I'm signing up for DSL(the only thing available), it's a $100 bucks a month for 1.5mbpsdown, and 128kbps up. The guy said that it would cost 80 bucks more to upgrade to 384k up. That's a lot of money for that. I also konw that when I was at school, they were anal about how much data you sent up, but they coudln't care less how much yuo downloaded. So I was just wondering why it costs so much more to send data than to receive.
why is upload so expensive
- Thread starter 22Admub
- Start date
Where the hell are you that has DSL for that price?! That is outrageous. I pay 35 bucks for 1.5/128 throught Verizon.
yeah, I konw it's expensive as hell, it's in a little town, through the local phone company==massive @$$-raping monopoly. Also it's a business, so most places would charge more, but the residential would still be about 80bucks for 1.5/128. But the cost of the service in particular isn't what I'm worried about. i was just wondering why upload in general is so much more expensive.
Bandwidth costs alot to buy. Downstream bandwidth you have to be actively using really. You can get broadband cheap because you're not going to be using it all the time. You're usually not using up any downstream traffic unless you're on the computer so you can sell more people service with the same amount of bandwidth. If you're surfing you're also not usually using your downstream to capacity all the time, just in short bursts, so once again you can pack more people onto the same amount chunk of bandwidth. Lets say you're running a server with your upstream traffic though. You now don't have to be there to use it because people are hitting it all the time, and its fairly steady flow of traffic. You can't spread that same chunk of bandwidth around to as many people now so you have to charge more for using more of it.
yeah, comcast is wiring up our town, they say it should be done in 5month(read
rolly about a year and a half)
rolly about a year and a half)It's all about market positioning. SOHO users are mass consumers, and want fast download but don't need upload. Power users and business users run servers or do things that need upload speed... and are often enough willing to pay more for it. ISPs are taking advantage of that and charging more for it. Yeah, technically the extra bandwidth does cost something, but rarely as much as the delta-cost. They're charging that because they can.
In some cases - most notably in cable modem networks - upload bandwidth is truly a more scarce resource, and in those cases the ISPs have a strong interest in discouraging upload intensive stuff - and the market provides a good way to do that. (Rather than just saying no more than 128k upload, they instead say it's gonna cost you, a lot)
In some cases - most notably in cable modem networks - upload bandwidth is truly a more scarce resource, and in those cases the ISPs have a strong interest in discouraging upload intensive stuff - and the market provides a good way to do that. (Rather than just saying no more than 128k upload, they instead say it's gonna cost you, a lot)
Well, this is the way I understand it (at least the view from one local ISP I work with a lot)
Say you have a large ISP or hosting company. This example in particular started out as a hosting company.
In order to host all of the servers for themselves and their clients, they required a lot of bandwidth (naturally). They started out with about 600mbps worth of connections through a couple of Tier1 ISPs.
So now as they go on with their hosting business they are using about 500mbps, and charging their clients for that amount. The clients are getting a better deal then they could by normally getting a T1 or similar and can burst to higher speeds when needed. The hosting company is getting a better deal on the bandwidth because they are buying it in large amounts, so they are profitable at this point just selling hosting.
Here's where the rest of it comes in. You have someone sitting there looking at bandwidth charts realizing that on average there is 500mpbs being pushed out, but only about 50mpbs coming in. That's 550mbps of unused "back" bandwidth sitting there. (600 total - the 50 being used).
Since they are a hosting company, how do they make use of all this "back" bandwidth?
They start an ISP. Typical home, and even business users download way more than they upload, and can have cap restrictions without it hurting most of them too much. This way they can use the reverse structure (the ISP is reverse of hosting, more download, less upload) and get a much better utilization of their pipe they are paying for.
Not only that, but if the network is set up right, and they have a lot of customers on their DSL or Dialup, etc. they can keep some of the hosting bandwidth from ever hitting the Internet pipe, (because it goes straight from the hosted servers to the users, all without touching the Tier1 network) which means (almost) free money for them all the way around. (Not using bandwidth in the pipe for hosting or the DSL customer)
That's essentially why upload speed costs more than download speed from a connection standpoint, it costs the ISP more money because they can't then use that bandwidth for hosting.
Say you have a large ISP or hosting company. This example in particular started out as a hosting company.
In order to host all of the servers for themselves and their clients, they required a lot of bandwidth (naturally). They started out with about 600mbps worth of connections through a couple of Tier1 ISPs.
So now as they go on with their hosting business they are using about 500mbps, and charging their clients for that amount. The clients are getting a better deal then they could by normally getting a T1 or similar and can burst to higher speeds when needed. The hosting company is getting a better deal on the bandwidth because they are buying it in large amounts, so they are profitable at this point just selling hosting.
Here's where the rest of it comes in. You have someone sitting there looking at bandwidth charts realizing that on average there is 500mpbs being pushed out, but only about 50mpbs coming in. That's 550mbps of unused "back" bandwidth sitting there. (600 total - the 50 being used).
Since they are a hosting company, how do they make use of all this "back" bandwidth?
They start an ISP. Typical home, and even business users download way more than they upload, and can have cap restrictions without it hurting most of them too much. This way they can use the reverse structure (the ISP is reverse of hosting, more download, less upload) and get a much better utilization of their pipe they are paying for.
Not only that, but if the network is set up right, and they have a lot of customers on their DSL or Dialup, etc. they can keep some of the hosting bandwidth from ever hitting the Internet pipe, (because it goes straight from the hosted servers to the users, all without touching the Tier1 network) which means (almost) free money for them all the way around. (Not using bandwidth in the pipe for hosting or the DSL customer)
That's essentially why upload speed costs more than download speed from a connection standpoint, it costs the ISP more money because they can't then use that bandwidth for hosting.
With high speed upload you are more likely to start warez ftp etc.
Thought I don't think this is main reason, as mentioned ISP can take more money for upload speed from hosting companies, slow uploads for SOHO
reduces chances for buisness company to host some site paying less money.
Thought I don't think this is main reason, as mentioned ISP can take more money for upload speed from hosting companies, slow uploads for SOHO
reduces chances for buisness company to host some site paying less money.
Upload is so expensive because high upload speeds are virtually unnecessary for anyone not serving, so nobody cares... It's also a check to keep users from serving (which is almost always against the ISP's policy) because ISPs don't have the bandwith to have users running 24/7.
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: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter