fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| reply to knightmb
Re: hell ya.
The majority of the traffic is piracy - yet so many people want to ignore that fact and justify it's wonderful uses.
The real bottom line here is that in the end, the "smart people" as is being stated here, that will come out on top will be the ISPs. It's only a matter of time if they can't traffic shape their networks to manage high users that they WILL move to a billing by the byte model.
Then, in that case, .... who really wins? and who loses?
The pirates don't win... the bulk of the end users lose when their bills go through the roof thanks to the smug piracy fighters.
These people fighting this BT battle are not doing anyone, including themselves, any favors. |
|
fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| reply to Kearnstd
said by Kearnstd  :i dont think BT should be throttlable, i dont want my WoW patches slowed down when big patches come out. Then write WOW and ask them to operate a legitimate data center. After all, you are paying a monthly fee for the service. That should also include WOW running a datea center of their own. |
|
james
join:2001-02-26
antarctica
| reply to jester121
Yeah  Poor Adobe Photoshop became the standard for photo editing because of all that damned piracy! I wonder how many people actually paid for photoshop while they were learning on it and screwing around.
I downloaded a pirated copy of S.T.A.L.K.E.R. and loved it, then I saw it on Steam and bought it.
I downloaded a pirated copy of Maya and have been learning how to use it, supposing I get good at 3d modeling and actually make money with it. I will then spend the money for a license (mostly because the penalty for corporate users is pretty bad).
Small amounts of piracy can be very good for a product. I'm not saying everyone should get everything for free, I'm just saying it's not as black and white as the lawyers are trying to make us think.
I make an exception for those who charge "customers" for the pirated product. Those are what the definition of Pirate SHOULD be. Anyone sharing for free shouldn't be punished, everyone knows sharing is caring 3  . |
|
gopnick
join:2005-01-07
Benton, AR | reply to fiberguy
Wow, if "that ain't the telco line," I don't know what is.
Do you work for AT&T?
If Blizzard's customers have a problem with it (they clearly do not) they can buy software elsewhere. That's capitalism. |
|
jtorre69
join:2005-12-26
Hollywood, FL
| reply to james
Bad argument. I have a car, I should be able to run over whoever I want with it!
A better point would be that copyright enforcement is not beneficial to either the artist or the consumer. The only people getting rich off the current copyright scheme are the middle men who contribute nothing. They USED to contribute by promoting bands and distributing their content, but now all that can be done by the average computer savy child.
You totally missed the point. I think the whole problem stems from the fact that comcast limits and caps your data. This whole post would not have been an issue if they named their service "limited hsi". |
|
bunklung
join:2002-07-13
Northampton, MA
1 edit | reply to fiberguy
said by fiberguy :The majority of the traffic is piracy - yet so many people want to ignore that fact and justify it's wonderful uses. The real bottom line here is that in the end, the "smart people" as is being stated here, that will come out on top will be the ISPs. It's only a matter of time if they can't traffic shape their networks to manage high users that they WILL move to a billing by the byte model. Then, in that case, .... who really wins? and who loses? The pirates don't win... the bulk of the end users lose when their bills go through the roof thanks to the smug piracy fighters. These people fighting this BT battle are not doing anyone, including themselves, any favors. I'm a bit more optimistic. I think the ISPs (cable) that have the inability to grow their networks to meet the bandwidth needs (this could be a technical reason or financial, or both) will suffer in the end.
I think Verizon will take the opportunity to eat cable's lunch if they are officially outed by the FCC on sandvine. This is regardless if the FCC does anything about it. High speed internet, where competition is available, is highly competitive. I can see the ads now... "DSL and Fios has no caps. We do not charge you for overages and we do not throttle you. It's pure fiber, unlimited. Comcast and cable TV however, has invisible caps and throttles your bandwidth!". The ad will follow up with quotes from the FCC report.
Now, that doesn't mean Verizon will do exactly what you say and use it as a money grab too, but I really think that want users to grab the perception that fios an dsl is much better than cable.
