cap, and asked for feedback from them.

I kind of like the name of the team: BigPond. Does that imply that they are just some little fish?

How will they provide for self metering? (2)

Quarters (18322) | more than 12 years ago | (#172719)

What application will they provide every user so that they can watch their download useage? Or, will they try to hide the numbers and then just start executing PING requests to users to put them over the 3GB limit each month?

Would be a nice way to suppliment their cash-flow, no?

Well, cool. (2)

mindstrm (20013) | more than 12 years ago | (#172721)

Personally, I wish @HOME would start billing on a bandwidth basis, and stop telling me what I can and cannot use on their network.

The more bandwidth you use, the more it costs them, therefore, the more they should charge you. Makes sense to me.

Re:Isn't this normal? (1)

maw (25860) | more than 12 years ago | (#172728)

Sadly, to get a passable price, you need to sign up for a contract. In my case, it's an 18 month contract.

I'm not sure if a change in the plan entitles me to leave Telstra Bigpond; I should look.

It's all a bit frustrating since Telstra isn't exactly hurting; instead, it has been making record profits. The excuse that it needs to cut back in service simply does not hold any water.

Re:This is quite common. (2)

maw (25860) | more than 12 years ago | (#172729)

Unfortunately, that is not the case. Telstra has to pay for its overseas links -- not just for having them, but also for the traffic it incurs.

Re:This is quite common. (2)

Large Green Mallard (31462) | more than 12 years ago | (#172738)

What's funny tho is that Telstra is also an international transit provider for Australia, meaning that if Telstra DID have to pay for the bandwidth, it would just be paying Telstra :)

Re:The Internet Cartel (1)

CSC (31551) | more than 12 years ago | (#172739)

I.e., a European ISP has to pay both for the use of the undersea cable between US and Europe, and then by the byte for the traffic going to and from the US part of the Internet.

This used to be true a few years ago; now the major European players actually are world-players by alliance or whatever. For instance, France Telecom, which is the biggest French (that is, within the country) backbone provider, happens to own Global One, and has remaining ties with Sprint among others, plus major or complete ownership of a bunch of transoceanic fiber paths and telecom satellites. Same goes for BT, Telia, etc.

OTOH smaller countries/ISPs are bound to pay for bandwidth, just like Mom&Pop ISPs in the States do.

It's time for competition ! (2)

CSC (31551) | more than 12 years ago | (#172742)

Here in Paris there are two choices for broadband: Cable, cheaper but with a mothly traffic cap, and DSL, somewhat more expensive but free of traffic limits. Net result is: Cable is vaguely stable (remember the overall market is expanding), DSL grows real fast.

I guess it's time for some competition in Australia...

Re:I'm suprised that (2)

CSC (31551) | more than 12 years ago | (#172743)

this hasn't happened in the states. I realize that this may be a bit offtopic but it does interest me. Do we just have the infrastructure to handle all of these spiffy new 1.5mb DSL lines or is there enough competition

Back-end bandwidth is cheaper in the States. Reason: you are right at the core of the network, while Australia is at the far-end, and has to buy heaps of undersea bandwidth (or fiber+hardware) for those pesky broadband customers.

[off-topic rant:] yet another case where market rules are biased towards the bigger players.

Mach3 Pricing (2)

jfunk (33224) | more than 12 years ago | (#172744)

You know that the blades last at least an order of magnitude longer than other ones, right?

The reason the blades are so expensive is because they are of a much higher quality. Gillette spent a ton of money researching the technology they used in those blades.

For me, they last virtually forever. I highly recommend them.

Re:Why not huge caches? (2)

PapaZit (33585) | more than 12 years ago | (#172745)

That's not how most caches work. The first user to hit a site makes the cache pull the data from the remote site, but then the cache saves the data. So, the cache doesn't grab any more than it needs.

I can quit any time I want. No, really. (2)

cisko (35325) | more than 12 years ago | (#172746)

There's only one way to effectively protest this kind of stuff... vote with your dollars. That would mean informing them of your intention to stop using thier service unless they change their plans.

I don't know if I could do that, though, if I didn't have an alternative to DSL. I have no interest in going back to the bad old modem days. That's a tough choice. It's like a drug dealer... first we'll get you hooked, then we'll take everything you've got.

Re:I'm suprised that (1)

thogard (43403) | more than 12 years ago | (#172748)

I can get any major telco in the US to terminate calls to Austrlia of just about the same price as int the US. Its the .000001 mile link to the Telstra system that costs so much.

In Australia you can expect a small business to pay about $1200/mo for 128 K isdn access. For that kind of money, you can call from the US to Australia for 24x7 on a good isdn plan.

Re:Existing Feedback (1)

thogard (43403) | more than 12 years ago | (#172749)

Its the ACCC that sets the prices!

If ACCC would let competition work and not be so involved with price fixing, telco costs in Oz might just be reasonable.

Re:Some perspective on Telstra cable plans (1)

thogard (43403) | more than 12 years ago | (#172750)

There is a board that deals with false advertising. I'm going to start looking into that just as soon as I get the letter.

The other options is a class action suit against Telstra (and maybe the ACCC?)

