dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
6
share rss forum feed


The Limit
Premium
join:2007-09-25
Greensboro, NC
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Windstream
reply to Nightfall

Re: Reasonable

Thanks for the helpful, and informative, reply.

In reply to tshirt: I'm not asking Comcast to break the trend, I'm requesting that companies like Comcast to be "fair". Sure, have caps, but enforce them EVERYWHERE. I don't think it's necessarily fair to cherry pick where they enforce said caps because of "competition".

For future reference, I'd rather pay for broadband like I pay for a utility, but alas, can't break that "free market" we have going for us.

Nightfall, I've read about broadband history, shared resources, and nodes. This shouldn't be a problem if usage pattern are accurately measured. Don't complain about my short answer if you are going to give me the run around on "researching" said topics. I don't doubt your experience, but I do doubt that giving consumers choices rather than letting our "free market" decide, which many companies like this have their hand in the cookie jar but then complain they can't have their cake and cookies at the same time, is not the correct way to approach this.
--
"We will evaluate these integrals rigorously if we can, and non-rigorously if we must".
---Victor Moll, invited talk, Tom Osler Fest (April 17, 2010)


Nightfall
My Goal Is To Deny Yours
Premium,MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI
Reviews:
·ooma
·Comcast
·Callcentric
·Site5.com
said by The Limit:

Thanks for the helpful, and informative, reply.

In reply to tshirt: I'm not asking Comcast to break the trend, I'm requesting that companies like Comcast to be "fair". Sure, have caps, but enforce them EVERYWHERE. I don't think it's necessarily fair to cherry pick where they enforce said caps because of "competition".

For future reference, I'd rather pay for broadband like I pay for a utility, but alas, can't break that "free market" we have going for us.

Nightfall, I've read about broadband history, shared resources, and nodes. This shouldn't be a problem if usage pattern are accurately measured. Don't complain about my short answer if you are going to give me the run around on "researching" said topics. I don't doubt your experience, but I do doubt that giving consumers choices rather than letting our "free market" decide, which many companies like this have their hand in the cookie jar but then complain they can't have their cake and cookies at the same time, is not the correct way to approach this.

Tshirt put it better than I could in the time he had. Very helpful post and it should help you and others here see the answer to your question.

Its all about infrastructure and the way that shared services were built. I agree with you on usage patterns, but what happens when a node is being overused due to the actions of 5-6 people on the node? When the few hurt the experience of hundreds or thousands on a node, there is a problem.

I don't like caps anymore than the next person, but after working as a contractor in the ISP industry for a few years, I have seen the other side of the issue.

Case in point, there was a cable node that serviced about 100 subscribers. On that node, we had 2 users who kept torrents running on their connections 24/7. No problem, the node was not even close to full. Then, a new neighborhood was added to the node, a new development. In four years, the node tripled. The bandwidth was sized correctly, but now there were 20 people on the node that were running 24/7.

This comes down less to "usage patterns" and more to conservation of a shared service.

The free market decision is all about other ISPs not going this route and getting the people who want unlimited bandwidth as their customers. So far, every major ISP is going down this road right now, so it will have to be a new startup, like Google.
--
My domain - Nightfall.net


The Limit
Premium
join:2007-09-25
Greensboro, NC
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Windstream
Here we can agree. I think that the collectively mentality is to cash in on said usage increase, and that is just my hypothesis. I have no data to prove said hypthesis, and I'm sure data like that will never see the light of day.

I see where you are coming from, which is why intelligent network management should be in place for such cases as a stop gap measure until additional capacity can be added, whether that be upgrading backhaul, splitting nodes, etc. I'm not going to pretend that I'm an expert, because I most certainly am not one, but logically it doesn't make sense for these companies to complain about bandwidth crunch but then advertise the product as a "DOWNLOAD MOVIES! STREAM!" when this does nothing more than increase usage exponentially.

Making money isn't bad, but making money off deception is bad. Advertise the product as you would want customers to use it, rather than advertise more than promised. That's my argument. Like I said, I don't mind paying more, but I do mind having to deal with deception and smoke screens. I am in the minority, and I understand this.
--
"We will evaluate these integrals rigorously if we can, and non-rigorously if we must".
---Victor Moll, invited talk, Tom Osler Fest (April 17, 2010)


Nightfall
My Goal Is To Deny Yours
Premium,MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI
Reviews:
·ooma
·Comcast
·Callcentric
·Site5.com
said by The Limit:

Here we can agree. I think that the collectively mentality is to cash in on said usage increase, and that is just my hypothesis. I have no data to prove said hypthesis, and I'm sure data like that will never see the light of day.

I see where you are coming from, which is why intelligent network management should be in place for such cases as a stop gap measure until additional capacity can be added, whether that be upgrading backhaul, splitting nodes, etc. I'm not going to pretend that I'm an expert, because I most certainly am not one, but logically it doesn't make sense for these companies to complain about bandwidth crunch but then advertise the product as a "DOWNLOAD MOVIES! STREAM!" when this does nothing more than increase usage exponentially.

Making money isn't bad, but making money off deception is bad. Advertise the product as you would want customers to use it, rather than advertise more than promised. That's my argument. Like I said, I don't mind paying more, but I do mind having to deal with deception and smoke screens. I am in the minority, and I understand this.

You and I are in agreement. As for your last point, I believe that the days of smoke and mirrors are over. ISPs are no longer advertising "unlimited" use. Anyone who believes bandwidth to be unlimited are operating under a false assumption. I would understand your point if ISPs were saying that data was unlimited and use was unlimited, but that isn't the case.
--
My domain - Nightfall.net


The Limit
Premium
join:2007-09-25
Greensboro, NC
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Windstream
You are correct in that ISPs don't explicitly advertise unlimited, but they sure do advertise the product as more than promised, because the average user has no idea how much he/she consumes, let alone the speed they pay for in the end. When caps become more standard, people will start seeing nice overage charges on their bills if my hypothesis is correct.

I feel that better education would actually fix our situation rather than regulation, even though I've advocated for regulation in the past. I've given up on the FCC, as well as any government agency, to fix our problems for us.
--
"We will evaluate these integrals rigorously if we can, and non-rigorously if we must".
---Victor Moll, invited talk, Tom Osler Fest (April 17, 2010)


Nightfall
My Goal Is To Deny Yours
Premium,MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI
Reviews:
·ooma
·Comcast
·Callcentric
·Site5.com
said by The Limit:

You are correct in that ISPs don't explicitly advertise unlimited, but they sure do advertise the product as more than promised, because the average user has no idea how much he/she consumes, let alone the speed they pay for in the end. When caps become more standard, people will start seeing nice overage charges on their bills if my hypothesis is correct.

I feel that better education would actually fix our situation rather than regulation, even though I've advocated for regulation in the past. I've given up on the FCC, as well as any government agency, to fix our problems for us.

I agree. I think there should be some kind of "easy to find" meter that users can use to see how much that they have used and if they are close. Its in their billing system, but how many people actively look for it?

At the same time though, I am sure you will agree that with the caps set so high that there is virtually no risk of common consumers hitting them. I believe your hypothesis would be correct if the caps were set low. When Comcast is setting caps at the 250-300gb level, just based on the usage statistics I have seen and that have been posted here, you won't be correct.
--
My domain - Nightfall.net