Time Warner bandwidth caps arrive (updated)

[jonks]

In NYC Time Warner provides the cable, but you have a choice among 4 internet providers, so I don't think they'll be pissing away their market here by implementing the system. Still, as soon as FIOS gets here I'm out.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: Fritzo

I'll be glad to explain. Say you have a 100Mb pipe from an ATM. If you have 10 people at 10Mb running full bore 24/7, it's going to screw everyone else using that pipe.

This doesn't seem to be an issue in Japan. Why is it an issue here? The previous explaination made by another poster doesn't make sense since ISPs can simply purchase less total bandwidth to distribute if there are less people to sell to.

 

[Anubis]

Originally posted by: Fritzo

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: Fritzo

Originally posted by: Anubis
caps not good, way to low



http://arstechnica.com/news.ar...width-caps-arrive.html

40GB is HUGE!!!!! We service 200 employee corporations that only use 30GB/month. Turn off Bit Torrent and it won't be an issue.

I work for a big ISP- only .4% of our customers go over 10GB per month. The ones that do are impacting the network for other users, causing the need for more infrastructure and bandwidth. If those .4% are causing the other 99.6% slowness, would you expect an ISP to :

A) Charge higher fees to everyone
B) Make the heavy users pay more

I know which one seems fair to me.

Please explain how your ISP is having such problems if 99.6% of your paying customers are not using hardly any bandwidth? Their lack of usage combined should more than satisfy those other 0.4% of your users. Something isn't adding up right here at all.

Also, I say that if ISPs are going to charge more for additional bandwidth then they need to refund those for every bit of bandwidth that they do not use which is under their set cap.

I'll be glad to explain. Say you have a 100Mb pipe from an ATM. If you have 10 people at 10Mb running full bore 24/7, it's going to screw everyone else using that pipe.

Also, your refund suggestion is stupid. I'm sure your phone company, cell phone company, and cable TV company are going to refund you for unused services too.

Upgrade your crap infrastructure and/or stop lying to customers telling them they can have super speed internet with unlimited downloads

prob is US telcos are basically scamming money off people who pay for high speed and simply check email, yet those users who arnt morons and actually use their connection get punished

its the telcos fault for wanting to sell internet to as many people as possible with the least amnt of infrastructure

Cell phones - Roll over minutes, kinda like a refund, very good idea
cable TV wont do ala carte because they woudl all go under, even tho people shoudl not be forced to pay for stupid channels we never watch, i get liek 800 channels, i watch maybe 6

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: Fritzo

I'll be glad to explain. Say you have a 100Mb pipe from an ATM. If you have 10 people at 10Mb running full bore 24/7, it's going to screw everyone else using that pipe.

This doesn't seem to be an issue in Japan. Why is it an issue here? The previous explaination made by another poster doesn't make sense since ISPs can simply purchase less total bandwidth to distribute if there are less people to sell to.

Smaller area = less distance to cover with the fiber = MUCH lower optical costs.

The longer you have to go the more expensive it gets.

 

[Anubis]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: Fritzo

I'll be glad to explain. Say you have a 100Mb pipe from an ATM. If you have 10 people at 10Mb running full bore 24/7, it's going to screw everyone else using that pipe.

This doesn't seem to be an issue in Japan. Why is it an issue here? The previous explaination made by another poster doesn't make sense since ISPs can simply purchase less total bandwidth to distribute if there are less people to sell to.

Smaller area = less distance to cover with the fiber = MUCH lower optical costs.

The longer you have to go the more expensive it gets.

yes but one could argue the point that every major US urban area could be like japan yet its not

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: Anubis
Upgrade your crap infrastructure and/or stop lying to customers telling them they can have super speed internet with unlimited downloads

prob is US telcos are basically scamming money off people who pay for high speed and simply check email, yet those users who arnt morons and actually use their connection get punished

its the telcos fault for wanting to sell internet to as many people as possible with the least amnt of infrastructure

Cell phones - Roll over minutes, kinda like a refund, very good idea
cable TV wont do ala carte because they woudl all go under, even tho people shoudl not be forced to pay for stupid channels we never watch, i get liek 800 channels, i watch maybe 6

Anubis,

Most all of the major ISPs are doing significant upgrades all the time DOCSIS 3.0 being on of the big ones. Don't say "upgrade your crap infrastructure" if you don't know what you're talking about. Do you have ANY IDEA how expensive this stuff is? What if they did a major upgrade two years ago and the equipment isn't fully depreciated yet, do you just forklift upgrade that and put in some new gear?