Thats not what I can broadband (1)

JohnnyO (50199) | more than 12 years ago | (#172758)

That comes out to ~ 100 MB a day, which is exceedingly low in my opinion. If it were me, I would fight it, assuming you have some sort of legal recourse ( a service contract or something)

When I lived in the dorms, we had a limit of 2 GB a week, and I knew people who regularly exceeded that.

What about people who split their DSL line and share the connection between two or more computers?

Sounds to me like it is time for a new ISP.

Me Too! (1)

www (58894) | more than 12 years ago | (#172762)

For the last several years, my ISP, Videon, has capped uploaded data to 1 Gig and downloaded data to 10 Gigs. Any extra upload data was $5CDN/128 megs and extra download data was $5/512 megs. They actively advertised as being perfect for multimedia, etc. (bandwidth intensive applications). New customers did not know about the bandwidth limitation in any obvious way unless they read the contract (while the installation guy is at their house). Although a small group of people (including me) raise concerns in the newsgroups, nothing was changed. As well, it did not matter where data was being transmitted to/from (i.e. they still charged for internal network data).

This has been going on for about 3 years (if I remember correctly) now, but may have stopped this month as Videon has joined with Shaw. One user reports going over the limit and not being charged. As I understand, Shaw will simply kick you off if you use excessive (i.e. way above 10G/1G) data transfer.

AOL (1)

vbrtrmn (62760) | more than 12 years ago | (#172765)

Were they bought out by AOL, or do they just like bad business?
What kind of drunk-ass CEO came up with that crap anyway?

microsoft, it's what's for dinner


Re: Australia (OT) (1)

netwerk (80818) | more than 12 years ago | (#172772)

1. its a kids movie
2. you think that all 20 million people in this country have a big meeting to decide what movie based in australia will be next??
3. get a life, please :)

Dwindling competition in the US (2)

Greyfox (87712) | more than 12 years ago | (#172778)

I noticed a couple of stories yesterday in various news sources talking about the dwindling competition of internet providers in the US. One of the fears mentioned was that big corporations would be able to actually control content on the net once all competition has been eliminated. Certainly, high speed access choices are dwindling with the alternative DSL providers going out of business left and right. The local baby bell just announced that they weren't going to put any more money into residential expansion of DSL either, since offering the service just isn't profitable enough.

Some number of years ago, I discussed running a T1 line into an apartment complex and wiring the whole thing with ethernet. At the time there were no other choices and in a neighborhood full of techies I'm sure you could find enough people who'd be willing to pay a bit extra a month for the service. It wouldn't take much to defray the cost of the thing (Local ISPs were offering T1 access for as low as $400 a month back then, though to connect to the MCI backbone, they wanted $1600 a month.) These days you could probably do something along those lines with a wireless microwave setup, kind of like the guys at http://www.plusten.com are doing. Doing an end-run around the telco like that may be the only way to get a fair shake in the long run.

Customers asked for it (2)

BobandMax (95054) | more than 12 years ago | (#172780)

According to the email, this is the result "many requests from customers for a defined usage allowance under the Acceptable Use Policy." Of course, we've all asked our providers (many times) to limit our otherwise uncontrolled downloading.

We just need to be saved from ourselves.

"Computers are useless. They can only give you answers."

Re:Just wondering (1)

jdcook (96434) | more than 12 years ago | (#172783)

I assume so because the email says that the change doesn't affect customers on "volume based plans." I read that as saying if you contracted for 6 gigs a month, you get 6 gigs a month. Of course, you will also pay for 6 gigs when you only use 5. But them's the breaks

No, it's not bait-and-switch. (5)

jdcook (96434) | more than 12 years ago | (#172784)

"Bait-and-switch" is when, for example, a store advertises something but when you go to purchase it, they are "sold out" (because they never had it) but have plenty of a different model that is "just a little bit more money."

The software model of cheap software / expensive support has evolved because a few people need much more support than others. If you wish to subsidize other people's need for support, be my guest. I'd rather have cheaper software and fix my own problems or research the answers online. (Thanks, Google!)

Video game consoles and razors are a different, classic pricing model. It is called the "razor pricing model." A razor is two things: a sharp thing and a handle thing. The sharp thing is a precision manufactured blade designed to scrape away unwanted facial hair (which has a tensile strength comparable to copper wire of the same diameter) with out scraping away the wanted flesh underneath. The handle thing is a modified stick. Which do you think is the value-add in this product? Moreover, the blade wears out. You may view this as part of the Illuminati's conspiracy to keep hirsute men in chains. If so, you are welcome to use a straight razor and a strap. Pay up your health insurance first though.

The Gillettes and Shicks of the world give away, practically, the stick part because it is cheap in itself and it will give you an incentive to purchase their blades in the future. Eventually you will see third-party blades that fit the Mach3. And you may or may not like them.

In addition, Gillette apparently spent $750 Million doing the R&D on the blade and blade assembly. There was an interesting article on it in the New Yorker a long while back. (Sorry, I couldn't find a link on Google.) I imagine they didn't do that for fun. I use the razor and am annoyed at the high cost of the blades. But, they do seem to give me a better shave than my Atra did and the blades seem to last a bit longer as well.