Cable internet has had the perception that it's so much faster than DSL and a much better product. I think their advertised rates are finally catching up to the pain of real world use.
Also, if BT went away right this second, the bandwidth needs continue to grow.
Long ago will be the days when mom and pops point and click their way through thier e-mail and check the news on cnn. The killer apps will move/force the ISPs to grow.
Secondly, I don't think for a second the move to tiered caps is just because they can't handle BT, it's because cable is threatened by other forms of digital distribution, like Apple TV and Netflix online.
Would you agree that Apple TV and Netflix are getting a free ride on the ISPs just like Blizzard does on their distribution model?
*edit for spelling* |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·Comcast
2 edits | said by bunklung :
Secondly, I don't think for a second the move to tiered caps is just because they can't handle BT, it's because cable is threated by other forms of digital distribution, like Apple TV and Netflix online.
Would you agree that Apple TV and Netflix are getting a free ride on the ISPs just like Blizzard does on their distribution model?
Cable will have no problem handling very large bandwidth growth downstream. It is only the stress that P2P puts on upstream that is the issue. So, no I don't think Netflix and Apple TV are problems.
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page |
|
elios
join:2005-11-15
Springfield, MO
·Mediacom
| reply to fiberguy
right do you have any idea how much bandwidth that would take come a big patch some are over 400MB
that x a few million all trying to get it at once
one would be lucky to get 10-20KB/s
they picked BT becouse its bandwidth scales with the users on the network the more sharing the faster the patch
btw bliz DOES seed the patches out of there data centers this just takes the load off of them on big patch days
/youfail |
|
SimbaTLK1
Rawrrr
join:2001-09-07
Bethel Park, PA
clubs:
| reply to jester121
said by jester121 :That's surprising -- your files are shared and served by that many people? BT isn't really helpful for 1:1 sharing... ...I was wondering the same thing :-\
--Matt |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
1 edit | reply to elios
said by elios :right do you have any idea how much bandwidth that would take come a big patch some are over 400MB that x a few million all trying to get it at once one would be lucky to get 10-20KB/s Well Microsoft seems to manage OK every month on Patch Tuesday without using P2P.
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page |
|
zachary1
you talkin' to me?
join:2004-03-07
right here | reply to raduque
Freedom would include freedom to obey, or break, any law. |
|
bunklung
join:2002-07-13
Northampton, MA
| reply to TKJunkMail
said by TKJunkMail :said by bunklung :
Secondly, I don't think for a second the move to tiered caps is just because they can't handle BT, it's because cable is threated by other forms of digital distribution, like Apple TV and Netflix online.
Would you agree that Apple TV and Netflix are getting a free ride on the ISPs just like Blizzard does on their distribution model?
Cable will have no problem handling very large bandwidth growth downstream. It is only the stress that P2P puts on upstream that is the issue. So, no I don't think Netflix and Apple TV are problems. I'd like to reiterate my point. Netflix and Apple TV are a problem, since it's competition to their services, re: VOD.
Tiered service fixes all those pesky problems.
They will continue to advertise high speeds beyond what they can sustain. Yes, cable will have no problem handling very large bandwidth growth downstream, but that comes at a cost. It's an expense they would rather not pay for a technology that has it's limitations. |
|
elios
join:2005-11-15
Springfield, MO
·Mediacom
| reply to TKJunkMail
said by TKJunkMail :said by elios :right do you have any idea how much bandwidth that would take come a big patch some are over 400MB that x a few million all trying to get it at once one would be lucky to get 10-20KB/s Well Microsoft seems to manage OK every month on Patch Tuesday without using P2P. they dont have to run a live MMO server at the same time |
|
Thaler
Premium
join:2004-02-02
Encino, CA
| reply to TKJunkMail
said by TKJunkMail :Well Microsoft seems to manage OK every month on Patch Tuesday without using P2P. And damn anyone else for innovating on top of that, eh?
