 |
 | |
| | |
| | | |
| | | jimbo2150
join:2004-05-10
Youngstown, OH
| said by Eat Me  :Actually the problem is oversubscription. If everyone were on full throttle 24x7 no one would be able to use their connection. One of the issues that causes issues when oversubscription is done is that there is no option to get that kind of connection. Networks overtaxed: Have the heaviest users moved over to a more dedicated, pricier service: ooops! This is not available to most people to begin with.
--
- "Techie" Jim | |
|
| | | | iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO | Re: AVG off 11.4 GB/month shows caps not out of line It's available for me. $3000 for a 100 Mbit connection. No thanks. | |
|
| | gorehound
join:2009-06-19
Portland, ME
| I host a large website and I am an artist with a lot of things for people to download.
The biggest download would be downloading my Holocaust DVD.
A Family Journey Backwards is a 5 1/2 hour detailed study of Jewish life in the Carpathian mountain/Northern Transylvanian region before,during,and immedaitely after World War 2.
This documentary is available on my site for free and can be downloaded at master quality 6 DVD Set.That menas your stupid 11 gig is krap because it would be equal to 2 months worth...it is a 23 roughly gig download.
I never want to see any capping of anyones accounts.i want to pay a flat rate.i do not want to see folks not want to download my art because of some stupid greedy cappping behavior.
if you are interested go here for my holocaust site before you are capped i guess.
»www.bigmeathammer.com/aushwitz.htm | |
|
| | 
anonymoose
@sbcglobal.net
| damn it! why can't people today just be happy with only surfing web pages and reading emails!? If it was fine for 1995, then it is fine for 2009! then everyone can guarantee to be below current ISP caps and stop whining about caps.
 | |
|
| | | |
| gpmoo7
join:2009-01-03
Montreal, QC
 ·Videotron
| The problem is that people only use 10GB because they have caps ... if everyone were unlimited, they would use more data 
People don't want to check their bandwith usage every day to see if they can do or not do what they want. | |
|
| | jester121
join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL | Re: AVG off 11.4 GB/month shows caps not out of line The data doesn't support that supposition at all. | |
|
| | | gpmoo7
join:2009-01-03
Montreal, QC
·Videotron
| Re: AVG off 11.4 GB/month shows caps not out of line said by jester121 :The data doesn't support that supposition at all. Which data? It's clear that the future is unlimited bandwidth for every one. That's it.
The future is FTTH starting à 100 Mb/s and going over Gb/s in a few years (that's a reality in some country, not in Canada).
All this bandwidth will be used by everyone ...
Of course, today, in Canada, people are stick to their 7Mb/s throttled Internet access with limited bandwidth so they just do IM, mails and Facebook ... who is going to rent an HD movie with this kind of Internet access ? | |
|
| | | | iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO | Re: AVG off 11.4 GB/month shows caps not out of line I'm pretty sure that the sample size was big enough that caps weren't an issue. Everyone except mobile broadband providers have caps much higher than 11.4GB. | |
|
| | | | | gpmoo7
join:2009-01-03
Montreal, QC
·Videotron
1 edit | Re: AVG off 11.4 GB/month shows caps not out of line said by iansltx :I'm pretty sure that the sample size was big enough that caps weren't an issue. Everyone except mobile broadband providers have caps much higher than 11.4GB. Yes but 11.4GB is a worldwide average including countries where Internet is almost not used ... so the average in ... let's say, the G8 countries (Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, UK, US) should be more like 30GB or more ... (I hope ) | |
|
| | | | | | iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO | Re: AVG off 11.4 GB/month shows caps not out of line I'm pretty sure that Cisco picked twenty relatively high-profile broadband providers. Also, 11.4 GB per connection seems to be about right... | |
|
| | | | | | | 
tubbynet
reminds me of the danse russe
Premium
join:2008-01-16
Chandler, AZ
·Cox HSI
 ·Callcentric
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·FrontierNet Intern..
| Re: AVG off 11.4 GB/month shows caps not out of line said by iansltx :I'm pretty sure that Cisco picked twenty relatively high-profile broadband providers. not quite an assumption i'm willing to make. i would assume that most of these isps would have to have a working relationship with cisco, in the form of account managers and sales engineers. through these relationships, cisco would pitch the box that collects the survey data onto the isp network.
a company that is running juniper switch/routers utilising alcatel dslams or motorola cmts units is not going to have the working relationship/trust with cisco to say "sure, through that big box collecting data into the network". in fact, just like there is an mac vs. windows debate, there is the same in the enterprise/service provider space with juniper and cisco (and some others like force10). some people patently refuse to run c* gear because they only like j* gear. from an issue of interoperability, it makes sense to stick with what you have, but i digress.
at any rate, if the isp does not have a working relationship with cisco, they aren't going to be part of this survey. i would say that this cuts out a good chunk of isps from the mix.
q.
--
"...if I in my north room dance naked, grotesquely before my mirror waving my shirt round my head and singing softly to myself..." | |
|
| | | | | | | | iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO | Re: AVG off 11.4 GB/month shows caps not out of line Comcast uses Cisco. Pretty sure AT&T does. TWC probably does. Though Comcast doesn't use Cisco on the CMTS side (because their CMTSes don't know how to load balance worth a crap). | |
|
| | | | | | | | | weaseled386
join:2008-04-13
Port Orange, FL
·Verizon Wireless B..
