GOLFnSUN
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·Comcast
4 edits |  Cable always has upload problems
Cable always has upload problems and programs like Bit Torrent make a big demand on uploads. Cable companies won't make the big financial commitments to upgrading the systems for those limited numbers of users who flood upstream paths. Their solution to throttle upstream is reasonable under those circumstances. One solution is to charge those making inordinate upstream demands double and triple their monthly charges. That can pay for upgraded electronics to handle the load.
--
My Web Page
Join Red Room Forum |
|
Primis1
join:2005-06-13
Coldwater, MI
| I gotta' disagree though.
A few years ago still, it made sense still in many ways. Not any more though.
The internet is supposed to be a tool to exchange data and ideas. "Exchange", not "download". EXCHANGE, as in back and forth. To exchange, I have to have reasonable upload, and all the download in the world can't and won't make up for it if my upload sucks or is capped. And if my download is fine but my upload sucks, then the exchange process sucks.
It's no longer just text-based. Nor is it about increased multimedia during normal "surfing". It has nothing to do with surfing, never has been and never will be. "Surfing" isn't what most people do anymore, they want to do more.
It has to do with if I record a track and want to send it to a buddy to have him lay a track of his own over it and mix it togetehr to send back. It has to do with if I want to send a large .PSD to someone to have them correct or fix something in it. It has to do with the 10-minute movie I recorded at a reunion earlier in the day and would like to send to my cousin in the military serving overseas to keep them in the loop and let them know they're not forgotten.
These are things everyday users want, and expect, to do now. Not commercial or business users, just regular users.
And if cable can't provide that... then get the hell out of my way and let someone else through that *CAN* provide the upload I want and expect. Because a poor infrastructure or plan on cable's part is *their* problem, not mine, and no I'm not obligated to feel sorry because someone can't keep up with the demand. |
|
GOLFnSUN
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
3 edits | But will you be willing to pay what it costs to do the upgrades? And do you think these upgrades should be born by all users or by those putting the larger demands on the system?
--
My Web Page
Join Red Room Forum |
|
Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02
Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
| Well in this case users are already paying more for the tier, so they are contributing more capital than the average user.
The tier is also clearly being marketed toward that hungrier user-base. Don't want them gobbling up that bandwidth, or can't supply it? Tone down the speed rhetoric slightly.
Raise the caps to 100GB monthly and eliminate app-specific throttling and they'd have no complaints. |
|
Drex_CS
join:2005-05-11
canada
1 edit | reply to Primis1
I agree, the demand *does* need to be met.. but list a company (even in the US) that allows full out DL/UL, and to do that as much as you want...
I think that Retire_Rich has the idea here. Allow over usage, but make them pay for it.
I think they *should* up the cap a bit though. While 50GB is MORE than enough for most users (talking about non-bbr visitors here) for some of us who like to Dl thier favorite shows/pod casts, 50 is to little.. 75 or 100 GB would be fair I think, if you go over that then you should rethink what your getting. |
|
RadioDoc
58ef2c0
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
 ·AT&T Midwest
| said by Drex_CS  : but list a company (even in the US) that allows full out DL/UL, and to do that as much as you want... No major DSL provider has such limits. Speaking from 5 years experience with SBC, I can run my 6016/608 connection 24/7 (servers are legal, too) and not see any throttling or receive a "bandwidth hog" nastygram.
--
Let me see you make decisions, without your television. |
|
Drex_CS
join:2005-05-11
canada
| said by RadioDoc :said by Drex_CS : but list a company (even in the US) that allows full out DL/UL, and to do that as much as you want... No major DSL provider has such limits. Speaking from 5 years experience with SBC, I can run my 6016/608 connection 24/7 (servers are legal, too) and not see any throttling or receive a "bandwidth hog" nastygram. Sorry I meant Cable Internet provider, DSL is different because they don't run through the same kind of node system that cable does. In Alberta (and BC I believe) Telus is the DSL provider and they have caps as well (though they don't enforce it strictly) Competition + Demand = Results |
|
Primis1
join:2005-06-13
Coldwater, MI
| reply to GOLFnSUN
quote:
But will you be willing to pay what it costs to do the upgrades?
