No sir. The cable & other equipment still belongs to service provider. You are only allowed to use it only for the sole purpose that is mentioned in the agreement. They day you terminate the connection, they take back their cable back.
And how does your example compare to public resources like spectrum & coal blocks?
huh ? an ISP is the one being referred to here. If public lines could be leased out the story would be different ie unbundling. But that is not the case so ISP lay their own cables and therefore gets to say what goes on on their network.
Spectrum is leased, to different operators who can offer whatever services they choose to or not during the period of the lease.
Show me otherwise. You are the one asserting public this or that. not my job to prove negatives. yours is to make the point.
put it another way, if i were to make the same 'public argument' as you i'm unsure of being able to adequately defend it. So give me more.
Go complain the govt. for their policies just like we are trying to do about net neutrality.
i'm suggesting if you care so much about the internet YOU should be doing what i advocated instead. But you dont care. all you will whine about is rising prices and say cartel failing to understand the causes behind. This is the ISP's problem, let them do the lobbying. When they do that you say corrupt. So they pass on the cost to you. got it now ?
Again no. As the internet penetration grows, and more content i put, the consumption will grow. Internet is an essential commodity which cannot be regulated by increasing costs.
Whether it can be regulated or not remains to be seen. The govt is very intent on doing just that. They just haven't figured out how to do so yet. This is one attempt in that direction. Telco says i want to charge for services a and b and i think i can make a profit. Govt says whats my cut. Only so good as long as people are willing to pay.
Another reply is ours is a price sensitive market.
They won't. In 2011, data packs used to cost around Rs. 50-100 per GB. Now it is 175-250 per GB. Have people started to use (let's say) 500MB per month instead of 1GB per month? The consumption remains same.
Exactly. The reason consumption has increased is more people have joined the network. Now so long as that continues then profits can be made but you are not getting repeat customers just new ones. My behaviour over the last few months is a good example. I doubt you or anybody else would be different. You will figure out eventually what the cheapest way to perate is and if its not possible then you will not use it. And rely on alternatives instead. That is a net loss in the medium to long term.
If not, why the telecom operators are adamant to do so? Their managers and accountants are stupid?
why did airtel start to charge for whatsapp AND then withdraw it. Two inexplicable actions.
See the T&c's
mentioned by swatkat and then click the link to airtels page. They ain't there any more. where did they go ?
If you are talking about broadband, then no the speeds have not gone up. BSNL still has the same plans was 7-8 years ago. Even they earlier used to have night unlimited on some packs, which they pulled off. Airtel tariffs have hardly improved. (Only Bangalore, Hyderabad & Chennai guys are lucky to have ACT).
Because minimum speed to qualify as broadband has not moved much in that time. There is a push to make it 2Mb/s. I was referring to my journey from 48kbs to 256kbs then 512 and eventually to 2Mbs and presently 10Mbs. course i never see those high speeds any my average is around 4Mbs.
The problem with ACT is reliability for me. They are cheaper because their cables go through trees. airtels is an armoured underground cable. ACT always boast about their prices but when i spoke to a manager and asked are your cables underground or over peoples houses. no answer. my cable tv goes out on a regular basis. Lucky i don't watch much tv.
Also ADSL isn't a shared medium. Your speeds are more likely to remain stable compared to a highly subscribed cable service. I would pay extra for ADSL over cable any day for reasons mentioned. I have always had a choice of numerous cable alternatives but chose to stick with airtel. i went through hell with the local guy until airtel showed up in my neighbourhood. At least I thought i went through hell until i read still worse experiences of others.
In case of 2G, its speeds have become pathetic & miserable to the point of being unusable in comparison to what it was a couple of years ago, despite the insane increase in tariff, as per my experience.
That is a sure sign of over crowding. A lack of capacity and the use of disincentives to alleviate over crowding.
we need more spectrum and not charge the moon for it. In fact this present move to attempt to charge more should be seen in the same context.
I won't comment on 3G as it is too expensive to my requirements.
Right, again same problem. if you read airtels paper you would know why.
My behaviour with 3G seems to very close to yours. It kinda sucks because the whole point of a mobile platform is to do mobile computing and interact with the world. The preset scenario does not exactly encourage it. Most people use wifi at home on thier mobiles. Not out on the street unfortunately. This must change. Only the govt can do it. Lots of overdue reform is required here.
Why the hell we had to pick such rare frequencies instead of sticking to what most other countries have chosen. govt is squatting on those bands and will not or cannot release it.
Before crying out loud for unbundling (which BTW has nothing to do with the matter of this thread), why don't you look what quality of service vs price, craptel is providing in cities where it has its own last mile connectivity. And how it has given up on cities like Bangalore & Chennai due to ACT & Beam. Don't you think they'll try every hook & crook to destroy these small players?
Unbundling is one aspect of a regime that needs reform. the ISP's have outlined suggestions how to improve the situation in the Sept last year consultation paper.
is anybody listening ? this push for NN is a symptom of a bigger problem. You say cartel i say the present system cannot handle demand. So the stop gap quick fix is curb demand (!)
The rest i've already answered. It works for some and not others. And when i ask around i find more people concurring.
Which is true by the fact. Again, go complain the govt. on why they're running such companies at loss.
No need, service is discontinued if it becomes unprofitable. end of story. Who are the losers ? both the company and its customers who will now have to find other alternatives. maybe better possibly worse.
It should be. Or do you want this also to be rich-exclusive like education & healthcare?
should be is a different argument. It is not a right at present.
