Bandwidth Limits by Internet Providers

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 14, 2009 10:20 AM GMT
    Has anyone here heard of Time Warner's experiments in creating bandwidth limits?

    Apparently, major internet service providers are researching ways to create "tiers" of bandwidth that one subscribes to. (I.e, "metered" internet use) If you go over it, you must pay to go up a level or face the rest of your month without internet. This has already been implemented in places in Texas, and is scheduled for wider research this year by Time Warner. (Their competitors are already performing similar market research...)

    Here's a blogger from last year detailing the research program at Time Warner:
    http://arstechnica.com/old/content/2008/01/leaked-memo-time-warner-cable-to-trial-hard-bandwidth-caps.ars

    Here's an interview on NPR, with Omar Gallaga.
    http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=103041709

    The All Tech Considered page here has several more articles by Gallaga on the story:

    http://www.npr.org/templates/community/group.php?slGroupKey=057f585e-0aad-4e91-a70d-ebcc8ac7f50d

    Anybody have any thoughts/opinions on if this is a valid or legitimate corporate practice? While you already pay for the internet access, should you have to subscribe to it? icon_question.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 14, 2009 10:28 AM GMT
    welcome to the rest of the world....
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 14, 2009 1:00 PM GMT
    Well, there is a cap so it isn't too bad.
    Except its at $150 icon_eek.gif

    I'm a lowly college kid, so I don't actually pay for it, but it is going to suck.
    If they're gonna give us caps, at least up the download/upload speeds.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 14, 2009 1:05 PM GMT
    Capping bandwidth threatens to violate Internet freedom agreements in the country--remember the debate over tiered levels of the Internet?

    "Welcome to the rest of the world"? Seems a lil' passive and semi ignorant (this could spell larger problems later on), there is still time to combat this.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 14, 2009 2:48 PM GMT
    Yeah, I read about this in the paper a couple of weeks ago. There is a local company here in Austin that is reported to not be going that route. I don't know how good the company is but I may be switching services.

    http://www.grandecom.com/

    I have found that a lot of companies are trying to cause people to spend more money with the bad economy than when the economy seemed fine.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 14, 2009 2:56 PM GMT
    Australia has this already and I am terribly surprised that the US didn't have anything similar.

    Most ISPs in Australia have a 'shaping' scheme. This means when you hit your bandwidth limit, the speed of your service is limited to dial up speeds until the next month.

    The schemes here in Australia, in my mind, work well. I am on a 40gig per month plan that I make sure I get pretty close to. Everyone would like a little bit more bandwidth though.. icon_rolleyes.gif

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 14, 2009 2:58 PM GMT
    ucla_matta said
    "Welcome to the rest of the world"? Seems a lil' passive and semi ignorant (this could spell larger problems later on), there is still time to combat this.


    Ignorant? I think it is a little ignorant that you didn't realise this happens in most countries already..
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 14, 2009 3:07 PM GMT
    north_runner saidHas anyone here heard of Time Warner's experiments in creating bandwidth limits?

    Apparently, major internet service providers are researching ways to create "tiers" of bandwidth that one subscribes to. (I.e, "metered" internet use) If you go over it, you must pay to go up a level or face the rest of your month without internet. This has already been implemented in places in Texas, and is scheduled for wider research this year by Time Warner. (Their competitors are already performing similar market research...)

    Here's a blogger from last year detailing the research program at Time Warner:
    http://arstechnica.com/old/content/2008/01/leaked-memo-time-warner-cable-to-trial-hard-bandwidth-caps.ars

    Here's an interview on NPR, with Omar Gallaga.
    http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=103041709

    The All Tech Considered page here has several more articles by Gallaga on the story:

    http://www.npr.org/templates/community/group.php?slGroupKey=057f585e-0aad-4e91-a70d-ebcc8ac7f50d

    Anybody have any thoughts/opinions on if this is a valid or legitimate corporate practice? While you already pay for the internet access, should you have to subscribe to it? icon_question.gif


    Verizon has told us they have no intentions of limiting us.

    flex89 and I have 20M/5M service from Verizon FIOS. It's called Internet 2.

    I have two fibers (one business, and one residential).

    We have over 700Mb/s on each link.

    fios_onts_600px.jpg
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 14, 2009 3:52 PM GMT
    chuckystud said
    north_runner saidHas anyone here heard of Time Warner's experiments in creating bandwidth limits?

    Apparently, major internet service providers are researching ways to create "tiers" of bandwidth that one subscribes to. (I.e, "metered" internet use) If you go over it, you must pay to go up a level or face the rest of your month without internet. This has already been implemented in places in Texas, and is scheduled for wider research this year by Time Warner. (Their competitors are already performing similar market research...)