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: Anubis

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: Fritzo

I'll be glad to explain. Say you have a 100Mb pipe from an ATM. If you have 10 people at 10Mb running full bore 24/7, it's going to screw everyone else using that pipe.

This doesn't seem to be an issue in Japan. Why is it an issue here? The previous explaination made by another poster doesn't make sense since ISPs can simply purchase less total bandwidth to distribute if there are less people to sell to.

Smaller area = less distance to cover with the fiber = MUCH lower optical costs.

The longer you have to go the more expensive it gets.

yes but one could argue the point that every major US urban area could be like japan yet its not

Subscriber density per route mile of fiber is another one.

 

[Xavier434]

I should also note that many people like to take advantage of digital downloads for entertainment purposes such as video games from Steam or renting movies over XBOX Live. I rent from XBL often and it is about 7.5GB per movie that I download in HD. That means that I would be exceeding a 40GB cap by downloading 6 movies or more per month. Combine that with my regular internet usage while gaming and spending a some time (particularly weekends) streaming some music and video media and I am already way over the limit.

I really don't think this constitutes as an exceptional user who goes way above and beyond the average user in terms of bandwidth usage. If it does, then just give it time because the new generations who make regular use of the internet like that are getting older every day and year after year they are leaving home to go to college or graduating college to get jobs. This kind of usage is going to very quickly become to norm. I realize that ISPs are in the business to make money, but they really need to think about the future here. They do not have a choice. They need to plan to greatly increase their infrastructure. This capping of bandwidth will provide them with a bandaid solution at best.

 

[dbk]

I'm in Fairfax County VA and Cox is the only cable provider I can get and they cap mine at 40gb as well. It's a shame I can't get FIOS out here.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: Fritzo

I'll be glad to explain. Say you have a 100Mb pipe from an ATM. If you have 10 people at 10Mb running full bore 24/7, it's going to screw everyone else using that pipe.

This doesn't seem to be an issue in Japan. Why is it an issue here? The previous explaination made by another poster doesn't make sense since ISPs can simply purchase less total bandwidth to distribute if there are less people to sell to.

Smaller area = less distance to cover with the fiber = MUCH lower optical costs.

The longer you have to go the more expensive it gets.

That can be solved by building more hubs or whatever the correct term is that lessens the distance data needs to travel from point A to point B. Again, I realize this costs money but they are going to have to do it pretty soon anyways. Bandwidth demands are increasing extremely rapidly and bit torrent users are not the only ones to blame anymore. They can only ride on that excuse for so long. The rate the demand is increasing cannot not be satisfied properly by matching it with an equal rate in price. The cost would simply go up too high too fast and people would heavily demand that ISPs provide lower rates. Competition will arise from such demands and will spread. I believe that is guaranteed to happen.

 

[BassBomb]

I have 10megabit with 60gb cap for upload and download

They don't really do much when you go over they just tell u to stop downloading

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: Xavier434
That can be solved by building more hubs or whatever the correct term is that lessens the distance data needs to travel from point A to point B. Again, I realize this costs money but they are going to have to do it pretty soon anyways. Bandwidth demands are increasing extremely rapidly and bit torrent users are not the only ones to blame anymore. They can only ride on that excuse for so long.

As long as the traffic stats say that bittorrent is the way beyond obscene majority of the traffic, yes I can.

You're example of your usage is extremely high. As such you should pay for all that bandwidth you're using. Somehow you feel entitled to use that much and not pay for it?

 

[Vette73]

Originally posted by: dbk
I'm in Fairfax County VA and Cox is the only cable provider I can get and they cap mine at 40gb as well. It's a shame I can't get FIOS out here.

Really? I live in fairfax but have Fios. No DSL either where you are at?

 

[Anubis]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Anubis
Upgrade your crap infrastructure and/or stop lying to customers telling them they can have super speed internet with unlimited downloads

prob is US telcos are basically scamming money off people who pay for high speed and simply check email, yet those users who arnt morons and actually use their connection get punished

its the telcos fault for wanting to sell internet to as many people as possible with the least amnt of infrastructure

Cell phones - Roll over minutes, kinda like a refund, very good idea
cable TV wont do ala carte because they woudl all go under, even tho people shoudl not be forced to pay for stupid channels we never watch, i get liek 800 channels, i watch maybe 6

