 
dadkins
Living on a Blu Planet
Premium,MVM
join:2003-09-26
Hercules, CA | "all 64-129kbps of it"??? WTF?
How long would you have to have that running to get to, say... 100GB? 200GB? 
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera | |
|
 | 
jose3030
Premium
join:1999-08-17
Manassas, VA | Re: "all 64-129kbps of it"??? Not only that, but the "uploading" only starts when the voice convo starts.
So if you're dialing, its not using hardly any upload.
Up to the point of connection. | |
|
| |
dadkins
Living on a Blu Planet
Premium,MVM
join:2003-09-26
Hercules, CA
 ·Comcast
edit:
October 24th, @01:44PM
| Re: "all 64-129kbps of it"??? How long must you be yaking on the phone per day to even make a dent in your bandwidth? People call me, occasionally. But the calls don't last hours! Maybe 20 minutes 2-3 times per week.
Geez! I must be teh hog! Better not get VoIP, eh?
Think outside the Fox... Opera | |
|
| | |
jose3030
Premium
join:1999-08-17
Manassas, VA | Re: "all 64-129kbps of it"??? I mean, 64-128 kbps is like...
8-10Kb/sec
so like, talking for a good 1 hr will not even be that much. | |
|
| | | | gatzdon
join:2002-10-25
Lake Zurich, IL
| Re: "all 64-129kbps of it"??? Most VOIP providers complain at about the 3000 minute mark, so
129kbps * 3000 min * 60 sec / 8 (bits/byte) / 1024 (KB/MB) / 1024 (MB/GB) = 2.7 GB per month.
Most don't use 3000 minutes and most don't use more than 90 kbs.
--
$100 placed at 7 percent interest compounded quarterlyfor 200 years will increase to more than $100,000,000 --by which time it will be worth nothing.- Lazarus Long | |
|
| | | | |
jose3030
Premium
join:1999-08-17
Manassas, VA | Re: "all 64-129kbps of it"??? 3000 minutes?
damn.
thats a lot of talking , good god. | |
|
| | | | | jimbo2150
join:2004-05-10
Youngstown, OH
 ·Dreamhost
·Armstrong Zoom In..
| You are not looking at the larger picture, they are probably looking at all users that use the service.
Lets say the average is about 400 and there are 200 users on your network using it per month:
129kbps * 400 min * 60 sec / 8 (bits/byte) / 1024 (KB/MB) / 1024 (MB/GB) = .3GB per month per user.
With 200 users that is (.3 * 200) = about 73GB per month | |
|
| | | | | gatzdon
join:2002-10-25
Lake Zurich, IL
| said by gatzdon  :Most VOIP providers complain at about the 3000 minute mark, so 129kbps * 3000 min * 60 sec / 8 (bits/byte) / 1024 (KB/MB) / 1024 (MB/GB) = 2.7 GB per month. Most don't use 3000 minutes and most don't use more than 90 kbs. I guess what I'm saying is that if I'm paying for "Broadband" and 2.7 GB / Month is a big deal, then I'm buying my "Broadband" from the wrong company.
--
$100 placed at 7 percent interest compounded quarterlyfor 200 years will increase to more than $100,000,000 --by which time it will be worth nothing.- Lazarus Long | |
|
| | | | | | NoOneButMe
join:2001-08-24
TX | Re: "all 64-129kbps of it"??? No Kidding just think of it when we will have Video over ip phones jeez i wouldnt want to be part of that isp ide ditch them in a heart beat | |
|
| | | |
| |
| 
fireflier
Coffee. . .Need Coffee
Premium
join:2001-05-25
Limbo | They're saying VOIP traffic is eating up bandwidth on their network? What's zombie PC traffic doing? Seems to be an inconsistency here. . .
--
When people are free to do as they please, they usually imitate each other. | |
|
r81984
Tough to beat.
Premium
join:2001-11-14
Morgan City, LA
·Insight Communicat..
 ·AT&T Midwest
| Providers need to change. ISP's sould not be allowed to advertise unlimited service if they are going to bitch about people maxing out their connection.
There just needs to be a new law that forces companies to advertise their service as bandwidth capped, speed throttled, or Anti VOIP instead of unlimited if they practice these deceptive tactics. | |
|
| The Way Out
join:2003-01-20
| Re: Providers need to change. If you want it that way, you should be prepared to pay for bandwidth on a per-megabit basis like everyone else does in the wholesale bandwidth market. If you're buying less than 10MBit, expect to pay between $100 and $250/Mbit. Don't forget to pay for the crossconnect between the provider and your home, and the 1 year contract so you don't jump ship.
