 rebus9
join:2002-03-26
Tampa Bay
1 edit | All that money yet a 400 GB cap So you max out this shiny new 100 Mbps connection for 8-1/2 hours, and you're done for the month.
And all of that for the low-low price of just $150/mo.
Gee, what a bargain. | |
|  | | | | | | 
SLD
Premium
join:2002-04-17 | Re: All that money yet a 400 GB cap Huh?!? Proof?
You want to make us all datacenters? | |
| | | jjeffeory
join:2002-12-04
USA | It's just more proof that the big players are really taking advantage of the little guy... ...and the little guy is allowing it to happen. No need to switch the billing method. They're effectively billing by the byte anyway if there's a cap. | |
| | | Lazlow
join:2006-08-07
Saint Louis, MO
1 edit | GOLFnSUN
The reason ISPs charge for more speed is becuase that is what costs them money and not GB/month. Both hardware costs and transit costs are based solely upon peak Mbps. Any GBs downloaded during non peak hours costs the isps nothing (zero, $0.00) extra.
Which costs the ISPs more, 400 GB download via a 100Mbps line or a 5Mbps line (both during peak hours)? The 100Mbps download is likely to cost them 20X as much. The 5Mbps line can only increase the peak Mbps by 5Mbps, which is unlikely to significantly increase the aggregate peak Mbps(no significant increase in transit costs or hardware cost). Now flip that around with a 100Mbps line, 100Mbps is quite likely to saturate a channel (or channels, remember each channel only supports 38Mbps, leading to node splits, increased hardware costs) and is also much more likely to increase the aggregate peak Mbps(increasing transit costs). | |
| | | | rebus9
join:2002-03-26
Tampa Bay
 ·Verizon FIOS
 ·RoadRunner Cable
| Re: All that money yet a 400 GB cap said by Lazlow  :Which costs the ISPs more, 400 GB download via a 100Mbps line or a 5Mbps line (both during peak hours)? The 100Mbps download is likely to cost them 20X as much. The 5Mbps line can only increase the peak Mbps by 5Mbps, which is unlikely to significantly increase the aggregate peak Mbps(no significant increase in transit costs or hardware cost). That's only applicable when they're buying ports with a partial commit. That is not the case with ISPs of any decent size.
A Gig-E or 10Gig-E port at full commit costs them a fixed amount no matter if their utilization is 20% or 100%. The ISP isn't going to dramatically increase their transit because a new speed tier is introduced, until adoption crosses a particular threshold.
Why?
Because most people will consume about the same at 20 Mbps as they would 100 Mbps. (abusers and pirates not included) That CNN webpage or Netflix stream contains the same number of bytes either way.
I surf the same websites at 25 Mbps on my FIOS circuit as I did on my 7 Mbps Road Runner circuit. Just with FIOS, load times are shorter.
Said another way, on a faster connection, the bursts go higher but the duration is shorter. On a well-engineered network, a few users on faster connections aren't going to be noticed under normal use.
And let's not forget that the ISPs are charging a LOT more money for these shiny new 100 Mbps tiers, so they can AFFORD to properly add transit capacity.
Take a look at the bottom line. The big ISPs (cable, telco) are making a small fortune on their internet services. They only cry poor-mouth to keep the regulators off their backs. | |
| | | | | | | 
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
 ·North State Commun..
| said by rebus9 :So you max out this shiny new 100 Mbps connection for 8-1/2 hours, and you're done for the month. And all of that for the low-low price of just $150/mo. Gee, what a bargain. A 400GB cap is extremely reasonable. Even in a high-quality data center that 400GB of transfer would run you close to $150/month on a 100Mbps port. So getting 100Mbps across the last-mile and offering a 400GB cap is a great deal.
And very few people would use 400GB in a month unless you're a pirate. Argggh matey.
--
"What is conservatism? Is it not adherence to the old and tried, against the new and untried?" - Abraham Lincoln | |
| | | jimbo2150
join:2004-05-10
Youngstown, OH
| Re: All that money yet a 400 GB cap said by Matt :A 400GB cap is extremely reasonable. Even in a high-quality data center that 400GB of transfer would run you close to $150/month on a 100Mbps port. So getting 100Mbps across the last-mile and offering a 400GB cap is a great deal. And very few people would use 400GB in a month unless you're a pirate. Argggh matey. Please tell me you did not just compare a dedicated business-class connection to a shared residential one...
So a business class 100/100 dedicated connection
is the same as a 100/5 shared connection?
If thats true then $150/month for business and $150/month for residential is a rip-off! You get 5% the upload and on a shared connection for the same price compared to a dedicated business line? Really? Where do you get your info from?
--
- "Techie" Jim | |
| | | |
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| Re: All that money yet a 400 GB cap said by jimbo2150 :said by Matt :A 400GB cap is extremely reasonable. Even in a high-quality data center that 400GB of transfer would run you close to $150/month on a 100Mbps port. So getting 100Mbps across the last-mile and offering a 400GB cap is a great deal. And very few people would use 400GB in a month unless you're a pirate. Argggh matey. Please tell me you did not just compare a dedicated business-class connection to a shared residential one... So a business class 100/ 100 dedicated connection is the same as a 100/5 shared connection? If thats true then $150/month for business and $150/month for residential is a rip-off! You get 5% the upload and on a shared connection for the same price compared to a dedicated business line? Really? Where do you get your info from? You're right, what was I thinking, it's simple to get bandwidth across the last mile. I keep forgetting that's why we all have so many wonderful choices for super-high speed internet access.
--
"What is conservatism? Is it not adherence to the old and tried, against the new and untried?" - Abraham Lincoln | |
| | | | joebarnhart
Paxio evangelist
join:2005-12-15
Santa Clara, CA
| The great thing about FTTH is you get both You get datacenter quality and last-mile pricing. My provider sells 100/100 service for $94.50/mo. I don't know what the cap is, if any, since I have never hit it. But the quality of the connection is amazing. My latency is consistently under 0.6 milliseconds and I never see dropped packets.