In short, none of the things you mentioned are bait-and-switch. The change in DSL pricing described in the email doesn't fit classic bait and switch either. Rather, it looks like a pricing change designed to avoid having to offer the service at a loss. It is more akin to bait-and-switch then the examples in your post because it is a change in the product. But they aren't pretending the product exists at all. There is *no* all-you-can-eat DSL anymore. This may be rude or unfair or gouging, but it isn't a bait-and-switch.

Welcome to Business in the 00's. (3)

zpengo (99887) | more than 12 years ago | (#172787)

Bait and switch. Works every time. Welcome to Business in the 00's.

It's a time-tested technique. Software companies for the past two or three decades have offered reasonably-priced software, only to follow it with astronomically-priced support. Video game consoles are sold cheap because the games cost so much. Even toiletries: I just bought a Mach 3 razor, and realized that they could make a mint on it even if they gave it away, because the blades for it cost $armleg.99.

Possible here in the states? (2)

browser_war_pow (100778) | more than 12 years ago | (#172788)

Probably not since most people within 5-10 years will have the choice of cable or DSL. The people will be able to tell their service provider to stop screwing them lest they go to another type of provider. Also it could get very nasty for the service providers here because at a minimum they would find the state regulatory agencies sinking their teeth into their hides, then the FCC would eventually jump in too. What telecoms sometimes forget is that they are actually under the jurisdiction of the state for all telecom transactions within the state. That means that here in VA, if GTE tries that kind of shit, the general assembly can pass regulations mandating that all Virginians have unlimited downloads. And it is perfectly constitutional as GTE is operating within state borders and the sole purpose of the law would be to regulate what goes on in GTE inside our state.

Re:28.8kbps Is Generous (1)

wizarddc (105860) | more than 12 years ago | (#172790)

It's wrong because it's not what their customers signed up for. They, I would assume, signed contracts for not only unlimited usage, but unlimited bandwidth. Telstra is changing the rules in the middle of the game.

28.8kbps Is Generous (3)

wizarddc (105860) | more than 12 years ago | (#172791)

I calculate even less b/w than a 28.8kbps modem

3 GB / 30 days
3072 MB / 720 hours
3145728 KByte / 43200 mins
25165824 kbit / 2592000 secs

9.7 kbps

That's just wrong.

Re:Welcome to Business in the 00's. (1)

mikael_j (106439) | more than 12 years ago | (#172792)

I just bought a Mach 3 razor, and realized that they could make a mint on it even if they gave it away...
they do actually give it away, here in Sweden they sent one to pretty much every 18-year old male, probably hoping for us all to be morons...

/Mikael Jacobson

"But surely we won't be still stuck with Linux in 25 years!?"

Not news to me (3)

Carlos Laviola (127699) | more than 12 years ago | (#172799)

This happens a lot on the abusive country that I live (Brazil). There is a major cable ISP called Virtua [virtua.com.br] that used to allow the ridiculous amount of 1 GB per month. Nowadays, they allow you 7! Gee!!

Even though Ajato [ajato.com.br] really sucks sometimes, it doesn't have this sort of bullshit yet. I hear there are a few other ISPs doing the same thing Virtua is doing... I just hope mine doesn't get "infected" by this evil idea :-(

Re:Welcome to Business in the 00's. (1)

fl1t (129930) | more than 12 years ago | (#172801)

they do actually give it away, here in Sweden they sent one to pretty much every 18-year old male, probably hoping for us all to be morons...

They do this in the US, too. They send it as a high school "graduation present"...

Aside from animal testing issues, I refuse to use gillette products because of this.


Re:28.8kbps Is Generous (1)

neoptik (130091) | more than 12 years ago | (#172802)

Explain how this is wrong? The ISP is clearly explaining exactly what they can offer at a particular price, and they offer it. The unlimited bandwidth offers only work on networks that have no bandwidth hogs like you and me. It makes perfect sense to charge people for what they consume. And furthermore, to say that these users are getting 9.7 kbps all the time is absurd. They can obviously peak at far more than that, its just that if they stupidly decided to spread out their 3 gigs over every second in the month, they would be downloading at a very low speed. ITs a stupid choice by them. What exactly is your point?

A lawyer is going to cost more than $300... (1)

iconnor (131903) | more than 12 years ago | (#172803)

... and Telstra knows this and counts on you not fighting it.

There is always the small claims court. You may not win - but imagine the personal satisfaction of dragging some Telstra rep down to the local magistrates court and sit through you explaining all the technical stuff to court :)

I'm suprised that (2)

prisoner (133137) | more than 12 years ago | (#172805)

this hasn't happened in the states. I realize that this may be a bit offtopic but it does interest me. Do we just have the infrastructure to handle all of these spiffy new 1.5mb DSL lines or is there enough competition (until all of the smaller DSL companies go bankrupt) to keep things pretty much free and open? I know that the satellite folks (hughes) implemented a cap on downloads awhile ago - actually, they would just reduce your bandwidth and not tell you - but I haven't seen this with cable or DSL....

Re:Welcome to Business in the 00's. (1)

The_Rook (136658) | more than 12 years ago | (#172808)

funny thing is, gillette spent the better part of 15 years convincing everyone that a two bladed razor is the best thing. now they are telling us that two blades are no good and that three are better.

i think i'll wait 15 years for them to come out with their four blade razor.

