funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Washington, DC | reply to DINGDONGBONG
Re: We need caps again why?
Just quit responding to him. |
|
DINGDONGBONG
@telus.net | reply to ninjatutle
Try reading »www.dslprime.com maybe then the BS you always spout about can have some basis in reality... |
|
asdfdfdfdfdfdf
@Level3.net
| reply to ninjatutle
Om malik isn't just another blogger. He is a well respected tech and telecommunications journalist.
He has at least one book published, has worked for forbes, been published at places like the wall street journal. His analysis is taken seriously by serious people. |
|
cornelius785
join:2006-10-26
Worcester, MA | reply to ninjatutle
oh hey! look! here is everybody's favorite anti-p2p troll at work! |
|
Smith6612
Premium
join:2008-02-01
united state
 ·Dish Network
 ·Verizon Online DSL
·FrontierNet Intern..
| reply to ninjatutle
I don't see P2P lagging up my FPS games while I'm downloading large files on a 768kbps line now, do I? I honestly don't see FiOS slowing down in my area either. Many game download sites I use can max the 20Mbps connection right out. There's plenty of bandwidth and fiber out there waiting to be utilized on the backbones :P |
|
jimbo2150
join:2004-05-10
Youngstown, OH
| reply to ninjatutle
said by ninjatutle  :Who the heck is gigom? Another blogger? And they got their data by surveying a small software co?  Who the heck is the company? Someone who lies and makes up false data to appease their stockholders at the expense of the consumer?
I have seen many companies over the years lie or provide false data to shore up support for their ever-dwindling idea of fair use.
I don't trust the company itself anymore than you trust a random blogger to provide the information.
--
- "Techie" Jim |
|
nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD | reply to ninjatutle
Re: We need caps again why?
why don't you click the damn link and decide for yourself - that's why I put it there. |
|
kamm
join:2001-02-14
Brooklyn, NY
 ·T-Mobile US
| reply to ninjatutle
said by ninjatutle :Because P2P is eating up all of their bandwidth. BS. |
|
ninjatutle
Premium
join:2006-01-02
San Ramon, CA | reply to nasadude
Who the heck is gigom? Another blogger? And they got their data by surveying a small software co? |
|
SLD
Premium
join:2002-04-17 | reply to ninjatutle
The P2P broken record spins again... |
|
nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
 ·Comcast
| reply to ninjatutle
said by ninjatutle :Because P2P is eating up all of their bandwidth. But still, I'd rather them can P2P and leave everyone uncapped. BZZZZZZT! WRONG!
»gigaom.com/2008/04/22/shocking-n···d-usage/
quote:
The P2P stats are the ones that came as a complete surprise. Like you, I have read many reports that suggest P2P applications account for the majority of the traffic on high-speed networks. But McPherson’s data suggests otherwise:
* 20 percent of traffic is P2P applications
* During peak-load times, 70 percent of subscribers use http while 20 percent are using P2P
* Http still makes up the majority of the total traffic, of which 45 percent is traditional web content that includes text and images. Streaming video and audio content from services like YouTube accounts for nearly 50 percent of the http traffic. It shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone — streaming TV shows from Hulu and videos from YouTube have been on a major upswing, as noted by our colleagues over on NewTeeVee.
also, please note this article is from April, so P2P is probably has even less of a share now. |
|
ninjatutle
Premium
join:2006-01-02
San Ramon, CA | reply to Chiyo
Because P2P is eating up all of their bandwidth. But still, I'd rather them can P2P and leave everyone uncapped. |
|
