So, what I can see so far is:

A. We give more $
B. They provide less
C. Why exactly is TS providing VPN / "downloading" service?

Great meeting indeed.

And I will agree to a form of FUP, PROVIDED that they have more in return for us.

_Since_ 90% of users _underuse_ Streamyx. Base charge for a 1mbps line can be RM30. And charges go as that goes.

So to enforce equality, they must also play a fair role.

Hey, I'm just saying, logically this is right, but ya know, this is where we live. And for the people, things will always work against you.

Do not accept their fascist policies. They are asking users to compromise with them. They have nothing offered for the users. People want to download what they need, and they want them to pay more, isn't that more or less the same as, eating bandwidth? Except it's being paid for now.
They can make it cheaper for users that don't require much bandwidth..

Let's see, MOST people i bet subscribe to RM88 onwards. Now why wouldn't people subscribe for lower packages? Time based. So before they start "capping" the 10% heavy users, they should make it cheaper to the 90% users that don't "overuse" bandwidth. They cannot just take benefits for themselves when playing the saint -- using communism to distribute bandwidth.

Never compromise. Not even in the face of Armageddon.

How come you people @ the meeting only talked about how users must compromise/give more/take less? Has there been ANY talk how TMNet will play its role? TMNet won't give / provide in any form?

Your verification of truth is what they tell you, and you believe everything they tell you.

Nobody can answer me? There's no indication of TM playing its role in the word "Fair".

Users are to give more, or pay less. NO ONE TALKED ABOUT TM GIVING TO THE MAJORITY.

No additional int bandwidth, no cheaper rates.

Answer geniuses @ meeting.

The only truth i see so far is them having more to gain and you're helping them. With annual profits like theirs, no share in the fair play?

Unifi eating bandwidth so streamyx got non left -- cockamie theory
but you also termed bandwidth limited resource -- a resource that needs to be drilled??

So there's enough bandwidth, but yet there isn't?

The only truth I see so far from you is you answer questions that are easy, and what most ask here -- you ignore.

You can apply FUP on Streamyx users, but right now you can't do so for UniFi. Not yet?.

You never fought for us. All that you've fought for benefits them -- more $$.

You forgot.

3,000,000

10% heavy users = 300,000
90% = ??% usage

No? And people upgrade to unifi for... well, not speed/bandwidth?

Good math, a lot of assumption, and no truth. Given they know usage patterns, why not just ask them about it? Since you're so close to them. Not like there are any competitors to make use of such info.

So you fight for yourself, just like them. And I'm all in for nationwide QoS, but they need to sweat a little. As it stands, the only one benefiting from all of these is TM right now. So truth is, you're really fighting just for them.

Get real, before they implemented FUP.. people complained about slow? lag? problems? Have they ever announced network degradation due to HEAVY usage?

No.

It was always about cables breaking. Service maintenance. System upgrades. I didn't hear much about heavy usage or filled pipes.

Has overall internet sped up for us? I've only seen everything going downhill. Did you talk to them about what that's all about? Didn't bother to ask?

Think in terms of money. With what they are doing, will it earn them more, or less money?

Cuz in Malaysia, they can evade lawsuit some way, some how.

Heavy users should pay more, lighter users should pay less, but not the same.

This then I'll believe they are really doing something.

don't think elec bills cost much for pcs..

avg .15-.2 kwh

no load.

shouldn't cost too much..

I ask TM and those @ Meeting

Why must users give in and take less? while TM earn more? Annual profits (undervalued definitely) seem to be doing so well?

Before FUP, why didn't TM announce network congestion issues due to overload? heavy usage? Why were slowness issues related to CABLE fault, system upgrade, service area maintenance and other crap but NEVER heavy usage? Was heavy usage even ever a problem?

I make a better calculation for you.

30,000 Unifi, say average user = RM200 = RM6,000,000 (assuming no registration fee, and ignoring biz users)

3,000,000 Streamyx, average RM100 = 300,000,000 (assuming no registration fee, and users use average of 1MB and no biz users).

Year gross profit = RM3,672,000,000

So now, i suppose TMnet is a public company. How is $ spent?

Telstra = Telephone + Internet
TM = Phone
TMNet = Internet.

Do not compromise with them for they will only compromise you. Everything that is planned for will benefit them in every way. They have nothing to lose.

I repeat, if they are going to take something away from the users, they also need to return something. Wanna do 25GB / month cap? They can also bill RM25 / month. We'll dl 75GB more to make it RM100 / month and they have their profits there.

In any case, to whatever they are doing. Say no.

Read the slides folks. "We listen".

If we say yes, all the more they will do it. They'll later say, the users wanted this form of schematic, RM88 for 1mbps and 25GB cap. You're welcome to pay more. On top of that, a form of FUP will still be in place.

We say no in the sense of disagreeing. Well, they'll probably still do whatever they like.

The difference is suggesting + accepting / disagreeing the bad ideas. They'll only say, hey you guys suggested it! Tentris talked to you, and you responded! Tentris suggestions are half bad, because it only benefits the company. They must lay something on the table too. In the first place, FUP should not be in place and should never be based on the agreement we signed up with. But hey, I suppose this is where we live. We can change policies as and when we like.