ARP etc (4)

techcon (139772) | more than 12 years ago | (#172812)

I have been running some IP accounting software for some time now. The Telstra routers (or something behind them) keep sending out ARP requests for random IP Addresses, about 130Mb a month. Do we get credit for this NO! Swap files with mates on the Telstra network and they still charge you (or record it against your usage) and it doesn't cost them a cent! All traffic charges should be accounted for on the border of the Telstra network not internal traffic, surely?

The are absolutely no options avaiable, no alternatives, I signed up for a rate capped unlimited service! I can't believe the ACCC have said this is all OK

Same in canada... (1)

tcc (140386) | more than 12 years ago | (#172813)

Videotron Montreal 6GB total quota, max 1GB upload... while I do agree with the 1GB upload limit for normal use, I think 5GB download for 50$/month is fairly expensive considering the DSL service (main competitor) is charging 40$/unlimited (and god they do get abused). I think there's 2 schemes that should be addressed, low bandwidth requiring joe should have a flat fee with low quota, like 3-5GB, and joe power should be able to fit in a price scheme, there's money to be made here and it's not by charging 35cents a meg or 2$/100 megs (videotron) that you'll do a profit, because that's more a restricting scheme then a profitable one... these people don't require extra tech support nor extra technician setup time, only some extra bandwidth, so I don't see why they don't do a pricing scheme to accomodate them as well, it's almost pure profit.

Most of the people I know switched. I didn't because they do offer a rock stable service, which DSL wasn't able to beat, but now it's fairly the same.

The analogy I see is, get a porsche, but don't drive over the speed limit... oh and you're limited to 50 liters of gas / months else you have to pay 10$ a liter. So yes you do get advantages, quick starts, arriving at the red light faster than anybody else, but in the end, is it really worth it?

Re:Stop and think for a while... (1)

Woefdram (143784) | more than 12 years ago | (#172814)

I feel like an average user and I sometimes hit 3GB in a day.

If a lot more ppl would use 3GB on a day, you'd be an average user. And I hope it will get that far soon, because then the ISPs would be forced to improve their networks. Until then 3GB a day can't be called average in my eyes.

Don't get me wrong here (as did the person who modded my original post to troll): I don't say you shouldn't use 3GB a day, but that it's only natural that an ISP doesn't like that too much. Same idea goes for a ferry: if you embark with your bike, you pay a whole lot less than when you park your roadtrain on C-deck. Doesn't mean that the truck driver gets an unfair treat, just that he uses more capacity and thus has to pay more.

If, however, Telstra doesn't offer more than this and calls this free then there's something not right, I agree.

Re:Stop and think for a while... (1)

Woefdram (143784) | more than 12 years ago | (#172815)

But there are STILL us geeks out there that use more than 3gb per month.

Count me in. And I hope there will be more and more users who do that, that's the best reason for an ISP to improve their networks dramatically. Let them invest in fiberoptics and stuff, I'd be happy to pay more if that would mean I had a truly fast and unlimited connection.

Stop and think for a while... (3)

Woefdram (143784) | more than 12 years ago | (#172816)

I don't really think this is an absurd idea, it happens everywhere. And let's be honest, for most users 3GB a month is more than they'll ever use in a month. There's just the few fanatic geeks who use their bandwidth as much as possible (#includeme) and place a relative burden on the network. Relative, yes, for if Telstra would have a better network, this wouldn't be an issue.

Sure, for the few souls that will have to decrease their traffic it sucks. But think of it again: a bigger, faster network costs money. Would it be fair to let the lightweight users pay for that, while only a few consume the bandwidth? Nah. The heavy users should think about what they want: decrease traffic or pay more. I'm sure there are options subscribe for unlimited traffic, but at higher cost. Will it be worth the extra cost, is the question these people should ask themselves. If 10 people in a city want a car that can do 200MPH, would it be fair for a car manufacturer to give all its cars this feature and increase the price? Or would it be more appropriate to sell normal cars to normal drivers and offer a sports car to those that want it?

It's easy to start yelling that Telstra sucks, but try to think what you would do if you were mr. Telstra and had to cut cost. If you really need the bandwith for downloading ISOs, movies, MP3s or whatever, you'll have to think about am I going to be fine with this, or would it be worthwhile paying more to continue this habit?

Isn't this normal? (1)

deepstephen (149398) | more than 12 years ago | (#172817)

I'm from England but I've spent a bit of time in Australia, and as far as I can tell this is just fairly normal behaviour. Almost every ISP I've seen out there charges per download.

Australia is in a pretty unique geographical position - it's a very big island, a very long way away from most other land masses. So telcos have to invest lots of money in laying under-sea cable, etc. So why shouldn't they charge per download? Won't market forces just determine what customers find acceptable?

The only problem is that Telstra, being a former government monopoly (much like the beloved BT we have over here) is in a pretty dominant position in the market, but I don't see why that won't change.

If you don't like Telstra's AUP, can't you just use a different ISP? This isn't flamebait, I'm genuinely interested to hear from Aussies who can tell me what other options there are.

Alternatives? (1)

vandan (151516) | more than 12 years ago | (#172818)

As far as I can see, only Telstra Bigpond and Optus@Home are offering broadband access for home users. I just rang Telstra today 'cause we have Foxtel in the building & Telstra & Foxtel share the same network. Does anyone know if there are any others out there?