Anubis,

Most all of the major ISPs are doing significant upgrades all the time DOCSIS 3.0 being on of the big ones. Don't say "upgrade your crap infrastructure" if you don't know what you're talking about. Do you have ANY IDEA how expensive this stuff is? What if they did a major upgrade two years ago and the equipment isn't fully depreciated yet, do you just forklift upgrade that and put in some new gear?

yes im well aware of the cost and i know that they are upgrading, however they seemingly never started till it became an issue, hell i can throw a baseball and hit the DSL providers building in my town yet i still cant get DSL because of old phone lines on the pole or some BS they keep spewing me on the phone (its been 9 years since i first called them about it )

my main issue with them is with deceptive marketing, if you are going to offer XXX speed and have YYY subscribers you should have the ability for all YYY subscribers to use all XXX of the speed you are selling them

if you cant do this don?t sell it and then complain when people use the service they pay for

Everything today is about streaming this or downloadable that, as Xavier434 said it?s moronically easy to hit that 40GB cap just using all the legal streaming/Dl things that we are being sold on a daily basis


and no i dont think i shoudl pay more for what i use as im allready paying 65$ a month for it

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Xavier434
That can be solved by building more hubs or whatever the correct term is that lessens the distance data needs to travel from point A to point B. Again, I realize this costs money but they are going to have to do it pretty soon anyways. Bandwidth demands are increasing extremely rapidly and bit torrent users are not the only ones to blame anymore. They can only ride on that excuse for so long.

As long as the traffic stats say that bittorrent is the way beyond obscene majority of the traffic, yes I can.

You're example of your usage is extremely high. As such you should pay for all that bandwidth you're using. Somehow you feel entitled to use that much and not pay for it?

I edited my previous post since you quoted.

Give it time. I will not be the exception for very long and I find it hard to believe that I really am that exception now without seeing some really solid proof. You would be very surprised how much a simple 5 years of the new generation entering the real world after college can quickly change those averages you speak of. They will be using features involving high bandwidth usages over the net a lot more beyond just bit torrent. In addition, the use of bit torrent will also increase a lot per household which is also partially due to the very young kids in middle and high school that use it at home even thought there parents do not. The bottom line is that it is changing incredibly fast. I hope these ISPs have a lot more than just a simple bandaid solution like capping bandwidth prepared so that they can handle these demands.

Furthermore, I don't have to feel entitled to use that bandwidth. My desire to use it that way and the competition which will follow in the ISP industry will grant me those desires whether I feel entitled or not. That is primarily why it is working out in Japan. You say it is a matter of time until the all you can eat goes away. I say it is a matter of time before bandwidth demands skyrocket along with the competition to provide it.

 

[Beev]

Originally posted by: spidey07
As long as the traffic stats say that bittorrent is the way beyond obscene majority of the traffic, yes I can.

You're example of your usage is extremely high. As such you should pay for all that bandwidth you're using. Somehow you feel entitled to use that much and not pay for it?

I'm entitled to what is advertised. If unlimited bandwidth is advertised, that what I'm damn well going to try and use.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: Beev

Originally posted by: spidey07
As long as the traffic stats say that bittorrent is the way beyond obscene majority of the traffic, yes I can.

You're example of your usage is extremely high. As such you should pay for all that bandwidth you're using. Somehow you feel entitled to use that much and not pay for it?

I'm entitled to what is advertised. If unlimited bandwidth is advertised, that what I'm damn well going to try and use.

It is never advertised nor is it stated on your contract. Also read the acceptable use policy. Using that much bandwidth is just obscene.

It's really simple, purchase a service that meets your needs. If you use that much capacity, then pay for it. It isn't free, and you didn't pay for an unlimited service. Entitlement mentality FTL.

 

[Rubycon]

Do they really advertise unlimited bandwidth? I thought they said unlimited service. That is different. It just means the service is unlimited meaning you can go on the web or check email any time you want - the service is always on.

 

[Special K]

Aren't the typical speeds for high speed internet now exactly the same as they were several years ago? If so, what are ISPs spending all of their money on? Is it just to roll out standard service to more remote areas?

 

[JeffreyLebowski]

Originally posted by: Fritzo

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: Fritzo

Originally posted by: Anubis
caps not good, way to low



http://arstechnica.com/news.ar...width-caps-arrive.html

40GB is HUGE!!!!! We service 200 employee corporations that only use 30GB/month. Turn off Bit Torrent and it won't be an issue.

