Cabal
Premium
join:2007-01-21
Boston, MA | Verizon's answer to throttling
What a coincidence that this frees up countless Gb of bandwidth...
--
Would you trust a brain surgeon with two years' experience? |
|
Doctor Olds
I Need A Remedy For What's Ailing Me.
Premium,VIP
join:2001-04-19
1970 442 W30
clubs:
| said by Cabal  :What a coincidence that this frees up countless Gb of bandwidth... That's what they erroneously think until they see what they once downloaded via peering one time to their News Farms and then distributed locally, is now coming in for each customer that was using it as cheaper local Bandwidth instead of much more costly outside Gateway transversing bandwidth. Lets estimate 1200 customers times what they use to get by peering each day in GBs. That's going to hurt. 
--
What’s the point of owning a supercar if you can’t scare yourself stupid from time to time? |
|
Qumahlin
Never Enough Time
Premium,MVM
join:2001-10-05
united state
| said by Doctor Olds :said by Cabal :What a coincidence that this frees up countless Gb of bandwidth... That's what they erroneously think until they see what they once downloaded via peering one time to their News Farms and then distributed locally, is now coming in for each customer that was using it as cheaper local Bandwidth instead of much more costly outside Gateway transversing bandwidth. Lets estimate 1200 customers times what they use to get by peering each day in GBs. That's going to hurt. Having worked at a major ISP in an network position I can tell you right now it doesn't cost nearly as much as the maintenance, hardware, and "one time" spooling to the server farms.
Most of the large newshosting providers in the USA already use backbones that have quite favorably agreements with the ISP's
I assure you, costs will go down, not up even with added external BW figured in. |
|
Doctor Olds
I Need A Remedy For What's Ailing Me.
Premium,VIP
join:2001-04-19
1970 442 W30
clubs:
1 edit | said by Qumahlin :said by Doctor Olds :said by Cabal :What a coincidence that this frees up countless Gb of bandwidth... That's what they erroneously think until they see what they once downloaded via peering one time to their News Farms and then distributed locally, is now coming in for each customer that was using it as cheaper local Bandwidth instead of much more costly outside Gateway transversing bandwidth. Lets estimate 1200 customers times what they use to get by peering each day in GBs. That's going to hurt. Having worked at a major ISP in an network position I can tell you right now it doesn't cost nearly as much as the maintenance, hardware, and "one time" spooling to the server farms. Most of the large newshosting providers in the USA already use backbones that have quite favorably agreements with the ISP's I assure you, costs will go down, not up even with added external BW figured in. That's exactly what Bellsouth said (this was before being taken over by SBC and becoming AT&T) when they closed in-house Usenet down swearing it was a savings. That lasted just over a year or so until they saw the true costs and they brought the Usenet Farm back in-house as it ended up costing them much, much less having it in-house than outsourced NNTP for binaries and the exponential Gateway transversing bandwidth. Bandwidth is much cheaper going out than it is coming back in.
--
What’s the point of owning a supercar if you can’t scare yourself stupid from time to time? |
|
SilverSurfer
join:2007-08-19
| reply to Qumahlin
said by Qumahlin :I assure you, costs will go down, not up even with added external BW figured in. Hahahahahaha hahahahahahaha hahahahahaha hahahahahaha. Dude, give me one, just a single example of X being cut in favor of Y, where Y are cost savings for the company,and, where those savings actually trickle down to the consumer? |
|
Bobcat
Premium
join:2001-02-04
Bedminster, NJ
 ·Verizon Online DSL
| reply to Qumahlin
said by Qumahlin :All of which are freely accessible via the web. No need for your ISP to provide them. said by Qumahlin :Having worked at a major ISP in an network position I can tell you right now it doesn't cost nearly as much as the maintenance, hardware, and "one time" spooling to the server farms. So please explain how these web services can provide the service for free, but it's such a major expense for ISPs. Do they operate in different economic universes or something?