Re:Advertising (2)

TeknoHog (164938) | more than 12 years ago | (#172822)

Isn't this exactly what Junkbuster [junkbusters.com] is for? I.e. not just blocking them for their annoyance. Great help when I'm on a modem connection. Of course another solution is one of the excellent text mode browsers like W3M [yamagata-u.ac.jp] .


local caches (1)

icedivr (168266) | more than 12 years ago | (#172823)

My ISP in Minneapolis discussed something like this a year or so ago when Qwest went and upped all DSL from 256k to 640K - they weren't sure they would be able to handle the increased bandwidth demands.

What they proposed at the time was to cap people's bandwidth to the internet after a period of sustained burst. They said they wouldn't cap internal network access.

The trick was, connecting to their cache server was considered internal network access. The upshot was, you got sustained high bandwidth but your data also got cached for others to use.

Of course telestra may already be doing transparent proxying, so who knows.

Re:I'm suprised that (1)

tester13 (186772) | more than 12 years ago | (#172829)

Internet Express (before they lost their Covad account) Only allowed a gig of transfer every month. After that, the user was billed a hundred bucks for a couple of extra gigs. Of course, I honestly can say that I'm not sad to see them die and let me out of that terrible contract (which at the time in NYC was one of companies doing residental DSL).

Re:This is quite common. (1)

ASIO (193653) | more than 12 years ago | (#172836)

Was conveniently written into the AUP and Terms & Conditions that Telstra could at any time change the policies with 30 days notice. I do agree with a limit, what I don't agree with is the amount. I mean, 1/2 an hour of streaming media, 1/2hr of surfing, email, and a debian sid update for the day, and oh no, in an hour and 1/2 or so, i'm already 50mb over my daily usage. 6-10GB would have been feasible but 3GB is just garbage.
Also, this is unconfirmed at this stage, I have not been able to get a complete answer, but rumours have pointed me to the 2nd example, 3GB across all 3 users, I have extra users on this ADSL plan, 2 of them, including my primary account, they each cost me $11. I've been madly trying to find out if this limit means 3GB per user, or 3GB across all the users. If it's 3GB across all the users then this service will be gone from my house, 33mb a day is unworkable for an ADSL service.

Re: Australia (OT) How do you think I feel?? (1)

ASIO (193653) | more than 12 years ago | (#172837)

Man, you think you've got it bad??????
I've got the acute embarrasment of only living 15mins drive from the IDIOT!

Funny how Telstra said it was never advertised (2)

ASIO (193653) | more than 12 years ago | (#172838)

This is a DIRECT quote from the ADSL FAQ posted by Telstra.
5.5. I am on the Freedom Plan - Why can't I view my usage online ?
Unfortunately, the usage meter service is not available to customers on the Freedom plan. This freedom to use the service with no data transference limits, subject to the Acceptable Use Policy, is the reason there is no usage meter with the Freedom Plan service. If you would like to monitor your usage, you may like to make enquiries with a relevant newsgroup. Members of the newsgroup may be able to provide you with suggestions about the type of software available, which is suitable for your needs. Telstra does not recommend one type of monitoring software over another.
Never advertised as an unlimited plan eh?

Re:Thats not what I can broadband (2)

gtx (204552) | more than 12 years ago | (#172840)

i'd like to point out that i break 100MB a day on my dialup connection...

in fact, i probably do this pretty much every day, so i probably pull down at least 2 gigs a month, every month, over DIALUP. sick, isn't it?

"I hope I don't make a mistake and manage to remain a virgin." - Britney Spears

Monitoring tool (1)

marcop (205587) | more than 12 years ago | (#172841)

Will they provide some tool to monitor bandwidth usage? Seems to me that if they will be metering usage then they should provide some feedback to users when they about to approach the cap and how much above the cap they have consumed. Without a bandwidth monitor users (who choose to allow above cap usage) could potentially accrue a large bill. Seems to me that there must be some law that states that metered usage of a product should have some means of telling the consumer how much has been used.

Re: Unfortunately, the ACCC has OK'ed this (2)

purplemonkeydan (214160) | more than 12 years ago | (#172844)

This was posted on aus.net.access earlier today:

Thank you for your e-mail to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission ('the Commission') concerning your broadband service.

The Commission enforces the Trade Practices Act 1974 ('the Act').

The Commission received complaints late last year concerning the enforcement by Telstra of its Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) on its cable product. The AUP allowed Telstra to restrict or suspend users from the service where Telstra considered that the use created an undue burden to the network or degraded use of the network by others. A large number of complainants were also concerned that they could not determine what level of use would breach the AUP.

You should note that the mere use of an AUP is not illegal, although the Commission does not encourage the use of this type of term.

The Commissions concern was that the service was advertised as "unlimited subject to an Acceptable Use Policy". It was the Commission's view at that time that the use of the term "unlimited" combined with what the Commission considered was a vague AUP could be misleading within the meaning of the Act.

Telstra subsequently agreed to remove the word unlimited from the cable webpages. The word unlimited did not appear on the ADSL webpages. Telstra also advised that it would change its AUP to allow for greater clarity in its enforcement.