The US needs a broadband plan. Here's mine: Everybody should have a connection this good.
 | |
| | | | | jimbo2150
join:2004-05-10
Youngstown, OH
| Re: The great thing about FTTH is you get both said by joebarnhart :You get datacenter quality and last-mile pricing. My provider sells 100/100 service for $94.50/mo. I don't know what the cap is, if any, since I have never hit it. But the quality of the connection is amazing. My latency is consistently under 0.6 milliseconds and I never see dropped packets. Good for you. I have 2 choices of broadband here. One services' max tier is 10mb/2mb and the other's is 6mb/512kb. Less than a mile from me my other family members have 1 choice and less than a mile from there there are people we know who have NO broadband choice.
--
- "Techie" Jim | |
| | | | | | |
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| Re: All that money yet a 400 GB cap said by Ignite :said by Matt :A 400GB cap is extremely reasonable. Even in a high-quality data center that 400GB of transfer would run you close to $150/month on a 100Mbps port. So getting 100Mbps across the last-mile and offering a 400GB cap is a great deal. And very few people would use 400GB in a month unless you're a pirate. Argggh matey. If you think nearly $150/month for 400GB of bandwidth (equivalent to less than 1.5Mbps/month) is a good deal it would be a privilege to supply you with bandwidth. Given I can purchase 400GB from extremely well connected data centres for around $10/month so that $150 will pay for GigE connectivity and a dedicated server for myself with some left over I can see it being a pretty profitable venture for me  Well connected and "high-quality" are not the same thing. Go price out 400GB of bandwidth in any datacenter like Equinix, Peak 10, NAC or The Planet and you'll quickly see there is a difference. I wouldn't touch any company offering $10 for 400GB of transfer on a 1Gbps port, they obviously have no capacity plan in place and are terribly oversold. I pay an extra $30 just for my GigE port, on top of my bandwidth.
--
"What is conservatism? Is it not adherence to the old and tried, against the new and untried?" - Abraham Lincoln | |
| | | | | 
Ignite
Premium,VIP
join:2004-03-18
UK
clubs:
·BlueYonder Interne..
·Be There
2 edits | Re: All that money yet a 400 GB cap said by Matt :Well connected and "high-quality" are not the same thing. Go price out 400GB of bandwidth in any datacenter like Equinix, Peak 10, NAC or The Planet and you'll quickly see there is a difference. I wouldn't touch any company offering $10 for 400GB of transfer on a 1Gbps port, they obviously have no capacity plan in place and are terribly oversold. I pay an extra $30 just for my GigE port, on top of my bandwidth. No the bandwidth isn't oversold. Check for example »www.kimsufi.co.uk/ and note the guaranteed bandwidth - 100Mbps or 1Gbps, and the price of the additional bandwidth.
If you're into overpaying that's your prerogative and evidently in the US that appears to be the case. Full and uncontended IP transit is $7-8/Mbps/month from premium quality carriers, not just McBandwidth Cogent.
EDIT: »www.chtix.eu/transit_ip.xml
1Gbps unmetered for 1000 euros a month. So 300TB potentially if you saturate it all the time. I've seen other transit deals which have 1Gbps unmetered for under $2000/month.
400GB will cost someone who purchases bandwidth in the kind of quantities an ISP Shaw's size with their own dark fibre network not a hell of a lot at all, the main cost is and remains the access network by a very long way. I would speculate the 400GB to cost Shaw no more than $10 taking into account transit, peering, and share of fibre and router costs. | |
| | | | | |
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
1 edit | Re: All that money yet a 400 GB cap said by Ignite :said by Matt :Well connected and "high-quality" are not the same thing. Go price out 400GB of bandwidth in any datacenter like Equinix, Peak 10, NAC or The Planet and you'll quickly see there is a difference. I wouldn't touch any company offering $10 for 400GB of transfer on a 1Gbps port, they obviously have no capacity plan in place and are terribly oversold. I pay an extra $30 just for my GigE port, on top of my bandwidth. No the bandwidth isn't oversold. Check for example » www.kimsufi.co.uk/ and note the guaranteed bandwidth - 100Mbps or 1Gbps, and the price of the additional bandwidth. If you're into overpaying that's your prerogative and evidently in the US that appears to be the case. Full and uncontended IP transit is $7-8/Mbps/month from premium quality carriers, not just McBandwidth Cogent. I like the asterisks on those prices:
* Traffic is unlimited. If you exceed 3 TB / month, the connection will be limited to 10 Mbps. A connection of 100Mbps will be restored (or 1Gbps if you have the 1G SwitchPort option) with the purchase of additional traffic of 2TB for £14.90 / month.
**: Request for the establishment of a block of IPs from RIPE (with geolocalisation): 4,8,16 IPs: £49. 32,64,128,256 IPs: £99. 512,1024,+ IPs: £199. the existing PI (unlimited IP): £99. Monthly Cost: £0.
So, you're limited in bandwidth and you pay out the ASS for a range of IPs. I have a /25 which you would pay an extra $150 USD a month for.
They don't even have any information about their data center, so I am guessing they don't run their own but are rather a reseller. Again, we're talking a different class of data center here. Those guys aren't even remotely in the class of data center I deal with. They are peered with chtix.edu who uses this company as their upstream provider: »www.ovh.net/
That is a wimpy upstream provider. Their upstream's upstream provider only has 7Gbps of bandwidth available. Again, terribly oversold.
--
"What is conservatism? Is it not adherence to the old and tried, against the new and untried?" - Abraham Lincoln | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | 
sporkme
drop the crantini and move it, sister
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-01
Morristown, NJ | FWIW, Level3 will do $1500/month on a GigE w/100Mb/s included. I forget what the per Mb is beyond 100, but it's pretty darn cheap.
--
with every mistake we must surely be learning | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | rebus9
join:2002-03-26
Tampa Bay
·Verizon FIOS
·RoadRunner Cable
| said by Matt :A 400GB cap is extremely reasonable. Only in the mind of Ed "Pipes" Whitacre, or if we are talking about a $39/mo. connection. When you're forking out $150/mo., a 400 GB cap is NOT reasonable.
said by Matt :Even in a high-quality data center that 400GB of transfer would run you close to $150/month on a 100Mbps port. Maybe in Singapore.