I work for a big ISP- only .4% of our customers go over 10GB per month. The ones that do are impacting the network for other users, causing the need for more infrastructure and bandwidth. If those .4% are causing the other 99.6% slowness, would you expect an ISP to :

A) Charge higher fees to everyone
B) Make the heavy users pay more

I know which one seems fair to me.

Please explain how your ISP is having such problems if 99.6% of your paying customers are not using hardly any bandwidth? Their lack of usage combined should more than satisfy those other 0.4% of your users. Something isn't adding up right here at all.

Also, I say that if ISPs are going to charge more for additional bandwidth then they need to refund those for every bit of bandwidth that they do not use which is under their set cap.

I'll be glad to explain. Say you have a 100Mb pipe from an ATM. If you have 10 people at 10Mb running full bore 24/7, it's going to screw everyone else using that pipe.

Also, your refund suggestion is stupid. I'm sure your phone company, cell phone company, and cable TV company are going to refund you for unused services too.

How is it stupid? If I use more, then I have to pay more, but if I don't use all of it I lose it?
Oh I wouldn't put it past companies that start charging this way to bill you at 1000K=1MB but your bill will have the correct 1024KB=1MB format, and they will just use some cryptic scheme to milk you out of the extra money.

 

[phreaqe]

Originally posted by: Beev

Originally posted by: spidey07
As long as the traffic stats say that bittorrent is the way beyond obscene majority of the traffic, yes I can.

You're example of your usage is extremely high. As such you should pay for all that bandwidth you're using. Somehow you feel entitled to use that much and not pay for it?

I'm entitled to what is advertised. If unlimited bandwidth is advertised, that what I'm damn well going to try and use.

exactly. i have no sympathy for the companies when they advertise this crap all the time. i personally have TW with a 7 meg connection. i wish i could monitor my bandwidth and see what i am using. i watched the entire season of Lost streaming from ABC's page in HD. that will use quite a bit of bandwidth. i also watch a fair amount of hulu. i am not that abnormal in this regard. My fiances dad even watched hulu and he is not a tech person at all. if the companies are not going to be able to provide us with the advertised service they need to change there advertising then. simple as that to me.

 

[zanejohnson]

this makes me love my connection even more, we almost went with time warner too, instead we went with the ethernet drops in room that the apt complex we live in offers... 30 bucks a month, no bandwidth caps whatsoever.... symetrical speeds up and down... varys throughout the day from 2.5mbps (lowest i've seen yet) to 6-7mbps (highest i've seen yet)

 

[phreaqe]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Beev

Originally posted by: spidey07
As long as the traffic stats say that bittorrent is the way beyond obscene majority of the traffic, yes I can.

You're example of your usage is extremely high. As such you should pay for all that bandwidth you're using. Somehow you feel entitled to use that much and not pay for it?

I'm entitled to what is advertised. If unlimited bandwidth is advertised, that what I'm damn well going to try and use.

It is never advertised nor is it stated on your contract. Also read the acceptable use policy. Using that much bandwidth is just obscene.

It's really simple, purchase a service that meets your needs. If you use that much capacity, then pay for it. It isn't free, and you didn't pay for an unlimited service. Entitlement mentality FTL.

bullcrap. 65 gigs in a month may be alot but it is not obscene. watch a couple streaming videos like lost in HD and you already are using quite a bit and it is not abnormal to do stuff like that.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Special K
Aren't the typical speeds for high speed internet now exactly the same as they were several years ago? If so, what are ISPs spending all of their money on? Is it just to roll out standard service to more remote areas?

Several years ago(7) I had a 640Kbps pipe. Two days ago I upgraded from 5 to 10Mbps for 5 bucks more a month. So Ill say the speeds are increasing.

btw the upgrade is nice, bursty connection has seen 23+Mbps at times.

 

[JeffreyLebowski]

Originally posted by: Fritzo

Originally posted by: Anubis

Originally posted by: Fritzo

Originally posted by: Anubis
caps not good, way to low



http://arstechnica.com/news.ar...width-caps-arrive.html

40GB is HUGE!!!!! We service 200 employee corporations that only use 30GB/month. Turn off Bit Torrent and it won't be an issue.

last month i downloaded a grand total of 1 torrent for less then 400 megs

i used 65 GB of bandwidth on a 8mb connection, no news groups no illigal shit

its too fucking low

Then you're a power user. Pay more.

Why, you're company said, 6Mbps unlimited downloads. OK, so that means. I GET UNLIMITED DOWNLOADS. If you can't live up to your part of the contract, then to bad. But if I can't then I should have to pay all kinds of fees right?