The fact of the matter is that you're already getting a bargain at $15/mo for 1.5Mbit service (or even $50/mo for 8Mbit service). $10/Mbit is very cheap for Internet access. Get over yourself. | |
|
| | 
bkhorn
2b1-Ask1
Premium,MVM
join:2000-03-24
Easton, PA
clubs:
| Re: Providers need to change. That's like saying you can have all you can eat but only 1 piece of this and 1 piece of that. Unlimited is like All You Can Eat. NO Limits! Other wise it is false advertising.
--
The sum IQ of the world is a constant.The more people, the more idiots. | |
|
| | | The Way Out
join:2003-01-20
| Re: Providers need to change. That's nice. You have two choices:
1.) They advertise unlimited, and you get unlimited. Expect to pay an appropriate amount for "unlimited." Probably somewhere around $100/Mbit. For an 8Mbit cable connection, expect to pay around $800/Month for your completely unlimited 8Mbit connection.
2.) They advertise unlimited, you get some fairly high limited amount. Pay something less than $100/Mbit and shut up.
You guys want cheap and unlimited. It doesn't exist. Get over yourselves. | |
|
| | | | 
Tsume
BOBBARR2008 .COM
join:2004-02-23
Vista, CA
 ·ViaTalk
·Cox HSI
| Re: Providers need to change. I'm pretty sure they want them to stop using the word unlimited when it's not unlimited.
Cheap and unlimited is nice, but doesn't happen. Anyone advertising a cheap service as unlimited is falsely advertising, because that's a service they can't provide. That's the issue here.
--
"True warriors do not follow paths, they make them. It is not just their desire, it is their nature." (Battletech) | |
|
| | | | radarman
join:2005-06-01
Odenton, MD
| No, I would actually like an option 3. Sell the service based on what it is - not on hype. If you are only 100Gb/month, then advertise the fact. Don't send a stupid letter months after the fact.
Basically, put the "hidden" caps and what not in the advertising. Hell, I'm not picky - they could print it in that typical 6-point legalese type if they want, just make sure its there.
To me, to offer an unlimited service - with no caveats - is to offer just that. I don't mind the caveats, so long as I am aware of them. I don't expect truly "unlimited" service for only $30-$40/mo - but I do wish ISP's would make the actual limits more clear. | |
|
| | | | 
Speedy8
Premium
join:2002-08-22
Alliance, OH
clubs:
| said by The Way Out :That's nice. You have two choices: 1.) They advertise unlimited, and you get unlimited. Expect to pay an appropriate amount for "unlimited." Probably somewhere around $100/Mbit. For an 8Mbit cable connection, expect to pay around $800/Month for your completely unlimited 8Mbit connection. 2.) They advertise unlimited, you get some fairly high limited amount. Pay something less than $100/Mbit and shut up. You guys want cheap and unlimited. It doesn't exist. Get over yourselves. It doesn't exist? Tell that to SBC, you can download or upload as much as you want. I've also had RR and have never had a problem. It does exist, just not on every ISP that claims "unlimited." | |
|
| | | footballdude
join:2002-08-13
Imperial, MO
| said by bkhorn :That's like saying you can have all you can eat but only 1 piece of this and 1 piece of that. Unlimited is like All You Can Eat. NO Limits! Other wise it is false advertising. I know people who have been thrown out of all you can eat buffets because they ate extreme amounts of food. What 'all you can eat' means is all the average person would want to eat. Extreme hogs get extreme treatment, like a boot in the rear. | |
|
| | | | 
braynes
Premium
join:2005-03-14
Waterville, ME | Re: Providers need to change. WOW you have a circle of friends
Bruce | |
|
| | | 
wildcards2000
| "That's like saying you can have all you can eat but only 1 piece of this and 1 piece of that. Unlimited is like All You Can Eat. NO Limits! Other wise it is false advertising."
I guess you never been to ALL YOU CAN EAT? They usually post a sign that says 2-3 hour limit.
I agree with most of everyone. If there is a limit, then post it. | |
|
| | | 
dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
| said by bkhorn :That's like saying you can have all you can eat but only 1 piece of this and 1 piece of that. Unlimited is like All You Can Eat. NO Limits! Other wise it is false advertising. Like an unnamed restaurant here in phoenix that has it listed like this in their menu.
All you can eat*
--
--
--
--
--
and at the bottom of the menu in small fine print it says
* all you can eat offer limited to two plates.
--
You can never be too rich, too thin or have too much Bandwidth | |
|
| | Sgtslaughtr
join:2005-08-29
Knox, IN
| said by The Way Out :The fact of the matter is that you're already getting a bargain at $15/mo for 1.5Mbit service (or even $50/mo for 8Mbit service). $10/Mbit is very cheap for Internet access. Get over yourself. $15 for 1.5 where the are you? I pay $55 for 384/1.5 thru sprint.
