how-to block ads
|
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
 ·RoadRunner Cable
 ·DSL EXTREME
1 edit | reply to WasteNot
Re: Gluttony?
Personally, I work remotely, and VPN/SSH tunnel in to sites half way across the country on a 3Mbps/512kbps pipe, and it works very well for SSH, Remote Desktop, VoIP (Skype) and even X11.
The issue that I typically have is...not the ability to have higher data rates, but the promotion of higher data rates with caps.
Eg. Is there a need for caps on a 3Mbps connection ?
Companies will promote 10-20Mbps connections, then complain that the lines are being abused, and force a round of caps on all, where the 'low' end user ends up on an insanely low (read wireless like) 5GB/month cap, forcing users to a higher tier, making more profits for the ISP.
Do I really need a higher data rate ? No! But I'd be forced to a higher data rate regardless.
I think anything under 100GB/month for a wired Internet connection is crazy. If you're going to put in a 5GB cap on a line (like TWC is proposing in TX), it should be on a 256kbps-512kbps line ONLY.
100GB cap on a 3MBps line would mean that I use ~1/10th of the total bandwidth in a month, based on a 3Mbps tier.
While I am no bandwidth hog, I do accept a reasonable amount of control.
--
Canada = Hollywood North | |
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·Cox HSI
 ·magicjack.com
| said by en102  :Do I really need a higher data rate ? No! But I'd be forced to a higher data rate regardless. I wonder if there's really a difference from the ISP perspective. If the average person consumes 1000x their [advertised] speed, I don't think I'd care whether 1. someone wants higher speed but not more consumption (i.e., their capacity will go unused more often). Or, 2. someone wants higher consumption at a slow speed (i.e., their capacity will go unused less often).
Without metered billing, it's all about averages. A perishable product going unused, or overused.
You're assuming that slow speed with above-average consumption (less unused time than the average) costs the ISP less, and would result in a significantly lower-priced plan than higher-speed/consumption. Their costs may be due to people falling outside the average.
Mark | |
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
·RoadRunner Cable
·DSL EXTREME
| said by amigo_boy :Without metered billing, it's all about averages. A perishable product going unused, or overused. Those averages may are typically business models.
In the case of some ISPs, it may depend on where their cost point is. Eg. Cable 'can' put high data rates, but may require caps to support it at the node. This model would work for this scenario, however, I do suspect that time of day usage may also play a part.
Eg. I could consume 95% of the bandwidth, but congestion occurs during peak periods. In the case of DSL, costs are not at the node, so the basis is somewhat different... but the same overall model will work.
If the model is (and most likely is) easier to track on a per GB model, and management can work with that model as a 1:1 correlation. Management can trend based on what they set as averages... they just have their 'averages' set a little 'low'.
--
Canada = Hollywood North | |
|
