Well I know one thing, Comcast isn't rolling out DOCSIS 3.0 and Verizon isn't rolling out FIOS because they enjoy pissing money away. I think if anyone here knew exactly how much this costs they'd go into business for themselves.
Homerboy
Lifer
- Mar 1, 2000
- 30,890
- 5,001
- 126
Yeap I know exactly how much they cost. Wanna buy one?
There is a trick here though, check your peering tables. Companies like RR and Comcast are starting to pull the plugs on may of the top backbones for free peering and making them come back to them for paid transit. Cable companies and the other "eye ball" networks are finally realizing that they have the vast majority of consumers and they shouldn't be giving away that commodity to other networks that have the content... there will soon be an epic battle.
I just did an online chat with a comcast rep last night and got my internet lowered from 42.95 per month to 33 for 12 months.
Lets look at some numbers.
1000 users
10 are "the baddies"
2,500,000gb of allowed bandwidth for those 1000 users (250gb * 1000)
900 users using 50gb each is 45,000gb (this is being very generous for granny and her knitting websites)
2,455,000gb left for 10 users or 23.9tb.
1mb upload on for 24/7/30 would be 303gb upload.
8mb download on for 24/7/30 would be 2.07tb downloaded.
Max possible is 2.5 tb with an 8mb/1mb connection.
What's the issue? I couldn't care any less about P2P or leeching or whatever reasons someone is using their connection. There is no way .01% can use more bandwidth than what is available for the other 99.99%.
On a related note, you can bet your ass that if the cable internet business was bad, the owners/investors would have sold a long time ago. The rich don't stay rich by continuing to own or invest in companies that lose money.
*removed an extra 0 from the baddies
1000 users
10 are "the baddies"
2,500,000gb of allowed bandwidth for those 1000 users (250gb * 1000)
900 users using 50gb each is 45,000gb (this is being very generous for granny and her knitting websites)
2,455,000gb left for 10 users or 23.9tb.
1mb upload on for 24/7/30 would be 303gb upload.
8mb download on for 24/7/30 would be 2.07tb downloaded.
Max possible is 2.5 tb with an 8mb/1mb connection.
What's the issue? I couldn't care any less about P2P or leeching or whatever reasons someone is using their connection. There is no way .01% can use more bandwidth than what is available for the other 99.99%.
On a related note, you can bet your ass that if the cable internet business was bad, the owners/investors would have sold a long time ago. The rich don't stay rich by continuing to own or invest in companies that lose money.
*removed an extra 0 from the baddies
Whoa this thread asploded.
All of you arguing that it's only the top .01% that have to worry about this, yes, right now, that may be true. However, that will not be the case for long. Look at how streaming media sites have exploded in the past couple years.
You know, that's funny, because Shaw cable, up in Canadaland, throttles VOIP just like they throttle torrents. I think spidey is one of those people that Comcast paid to go to their hearings and pretend to sleep in the audience so actual customers couldn't get in and voice their real concerns. Comcast is by no means a fair or ethical company.
All of you arguing that it's only the top .01% that have to worry about this, yes, right now, that may be true. However, that will not be the case for long. Look at how streaming media sites have exploded in the past couple years.
You know, that's funny, because Shaw cable, up in Canadaland, throttles VOIP just like they throttle torrents. I think spidey is one of those people that Comcast paid to go to their hearings and pretend to sleep in the audience so actual customers couldn't get in and voice their real concerns.
Comcast is by no means a fair or ethical company.VZ hasn't turned a single dime of profit from FIOS yet. Projections show they won't for another 4-7 years IIRC.
They took a huge gamble at the time, and only time will tell if they gambled correctly.
frostedflakes
Diamond Member
- Mar 1, 2005
- 7,925
- 1
- 81
It most definitely will, but it was probably a difficult sell for shareholders. IIRC it wasn't a very popular idea at the time.
But that's not what they portray as the company policy. As of Oct. 1, users have a maximum of 250gb per month. There is nothing about "don't use it, but you're toast if you do".
mugs
Lifer
- Apr 29, 2003
- 48,920
- 46
- 91
You're making the connection that the 250 GB limit means they have 250 GB available for each user. That probably isn't the case, nor does it need to be the case. They rely on most of their users not coming close to that limit, because that is reality.
On a user-by-user basis, the guy who does 2 TB in a month is not profitable. They don't want him as a customer. They don't need him as a customer.
frostedflakes
Diamond Member
- Mar 1, 2005
- 7,925
- 1
- 81
The 250GB cap is probably just to force the small amount of excessive users to cut back. I doubt the network could handle every customer downloading anywhere near 250GB/mo, but Comcast knows that won't happen. IIRC the median usage is a few GB per month.