Anyways, two months ago I was downloading/uploading constantly with Bittorrent and I bet I had at least 300GB of transfer and sprint aint said a damn thing so I think I'll stick with them. The only other option is mediacom at 256/3000 for $55 a month But I need upload more than download. Not only do I use bittorrent but I host lan parties everyonce and a while....well 4 to 6 people but considering my area thats alot. The majority of people here are all using $299 dells that dont have agp slots so there is no hope for gaming for them. | |
|
| | | The Way Out
join:2003-01-20 | Re: Providers need to change. That's nice. You're still paying below market value (as far as low-quantity bandwidth goes) for 1.5Mbit of transit. If you need the bandwidth, then pay for it. If not, be happy with what you've got. | |
|
| | | | 
DaSneaky1D
Tell me, where is your father?
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-29
The Lou
·Charter Pipeline
| Re: Providers need to change. said by The Way Out :That's nice. You're still paying below market value (as far as low-quantity bandwidth goes) for 1.5Mbit of transit. If you need the bandwidth, then pay for it. If not, be happy with what you've got. No, he's not paying below market value. These are two entirely different markets.
People who pay high dollar for Internet access are businesses and people who use their access to make money. They pay for the reliability and throughput of that connection.
Residential users pay for access and "perks". They pay what they do because most residential users don't use the connection a "data center" would.
Your reasoning is flawed. Apples to oranges.
--
:: my trivial ramblings :: | |
|
| | | | | 
John Galt
Spricket24
Premium
join:2004-09-30
Oceanside, OR
| Re: Providers need to change. said by DaSneaky1D :Residential users pay for access and "perks". They pay what they do because most residential users don't use the connection a "data center" would. Unless they are doing P2P or BT...
--
A is A | |
|
| | | | | |
DaSneaky1D
Tell me, where is your father?
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-29
The Lou
·Charter Pipeline
| Re: Providers need to change. You're a WISP operator. You run under a completely different business model than telco and cableco ISP's.
That's not to say your model or point is flawed, but you have less area to subsidize P2P and BT users than those companies.
--
:: my trivial ramblings :: | |
|
| | | | | | |
John Galt
Spricket24
Premium
join:2004-09-30
Oceanside, OR
| Re: Providers need to change. said by DaSneaky1D :You're a WISP operator. You run under a completely different business model than telco and cableco ISP's. That's not to say your model or point is flawed, but you have less area to subsidize P2P and BT users than those companies. The problem is still the same, however.
Someone ought to call Bram and tell him that allowing 10,000 connections per IP is a "problem".
Sometimes "users" can't be relied upon to show restraint...
--
A is A | |
|
| | | | vannyx
Premium
join:2003-07-07
Bronx, NY
| First companies wouldnt charge a per bit or byte amount for bandwith a month because alot of cheap people would jump ship and then they would be out of luck. Second all they need to do is remove the word unlimited and state their limits thats it , whats so hard about that. They already have the limits and they harras people who are paying customers about it. When i go to a restuarant and i order food if the price is 23 for prime rib then thats what i want to pay and thats what i expect to get i dont care if it cost you 200 a plate in the back. Its your problem change your business model to be profitable and tell your customers the truth. | |
|
| amungus
Premium
join:2004-11-26
America
clubs:
·Cox HSI
| agreed.
besides, voice packets are still just sent as packets with maybe a higher priority... it's not like someone's upping a (huge) file to many people/connections at once all night long.
this' one tiny little fraction of bandwidth... my net2phone for instance only up's about 10-24KB/sec. ...that's peanuts compared to the full 512kb (about 40KB in actuality) space on standard cox high speed. | |
|
| Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
| dont worry someday bandwidth will end up needing to be dirt cheap, this true multimedia world they speak of will not happen unless they can provide unlimited symetric 100mbit service for 19.95/mo.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports | |
|
gheezer
Compooters R Us
Premium
join:2002-12-20
Henrietta, NY
| Infrastructure is extremely expensive. Bandwidth doesn't grow on trees.
A Typical Cisco Big honking router with lots of bells and whistles costs over 1/2 a million dollars. (An OC12 adaptor runs around 65,000 dollars). That OC12(655mb/s) costs close to a Hundred grand just to light up, there's also at least a 30,000 dollar monthly cost to that circuit too.
Also, It takes years build significant infrastructure to the neighborhoods.
Internet applications have expanded the home user's capabilities much faster than infrastructure has been able to expand. (bit torrent, streaming video, VoIP, etc etc).
For many, the sad reality is that traffic shaping or (blech) outright port filtering, is the only way to ensure fair usage to *all* customers....pending full scale rebuild completion.
