Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years.

Thanks,

CNET Support

General discussion

AOL price hike for dial-up

Feb 23, 2006 1:14PM PST

Hey Molly,

I'm definitely not on the side of AOL on this, as I hate them with a passion, but you did miss a minor point about this price hike. According the Associated Press article:

"Those who can't get or don't want broadband can request lower-priced plans, including an unadvertised offering of about $18 with a one-year commitment (the broadband plans through the Baby Bells also require the year's commitment).

But if they do nothing, they are kept on the dial-up plan and will be charged $2 more a month.

Left unchanged are the $14.95 limited plan with 10 hours of dial-up and the $239.40 annual prepaid plan, which works out to $19.95 a month and allows subscribers to get a partial refund if they cancel early."

Nevertheless, it's still pretty evil (or 'greedy' .. I guess it's interchangeable here) of AOL to force dial-up users to pay the same price as broadband users.

-Terry

Discussion is locked

- Collapse -
Dial Up
Feb 23, 2006 7:56PM PST

Dial up is insane.

I use the net allot but seeing as I like to live in a big old house in the middle of no where I have a wonderful 14kb/s dial up connecting (that sometimes works). Last month, my surfing cost

- Collapse -
ugh
Feb 23, 2006 10:00PM PST

14kbs.. I don't think I could take that.

My uncle has the same problem. He used to have cable but when he moved (to the middle of no where) he could only get dial up. He no longer ueses the internet.

It seems like everywhere needs better broadband penatration.

- Collapse -
its a pain
Feb 23, 2006 10:45PM PST

Most of my work and stuff is on the web so I usually see my self staying in internet cafes after school and most of the weekend.

Its such a shame as if I were cooking at home, I would check how to make the stuff ont he web, not I have to starve, eat beans on toast or read a book!

Always on makes such a large impact.

Where I live, it?s more or less impossible to get high speed. I am suppressed we ever get fixed line telephone! It could be worse however, I could have no modern technologies and have to resort to smoke signals,

- Collapse -
This is why we need WiMax ..
Feb 23, 2006 11:33PM PST

WiMax was developed for this purpose, to have broadband access for remote locations, who could not get cable, DSL, or even satellite. And where do the investors want to roll it out and test it? You guessed it. In the cities, where it would be the most profitable. Doesn't that make you want to just smack your head on the desk?

Internet and broadband really need to be regulated (I think that's the word I'm looking for) as a commodity like electricity is. I think that will be the only way broadband will truly be made available everywhere.

-Terry

- Collapse -
Or BPL
Feb 24, 2006 12:37AM PST

Yea, I agree. About 20% of the US population has no access to any kind of broadband. And many of them have poor or no access to dial up, and what they get is expensive.

Satellite is an option for some, but it is laggy, and expen$ive as hell, both from equipment and monthly fees.

I'll all for either WiMax, or Broadband over Power Lines. (BPL). Yes, I know the amateur radio folks are throwing fits about it. The interference claims are overstated, and the benefit greatly outweighs the potential harm. Providing the utilities were forced to provide service to rurual areas not covered by current coverage I think they should be allowed to roll out that service.

- Collapse -
I'm for BPL as well
Feb 24, 2006 1:07AM PST

I also agree with you that the interference claims are completely overrated. BPL would probably be the perfect solution, especially for the remote and rural people. Heck, I'd even switch if they offered it to me.

-Terry