|
AT&T starts testing bandwidth caps
|
|
The following comments relate to this news article:
article published on 5 November, 2008
Just one month after Comcast began imposing a bandwidth cap of 250 GB on all of its subscribers, AT&T has begun testing a cap of their own, however with a much smaller limit, 150 GB.
The cap will have tiers as well depending on how fast your connection is, slower users will only get 20 GB limit while the fastest users will get the 150 GB cap.
The test, beginning in Reno, Nevada today, ... [ read the full article ]
Please read the original article before posting your comments.
|
Senior Member
|
7. November 2008 @ 09:16 |
Link to this message
|
|
edit
Its a lot easier being righteous than right.
DSE VZ300-
Zilog Z80 CPU, 32KB RAM (16K+16K cartridge), video processor 6847, 2KB video RAM, 16 colours (text mode), 5.25" FDD
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 7. November 2008 @ 09:38
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
Senior Member
|
7. November 2008 @ 09:37 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by warriorp:
dont worry....in a little while we will have this dumb new world order crap and then between 2012-2015 some catastrophic disaster will come. they wont have anything to cap then. lol. fuck the banks and the greedy corps! ruining a whole country just to make a few small dick mofos rich. pathetic!
I laughed at first, but it has a truth to it. If America (and my country Australia) used ethanol like Brazil there would be no need to "secure" the oil fields of another country. Yeah, absolutely right.. pathetic! And sad. History has shown that great countries have fallen pursuing an (un-winable) international war they could not afford.
Oh yeah, I get a monitor with graphs of daily usage going back over the last few months, at the ISP's website using a password, and the ability to set email notifications at whatever percentage and frequency I choose. I get 25GB download AND 25GB upload- but this is highly dependant on the provider, most combine the two, one I know of gives unlimited uploads. Some have off-peak and peak limits so it's a minefield of confusing "fine print" details for most users.
Its a lot easier being righteous than right.
DSE VZ300-
Zilog Z80 CPU, 32KB RAM (16K+16K cartridge), video processor 6847, 2KB video RAM, 16 colours (text mode), 5.25" FDD
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 7. November 2008 @ 09:46
|
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
7. November 2008 @ 09:42 |
Link to this message
|
|
I've had AT&T DSL for almost 10 years. The second I'm notified about a "cap" I'm switching providers. No cap was the one the keeping me with AT&T over Comcast for instance.
|
Senior Member
|
7. November 2008 @ 09:44 |
Link to this message
|
|
As I said they will all fall into line, just like the banks did over fees imo.
|
|
duke8888
Junior Member
|
7. November 2008 @ 11:07 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by TBandit:
yeah i guess it is nice that they actually NOTIFY you unlike comcast but i'm still not sold on the cap limits even though I really think they would cut down on piracy
I guess you aren't a Comcast customer as you have an email account with them and I think you have a home mailing address as they sent notices via both sources a month 1/2 ahead of time. I got a total of 3 noptices about the cap from them. I almost thought about Switching to Verizon but I have a feeling they will be putting in a cap to stop P2P users..
|
|
duke8888
Junior Member
|
7. November 2008 @ 11:11 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by djgizmo:
the question is, is this upload or download bandwidth? or the combination together?
IMO, I'd recommend an UPLOAD cap, not a download cap. This would prevent would be pirates from uploading crap tons of bluray / dvd rips.
Its a combine amount for both.
|
|
duke8888
Junior Member
|
7. November 2008 @ 11:14 |
Link to this message
|
This is really going to kill the online services from Netflix and Blockbuster as Tivo has signed an agreement with Netflix to use their box to display movies unlimited. So if you watch about 20 or more movies a month you are screwed.
If you go over the limit twice with a 1 year period then you get a ban from the internet service for one year sounds harsh.
|
Junior Member
|
7. November 2008 @ 11:23 |
Link to this message
|
|
Greedy bastards. Are they not making enough money off of us already...?
|
|
mrspyke99
Newbie
|
7. November 2008 @ 11:27 |
Link to this message
|
|
maybe I'll just switch to using my unlimited data plan with my phone...3g speeds aren't that bad through a tethered line....
lol
|
Senior Member
1 product review
|
7. November 2008 @ 15:26 |
Link to this message
|
I have to say, most if not all you folks here have the right idea. Speaking from the US side of the fence, yes we do have it a bit easier than the rest of the world. Where the US may have started several of the electronic revolutions, it is in the other countries that they practice their bold ass raping experiments.