I don't know where you get your figures, but they are not realistic. I can pull in a 100 Mbps circuit into a colo cabinet, with a full 20 Mbps commit, for $160/month with no restrictions. I can push 20 Mbps upstream AND downstream, simultaneously, 24x7x365 if I wanted to. And the price is still $160.
Oh, and that's for a commercial circuit with a decent SLA, not a "best effort" residential cable connection.
said by Matt : So getting 100Mbps across the last-mile and offering a 400GB cap is a great deal. Last-mile residential, yes, 100 Mbps is pretty spicy. But the 400 GB cap blows a hole right through it.
said by Matt :And very few people would use 400GB in a month unless you're a pirate. Argggh matey. Why do you people always assume high utilization must always equal pirates? Apparently you've never heard of Netflix. For $8.99/mo. you get unlimited streaming. For $16.99/mo. you get 3 unlimited streams.
Now of course you're asking, who would need 3 streams unless you're a pirate. Open your brain. Think: parents in the living room, teenagers in their bedrooms. 3 streams is easily 10-15 mbps, for hours at a time.
But I guess that kind of legitimate use doesn't cross your mind.
Nope, in your universe, high bandwidth means pirates afloat. | |
| | | |
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
1 edit | Re: All that money yet a 400 GB cap I have 3 x Windows Media Center PCs in my house and we stream tons of Hulu and Netflix. You don't have enough time, 3 people don't have enough time, to stream 400GB of Netflix a month, not even in HD; they simply don't offer enough HD content. A regular movie is about 500MB-1GB of transfer so I doubt you're watching 400-800 movies a month. I also game on Xbox 360, work from home, have a VoIP phone, yet combined our peak usage has been in the neighborhood of 150GB a month. 400GB is very reasonable.
And I get my figures from running 3 companies in 3 separate data centers, although I don't need to run my resume down. I'm not saying you can't purchase massive amounts of bandwidth cheaply, but I guarantee it's terribly oversold. My SLAs include uptime, throughput, and latency minimums.
--
"What is conservatism? Is it not adherence to the old and tried, against the new and untried?" - Abraham Lincoln | |
| | | | | rebus9
join:2002-03-26
Tampa Bay
·Verizon FIOS
·RoadRunner Cable
| Re: All that money yet a 400 GB cap said by Matt :And I get my figures from running 3 companies in 3 separate data centers, Which could mean you have 200 servers colocated, or have three shared hosting accounts at $10/each with separate hosting providers. I'm not here to pass judgment, but for the record, just be mindful that "running an internet business" means exactly zero because everyone with a laptop and a $5 shared hosting account can call themselves an internet entrepreneur.
It's become the most tedious, overused catch-phrase of this decade.
said by Matt : although I don't need to run my resume down. Neither do I, but I will offer that my career in this industry covers 26 years in a commercial setting. I've had many job titles, including senior network engineer (I ran the network operations department and reported directly to the CEO) at a large regional ISP that handled over 10,000 dialup users and several thousand DSL subscribers. I've worked daily on equipment that cost more than some people's houses. I remember when we turned up our first DS-3 at more than $30,000 per month and we thought it was a bargain compared to what we paid for the T1's it was replacing. The line card to terminate it cost more than my car at the time.
said by Matt :I'm not saying you can't purchase massive amounts of bandwidth cheaply, but I guarantee it's terribly oversold. And whatever you consider "oversold"-- is nothing compared to how oversold that capped 100 Mbps cable connection is.
My point is, when I can buy 20 Mbps of committed bandwidth on a Fast-E port, with a per-megabit rate under $10, it is highway robbery for a no-SLA, "best effort", residential cable connection to have a ridiculous 400 GB cap at the 100 Mbps tier.
If they want to cap the $39/mo. accounts at 400 GB, that is fine. But when you're selling premium tiers at premium prices, then no, 400 GB is not reasonable. | |
| | | | | |
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC | Re: All that money yet a 400 GB cap I have 3 full racks and 1 server co-located in a 4th datacenter. | |
| | | | | | | rebus9
join:2002-03-26
Tampa Bay
·Verizon FIOS
·RoadRunner Cable
| Re: All that money yet a 400 GB cap said by Matt :I have 3 full racks and 1 server co-located in a 4th datacenter. You have that much colocated, yet feel $150/mo. for 400 GB of transfer is reasonable?
I would love to have you as a colo customer. | |
| | | | | jjeffeory
join:2002-12-04
USA | Kewl...
It look like you don't really have time to use your home connection if you're running 3 companies in 3 separate data centers!
Good for you, though! 8-) | |
| | | | | TheRogueX
join:2003-03-26
Springfield, MO
| You know that game companies are starting to offer their products as downloadable apps, right? And that demos are offered on XBox Live Marketplace and PlayStation Network (they run an easy couple hundred megs to a gig or more)?
Just the other day I downloaded 14 demos for my Shiny New PS3. Doing the math on them, I used almost 15GB in just a couple hours.
Oh, and 1080p High-Definition movies are NOT 500MB-1GB. They stream at close to 1Gbps, which for a 90 minute movie would end up being 11.25GB. And there is PLENTY of HD content on the web; not just Netflix and Hulu.
--
»/im/78256995/4672.png | |
| | | | | chronoss2009
join:2008-09-23
·TekSavvy Solutions..
| 400-800 movies also translates into 1.5 hrs times that 400-800 in TV ......
thats 600 hrs a tv
divided by 3 = 200 hrs /30days = 6 hrs a day each
aka 5PM to 11PM
six measly hours a day = minimum
then you have that weekend gaming gore fest , buddy wanting a few music downloads to go on his LEVIED CDRS and woa
guess what its damn easy to go past 400GB
WAY easy and now imagine that unlike that 3 person example i have 4 people total on a 4 megabit.