Telstra has now changed its AUP. In relation to data limits Telstra has set the limit at 3 Gigabytes per month. In line with its contract Telstra has allowed users that do not feel that this limit is acceptable to cancel their contract. If you wish to exercise this option you must advise Telstra by the 18 June 2001.

The Commission is aware that some users of the service are unhappy with the outcome. However it should be pointed out that the service provided by Telstra was always subject to an Acceptable Use Policy. Previously this limit and how it was calculated was not clear to users. The Commission considers that the increased clarity of the AUP can only assist consumers in deciding to purchase products.

Similarly the Commission is aware that some consumers are of the view that the internet products should not be capped or limited. The Commission is not a price setting body for retail internet products and cannot determine product characteristics.

Should you have any queries please contact me.

I'm actually glad Tel$tra hasn't cabled my suburb, nor ADSL-enabled my exchange :)

This seems backwards... (1)

stonewolf (234392) | more than 12 years ago | (#172854)

I could be completely full of it here...

But, normally a network provider pays to for outbound traffic and gets paid for inbound traffic. This means they want more, a lot more, in bound (download) traffic than out bound traffic. This means they want you to pay to UPLOAD, not download data. They make money off of your downloads, and pay for your up loads.

The DSL service I have limits my UPLOADs to 5GB/month. Which normally means I can download about 50GB/month. And then they charge extra for each GB above 5GB I up load.

Sound like your ISP is truely ripping you off. Or else I don't know what I'm talking about.


Re:Not news to me (1)

droolfool (235314) | more than 12 years ago | (#172856)

The worst of all is that the contract I signed didn't have anythinig about that, they just said the limit was 1GB, but they didn't say what they would do after that (so, they couldn't do anything). Then, they told me they would NEVER charge for that. I trusted Virtua, now they are saying like "See how good we are, we are not charging YET!". I will fight in the Justice, because I WON'T pay, because the only contract I got with that limit was the one they sent me AFTER I signed the first one (so, it doesn't have any value at all, there's not my signature there)
------------------------------------------ ------
You think Bill Gates is evil?

Don't they really care about customers ? (2)

rcastro0 (241450) | more than 12 years ago | (#172857)

For the large majority of Freedom Plan customers, this allowance will not impact on their current usage patterns and will provide them with improved network performance. This is because around five percent of users take up 35 percent of total bandwidth at any one time.

I'd say that if their network does not have optimal performance today, it is because they designed it that way (knowing the current usage patterns, including the 5%/35% ratio and all). And just because they are going to force some high volume users to pay more for their traffic, or to change their usage pattern, or leave, does not mean that the utilization of their net will be lower. It could mean that they will be able to push their network investment schedule back a couple of months, and let the performance level crawl back to what it is currently. Considering the boom in the number of broadband users, and in the band used/user, this would not take long.

Another aspect, too, that should be considered, is: who cares about 3 Gb being downloaded/uploaded in off-peak time ? Why restrict it ? What impact does it have on costs, or on the network performance for the average user ? The answer is none -- no impact. Maybe we could one day evolve towards more economically sophisticated ways of charging for traffic [umich.edu] ...


Re:Just wondering (2)

DivineOb (256115) | more than 12 years ago | (#172865)

No, because they idea is for people to either never have a chance of hitting 3 gigs (like my parents) or to be terrified of doing so because of the high charges for going over...

good side effect--kill ddos'ing (1)

Proud Geek (260376) | more than 12 years ago | (#172866)

If outbound traffic is subject to this limitation, it will certainly be the bane of many script kiddies the world over. Anyone without the charging option would get cut off shortly if their computer was part of a ddos, and anyone who was on the plan would quickly rectify the situation after receiving their multi-million dollar bill...

Re:Why not huge caches? (1)

cavemanf16 (303184) | more than 12 years ago | (#172870)

If I understand correctly, the most expensive bandwidth is the overseas bandwidth... the inter-AU bandwidth shouldn't be that expensive. If that's the case, why doesn't Telstra put up a couple TB web cache and require that people use it?

Troll boy, wouldn't that actually blow the bandwidth problem out of the water (pun intended)?! Instead of cutting down cross continent access rates, they would have to suck it up continuously as they downloaded every domain in the world, constantly, so that they wouldn't miss a beat? Not to mention all those sites with server based code that wouldn't run on 'cached' websites in Australia. "This has got to be one of the worst trolls ever." (Simpson's comic guy)

Australias Very Own Evil Empire (1)

Libster (308301) | more than 12 years ago | (#172872)

Which ever way you look at it Telstra will always have the monopoly in Australia.... They are moving in on Asian comms companies [chinaonline.com] by the dozen and seem to barely even notice thier competitors leaving the game [yahoo.com] as quickly as they joined.
And just when you thought Ziggy couldnt get any luckier.... the Australian Government has rushed to assist him by subsidising satelitte broadband [bigpond.com] for customers in remote locations (aka: the outback)....
Oh, but its not about personal gain or pleasing shareholders, apparently its about delivery to Australia the technology that it deserves.
Ahh.... making it easier!

Clarification re: bandwidth limits (2)

freeweed (309734) | more than 12 years ago | (#172874)

I'll assuming you're a fellow pegger, Hi!