    Here's a blogger from last year detailing the research program at Time Warner:
    http://arstechnica.com/old/content/2008/01/leaked-memo-time-warner-cable-to-trial-hard-bandwidth-caps.ars

    Here's an interview on NPR, with Omar Gallaga.
    http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=103041709

    The All Tech Considered page here has several more articles by Gallaga on the story:

    http://www.npr.org/templates/community/group.php?slGroupKey=057f585e-0aad-4e91-a70d-ebcc8ac7f50d

    Anybody have any thoughts/opinions on if this is a valid or legitimate corporate practice? While you already pay for the internet access, should you have to subscribe to it? icon_question.gif


    Verizon has told us they have no intentions of limiting us.

    flex89 and I have 20M/5M service from Verizon FIOS. It's called Internet 2.

    I have two fibers (one business, and one residential).

    We have over 700Mb/s on each link.

    fios_onts_600px.jpg


    Well I have seven one dollar bills. I can see them from here. Aren't you jealous.
  • MikePhilPerez

    Posts: 4357

    Apr 14, 2009 4:11 PM GMT
    Was it necessary to photograph it icon_question.gificon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 14, 2009 4:20 PM GMT
    I had 2.5 miles of fiber optic line buried out to the house so that I could hook up with a local fiber optic network. I pay $75/mo for the service, and I have no bandwidth cap. On speed tests, I'm usually around 7M down and 3M up. It's a service that is geared primarily toward businesses, and I am courteous about doing my heavy downloading during non-business hours. For a house 5 miles from a town of 10,000 people in rural Iowa, it's a pretty sweet setup.
  • MikePhilPerez

    Posts: 4357

    Apr 14, 2009 4:40 PM GMT
    paradox saidI had 2.5 miles of fiber optic line buried out to the house so that I could hook up with a local fiber optic network. I pay $75/mo for the service, and I have no bandwidth cap. On speed tests, I'm usually around 7M down and 3M up. It's a service that is geared primarily toward businesses, and I am courteous about doing my heavy downloading during non-business hours. For a house 5 miles from a town of 10,000 people in rural Iowa, it's a pretty sweet setup.


    No photos icon_question.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 14, 2009 5:00 PM GMT
    MikePhilPerez saidWas it necessary to photograph it icon_question.gificon_rolleyes.gif


    Yes. Chucky was just giving us nerds our daily dose of hardware porn.

    Look at the LED's on that one! *whistles*
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 14, 2009 5:36 PM GMT
    Bullshiiiiiiit. They can't do that!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 14, 2009 6:18 PM GMT
    It's mostly cable companies that are considering bandwidth caps. Why? Because they're greedy bastards.

    Your monthly fees are merely funding the executive golden parachutes. These cable companies keep overselling their internet service. They're taking in more customers than their network can accommodate. So instead of spending money on improving their network infrastructure, they're just implementing bandwidth caps and throttling. Lame.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 14, 2009 6:26 PM GMT
    tafkalil saidBullshiiiiiiit. They can't do that!



    ACTUALLY....

    i have it from good source(s) - a friend that works for comcast - that technically we already _DO_ have limits on our bandwith usage. the thing is the limit is so high no one really reaches it - you'd have to download / surf pretty much 24/7 - and at that all things that use super high bandwith.

    So, the talk is actually to 'lower' limits - and this shouldn't affect most users much at all.
  • junknemesis

    Posts: 682

    Apr 14, 2009 6:34 PM GMT
    GwgTrunks said
    MikePhilPerez saidWas it necessary to photograph it icon_question.gificon_rolleyes.gif


    Yes. Chucky was just giving us nerds our daily dose of hardware porn.

    Look at the LED's on that one! *whistles*


    *grabs a hankie* "BE DOWN IN JUST A SEC HON!!!"
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 14, 2009 6:35 PM GMT
    Cobalt said
    tafkalil saidBullshiiiiiiit. They can't do that!



    ACTUALLY....

    i have it from good source(s) - a friend that works for comcast - that technically we already _DO_ have limits on our bandwith usage. the thing is the limit is so high no one really reaches it - you'd have to download / surf pretty much 24/7 - and at that all things that use super high bandwith.

    So, the talk is actually to 'lower' limits - and this shouldn't affect most users much at all.


    Ah OK- had me worried there for a moment
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 14, 2009 6:50 PM GMT
    MikePhilPerez said
    paradox saidI had 2.5 miles of fiber optic line buried out to the house so that I could hook up with a local fiber optic network. I pay $75/mo for the service, and I have no bandwidth cap. On speed tests, I'm usually around 7M down and 3M up. It's a service that is geared primarily toward businesses, and I am courteous about doing my heavy downloading during non-business hours. For a house 5 miles from a town of 10,000 people in rural Iowa, it's a pretty sweet setup.


