 espaethDigital PlumberPremium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
kudos:2
 ·Clear Wireless
| reply to me1212
Re: Wow 100m! said by me1212:Yes it is a decent cap, but when CV has 101m with no cap But it's not real. Ignoring overhead, there are 4 x 38mbps channels on the entire segment that users are connected to. That's 152mpbs of total capacity shared across at least 100 subscribers, if not more. Under the 101mbps plan, exactly 1 person on the segment can consume that bandwidth at any given time.
You have to see these plans for what they are; they are no different than the late-night infomercials that promise 6-pack abs in 3 weeks.
At this point you're just comparing the BS claims of one company against the BS claims of another company. |
|
| It's called splitting the nodes, which is not that expensive for the company to do. And not everyone in the area has the highest tier of broadband. The vast majority subscribe to the lowest tier. |
|
| reply to espaeth
said by espaeth:said by me1212:Yes it is a decent cap, but when CV has 101m with no cap But it's not real. Ignoring overhead, there are 4 x 38mbps channels on the entire segment that users are connected to. That's 152mpbs of total capacity shared across at least 100 subscribers, if not more. Under the 101mbps plan, exactly 1 person on the segment can consume that bandwidth at any given time. You have to see these plans for what they are; they are no different than the late-night infomercials that promise 6-pack abs in 3 weeks. At this point you're just comparing the BS claims of one company against the BS claims of another company. maybe you should read the cablevision forums with the people who have ultra and have been getting anywere from 92-120Mbp/s |
|
|
|
wentlancYou Can't Fix Dumb..
join:2003-07-30
Maineville, OH | reply to espaeth
None of this is real, and that's why people are not happy.
The 50 meg tier can transfer 16 Terabytes in a month. They are giving you 1.5% of the bandwidth that they are charging you for. The 100 meg teir is pointless except as a method to add revenue for people who use more than the cap. The speed upgrade at that point is pointless.
$$ grab....
How much of what you pay for should you actually be able to get?
cw |
|
espaethDigital PlumberPremium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Clear Wireless
| reply to hbk4099
said by hbk4099:maybe you should read the cablevision forums with the people who have ultra and have been getting anywere from 92-120Mbp/s Let's see how those stats look in 6 months when more than a handful of people in the entire OOL service area have Ultra subscriptions. |
|
espaethDigital PlumberPremium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Clear Wireless
| reply to wentlanc
said by wentlanc:The 50 meg tier can transfer 16 Terabytes in a month. They are giving you 1.5% of the bandwidth that they are charging you for. Unless you're paying $500+/mo, you're not even starting to pay for dedicated 50mbps service.
said by wentlanc:How much of what you pay for should you actually be able to get? That depends on if you understand what you are actually paying for. Not the crap the marketing departments are telling you, but what you are honestly paying for. |
|
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1 | reply to espaeth
said by espaeth:said by hbk4099:maybe you should read the cablevision forums with the people who have ultra and have been getting anywere from 92-120Mbp/s Let's see how those stats look in 6 months when more than a handful of people in the entire OOL service area have Ultra subscriptions. Yep, and there is a limit to splitting the nodes, at a certain point, it will be cheaper just to mount a gigabit ethernet switch on the pole and run fiber to your house than to give you a dedicated fiber node since what happens if 3 adjacent houses have 24/7 P2Pers? |
|
wentlancYou Can't Fix Dumb..
join:2003-07-30
Maineville, OH | reply to espaeth
said by espaeth:Unless you're paying $500+/mo, you're not even starting to pay for dedicated 50mbps service. You are absolutely right. Let's use your own numbers. If I'm paying $100 a month for 50Mbps service, then given that dedicated service is ~$500 a month (by your own numbers), then I'm paying for ~20% of dedicated service and only getting 1.5%.
said by espaeth:That depends on if you understand what you are actually paying for. Not the crap the marketing departments are telling you, but what you are honestly paying for. Again, you said it, I didn't. These companies are misleading consumers purposely to their own benefit. It's a shame that there is not more honesty in this world....
cw |
|
espaethDigital PlumberPremium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Clear Wireless
| said by wentlanc:said by espaeth:Unless you're paying $500+/mo, you're not even starting to pay for dedicated 50mbps service. You are absolutely right. Let's use your own numbers. If I'm paying $100 a month for 50Mbps service, then given that dedicated service is ~$500 a month (by your own numbers), then I'm paying for ~20% of dedicated service and only getting 1.5%. You're getting a little closer, but $10/mbps pricing is usually on a GigE handoff within the confines of a carrier neutral meet-me facility. You have to factor in the access costs for getting that connection to your house, which drives the cost up a bit more.
There's also some additional for service features (McAfee subscriptions, email, etc), residential support, and profit.
said by wentlanc:said by espaeth:That depends on if you understand what you are actually paying for. Not the crap the marketing departments are telling you, but what you are honestly paying for. Again, you said it, I didn't. These companies are misleading consumers purposely to their own benefit. It's a shame that there is not more honesty in this world.... True, but that's not unique to the broadband industry. As the phrase goes, a fool and his money are soon parted. Buying broadband access without actually doing some research is like going to a used car dealer without any preparation.
Comcast's 250GB cap is a step in the right direction, although I'm sure most people won't acknowledge it as such. Unlike ISPs that promise the world with absolutely no possibility of delivering to every customer, at least some ISPs are disclosing limits on what reasonable expectations are for usage on shared infrastructure.
It would be awesome if it really could be unlimited, but sadly that's just not the case. |
|
wentlancYou Can't Fix Dumb..
join:2003-07-30
Maineville, OH | I'm paying for cable, which covers the cost of that infrastructure already. Nice try.
Who freaking cares if other industries do it? I despise them also. But we are here talking about broadband...
Let me be clear, I don't mind the idea of the cap. What I fear is the lack of a fair operational process to increase the cap as NORMAL usage increases. Who gets to define normal, and how often are issues that need to be well planned prior to implementing this plan. For nothing more than to ensure that these companies who now own the content, distribution, and general access are not permitted to create their own artificial moneypots that will hinder our technological development.
cw |
|