If shaw were here id be able if i was legally allowed to resell out 20 5 megabit accounts at 10$, make a 50$ profit and under cut EVERY ISP IN CANADA.............
the caps kill that however
400/20 = 20GB , thats what this will feel like in scale and what you can share and do
in other words the max number of people in todays age that can use that are aobut 5-10 (80GB down to 40GB )
and you arent streaming very much and you aren't doing much of a need to buy levied cdrs also are you......
guess the music industry will need to double the levy again
WHY?
"cause ISPS capped every one and were not making as much money" | |
| | | | 
Van
Premium
join:2009-07-08
Washington, DC | How much does Netflix exactly take up? | |
| | | | |
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| Re: All that money yet a 400 GB cap said by Van :How much does Netflix exactly take up? Not much, this guy tracked his and an entire month of Netflix usage added up to a whopping 7GB: »blog.borngeek.com/2009/03/03/ban···-update/ With a brand-new Roku player he barely broke the 30GB total barrier.
HD video will eat massive amounts of bandwidth, but there just isn't enough of it available yet to really eat up a monthly usage cap as most are crying about.
--
"What is conservatism? Is it not adherence to the old and tried, against the new and untried?" - Abraham Lincoln | |
| | | | | | 
Rob
In Deo speramus, God Bless the USA
Premium
join:2001-08-25
Kendall, FL
·Comcast
| Re: All that money yet a 400 GB cap said by Matt :HD video will eat massive amounts of bandwidth, but there just isn't enough of it available yet to really eat up a monthly usage cap as most are crying about. No, I'm not following you! 
Yesterday I caught up on the rest of season 1 of Heroes. I watched 5 episodes in HD with my Roku box, with each episode being 40 minutes long.
According to my router, I downloaded a total of 5.6GB.
--
CheckSite.us | YourIP.us | Reverseip.us | |
| | | | | | |
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| Re: All that money yet a 400 GB cap said by Rob :said by Matt :HD video will eat massive amounts of bandwidth, but there just isn't enough of it available yet to really eat up a monthly usage cap as most are crying about. No, I'm not following you! Yesterday I caught up on the rest of season 1 of Heroes. I watched 5 episodes in HD with my Roku box, with each episode being 40 minutes long. According to my router, I downloaded a total of 5.6GB. LOL, that's ok. That great info. I would have figured that Netflix HD would have eaten up more than 1GB or so, but I guess for a movie that would translate to 2GB-3GB ... sounds about right to me.
--
"What is conservatism? Is it not adherence to the old and tried, against the new and untried?" - Abraham Lincoln | |
| | | | | | | rebus9
join:2002-03-26
Tampa Bay
·Verizon FIOS
·RoadRunner Cable
| said by Rob :Yesterday I caught up on the rest of season 1 of Heroes. I watched 5 episodes in HD with my Roku box, with each episode being 40 minutes long. According to my router, I downloaded a total of 5.6GB. That is helpful, putting some real numbers to it.
Doing the math, that's about 1.7 GB per hour. Extrapolating, that is 7.8 hours per day. Dividing, that is 3 streams running for 2.6 hours daily.
And that is BEFORE you deduct all the web browsing, email with attachments, YouTube, iPod downloads, games, VoIP, etc.-- all the stuff we do on a daily basis, that does NOT involve video streams, but still counts against the bandwidth cap.
Anyone with teenagers knows there is no end to what they can eat, or how many cell minutes they can talk away, or how much bandwidth they can consume.
And for $150/month just for internet service alone, I would expect to be able to satisfy the digital appetite without banging my head on a cap every month. | |
| | | | 
tubbynet
reminds me of the danse russe
Premium
join:2008-01-16
Chandler, AZ
·Cox HSI
 ·Callcentric
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·FrontierNet Intern..
| said by rebus9 :I don't know where you get your figures, but they are not realistic. I can pull in a 100 Mbps circuit into a colo cabinet, with a full 20 Mbps commit, for $160/month with no restrictions. I can push 20 Mbps upstream AND downstream, simultaneously, 24x7x365 if I wanted to. And the price is still $160. but to expect similar results in the last mile space are as equally unrealistic. its much cheaper to drag a 100meg fiber a few hundred meters over short haul optics than it is to trench a bundle of singlemode fiber with long-haul optics. the reason a colo is cheap is because they have created an "economy of scale" with transit providers peering in a neutal location and forcing them to compete for customers and peering relationships.
comparing the data centre with the last mile results in no meaningful comparison because there is no useful reference point.
Last-mile residential, yes, 100 Mbps is pretty spicy. But the 400 GB cap blows a hole right through it.
i consider myself a power user. my wife and i have no cable - everything we get is either ota, netflix, hulu, or espn360. we both stream pandora and sirius heavily. we watch hd video on our roku box. i often work on computers and am either downloading windows updates or patching my herd of boxen at home. my heavy flow months are ~150gb. there are nights when my wife will blow through 10gig/day on netflix, but she is literally watching it most of the day when she does that.
Now of course you're asking, who would need 3 streams unless you're a pirate. Open your brain. Think: parents in the living room, teenagers in their bedrooms. 3 streams is easily 10-15 mbps, for hours at a time.
how often are your teenagers home watching television? i think back to my teen years, i was *always* out doing something - homework, sports, hanging with friends. every now and then we'd go to someone's house and watch a movie or something - but it was always a *new* release. while i can see where people would blow through 400gig, i'd love to see people legitimately hitting that number *without* pirating material.
q.
--
"...if I in my north room dance naked, grotesquely before my mirror waving my shirt round my head and singing softly to myself..." | |
| | | | | 
andyb
Premium
join:2003-05-29
SW Ontario
·TekSavvy Solutions..
·Bell Sympatico
| Re: All that money yet a 400 GB cap My two teeenage boys and thier friends blow through 60 to 80 gigs a week just uploading to youtube/gaming/streaming before I even count mine or my wifes.Best of my knowledge none is "pirated" its just stupid stuff/vids off thiers/friends phones etc.