Again, P2P technology is legal, much like any other protocol zooming through the pipes. Rather than bastardizing a technology for its criminal miscreants, how about folks actually follow up with existing laws, and leaving us law-abiding citizens alone? |
|
fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| reply to elios
I do have an idea how much bandwidth that takes... I operate a data center of my own and purchase large amounts of bandwidth.
My point is simple... The WOWs of the world are charing money to it's end user each month to support their services.. by not operating a data center as everyone else does, they are 1) cheating the end user, 2) operating their business on the backs of the others 3) pocketing more of your money each month. Maybe they should drop the rate to the monthly subscribers... right?
Here's the other thing.. Maybe they should learn how to patch their software with out sending out a 400MB patch ... while everyone is bitching about Microsoft selling buggy software, with all these patches that they need to send, especially the 400MB patches.. well.. I guess they just don't know how to program very well.
Brought to you by Sony... the big winners in the BluRay HD war... I think people in the other thread, Sunday, have MUCH to celebrate!  |
|
elios
join:2005-11-15
Springfield, MO
·Mediacom
2 edits | you dont play mmos do you
or you would know the big "patchs" like that add NEW content to the game gg /youfail l2mmo etc... most are under 5MB but when that big content update hits i like that they use BT to send it out FFXI didnt and patch days like downloading the update took ALL DAMN DAY were it takes maybe a few min with WoW how much bandwith would they have to buy to max out even a million connections at 1MB/s? whos smarter now
id rather my 15/month go to them making new content not bandwidth for patchs
Blizz runs some of the worlds biggest data centers or did you miss the press releases?
if you didnt know take away the pretty graphics and all a MMO is a very very large interactive database think of the largest SQL server you have ever seen multiply that by few thousand users 24/7 PER world server then times that by how ever many of them
and thats just the live part of it on the server side not counting making items work right all the time as intended
WoW has a free trial go try it and see how massive this is your self |
|
Ikarasu
join:2004-01-09
Port Coquitlam, BC
 ·ITalkBB
 ·TekSavvy Solutions..
| reply to fiberguy
Are you saying Bittorent isnt legit?
WoW has over 10 million customers. Putting costs aside(since blizz is obviously pretty financially stable) Do you know the work/time involved in distributing a 300 MB patch to 10 million people at once?
sure, not all 10 million download at the exact same time, but a huge portion of them do. It's near impossible to be able to achieve that throughput.
Bit torrent was made to get files out to multi users as fast as possible. Blizzard is taking this new technology, and putting it to practice - And guess what? It works.
Theres no forum posts about patches downloading too slow, no queue/wait times to download patches like many MMOs have, no free hosting sites like filehost or other gaming patch sites.
WoW is putting new technology to use. Bittorent is NOT a problem, more internet developed companies dont seem to mind it at all, infact some endorse it. If USA/Canadas internet wasn't in the state it is, it wouldn't affect other subscribers either.
If comcast spent some of the billions it made to make their pipes larger, or adopt the many new diff cable standards out there, and increase their capacity... Bittorent wouldn't be a problem for them either.
So using your logic, The people who pay Comcast a monthly fee, should be able to use their ADVERTISED speeds, and ADVERTISED bandwidth for the actual subscription they're paying for.
People pay comcast specifically to access the Internet - They have imposed limits and speeds, and as long as people adhere to them, I don't see why they have a right to limit what you can/cant do on their network, as long as it's legal.
Blizzard doesn't announce that they have direct downloads, nor do they hide the fact they use Bittorent. It's as great technology, and I'm glad they put it to use. |
|
fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| reply to elios
For one, there are a couple people in my house that play many of the games... one of them is also friends with one of the founders of Blizzard. Among other things, I'm very much aware of what the games are, what they consist of, how they play (as I have played them as well) and what the patches are..
Besides all of what you said, their method of delivery system is still no excuse nor does it change my original message.. Microsoft, too, runs some large data centers in the country.. and do you see them using BT?