When offered here in the US, the price is reasonable and for most part accommodating. Once word of mouth gets from the customers to other countries, an outcry for a similar product is evoked and then the experiment begins. Once it is found that other countries will only allow some much pressure to their assholes, the companies here then take advantage and just expect the US to follow suit.
It's this double standard caca de toro that the US primarily whines about. It's not that we are ungrateful (hell, we ARE paying for the service), but its this quick change BS to world wide BFing that we really have the problem with.
Some of the facts stated in the earlier posts are right on the money.
ANY cap is unwarranted and uncalled for by any means. It seems to me that the companies in major control (the US ones anyway) of information traffic are cutting their own throats. They want us to subscribe to digital mediums and then want to restrain what is essentially THEIR advertising dollars.
Call me odd, but when was the last time you paid $7 to go see advertisement at the movie theater? Granted, not the entire 2 hour slot, but you DID pay to see advertising, especially before the main feature (again, here in the US).
Here's another thought... If I pay for cable service, why am I paying a bloated service fee when they still advertise THEIR service and local yahoos. My $100 is not for advertising, especially for a service I already have.
Now what is going to happen with VOIP services? They use bandwidth too. I went to Vonage because I got pissed about paying $100 to just have the phone in the house. I didn't even use the SOB!
I don't want to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but something reall does "smell rotten in Denmark".
It just seems to me that if you run over a Capped limit, you may also loose out on some other services that you are paying for in collaboration with your internet service. I.e. Netflix, ANY cable on demand shows, you VOIP telephone, etc..
Greed can be the only motivator for this kind of behavior and it seems odd that this is becoming more of an issue now that the US has a new president that may in fact, knock the nuts off of this kind of price gouging across the world.
So, just for closing... Isn't it odd that the folks who don't care about everyday costs of items aren't the ones commenting on these kind of issues? I for one, metaphorically, had to cut my nails back to the tune of $250 just to make ends meet in my home. I can probably assume that a majority of you fine folks may be in a similar situation.
Just a though....
|
|
avoidz
Junior Member
|
7. November 2008 @ 20:57 |
Link to this message
|
|
Boo hoo. Here in Australia I have to pay $60 a month for 12GB.
|
|
susieqbbb
Suspended permanently
|
8. November 2008 @ 11:01 |
Link to this message
|
|
Who the heck has at&t anyways..
Most of the phone lines are rigged to comcast and there partner companys.
Along with there broadband service there is really no way to save your @#$ from whats coming.
|
|
jetyi83
Member
|
8. November 2008 @ 11:49 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by avoidz:
Boo hoo. Here in Australia I have to pay $60 a month for 12GB.
well youre getting raped too
|
Senior Member
|
8. November 2008 @ 13:21 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
Australia is possibly the only country in the world that can fake orgasm whilst being raped.:D
|
Junior Member
|
8. November 2008 @ 13:25 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by susieqbbb:
Who the heck has at&t anyways..
Most of the phone lines are rigged to comcast and there partner companys.
Along with there broadband service there is really no way to save your @#$ from whats coming.
Hey, don't be such a pessimist! Find an alternative! There are some dedicated 802.11 ISP's up and coming!
In the house to which I am moving soon, we can get a 900 Mhz 2 Mbps symmetrical wireless connection through surfnet!
I think it's gonna be all about the 802.11 in the near future. Free yourself from The Man's infrastructure!! In the 900 Mhz band, you don't even need line of site to connect to a node over several km from you!
research it.
~Maitland
|
|
Mez
AfterDawn Addict
|
10. November 2008 @ 10:05 |
Link to this message
|
warriorp, get real! You talk about greedy corporations, when there isn't enough bandwidth to go around why should a few users hog it all?
After saying that, some of the caps ARE ridiculous. There are way too many capping way below 100 G for all activity. Most users have nowhere to go.
|
|
emugamer
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
10. November 2008 @ 14:36 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Mez:
warriorp, get real! You talk about greedy corporations, when there isn't enough bandwidth to go around why should a few users hog it all?
After saying that, some of the caps ARE ridiculous. There are way too many capping way below 100 G for all activity. Most users have nowhere to go.