Some people just need to know that they are not the average family and can go to a smaller package.Quit following marketing and let it follow you. | |
| | | | battlepig
join:2009-09-29 | the raeson why bandwidth is so expensive in singapore is because most of the bandwidth used are to overseas sites.
i am very sure, u guys in the states have very shitty bandwidth to asia | |
| | | | | rebus9
join:2002-03-26
Tampa Bay
·Verizon FIOS
·RoadRunner Cable
2 edits | Re: All that money yet a 400 GB cap said by battlepig :the raeson why bandwidth is so expensive in singapore is because most of the bandwidth used are to overseas sites. I mentioned Singapore because nearly all of their connectivity with the outside world is via undersea cable systems. Naturally, pricing is much higher, which is why I specifically used them as an example.
said by battlepig :i am very sure, u guys in the states have very sh**ty bandwidth to asia We reach Asia-Pacific via Global Crossing/AS3549 pretty well. But, obviously Singapore has good reach to Asia because it's 300 ms closer. | |
| | | dfxmatt
join:2007-08-21
Evanston, IL
| please, don't play this bullcrap. There is no accurate definition of reasonable cap. Everyone uses different data per month and plenty of legitimate uses involve huge bandwidth such as gaming ,watching videos on youtube, sharing files with friends and family (which suddenly becomes more viable on faster connections), and downloading ISO's. WHAT AN IDEA?
In a data center 400GB is $15. »forums.digitalpoint.com/showthre···t=721919
first google result, and there are many others.
go crawl back under your rock. | |
| | | |
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| Re: All that money yet a 400 GB cap said by dfxmatt :please, don't play this bullcrap. There is no accurate definition of reasonable cap. Everyone uses different data per month and plenty of legitimate uses involve huge bandwidth such as gaming ,watching videos on youtube, sharing files with friends and family (which suddenly becomes more viable on faster connections), and downloading ISO's. WHAT AN IDEA? In a data center 400GB is $15. » forums.digitalpoint.com/showthre···t=721919first google result, and there are many others. go crawl back under your rock. I would urge you to go look at how much bandwidth all those things you mention actually use.
--
"What is conservatism? Is it not adherence to the old and tried, against the new and untried?" - Abraham Lincoln | |
| | | | | dfxmatt
join:2007-08-21
Evanston, IL
1 edit | Re: All that money yet a 400 GB cap I've gone over 400GB quite easily in months with 1/4 the speed (comcast 22/5 or something), doing exactly what I mentioned.
7 megapixel camera + 640x480 video + sharing pictures to friends and family = uses up way more than you'd imagine. Then we have gaming, and streaming music, and that's it. Yes I game a bit, and screaming music is on 24/7 for the girlfriend. Oh whoops, forgot some netflix movies and steam game downloads too. Yet I'm well over 400 gigs every month, and no I dont' take thousands of pictures but I do have probably 4 or 5 hours of video comprising of 10-20 gigs plus.
don't talk crap you don't know. Like I said, everyone can use 400GB (and plenty more) in their own way. Faster connections beget uses of technology people have wanted for years that only now are starting to open up such as video conferencing or hell, just generally sharing things with other people at better than a snail's pace.
you sure avoided the "you can never get it this cheap", didn't you, eh? Oh right, lets look at ian's comment. 10TB for 90$ is a bit cheaper than 400GB for $150, isn't it.
Is any of what I do unreasonable? no. I probably spend an hour or two a night in front of a computer, tops, maybe a little more with other video watching. the rest doesn't need me to be there.
TLDR version: the more bandwidth you give (and cap), the more people will use and new services will take advantage of said bandwidth. To say "it's good enough for X" is just trying to avoid the obvious crawl of bandwidth usage (since it's far from exponential growth). | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| Re: All that money yet a 400 GB cap said by iansltx :I don't know where you're getting your data center numbers from. I can get an unmetered 100 Mbps server (20+ TB, 20,000GB) for $100 per month from a lower-priced provider. I can get a VPS with 400GB of traffic for $10 per month. I can get colocation for a server, including 1500GB of bandwidth, for $50 per month. That said, 400GB per month would be enough for me on a home internet connection, for now at least. Though I'd much rather have 50/10 or 20/20 than 100/5. I don't deal with "lower-priced providers" as I believe I stated earlier in the thread. If a data center doesn't have at least 3 Tier-1 connections plus multiple GigE links to public peering points, the bandwidth you're buying is oversold. The Planet has over 250Gbps of connectivity for example. And I'll add that unless you're dealing directly with the data center, what you're buying is almost certainly oversold because you're buying from a reseller.
Regardless, getting 400GB to the end-user at 100Mbps across the last mile is absolutely worth $150/month.
--
"What is conservatism? Is it not adherence to the old and tried, against the new and untried?" - Abraham Lincoln | |
| | | | |
Ignite
Premium,VIP
join:2004-03-18
UK
clubs:
·BlueYonder Interne..
·Be There
1 edit | Re: All that money yet a 400 GB cap said by Matt :I don't deal with "lower-priced providers" as I believe I stated earlier in the thread. If a data center doesn't have at least 3 Tier-1 connections plus multiple GigE links to public peering points, the bandwidth you're buying is oversold. Like OVH for example and their '7Gbps' network?
quote:
Paris 19, datacenter owned by Ovh, 2700m2, capacity: 350 rack space, available offers: servers for ovh.com websites, web hosting, dedicated servers lease, administrators' service: 24/7
Paris 11, datacenter owned by Free Telecom, 300m2 capacity: 180 rack space, available offers: housing, ip transfer
Redbus, datacenter owned by Redbus, 3000m2
capacity: 53 rack spaces
available offers: housing, IP transit
Telehouse 1, datacenter owned by Telehouse, 1500m2
available offers: ip transit
Telehouse 2, datacenter owned by Telehouse, 2000m2
available offers: ip transit
Global Switch, datacenter owned by Global Switch, 15,000m2
available offers: ip transit
quote:
optical fibres network connected in double safe circulation
connections of 2 * 10 Gbps minimal traffic
IP multihomed network is passing through 3 independent transit providers,
multiple peering through peering points in Paris, London, Frankfurt and Amsterdam,
total bandwidth of network 120Gbps
They need to fix that total bandwidth though it's quite a bit higher than that now, silly OVH.