I want to bring up one item you talked about... "it took all damn day".. and? It's not the same as mowing a 1 acre lawn with a push mower vs. a riding mower.. you're not actively doing any hard, physical labor. You're talking about instant pleasure. Start the download and let it do it's job.
You may want your $15 a month to them going to new content, but now you also know now why Comcast doesn't want to be the one to have to spend the "billions" to upgrade their networks BECAUSE of Blizz's business model. Maybe Blizzard should collect an extra $5 or $10 per month per user in order to supply more bandwidth. $180 a year times how many users? I think they have PLENTY of money to handle their own servers. They DON'T need to send out the patches on the back of last mile providers.
Like I said.. I used to play the games when I didn't have better things to do.. regardless of anything of how great the "system" is... they need to support their own stuff 100%. Just my view. |
|
Ikarasu
join:2004-01-09
Port Coquitlam, BC
·ITalkBB
·TekSavvy Solutions..
| said by fiberguy :For one, there are a couple people in my house that play many of the games... one of them is also friends with one of the founders of Blizzard. Among other things, I'm very much aware of what the games are, what they consist of, how they play (as I have played them as well) and what the patches are.. Besides all of what you said, their method of delivery system is still no excuse nor does it change my original message.. Microsoft, too, runs some large data centers in the country.. and do you see them using BT? I want to bring up one item you talked about... "it took all damn day".. and? It's not the same as mowing a 1 acre lawn with a push mower vs. a riding mower.. you're not actively doing any hard, physical labor. You're talking about instant pleasure. Start the download and let it do it's job. You may want your $15 a month to them going to new content, but now you also know now why Comcast doesn't want to be the one to have to spend the "billions" to upgrade their networks BECAUSE of Blizz's business model. Maybe Blizzard should collect an extra $5 or $10 per month per user in order to supply more bandwidth. $180 a year times how many users? I think they have PLENTY of money to handle their own servers. They DON'T need to send out the patches on the back of last mile providers. Like I said.. I used to play the games when I didn't have better things to do.. regardless of anything of how great the "system" is... they need to support their own stuff 100%. Just my view. Can you tell me how using new technology isnt supporting their game 100%?
There is no way they can max out everyones speed 100% through a data center. I don't care if you run your own, I don't care how large it is. When you have 10 million subscribers, a good amount of which downloads at the same time, you simply cannot meet the requirements.
They took a new technology, used it for what it was DESIGNED to do.
10 million customers. Some in diff regions, so lets presume average is $10 a month. Thats 100 million a month, which even with all their other bills... is a pretty heft sum. If they could do more efficiently then BT... don't you think they would? A data center for 10 million people isn't optimal, possible at crawling speeds, sure... but not optimal. Blizzard is a gaming company, not a data center. What your asking them to do is impossible, let alone realistic.
Not to mention they do have servers seeding the torrent. Which is the reason people can get max speeds, even at the beginning of the download. I'm no sure of what speeds they have, but I've maxed out a full 100 Mbps server the moment the patch came out, so to think they just push all the burden onto their customer is just wrong.
Bittorent is a protocol, much like HTTP. To say they shouldn't use it is absurd. My clients never used more then 5 Kb/s up, and I imagine same goes for everyone else.
BT has A LOT more benefits to it then HTTP. For instance, they stream all the graphics, and finished data out weeks before the final patch is released in the background, then on Maintnence/patch day, all the user has to do is download a 5 MB file, click install, and the patch is there.
Not only does this take stress off their 100 + Servers and millions of people playing on patch day, but it ensures a seamless patch transfer.
You seem to be the only person with a problem with it. I suggest you go read up on it, if you care so much about blizzards practices.
I do suggest you go look up information on it, before spewing out nonsense about a company though. |
|
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY | reply to elios
Buy a couple 10 gigabit lines then. Or better yet, PAY a content distribution network like Limelight or Akamai. |
|
