| reply to Matt
Re: 50mbps for 192 seconds? I'm going to assume sarcasm here. |
|
Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
| I think that's probably correct. Lets put Matt on a business tier or cancel his service, clearly that makes more sense than implementing a system that punishes use of alternative video delivery.  |
|
beaups
join:2003-08-11
Hilliard, OH | Punishes alternative video deliver, how? |
|
Reviews:
 ·Comcast
·Charter
3 edits | That's the FUD talking. I use Internet video everyday with Fancast, Hulu,, Netflix kids with online games, YouTube and Slingbox. Never come close to caps. The world will end with CAPs is just plain rhetoric.
CAP usage is better explained in this editorial by Justin(the owner of DSLReports). |
|
Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
2 edits | reply to beaups
Punishes alternative video deliver, how? Monthly caps as low as 5GB are currently being trialed by companies like Time Warner Cable and Frontier. I'll let you do the math for a household full of users. Meanwhile, BitTorrent throttling (like Bell Canada's) doesn't just target P2P piracy, it targets alternative BitTorrent delivery systems that will increasingly compete with Cable or telcoTV.
Higher caps that are clear, and only reached by a vast minority of extremely high-consumption customers are fine. As is smart network management. The problem is that what constitutes excessive use is arbitrary, raw core network congestion data is not published by ISPs, and it will be very easy to abuse systems "for the good of the network" in order to protect TV revenues.
I suppose those who think that's "FUD" (97% of the time that's coming from people in the industry whose wallets or portfolios benefit from metered billing or anti-competitive behavior) can bookmark this post and come back to it in four years to tell me I was wrong. |
|
|
|
Reviews:
·WOW Internet and..
| reply to devnuller
said by devnuller:That's the FUD talking. I use Internet video everyday with Fancast, Hulu,, Netflix kids with online games, YouTube and Slingbox. Never come close to caps. The world will end with CAPs is just plain rhetoric. CAP usage is better explained in this editorial by Justin(the owner of DSLReports). From what I read Netflix HD streaming requires 8-10MBit bandwidth. So if throttling like this was implemented by US ISPs and you were on 20MB tier, then you'd be throttled even before you finished watching your movie. |
|
Reviews:
·Comcast
·Charter
| said by JazzJRabbit:From what I read Netflix HD streaming requires 8-10MBit bandwidth. So if throttling like this was implemented by US ISPs and you were on 20MB tier, then you'd be throttled even before you finished watching your movie. You are confusing speed (20Mb per second) with usage (250,000M per month). This is a common mistake. |
|
beaups
join:2003-08-11
Hilliard, OH | reply to Karl Bode
But this article has nothing to do with a 5GB cap. |
|
beaups
join:2003-08-11
Hilliard, OH | reply to JazzJRabbit
And you read this where exactly? |
|
Reviews:
·Comcast
·Charter
4 edits | reply to Karl Bode
Karl, I actually agree with much of what you said in that post. The only thing I challenge are changes around the delivery systems. Current video delivery is predictable and has clear economics around it. If it is live/linear or VoD across cable or fiber, people know how to predict, build and charge for it to run a business.
Even alternative Internet video today via CDN or hosters is pretty clear and mostly has solid economics if the proper payment systems are in place (they pay someone) for transit delivery and no one exploits the peering infrastructure.
Where it breaks down is with P2P. Shifting all the costs of video delivery to the consumer based infrastructure (and in turn consumers) does not have clear economics behind it. Some call it "free", others call it "helps the ISP", and others see it as the "holy grail" of CDN. The problem is, none of those people pay the bill in a P2P delivery world.
You know who REALLY wants unlimited???? Content companies that want to use your and my bandwidth for "free"
It's not as simple as "stick it to the man". Find me a real study that shows P2P is cheaper OVER ALL and not just for the content owners. Look into this a little bit more as it is a real technical and business issue.