Excuse me? It's the cableco's obligation to pay for the upgrades, or else. The "or else" being "you'll lose your userbase". The burden is not on me, the user. They already HAVE our money, what are they using it for?
It is not the user's responsibility to durectly pay for natural progression to meet increasing demands. That's the company's responsibility. And if they can't hack it, then their business model is flawed and... that's not my fault or responsibility.
It's called capitalism. It's darwinistic in nature. If you can't provide what's necessary or can't cut it.. too bad. Those are the breaks. It's life.
It's not the Special Olympics. It's not welfare. It's not "Help out a multi-billion dollar-earning brotha'" Day. It's reality. You (meaning the cablecos) have income. USE IT, and use it wisely. If you're not... then I guess it sucks to be you. |
|
Drex_CS
join:2005-05-11
canada
| said by Primis1 :And if they can't hack it, then their business model is flawed and... that's not my fault or responsibility....It's called capitalism. It's darwinistic in nature. If you can't provide what's necessary or can't cut it.. too bad. Those are the breaks. It's life. First, your missing a big point here, Shaw *does* meet the demands of most users. just because you choose to download and pirate 100's of GB's a month of info doesn't mean my grandma does as well. You need to learn how to put your feet in other people's shoes. For every 1 or 2 of you (and me) who download a lot, there are 100 people who use 10 Gb a month if they go crazy on it.
Shaw's the 2nd largest CableCo in the country I believe.. looks like they're havin a rough time eh?  |
|
anonpronman
@69.183.x.x
| reply to GOLFnSUN
IF they have the download capacity they also have the upload capacity.. They "ISP" simply don't want to spend the extra $$$ on the upload..
Larger Demand? Proper provisioning on the isp's part is what i say.. everyone should be treated equal.. NO MATTER WHAT.. |
|
Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02
Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
| reply to Drex_CS
quote:
just because you choose to download and pirate 100's of GB's a month of info doesn't mean my grandma does as well.
Again though, that's why Grandma is on the standard plan and he's clearly going to go for the Extreme tier (and pay more for it).
Grandma would be offered a "Lite" plan if cable operators weren't afraid standard customers would downgrade and they'd lose revenue. Instead, she's using 10% of a $50 connection and paying much more than she's getting. So it works both ways.
Cable companies hold some responsibility for their marketing choices, you know.... |
|
Drex_CS
join:2005-05-11
canada
| said by Karl Bode : quote:
just because you choose to download and pirate 100's of GB's a month of info doesn't mean my grandma does as well.
Grandma would be offered a "Lite" plan if cable operators weren't afraid standard customers would downgrade and they'd lose revenue. She is on the Lite plan, shaw does offer that (128kbps). I dont mean to say that shaw is right in capping at 50 (I said earlier that a raise would be good) but saying that Shaw is going to go out of buisness because of the 5 to 8% of people that hit 100 GB a month is silly. And 80+% of shaw's internet basis are made up of people that wont go over that cap unless they really try to. |
|
zod5000
join:2003-10-21
Edmonton, AB
·TELUS
·TekSavvy Solutions..
| reply to GOLFnSUN
shaw makes more then enough to pay for the upgrades a year, they are just squeezing the existing system to increase profits.
They are like any other freemarket company, its about making as much money as possible, its not about the customers.
from their point of view, you can see why, there isn't really any competion in western Canada. You've got telus, and then you've got all the companies that resell either shaw or telus.