--
02NH NORMAL HALT |
|
EPS
join:2008-02-13
Hingham, MA | Do any free web services allow access to binaries? All the ones I've seen are just text. My guess is that's the difference. |
|
Pathfinder
Dazed Confused
Premium
join:2000-03-26
Mount Vernon, NY
·Verizon Online DSL
| reply to SilverSurfer
said by SilverSurfer :said by Qumahlin :I assure you, costs will go down, not up even with added external BW figured in. Hahahahahaha hahahahahahaha hahahahahaha hahahahahaha. Dude, give me one, just a single example of X being cut in favor of Y, where Y are cost savings for the company,and, where those savings actually trickle down to the consumer? Maybe you should reread the post after you stop laughing. No where did he state or imply that your bill would go down only that the company costs would go down. |
|
SilverSurfer
join:2007-08-19
| said by Pathfinder :said by SilverSurfer :said by Qumahlin :I assure you, costs will go down, not up even with added external BW figured in. Hahahahahaha hahahahahahaha hahahahahaha hahahahahaha. Dude, give me one, just a single example of X being cut in favor of Y, where Y are cost savings for the company,and, where those savings actually trickle down to the consumer? Maybe you should reread the post after you stop laughing. No where did he state or imply that your bill would go down only that the company costs would go down. That's even funnier, dolt. Which part of: said by Qumahlin :I assure you, costs will go down, not up even with added external BW figured in. confuses you the most? |
|
Bobcat
Premium
join:2001-02-04
Bedminster, NJ
·Verizon Online DSL
| reply to EPS
said by EPS :Do any free web services allow access to binaries? All the ones I've seen are just text. My guess is that's the difference. Yeah, but what about the tens of thousands of text newsgroups that Verizon is dropping? Hell, they're even dropping alt.cellular.verizon!
--
02NH NORMAL HALT |
|
EPS
join:2008-02-13
Hingham, MA
| Convenience- dropping alt.* (and a bunch of others) isn't because they don't like alt.cellular.verizon, but is a way to try to make sure they don't drop the known child-porn groups, but then get hit by some state Attorney General in a few months because new child-porn groups have sprung up. (This is looking at it in the best possible light, mind you)
I don't think it's all about wanting to save money on newsgroups- if that was it, then why wouldn't they just drop them all like Time Warner did? |
|
espaeth
Digital Plumber
Premium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
 ·voip.ms
·Vitelity VOIP
·Callcentric
·VoiceStick
·ViaTalk
 ·Comcast
·Embarq
| reply to SilverSurfer
said by SilverSurfer :Which part of ... confuses you the most? I'm confused that you didn't bother to read Qumahlin 's post enough to understand he was talking about provider costs, specifically in reference to the assertion someone made that it is "cheaper" for a provider to provide the usenet service on their network instead of having all of their subscribers (who use newsgroups) use an external service.
Given that his post started out with:
said by Qumahlin :Having worked at a major ISP in an network position I can tell you right now it doesn't cost nearly as much as the maintenance, hardware, and "one time" spooling to the server farms. what makes you think he's talking about user fees? |
|
KCrimson
Premium
join:2001-02-25
Brooklyn, NY
·Optimum Online
 ·Verizon FIOS
| reply to SilverSurfer
said by SilverSurfer :Hahahahahaha hahahahahahaha hahahahahaha hahahahahaha. Dude, give me one, just a single example of X being cut in favor of Y, where Y are cost savings for the company,and, where those savings actually trickle down to the consumer? Dude (I hate the missuse of that expression, from one of passive friendship to aggressive dismissal), if you'd stop laughing and look all around you, you'll see plenty of evidence. Considering that the dollar is worth a small fraction of what it was worth when I was a child, and yet many objects are cheaper in real dollars (or remain stable), there's PLENTY of evidence all around you.
Lets look down at your keyboard, computer and monitor. The prices of these luxuries are cheaper (in many cases) than my old Apple ][+ - call it "economies of scale" or whatever you like - its a result of manufacturers able to offer a commodity for cheaper prices to retailers, and the savings is passed to the consumer. Even our broadband connections - they're in most cases cheaper than we were able to pay for only basic POTS service in the 60's. Are you old enough to remember what long distance phone calls cost back during the 60's and 70's? The federal break-up of AT&T along with VOIP and CLEC competition brought phone rates MUCH lower in real dollars.
In fact MANY basic items you purchase today are actually CHEAPER in REAL dollars than what we were paying years ago. There are many factors involved - cheaper labor, mass merchandising, etc - but the fact remains that the ultimate cost is actually cheaper in comparison to the salaries we typically earn. Therefore, the distributor, manufacturer and retailer were able to switch from distribution channel A to distribution channel B and save consumer $$$.
I want you to realize however, that I wouldn't have even posted this reply had you not been so dismissive, DUDE! 
--
Confusion Will Be My Epitaph |
|