»weathermap.ovh.net/europe
Anyway, point is that you're paying a lot for your bandwidth, ISPs won't be paying anywhere near that much. If I can purchase the quantities of bandwidth I can from OVH as a single user I can imagine Shaw and its' millions of customers would be getting bandwidth for less.
ISPs don't care about quality bandwidth for their residential services anyway, business maybe, residential pfft. | |
| | | | | rebus9
join:2002-03-26
Tampa Bay
·Verizon FIOS
·RoadRunner Cable
| said by Matt :If a data center doesn't have at least 3 Tier-1 connections plus multiple GigE links to public peering points, the bandwidth you're buying is oversold. Collectively, the entire internet is oversold. Some parts of it moreso than others.
For example, the Level3 POP in Tampa (their gateway facility at 7909 Woodland Center), which is in the middle of their southeast ring, has 20 Gbps of capacity facing north to Jacksonville and south to Miami.
I can assure you, they cumulatively sell a LOT more than 20 Gbps aggregate to their customers in the Tampa Bay region.
Yes, they oversell. So does everybody. But as long as you engineer for your current and near-term expected traffic-- and ramp up capacity as trends indicate-- this is neither problematic nor irresponsible.
So please stop using the "oversold" bit. It's nothing more than a marketing pitch from guys with big hair who know nothing about engineering a network. | |
| | | | | |
Ignite
Premium,VIP
join:2004-03-18
UK
clubs: | Re: All that money yet a 400 GB cap Yep, some contention means nothing so long as the apparent congestion is kept to nil. Selling 100Gbps of 20 is just fine so long as you never fill the 20. | |
| | | | | | | |
SLD
Premium
join:2002-04-17 | Not so, Hostway is giving its users 4TB/mo. on the 100Mbit connections as part of their $99-150/mo hosting packages. | |
| | | jjeffeory
join:2002-12-04
USA | 400GB cap is better, but it's still a cap. Besides, it's not about 1 person using that much bandwidth, it's about a family of 4 doing a bunch of different things separates through out the day that makes me worried. | |
| | | 
Augustus III
If Only Rome Could See Us Now....
join:2001-01-25
Gainesville, GA
1 edit | said by Matt :said by rebus9 :So you max out this shiny new 100 Mbps connection for 8-1/2 hours, and you're done for the month. And all of that for the low-low price of just $150/mo. Gee, what a bargain. A 400GB cap is extremely reasonable. Even in a high-quality data center that 400GB of transfer would run you close to $150/month on a 100Mbps port. So getting 100Mbps across the last-mile and offering a 400GB cap is a great deal. And very few people would use 400GB in a month unless you're a pirate. Argggh matey. Yes and only criminals hire an attorney... hell innocent people dont need anything since they are innocent, right?
and hell only internet users need bandwidth... see that doesn't even sound right, let alone make sense.
please hush with the old mantra of if you are using your internet you are doing something "that i dont like". internet police, coming to a troll thread near you.
every time there is a bandwidth/speed thread you hobbits roll in hordes and keep repeating the same crap over and over again.
given the high levels of current unemployment, i too can do this job for an oppressive ISP. and i can bet you i will be a much better employee too. | |
| | | |
Van
Premium
join:2009-07-08
Washington, DC
·Cox HSI
·Comcast
1 edit | Re: All that money yet a 400 GB cap I think you are being a bit sensitive to what he said.
Many people have already stated reasons that they could possibly hit 400gigs...business reasons or maybe legal services for movies
With all that said, I just can't fathom MOST of those non-business people coming even slightly close to the limit without some sort of cough cough downloading.
I have downloaded HD movies, use XBox, etc....and I still don't even come remotely close to 200 gigs a month....I mean, not even slightly close | |
| | jimbo2150
join:2004-05-10
Youngstown, OH
| said by rebus9 :So you max out this shiny new 100 Mbps connection for 8-1/2 hours, and you're done for the month. And all of that for the low-low price of just $150/mo. Gee, what a bargain. That's if the cap is only on the download. If the cap is cumulative (includes upload and download) then your time decreases a bit.
--
- "Techie" Jim | |
| | | | | | | | | iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO | 400GB > 250GB, though even when you convert Shaw's pricing into US dollars the price per GB is about the same as Comcast's $100-$117 residential service. Also, 5 Mbps uploads are weak. | |
| | 
stoopwhinin
@shawcable.net
 from:
TKJunkMail
| I can't believe people are calling this bad.
400 FRICKEN GB A MONTH
That is enough to download a 1080p movie and recent video game for every day of the month.
Seriously who is going to be using anywhere near that amount on a residential connection.
Not to mention Shaw are not bandwidth nazis. They don't care if you go way over your cap unless you are uploading constantly. For Usenet you could probably get away with several TB a month before shaw gave you a call. | |
| | | MaynardKrebs
Premium
join:2009-06-17
| Re: All that money yet a 400 GB cap said by stoopwhinin :
I can't believe people are calling this bad.
400 FRICKEN GB A MONTH
That is enough to download a 1080p movie and recent video game for every day of the month.
Seriously who is going to be using anywhere near that amount on a residential connection.
Bored housewives. Shut-in disabled.
People who like to watch lots of movies. I know a large number of people who watch a couple of movies per night.
All the bove presupposes just one person in the house. Now add a second adult, and a pair of kids, and the kids friends who come over for movie or gaming parties.
400GB/month - it's chump change for a connection like that. | |
| | chronoss2009
join:2008-09-23
1 edit | im paying 67$ with all the taxes dry loop and fees
for 1.6TB a month :P
SUCKERS
ironically
4 people hten have 400GB and a cost of about 15$ each exactly ONE TENTH WHAT SHAW will charge you
hahahahahaha | |
| | |
Ignite
Premium,VIP
join:2004-03-18
UK
clubs:
·BlueYonder Interne..