I've had shaw for 3 years now. Their TOS says nothing about bandwidth limits, beyond 'excessive use will have consequences' or something to that effect. For the record, I generally average about 30GB down, maybe 4-5GB up per month.

I've never been cut off, however when the upload becomes excessive they will give me a 5-minute timeout, then the connection resumes :)

Someone suggested 're-booting' the cable modem, as apparently this is where Shaw gets their figures from, and guess what? IT WORKS! I haven't been kiced off in months, including the 5GB upload I did one day :)

Re:What's the fuss about? (1)

Narcissus (310552) | more than 12 years ago | (#172877)

Unfortunately BigPond are not "little fish": they are the internet arm of Telstra: the company that had the monopoly over all telecoms until not long ago. AUP's are fine, except this one is unbelievably restricted, especially as our download speeds are capped to begin with.

Optus@home (the other cable 'net provider), on the other hand, have a great AUP: you can use no more than 10x the average use of all users. That means that if everyones use increases, then obviously yours can, too.

Telstra's cable service is rediculous: it's more expensive than Optus (who also give you a free landline), slower than Optus (whose users regularly get speeds of 5-10x my download speeds), and obviously now this useless AUP.

Unfortunately, Optus can't have overhead cables in Bondi, so I'm stuck with Telstra...

My advice to anyone considering cable: go Optus. They shook Telstra awake when they started here for landline calls, and they're doing the same for cable internet. And when you sign up with them, let Telstra know you did, and why!

Re:Existing Feedback (1)

Narcissus (310552) | more than 12 years ago | (#172878)

My one question to this is: if the ACCC is setting prices too low to be supported, how is it possible for Optus to charge less for a better service?

Or are you going to tell me that they are losing money to increase market share?

Either way, it could be worse: imagine if OneTel had offered this Freedom plan to us :) Well, I suppose we might have been able to get a cheaap cable modem out of them, if not any service...

Re:28.8kbps Is Generous (1)

Charm (313273) | more than 12 years ago | (#172880)

Because in most of the country they are the only ISP, they own all the major links. If you want broadband you have to go with telstra (Fsckers) in most of the country and there is no other plan, no fscking way out of it. Hint there are other uses for broadband such as playing games, now playing games is out of the question for most of the country. Why do you think we are so upset you probably have a choice of ISP but we have NONE.

This is bad for Optus@home users (1)

k-flex$ (315275) | more than 12 years ago | (#172882)

The fact that O@H's only competitor allows 5 times less data downloaded per month will prove a major threat for O@H customers. We can only hope optus does not follow this lead, announcing:

"we now implement a generous 6 gig a month! twice the competition"!


Re:Monitoring tool (1)

nim_eye (316621) | more than 12 years ago | (#172883)

there is a usage option on their software that they provide you with the modem but when you click on it, it sends you to a webpage informing you that they have concluded a trial of the service and they are in the process of collating and reviewing the data.....read, they are figuring out how much they can get away with charging you

what really gets me is...... (2)

nim_eye (316621) | more than 12 years ago | (#172884)

i'm one of those poor users who has just signed up for a 12 month contract with said telstra and what really pisses me off is that as far as i can see, I've got no choice but to live with this for the next 12 months or pay a hefty fine (about $300AUD i think)....unless...any of you budding lawyers out there know if this is in breach of my contract in anyway? i mean i signed up for no download limits..(or don't lawyers read this site) nim

Just wondering (2)

TequilaMonster (321655) | more than 12 years ago | (#172886)

Assuming that it costs $FOO per month for this 3gb limit, wonder would they allow someone to pay $FOO x 2 for 6gb month, and so on?

Tequila - drink of the gods.

Infrastructure restriction? (5)

s20451 (410424) | more than 12 years ago | (#172888)

Take 3 GB/mo, divide by (31days/mo)*(24hrs/day)*(60min/hr)*(60sec/min) and multiply by 8 bits/byte, and you get 26882 bits/sec - on average, a little less than a v.34 modem. Could it be that ISP infrastructure is designed for 28.8 kbps, even though the technology exists through DSL to increase the peak data rate?

On a related note, most companies find that "unlimited access" to a resource that normally costs per use is a bad business strategy. In Canada, "unlimited" long distance services were recently introduced, then caps were rapidly put in place when it was realized that people would phone across the country and leave the line open all night, just because they could.

They always get the short end of the stick... (1)

User 6437829468 (413056) | more than 12 years ago | (#172889)

Is it me, or do the Australiens always get screwed with things related to rights and internet? Thank god I live in a country with actual freedom... no not America (I used to live there). Germany :) now about the forcing people to join the army after high school (13th grade), they sorta gotta work on that. : PLEASE DON'T FLAME ME BECAUSE I'M GERMAN : THANKS, - MicK

who's good, anyway? (1)

spacefem (443435) | more than 12 years ago | (#172891)

Hell, who cares. I'm sick and tired of every internet service in the entire world. This doesn't surprise me at all, it's not isolated either, companies just don't see a need to make people happy no matter who they are. Like a lot of people, I thought broadband was going to be like heaven, I pictured these endless fields of bandwidth (think Julie Andrews in Sound Of Music) and got hell, we signed up for the other evil, DSL. It took forever to get signed up, they wanted my firstborn male child in exchange for a second IP address, the cap is nuts, and the service isn't fast. So anyway, Australia, I feel your pain and dissapointment, we all hope for the best with these things, I am a bitter angry disconnected person and this article just contributed to that. Time to try another service. Sigh.

gee... (2)

PYves (449297) | more than 12 years ago | (#172893)

In Québec, the main cable provider (Videotron) charges a fee after 3 Gigs of download and 1 Gig of upload.