The problem is that the "greedy corporations" never told us that there isn't enough bandwidth to go around. Throttling and capping without consent is a slap in the face to a paying customer who signed on based on an advertisemt of "unlimited high speeds." The biggest slap in the face is telling a customer that they were throttled for "abusing" the system, where abuse is defined as whatever they feel is excessive (which was never spelled out in the terms of use). I believe that is where most of the anger comes from. I don't mind the caps, as long as they are up front about it and give people ways of measuring. And as long as they are reasonable. I want to know if I should invest in streaming media. And the only way I can make an educated decision is if I know my limitations.
|
Junior Member
|
10. November 2008 @ 14:56 |
Link to this message
|
@emugamer:
It would be nice, though, if instead of stooping to Comcast's level (and, indeed, undercutting them by several notches!), AT&T had chosen to research ways to increase the bandwidth available on the network.
That's why capitalist corporations are a failure for humanity. The only thing that really matters to them is the bottom line, and thus they will almost always choose to decrease quality of service or product rather than improving their offerings to adhere to customer needs or demands. They simply don't have to do it; so, they don't.
Greed. It's sad.
~Maitland
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 10. November 2008 @ 15:08
|
Senior Member
|
10. November 2008 @ 14:59 |
Link to this message
|
I agree with you 100% emugamer, at least my ISP hasn't reneged on my deal- which as I said is unfortunately fair for here- much less arrogantly penalised me. They will just throttle me if I go over..haha I mean shape me to 64KB\s.
They also claim they will never throttle P2P etc. too and give good tools to monitor it with. Even giving me double the GBs if I use ipfilters in uTorrent. It's a little complicated but essentially it works out 25GBs fastest\external plus an extra 25GBs slower\local piping- where the monitor comes in really handy, coz if I exceed either limit they'll shape the line.
|
|
Mez
AfterDawn Addict
|
10. November 2008 @ 16:27 |
Link to this message
|
I never thought I would be on this side of the fence but I love an argument!
I do think they made a statement that they could provide enought service because of all the torrent traffic sucking up all the band width. Last Sept torrents were over 50% of the US bandwidth and torrent traffic increased 30% in 6 months in the US. Most of the world even has more torrent traffic.
In Feb Comcast rolled out an attack robot. Now it has dropped off maybe 40% of Feb. They can throttle torrent traffic down to 0. The FCC said No, No you can't throttle the torrent s like that. Yes they should have been forthwith and they are weasels for that.
That is why they are capping us. No one can deal width logrythimic growth. It is out in the open now. Publicly stated reasonable caps is maybe the best we may get it could be much worse.
|
Junior Member
|
10. November 2008 @ 16:50 |
Link to this message
|
@Mez:
The internet will just have to morph in order better suit its users. It's as plain as that. Right now it is pretty centralized with the primary backbones being controlled by corporations and universities. This is pretty contrary to the notion of torrents where load distribution is totally decentralized. And if torrents are the largest portion of network use, the network will simply have to change.
I'm really starting to think that as 802.11 becomes more and more sophisticated we will start to see small but powerful wireless network nodes begin to arise in communities and cities. This may help to take the load off of the backbones and serve the dual purpose of freeing users from babylon's wired infrastructure...
~Maitland
|
|
Mez
AfterDawn Addict
|
10. November 2008 @ 20:33 |
Link to this message
|
|
maitland, I hope you are right. I would rather see things open up than tighten up. However, there is always too many greedy suits that want to suck the blood out of anything with potiential.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
vudoo
Member
|
12. November 2008 @ 19:04 |
Link to this message
|
Its all a bunch of bullshit. There is no critical mass ready to happen from p2p. Only in small rural locations where you have 50-100 homes connected to the same node or maybe a dorm type community will you ever see this kind of bandwidth shortage described here. If this type of behavior becomes the main stream I hope that they have 320 bit encryption as hackers will crack the WEP encryption built into routers and begin hacking other people's wireless networks and using p2p all they want. This shit was going on with cell phones and the hackers simply cloned other peoples cell phones, set up code lines (on business's 800 numbers) and distributed the codes for the public to use. Codes were exchanged everyday and nothing could be done about it. Even caller ID can be spoofed and the same goes for ANI. So if the phone phreakers can get around a system designed to bill you according to the amount of usage you accumulate, so can the hackers of today use hot spots, home networks, and other deceptive measures to do their bidding.
|