[EDIT: These statements are not meant to support protocol based throttling. Which I personally do not] |
|
| reply to devnuller
said by devnuller:said by JazzJRabbit:From what I read Netflix HD streaming requires 8-10MBit bandwidth. So if throttling like this was implemented by US ISPs and you were on 20MB tier, then you'd be throttled even before you finished watching your movie. You are confusing speed (20Mb per second) with usage (250,000M per month). This is a common mistake. Speed + time = usage
Usage, of course, varies relative to how much time you spend "speeding". (Or were you just trying to be funny?) |
|
1 edit | reply to beaups
No, but Virgin is going to start targeting BitTorrent specifically. Do you see any anti-competitive implications of a cable TV company suddenly throttling a protocol that delivers competition via peer to peer networks? |
|
Reviews:
·Comcast
·Charter
1 edit | reply to meh37
said by meh37 :
Speed + time = usage
Usage, of course, varies relative to how much time you spend "speeding". (Or were you just trying to be funny?)
I think it is actually a sum of instances around speed * time = usage. And no, I was trying to clarify a misconception. |
|
| reply to beaups
I didn't know it was that hard to google in this day and age
»news.cnet.com/8301-13515_3-10078091-26.html |
|
Reviews:
·WOW Internet and..
| reply to devnuller
said by devnuller:said by JazzJRabbit:From what I read Netflix HD streaming requires 8-10MBit bandwidth. So if throttling like this was implemented by US ISPs and you were on 20MB tier, then you'd be throttled even before you finished watching your movie. You are confusing speed (20Mb per second) with usage (250,000M per month). This is a common mistake. I'm assuming you're talking about comcast since you mentioned 250GB cap.
I said if US ISPs followed Virgin throttling approach then you would be throttled before you could even watch one HD movie from netflix. |
|
| reply to devnuller
Well, regardless, users seldom attain the rated speed, so using the rated speed to "compute" usage is always a best case scenario (or worst case if you have ridiculously low caps). Of course, if ISPs simply performed the function for which customers contract with them--namely, providing access to the Internet; then those customers wouldn't have to deal with stupid issues caused by greedy ISPs. |
|
beaups
join:2003-08-11
Hilliard, OH | reply to JazzJRabbit
Thanks. Google is easy, getting CORRECT information only a little more difficult. Try here: »www.netflix.com/WiMessage?msg=59
You'll need to login.
Basically it says a 5mbps or higher is fine. Not to mention why would netflix release technology that only, say, 1% of people can get?
So at 5mbps you could watch 24/7 on virgin if you had a 20mbps package right? Because if they throttle you to 25% you still have 5mbps. And the 50mbps plan you'd still have plenty of headroom. |
|
beaups
join:2003-08-11
Hilliard, OH | reply to JazzJRabbit
Jazz that is absolutely BS |
|
 MattAll noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | reply to JazzJRabbit
said by JazzJRabbit:said by devnuller:That's the FUD talking. I use Internet video everyday with Fancast, Hulu,, Netflix kids with online games, YouTube and Slingbox. Never come close to caps. The world will end with CAPs is just plain rhetoric. CAP usage is better explained in this editorial by Justin(the owner of DSLReports). From what I read Netflix HD streaming requires 8-10MBit bandwidth. So if throttling like this was implemented by US ISPs and you were on 20MB tier, then you'd be throttled even before you finished watching your movie. The total size of a Netflix HD movie is about 6GB. The rate at which it downloads doesn't matter as it doesn't use 8-10Mbps for the entire time the movie runs. |
|
MattAll noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | reply to Karl Bode
said by Karl Bode:No, but Virgin is going to start targeting BitTorrent specifically. Do you see any anti-competitive implications of a cable TV company suddenly throttling a protocol that delivers competition via peer to peer networks? Clearly, you're mistaken. There's absolutely no reason for a corporation to cripple an up-and-coming competitor. Why, I don't believe that has ever happened in this history of our great company, errr, country. |
|