·Be There
| Re: All that money yet a 400 GB cap Shame it's at 5Mbps, here's hoping you don't need anything in too much of a hurry, especially if with the whole 4 people thing it could go as slow as 1.25Mbps.
Interesting though hardly 'ironic' comparing pricing between 4 people to Shaw's service for one person on its' own by the way. Split the shaw pricing 4 ways and it's hardly 10 times the price, it does however come at 20 times the burst speed being 25Mbps for each of 4 people.
If we're going to gloat prices in the UK for most things are higher, the cost of living is considerably higher and this is reflected in higher salaries, yet I get 53Mbps or nearly 16TB a month for less than you pay for 1.6TB a month, and I can get your 1.6TB over 10 times faster than you can. Oddly enough though I don't feel the need to use 15TB or even 1.6TB or even 160GB a month, in common with most people.
If Teksavvy's average customer decided they absolutely had to start using all the bandwidth at those kinds of rates you'd soon see a slow down, they actually only budget around 100kbps per customer peak bandwidth, equivalent to 30GB or so a month
Each to their own, and while your service is uncapped (for now) it's also really slow. I don't want to think about having to put up with a service that slow having had faster services for quite a few years now, I've been on ADSL2+ or better since 2005, no usage caps on any services I should mention of course, and none of them costing the price you pay.
For people who love burst speed, have the money and don't download the entire internet every month it's probably a reasonable-ish deal given the stupidly overpriced services in Canada. There is far more to a package than bit caps, and regardless of the bit cap if a customer isn't reaching it the cap may as well not exist.
You've probably set yourself up to get nicely flamed having posted this gloating tripe a few weeks away from UBB, but be nice to those people who pay more and don't hammer the hell out of it, they keep the price of your 1.6TB down
Me defending Shaw, first time for everything 
EDIT: By the way I just checked, and I have never done 400GB in a single month, ever, despite having been on services capable of it since 2003, never having a bit cap on any services, being a member of 3 private trackers and having an unmetered NNTP account.
To each their own. | |
| |
Gunnanator
@comcast.net | A bit is 1/8th of a Bite.
b is 1/8th of a B. | |
| 
EUS
Kill cancer
Premium
join:2002-09-10
Montreal, QC
clubs: | I'd buy it $50 more/mth for 10x more down, 5x more up than what I presently receive.
I call it a good deal. | |
| | chronoss2009
join:2008-09-23 | Re: I'd buy it you stupid and this flame will self destruct | |
| | | | kd6cae
P2p Shouldn't Be A Crime
join:2001-08-27
Lancaster, CA
·RoadRunner Cable
·DSL EXTREME
| online backups Folks here complaining that if you use 400GB in a month, you must be a pirate forget something. Some of us do off site backups of our data so that should something happen where we lose everything localy, our data will still be safe. A total backup for me is roughly 90-100GB or so. So saying that using the bandwidth we pay for means I must be a pirate and nothing more is just crazy! | |
|
Chuck Carlso
@bell.ca | Shaw Expands 100 Mbps Service You'll understand why you'd never use more than 400 gigabytes a month if you knew about traffic shaping and speed throttling that Shaw uses on torrents. | |
| | 
Ikyuao
Pro. debian Linux
join:2007-02-26
Wichita, KS
·Cox HSI
| Re: Shaw Expands 100 Mbps Service That could be TCP RST technique in TCP specific to cut the P2P application virtual connections down completely that called traffic shaping control that where users didn't put a filter on the both source and destination of TCP RST out of their way in the downstream traffic direction only and thank god I'd put a filtered to lid on the crap TCP RST in both source and destination for a downstream direction traffic only.
--
Professional Linux environmental blows microsoft windows out of the water. | |
| zod5000
join:2003-10-21
Edmonton, AB
·TELUS
·TekSavvy Solutions..
| Offer a larger cap I can need 100gbps for. I can hit 400gb on my telus 15mbps connection (in a short period of time).
A gig takes me 15 minutes to download. so 4 gigs an hour. So on my telus turbo it'd take me just over 4 day's to hit shaws 400gb cap on 100mbps connection.
I don't see the need for all that speed when you could bust out the cap in less then a day. You'd have to leave the connection idle most of the time. | |
| |
ShawUserX
@shawcable.net
| Re: Offer a larger cap I can need 100gbps for. I will sign up for this if even just for a month when it comes to Medicine Hat.
100/5 is perfectly fine with me, I never ever do any uploading and wouldn't touch a slow torrent.
I also think the 400gb limit is reasonable, would I like more? Yes...
It is a new product which has all ready be dropped by $100 when it first arrived in Saskatoon and only had a 250GB cap then to.... Shaw is obviously improving their services albeit in small steps.... | |
| chronoss2009
join:2008-09-23
·TekSavvy Solutions..
| the caps game ok comcast gives out 250GB for standard net
honestly thats hard to do a lot of not all of us can afford that HD monitor and HD card and HD azswiping .....
NOW 150$ for 400GB and 100megabit means
[[10X]]10megabit = 15$ = 40GB cap
now figure
[[20X]] 5 megabit = 7.50/month per 5 megabit = 20 GB cap
1/3rd of what most providers offer at that 5 megabit range, WHY are we paying more and more and getitng less and less as you get more speed ?????
just so you see how useless this is. Although at least shaw has or will have the highest caps expect a few small ISP scattered about Canada. AND the price is equal to rogers best at half shaws speed. | |
|
cmenson
@comcast.net
| caps... The problem I see here is that, when you are buying something that is probably meant for a power user, you shouldn't have to be on a capped service. I mean caps are ridiculous in the first place but, if you're going to do it, enforce it on the low package users who most likely aren't going to go that high in usage anyway.