Telus is fairly slower, and has been dicking around with idea of caps lately.
shaw can just keep screwing people over, because they're aren't really any places for their customers to go. For ever high bandwidth user they dump of their system then can bring on about 300 people like my grandparents. Then is skews their statisitics (because they boot off all the high bandwidth users), then they can tell high users their in top 5 or 10 percent, went that number is screwy, because there can't be alot of heavy users, because they chased 'em all away.. lol
Shaw is so damned crooked it drives me nuts (I've been lingering on telus, because as of yet, they haven't punted me off or threatened me with suspension.. also no p2p throttling). Telus is slower, but in the long run (unless they do begin to enforce caps), having a slower speed, but a more accessible connection wins out for me. |
|
zod5000
join:2003-10-21
Edmonton, AB
·TELUS
·TekSavvy Solutions..
| reply to Drex_CS
the argument is flawed, because when shaw states their statistics in those warning emails that say you're in the top 10 percent. They fail to point out how many people they already punted off their networks (or left due to the warnings).
why don't you guys see how that artifically lowers the bandwidth usage numbers their always flashing. Mix that with the caps, and of course its not hard to get in the top 10 percent. To get an accurate number, they'd have to let the floodgates open for a few months, let the people comeback, redo the states, and see what kind of average they get, and then still see if you're in the top 10 percent.
shaw controls their own bloody statistics through indimidation and threats. |
|
Drex_CS
join:2005-05-11
canada
1 edit | said by zod5000 :the argument is flawed, because when shaw states their statistics in those warning emails that say you're in the top 10 percent. They fail to point out how many people they already punted off their networks (or left due to the warnings). shaw controls their own bloody statistics through indimidation and threats. Never heard of someone being punted off the system. usually it's a standard phone call/emial saying to slow it down a bit.. if you do, then they forget about you, if you dont, they turn off your modem for a predetermined amount of time (which they tell you before hand).
Ofcourse they dont count people that leave... you want them to count everyone who is not using thier internet? why dont you ask them to put thier caps up by making an assumption on the fact that they "could" have all of north america as customers... just sounds stupid now doesn't it?
What threats are you getting from shaw? I know i got a letter that said they are offering me a free trial of thier Cable because I have the internet.. O and there was this scary one about how they're offering a inexpensive phone service now.. ya that one was scary! |
|
TWCisagoat
@rr.com | reply to Drex_CS
Time Warner Cable. |
|
koolman2
Premium
join:2002-10-01
Anchorage, AK
·GCI.net
| reply to Drex_CS
My local cable internet provider, GCI, offers unlimited transfer plans. These are actually advertised as unlimited transfer, so if they throttled you, you could probably sue.
--
"I wonder if other dogs think poodles are members of a weird religious cult." -Rita Rudner |
|
zod5000
join:2003-10-21
Edmonton, AB | reply to Drex_CS
yah they'll kick off if suspensions don't work on you. |
|
Primis1
join:2005-06-13
Coldwater, MI
| reply to Drex_CS
quote:
First, your missing a big point here, Shaw *does* meet the demands of most users. just because you choose to download and pirate 100's of GB's a month of info doesn't mean my grandma does as well. You need to learn how to put your feet in other people's shoes.
No, I don't. Aside from your childish resorting to accusation of piracy because you're apparently bereft of any other argument, you also didn't actually read a single thing I've said yet obviously, since you're harping on download. The DOWNload is irrelevant. We want more UPload. I don't use much in the way of download anymore, I find myself using upload more and more.
And the original argument was that "The cableco's infrastructure can't handle increased upload".
And the statement that "Are you willing to pay more?" for something I should already have by now in the year 2005 is completely asinine and stupid.
Thus why I said "If they can't hack it and keep up... that's their problem not mine". My demands as a consumer don't have to in any way take into consideration any 5-year or 10-year plan they may or may not have. |
|
Wills
join:2001-01-03
Port Charlotte, FL
| reply to GOLFnSUN
said by GOLFnSUN :But will you be willing to pay what it costs to do the upgrades? And do you think these upgrades should be born by all users or by those putting the larger demands on the system? The cost to fix this solution for Shaw was 2 to 3 million dollars.
Are you expecting me to believe, that the largest cable provider in Canada, doesn't have 2 or 3 million just laying around?
The ones putting the larger demands on the systems ARE paying for it. They are paying a higher price for those higher speeds they'll never see.
Only 3 million to fix these problems, yet Shaw chose to cap their users. That is greed, plain and simple.
--
I have a shaved head, a goatee, and tatoos. Don't you realize the rules don't apply to me. |
|