    No photos icon_question.gif


    Well, if you insist...

    basement_fiber.jpg

    The fiber optic cable is the black loop on top of the plywood. Mounted to the plywood is the media converter and a switch. The ancient PC on the table is the webserver that's dishing up the image above.
  • MikePhilPerez

    Posts: 4357

    Apr 14, 2009 7:01 PM GMT
    paradox said
    MikePhilPerez said
    paradox saidI had 2.5 miles of fiber optic line buried out to the house so that I could hook up with a local fiber optic network. I pay $75/mo for the service, and I have no bandwidth cap. On speed tests, I'm usually around 7M down and 3M up. It's a service that is geared primarily toward businesses, and I am courteous about doing my heavy downloading during non-business hours. For a house 5 miles from a town of 10,000 people in rural Iowa, it's a pretty sweet setup.


    No photos icon_question.gif


    Well, if you insist...

    basement_fiber.jpg

    The fiber optic cable is the black loop on top of the plywood. Mounted to the plywood is the media converter and a switch. The ancient PC on the table is the webserver that's dishing up the image above.


    Eat your heart out Chucky icon_lol.gif

    Paradox, in all fairness, that looks a bit all over the place. How do you know what's what icon_question.gif

    Oh, the things I can get guys to do icon_wink.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 14, 2009 7:05 PM GMT
    Cobalt said
    tafkalil saidBullshiiiiiiit. They can't do that!



    ACTUALLY....

    i have it from good source(s) - a friend that works for comcast - that technically we already _DO_ have limits on our bandwith usage. the thing is the limit is so high no one really reaches it - you'd have to download / surf pretty much 24/7 - and at that all things that use super high bandwith.

    So, the talk is actually to 'lower' limits - and this shouldn't affect most users much at all.



    I wasn't meaning that they can't do it literally. Just that it's bullshit.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 14, 2009 7:31 PM GMT
    MikePhilPerez said
    Paradox, in all fairness, that looks a bit all over the place. How do you know what's what icon_question.gif


    Well, the pipes carry water and the cat5 cables carry data, so it's pretty easy to not get the water system hardware confused with the computer network hardware. The wiring is a bit of a mess, but it's simple enough to follow the cables to see what they're connected to.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 14, 2009 7:59 PM GMT
    Thanks for the responses guys. LOL and yes, for those of you outside the US, by and large we have no limits on the bandwidth for broadband internet usage..you pretty much just pay for access and the speed of that access. (Cable, dsl, yada yada.)

    In fact, Obama was talking about creating better internet infrastructure (giving broadband access to the majority of Americans, especially in cities) during the campaign. I'm pretty sure there might be something related to that idea in the TARP package or the stimulus bill. I just haven't looked yet.

    Cobalt
    ACTUALLY....

    i have it from good source(s) - a friend that works for comcast - that technically we already _DO_ have limits on our bandwith usage. the thing is the limit is so high no one really reaches it - you'd have to download / surf pretty much 24/7 - and at that all things that use super high bandwith.

    So, the talk is actually to 'lower' limits - and this shouldn't affect most users much at all.


    Eric Bangeman talks about Comcast in that article. Apparently, they had very very ambiguous terminology in the contract as to what constituted going over your limit and what that limit was defined as:

    "The problem is that Comcast (and other ISPs) do not publicize what limits they have in place. Comcast's Acceptable Use Policy, for instance, offers users only a vague warning against "generating levels of traffic sufficient to impede others' ability to send or retrieve information."

    And the Time Warner policies apparently have levels starting as low as 1GB a month. While it is better that they're publicizing the limits, it still seems a little tight.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 14, 2009 8:04 PM GMT
    lilTankerwelcome to the rest of the world....


    LOL I'm not sure about Australia, but when I was in Denmark, we got free wifi.icon_cool.gif

    There were about 9-10 private and semi-private (the school provided it with the flat, and the access was pretty much public) networks operating in our building and the adjacent areas, and most people picked and choose which networks they surfed off of, even my professors and advisors...the school pretty much stopped caring.
  • zakariahzol

    Posts: 2241

    Apr 14, 2009 8:27 PM GMT
    I am using a 1 mg, connection over a fixed line. It no problem for reading and browsing internet (to RJ for for example). The problem is when you want to watch video clip , I am sharing it with a other user and the speed will slow down. That why the best time to download movie clip and porn is during early morning when most people are sleeping.

    There a possiblity I might switch to wireless broadband wifi, but I work in the company that supply my internet connection now. So I get some discount and feel I have an obligation to use services from a company that provide me a job.