Also, why should you care how someone uses his connection to get to said cap? It's their internet connection, they use it how they like. The fact that the cap is still there stands. It's ridiculous and you should inform more people about it and get it out there, because I'm pretty sure if you told people that they aren't getting as much as they used to before caps, they'd all be pretty damn upset and complain. | |
| | battlepig
join:2009-09-29 | Re: caps... do you guys here stay at home all the time and d/l stuffs?? u guys sound like nerds to me | |
| | |
Van
Premium
join:2009-07-08
Washington, DC | Re: caps... I am a proud nerd
Love my computer, XBox, music/movies
Wouldn't want it any other way | |
| jwlschweps
join:2009-10-06
Calgary, AB
| I'm sold on it. Currently I have been using Shaw's Wave service (25/2 150GB) and it has done me pretty well, however I have been finding myself running into issues when I my wife using the internet and I am accessing my vm box remotely from my office. The 2mbit upload works great until someone else starts messing about the internet. With 5mbit upload it gives me free and clear access to remote in and have her stuff work seamlessly.
I am sold and currently awaiting for the tech to show up to install it. Sadly Shaw will not give out the modems and they require their techs to install it. | |
|
Ikyuao
Pro. debian Linux
join:2007-02-26
Wichita, KS
·Cox HSI
| Fast lane... That should be definitely puts Linux users on the fast lane all times if Linux users have been put filter on the TCP reset packet though their a point at iptables firewall inbound of downstream that would be unique perfect plan but windows users are utterly SOL about dealing with TCP reset packets though downstream. 100Mbits of broadband are very nice but that really definitely puts Linux users on the fast lane all times right there
--
Professional Linux environmental blows microsoft windows out of the water. | |
|
Calgary
@shawcable.net
| Want 50Mbps Internet in your town? ISPs may not act for years on local complaints about slow Internet—but when a town rolls out its own solution, it's amazing how fast the incumbents can deploy fiber, cut prices, and run to the legislature.
By Nate Anderson | Last updated October 27, 2009 9:40 PM CT
Regional telco TDS Telecommunications last week issued a press release announcing a major milestone for the company: 50Mbps service over fiber optic cable to residents of Monticello, Minnesota. The Minneapolis suburb became one of the few non-FiOS communities in the country to experience full fiber-to-the-home deployment, and subscribers will all receive a free upgrade from 25Mbps service to the new 50Mbps tier.
Even better is the price, which starts at $49.95 a month for 50Mbps fiber service without the need to buy other services.
TDS is thrilled. "This is a huge first for TDS," said market manager Tom Ollig. "TDS is working incredibly hard to deliver the faster speeds customers want."
But the entire congratulatory press release glosses over a key fact: the reason that Monticello received a fiber network was the town's decision to install a municipal-owned fiber network to every home in town… spawning a set of TDS lawsuits that went all the way to the Minnesota Supreme Court, which ruled in favor of the town.
Screaming to be heard
The saga began in 2007, when the town passed a referendum approving the city-owned fiber network. The city says that it had approached TDS and was told that no such system would be installed in town in the near future, so it went ahead with its own plans.
After the referendum, the city was sued by the telco just before groundbreaking began. The suit didn't seem to have much of a chance under Minnesota law, and indeed judges at multiple levels ruled for Monticello. But in the meantime, TDS rolled into town with nine crews of its own and began installing—you guessed it—fiber to the home.
Monticello had just become one of the only US cities in which twin, parallel fiber networks were being built at the same time. Backers of the muni fiber plan were outraged; not only could TDS build a modern fiber network on a moment's notice when it wanted to do so, but the lawsuits prevented the city from doing much of its installation even as TDS moved ahead.
We spoke to TDS about the situation last year, and its director of legislative and public relations told us that TDS didn't act earlier because it didn't actually know that people really, really wanted fiber; once the referendum was a success, the company moved quickly to give people what it now knew they wanted.
After delaying the town's deployment through lawsuits and rolling out fiber service of its own, TDS issued a statement in June 2009 in which it then called the whole rational for the government project into question.
"In view of TDS' development of a robust broadband platform in Monticello during the past year, it is questionable whether or not the City's feasibility study supporting its own fiber project, which was premised on no broadband competitors and on which the revenue bond purchasers relied when they secured the bonds more than a year ago, is still accurate, and whether the city fiber project is feasible today."
Now, it has upped the ante by doubling everyone's speeds. The moves all seemed designed to keep the idea of a muni-owned fiber network from spreading, but they might well have the opposite effect; one takeaway from the entire saga is that trying to build a muni fiber network is an excellent way to "encourage" investment and innovation from regional or national companies that might not otherwise have your town's own best interests at heart.
Such stories aren't limited to Minnesota suburbs, either. Just last month Telephony Online ran a piece on how Cox cable prices had "dropped considerably" since Lafeyette, Louisiana lit up a fiber system of its own.
"Cox froze the cable rates in Lafayette, and they didn’t freeze the rates in other areas," said Terry Huval, director of the muni project. "We figured our citizens saved over $3 million in cable rates even before we could offer them service."
Competition
This shouldn't be a surprise, as it's really just a classic case of direct competition—something not seen often enough the wired broadband market. Unfortunately, getting high-speed Internet to your town isn't always as simple as threatening to start a municipal network. Many times, incumbent providers simply file lawsuits while keeping speeds the same.
If your town is really unlucky, the incumbent will just head right to the state legislature, seeking to pass laws constraining the practice. That's what happened to Wilson, North Carolina, which runs a moderately famous 100Mbps system known as Greenlight (which just happens to be the fastest ISP in the entire state).
When Time Warner Cable (which still tops out at 10Mbps and no DOCSIS 3.0) was asked why it had not stepped up to meet the city's demand for faster access, a company rep told TechJournal South that it hadn't actually heard a citizen outcry over the issue—or it would have acted.
Wilson's Internet manager is having none of it. "We don’t want to run anyone out of business," he said, "but we also don’t want to take the leftover table scraps. If they had offered us what we were asking for, next generation good service, we would have happily stepped aside."
»arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news···-own.ars | |
| | | |
|
|
Shaw Expands 100 Mbps Service
Re: All that money yet a 400 GB cap