Comcast is also supposed to be implementing a protocol agnostic system that gives lower priority to packets to/from high bandwidth users during periods of heavy network load. With this system Comcast probably doesn't need the cap, but it's still a good policy IMO.
Comcast is also supposed to be implementing a protocol agnostic system that gives lower priority to packets to/from high bandwidth users during periods of heavy network load. With this system Comcast probably doesn't need the cap, but it's still a good policy IMO.
Lets do a quick review of how our (USA) society works with non-essentials, or "luxury items":
Im a business, I supply a service. You are not required to use this service and trade me currency for it.
Unless you sign a specific long term contract, I can change the terms/conditions of this service. Even in many contracts, it states that I CAN change terms and conditions.
If I change terms and conditions, and you are no longer happy, you may stop sending me currency, and I will no longer provide the service. You are free to then live without the service, or obtain it from someone else.
Im a business, I supply a service. You are not required to use this service and trade me currency for it.
Unless you sign a specific long term contract, I can change the terms/conditions of this service. Even in many contracts, it states that I CAN change terms and conditions.
If I change terms and conditions, and you are no longer happy, you may stop sending me currency, and I will no longer provide the service. You are free to then live without the service, or obtain it from someone else.
I don't know where you live, but internet is 100% essential for me, being a college student. Class assignments, information, communication, resources, etc... are all available solely online. Many of my profs don't even give out phone numbers any more.
Also, contracts carry early termination fees.
Im not sure you understand what "essential" means. You can go to a library, etc. High speed internet in your home is a luxury, not a birth right.
Ahh, now I understand the entitlement mentality. Look, you don't NEED to have the Internet, it's a luxury. Also you have libraries if you need to get online. It isn't essential.
To complain about comcast upgrading their network when you guys have been clamoring about "*rabble* UPGRADE THE NETWORK *RABBLE*" for a while now is just silly.
Nah, it's more better to give a few extra "features" that nobody particularly cares about (like some upgraded Mbps number that's canceled out by a hard cap, or digital channel 174 History Channel Antarctica that was forced on you when you opted for their DVR) and charge $50 more.
Also see telephone industry, cellular.
shortylickens
No Lifer
- Jul 15, 2003
- 80,287
- 17,081
- 136
I dont think I'll be paying $140 a month for internet access. And I damn sure dont like hearing you can only get this if you pay for TV as well.
BUT, I am glad to hear a lot of folks will be doubled for free.
Does that mean my 9 meg will go to 18 meg?
Or does that mean all the really poor bastards who were stuck at 1.5 meg will finally get the 3 meg the regular poor bastards have had to suffer?
BUT, I am glad to hear a lot of folks will be doubled for free.
Does that mean my 9 meg will go to 18 meg?
Or does that mean all the really poor bastards who were stuck at 1.5 meg will finally get the 3 meg the regular poor bastards have had to suffer?
What would they do if people wanted to start using 200gb per month? Make a new cap?
This bullshit about better capacity is, well, bullshit. They simply don't have enough bandwidth for the amount of customers they've sold to. The reasons given for the cap to curb heavy usage by .01% of the users are completely bogus.
Another great thing about America is there's usually this little thing called competition so we can get our luxury items from someone else if need be..but ooops, not happening with cable companies!
Here in town I do have a choice between DSL and cable, but back home (I'm a college student) barely anybody has the choice. Cable rolled out first and then the local phone company put out DSL mainly to areas that didn't have cable. Hell, my parents offered to pay to have the cable line put out to our house (we're only about 100' from the last person on the line) and they refused. Of course, no other cable company can come to the area and offer us service even if they wanted to.
So facts don't make sense to you?
The fact is .1% of customers go over 250 GB (nomenclature correct). 1% would be 1 out of 100. .1% would be 1 out of a thousand. Math...learn it.
Your post IMHO is pure ignorance. Not a slam, but just ignorant.
I quote:
"They simply don't have enough bandwidth for the amount of customers they've sold to."
1) Point - do you know what bandwidth is? It is data moved over time in simple terms - delta bit/delta time. Let throw out L1/L2/L3/L4 protocol overhead and focus on throughput for a moment so to not confuse everybody that has no idea what they are talking about, like you.
2) Point - What do you mean by they don't have enough bandwidth?
3) Point - Concept of into and out of each layer of a modern network, ingress and egress.
4) Point - what are best practice ratios of ingress and egress of each layer of modern network design? Refer to point 1 and 2, do you know what bandwidth is?
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 384
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
Facebook
Twitter