All this infrastructure expansion must take place prior to any reliable and open architechture allowances take place.
At the same time, the ISP *must* remain profitable, or go out of business.
It's a difficult balancing act.
I tend to favor announcements to customers regarding limitations of infrastructure, however, this has the negative effect of driving away consumers, so the ISP tends to frown on making announcments which would drive down revenue.
It's a business still, the government (As in the Korean infrastructure model), is not pitching in. the ISP HAS to upgrade, while still keeping as many customers satisfied and on line as possible.
In many places in the US....expectations and capabilities of the consumer have increased beyond the infrastructure's current capabilities.
Open questions...if you are unlucky enough to live in such a location, what are the options you'd prefer?
1) Traffic management?
or
2) outright port filtering?
Remember, the ISP must turn a profit, or go out of business.
Just selling off to one of the BIG players is no guarantee of infrastructure upgrade either.
--
Join the NAVY, see the world....It's mostly water! | |
|
|
See 14 replies to this post |
|
WirelessMajr
Premium
join:2005-08-03
College Place, WA | Be upfront If they are going to place restrictions (which, in the real world, nothing can exist peacefully without restrictions), then they should be upfront about it, and be clear about them as well. | |
|
chaser7016
@68.34.x.x
| Future DATA bills 2 mirror current Cellphone bill I think this when this finally happens it will be a win-win for consumers and businesses. New ISPs can emerge with this business model, where consumers can get a cheap monthly data service(pay for any overage they choose to so) and these ISPs will just sell data. Current and emerging Internet applications could flourish as these new ISPs will be neutral to what data flows over the network.
File sharing could become legal(funnel monies to copyright), regualar joes could file for copyright to make monies through p2p, telephony the service will become free and other important societal applications will flourish. This will also make broadband universally available and affordable. It will also crush the silly cable business model John McCain was looking to regulate.
Cant see this not happenning, especially with applications like Skype that will replace paying for voice communication. Those cell providers will then just evolve and change their data plans to match cell phone plans.
Cheers, Chaser | |
|
travelguy
join:1999-09-03
Albuquerque, NM
| The Finance Guys Don't Like Selling A Pipeline... The problem is that you have a bunch of finance MBAs and old school cable execs who don't like the idea of just selling a pipeline. They see that as low margin and prefer to sell the same product (bits) over and over in a slightly different format for extra charges. That's how they "add value". Sounds like the RIAA, doesn't it?
So - anything that threatens their ability to sell value added content is a threat and has to be dealt with accordingly. | |
|
| Bait_hammer
join:2002-12-16
Victoria, BC
| Re: The Finance Guys Don't Like Selling A Pipeline... The problem with the term unlimited is it has multiple meanings.
What the ISP's were refering to is unlimited time, not unlimited traffic. It was done to contrast dialup like connections from broadband connections.
Technically it wasn't deceptive advertising. ( Except for a few ISP's that actually printed unlimited traffic in there notes.) | |
|
| | vannyx
Premium
join:2003-07-07
Bronx, NY
| Re: The Finance Guys Don't Like Selling A Pipeline Unlimited time on dialup isps came about because of the pay per hour model they had before. Now dialup is so slow that even if you get a sustained 56kb/sec connection your not going to be using that much. But with DSL/Cable you can use alot of data if you could sustain 10mb/sec and use it 24/7, its still called unlimited because on dialup no one ever got a letter from their provider saying that they upload too much or they download too much or they are hogging all the bandwith. So when people move to broadband they expect the same thing they had with dialup. Unlimited use of the connection. Limitations should be clearly publized , just like how vonage now makes you sign 3 different things that you know that they cant offer 911 like pots broadband providers should be forced to make a proactive effort to tell you all their limitations that you didnt have with dialup. | |
|
Towerguy
@clallampud.net | My company As an ISP/WISP owner I actually encourage transition to VOIP. If I could find a $3-4 per month Wholesale VOIP I would bundle it like email at no extra charge.
Anything to F*** QWEST ....
Luv & Bullets | |
|
| WirelessMajr
Premium
join:2005-08-03
College Place, WA | Re: My company Where is your company located....and do you hire wireless communications major students? | |
|
| | Galvage
join:2004-02-11
Taconite, MN | Re: My company If a company is worried about 3gb a month of bandwidth then they are in the wrong bussiness. Most BB users will typically do about 5 to 10gb a month just surfing the net and downloading. | |
|
| | |
towerguy
@clallampud.net | Re: My company A little off subject
My Top 5 DNS request last month
Google.com
amazon.com
yahoo.com
thumbzilla.com
persiankitty.com
LOL
My users average about 5.2 gig per in the winter a bit more. | |
|
|
|
|
·