On the other hand, the adsl providers have a flat rate.

The day I switched from 56K to ADSL I downloaded 3 gigs worth of stuff, so let's just say I don't regret my choice ;)


Re: Australia (OT) (1)

nexywoo (456002) | more than 12 years ago | (#172895)

You yanks only have yourself to blame! you are the ones that liked crocodile Dundee! why else did they make a sequel in yank land and **SHUDDER** a 3rd one.


Re:How will they provide for self metering? (1)

nexywoo (456002) | more than 12 years ago | (#172896)

If it is the same usage meter that was used a few years ago. It's a simple bar graph that should update twice a day, but in the real world it used to lag between 1-2 weeks or more.
at one stage it was even lagged behind by a whole month.

No need for the ping stuff, all the upstream and downstream is going to be counted to the 3gigs so with all the overhead and checking mail , refreshing slashdot ;) is going to eat up the usage nicely..

Links and results (2)

nexywoo (456002) | more than 12 years ago | (#172897)

Below are a few links, not going to well, Telstra have written the terms and cons very well. One thing is for sure, They have another public relations nightmare like they did back in 1999.

http://australianit.news.com.au/common/storyPage/0 ,3811,2085164%5E442,00.html [news.com.au]

http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/2001/06/06/ FFXHH7FZLNC.html [theage.com.au]

http://it.mycareer.com.au/breaking/2001/06/06/FFX7 G6FZLNC.html [mycareer.com.au]

http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/telco/story/0,2000020 799,20227632,00.htm [zdnet.com.au]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newslink/nat/newsnat-6j un2001-50.htm [abc.net.au]

http://www.whirlpool.net.au [whirlpool.net.au]

http://www.a1h.com [a1h.com]

My new patent (1)

Zen Mastuh (456254) | more than 12 years ago | (#172898)

A process which measures internetwork data consumption and alerts an individual when consumption approaches a preset arbitrary limit. The consumption metric is set to zero at the beginning of each month of the Gregorian calendar.

Hey aussies, pay up! Send $10USD/month to Zen Mastuh, c/o slashdot.org . G'day! I'm rich!

Re:Stop and think for a while... (1)

Zen Mastuh (456254) | more than 12 years ago | (#172899)

And let's be honest, for most users 3GB a month is more than they'll ever use in a month...

Ummm...I feel like an average user and I sometimes hit 3GB in a day. Anybody else have this problem? Two words: streaming audio.

Re:Stop and think for a while... (1)

TrollMaster3000 (457831) | more than 12 years ago | (#172900)

But there are STILL us geeks out there that use more than 3gb per month. For stuff like, browsing, downloading, web-serving, mail servers, DNS, FTP servers. Stuff like that. People who don't really care what the average AOL-like M$ user does.

Tel$tra and the dark side. (1)

dardalion (457890) | more than 12 years ago | (#172901)

Similiar to the States, recently in Oz we've had a deregulated and somewhat privatised telephony, internet, and broadband market. Optus, which is a major competitor of Telstra, installed an Acceptable Useage Plan, which measured the amount of bandwith used by all users. Its a rolling 14 day check on the average of all users, removing the top and bottom 5 percent. Any use over the value 8 generated an alarm, 10 means disconnection. As an Optus broadband user, I figured their plan restrictive at first. Having now seen the Telstra " unlimited " use plan now held down to /3/ gig a month..it looks a lot more pleasant * grin *. However, what Telstra get away with, you'd think the other Telco's will look closely at. Three gig is simply not enough for an unlimited contract plan. Whatever will happen next...no Counterstrike?!? * grin * Cheers, Dardaspam

Advertising (2)

BigNumber (457893) | more than 12 years ago | (#172902)

If you're now being charged by the byte that you download, this means that you're actually paying for those banner adds and other popups on websites. It's bad enough we're subjected to advertising we don't want to see and now we'll be expected to pay for the priveledge?! I sincerely hope this doesn't become a worldwide trend.

Re:Isn't this normal? (1)

Angel of Retribution (457901) | more than 12 years ago | (#172903)

Yes, this would be true however Telstra's decision (because Telstra make up such a stupidly large amount of the broadband market) no matter what it is will most likely have whatever they say handed over to most other ISP's. As far as cable goes it's either choose to use BPA (BigPond Advance) or Optus@Home. That's it for cable. For ADSL it's slightly different you have a choice of either Telstra or Telstra's network repackaged under another name eg iPrimus. So the only thing you can do is support O@H cable, which since it's only them and Telstra can easily put in a slightly higher monthly rate and charge after that because there's nothing anyone can do, I mean what can you do? Go back to dial-up? As for ADSL 99% if not more of it is now volume based and those that aren't have very strict limits on what you use. And even if your lucky enough to find some little ADSL place where you like the service and they are nice people you are still supporting Telstra as EVERY ADSL telco in Australia uses their network.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account