·Bright House
| Re: AVG off 11.4 GB/month shows caps not out of line said by iansltx :Comcast uses Cisco. Pretty sure AT&T does. There is very little Cisco equipment in the AT&T Central Offices. What Cisco equipment is there is currently being phased out for Juniper (MX480's and MX960's). The VRAD backbone is Alcatel routers & switches. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | 
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| said by iansltx :Comcast uses Cisco. Pretty sure AT&T does. TWC probably does. Though Comcast doesn't use Cisco on the CMTS side (because their CMTSes don't know how to load balance worth a crap). Time Warner definitely does.
--
"What is conservatism? Is it not adherence to the old and tried, against the new and untried?" - Abraham Lincoln | |
|
| | | | | | | | jester121
join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL
 ·surpasshosting
·ViaTalk
| said by tubbynet :said by iansltx :I'm pretty sure that Cisco picked twenty relatively high-profile broadband providers. not quite an assumption i'm willing to make. i would assume that most of these isps would have to have a working relationship with cisco, in the form of account managers and sales engineers. through these relationships, cisco would pitch the box that collects the survey data onto the isp network. a company that is running juniper switch/routers utilising alcatel dslams or motorola cmts units is not going to have the working relationship/trust with cisco to say "sure, through that big box collecting data into the network". in fact, just like there is an mac vs. windows debate, there is the same in the enterprise/service provider space with juniper and cisco (and some others like force10). some people patently refuse to run c* gear because they only like j* gear. from an issue of interoperability, it makes sense to stick with what you have, but i digress. at any rate, if the isp does not have a working relationship with cisco, they aren't going to be part of this survey. i would say that this cuts out a good chunk of isps from the mix. So be it. Please explain why ISPs using non-Cisco gear would expect to see drastically different results, if they had chosen to collect the same metrics? | |
|
| | | | | | | | |
tubbynet
reminds me of the danse russe
Premium
join:2008-01-16
Chandler, AZ
·Cox HSI
·Callcentric
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·FrontierNet Intern..
| Re: AVG off 11.4 GB/month shows caps not out of line said by jester121 :Please explain why ISPs using non-Cisco gear would expect to see drastically different results, if they had chosen to collect the same metrics? the metrics may be the same, but the data outcomes could be drastically affected. again, this is a survey of *20* isps spread across the globe. because of the differences in content, restrictions, cultures, norms, and societal emphasis on technology, it is difficult to put anything into a "cookie cutter". sure, worldwide monthly average consumption is 11 gigs. great. however, that doesn't account for every isp in every part of the country and there is no differentiation between regions of the globe.
while you could make the argument that cisco wouldn't publish these results if they weren't accurate, i contend that the addition of several larger isps in each region and a breakout of each regions monthly consumption would be a better indicator.
q.
--
"...if I in my north room dance naked, grotesquely before my mirror waving my shirt round my head and singing softly to myself..." | |
|
| | | | | patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
| said by iansltx :I'm pretty sure that the sample size was big enough that caps weren't an issue. Everyone except mobile broadband providers have caps much higher than 11.4GB. How do you know what?
quote:
Globally, the average broadband connection (primarily residential subscribers and some business users) generates approximately 11.4 gigabytes of Internet traffic per month.
Did they include every 3G phone with a phone-only data plan, or every 3G device with a laptop/tether plan? Did they include dialup users? What about satellite (WB, Hughes)? What about business grade satellite like Inmarsat? What about WISPs that put 200 users on 1 T1 for backhaul where the speed crawls to 100kbitps during peak usage (still better than 19kbitps on rural dialup)? | |
|
| | | | | | |
| | | |
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| said by gpmoo7 :said by jester121 :The data doesn't support that supposition at all. Which data? It's clear that the future is unlimited bandwidth for every one. That's it. The future is FTTH starting à 100 Mb/s and going over Gb/s in a few years (that's a reality in some country, not in Canada). All this bandwidth will be used by everyone ... Of course, today, in Canada, people are stick to their 7Mb/s throttled Internet access with limited bandwidth so they just do IM, mails and Facebook ... who is going to rent an HD movie with this kind of Internet access ? I've got access to a gigabit connection and a couple of 100Mbps ones. I can't find anything to tax the 100Mbps connection, much less the 1Gbps. There won't be a need for that type of bandwidth to the home for a lot longer than a couple of years, although I'd LOVE to be able to purchase one at a reasonable price right now.
--
"What is conservatism? Is it not adherence to the old and tried, against the new and untried?" - Abraham Lincoln | |
|
| | | | | gpmoo7
join:2009-01-03
Montreal, QC
·Videotron
| Re: AVG off 11.4 GB/month shows caps not out of line said by Matt :I've got access to a gigabit connection and a couple of 100Mbps ones. I can't find anything to tax the 100Mbps connection, much less the 1Gbps. There won't be a need for that type of bandwidth to the home for a lot longer than a couple of years, although I'd LOVE to be able to purchase one at a reasonable price right now. That's the future of broadband Internet. Isn't great to know that the speed is not an issue because you can't find anything to use it all?
100 Mb/s today is like a virtually unlimited speed!
Tomorrow, HDTV will go IPTV with 20 Mb/s for an HD channel and multiple channels through the same Internet access ...
This tomorrow is going to happen sooner than you think ... at least in countries where unlimited bandwidth and 20 Mb/s is for everyone today (even if you doesn't think you need it ) and FTTH on his way.
As of today, I really think that unlimited 20Mb/s should be available for everyone ... at least in the biggest cities in North America. | |
|
| | | | | patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
| said by Matt :I've got access to a gigabit connection and a couple of 100Mbps ones. I can't find anything to tax the 100Mbps connection, much less the 1Gbps. There won't be a need for that type of bandwidth to the home for a lot longer than a couple of years, although I'd LOVE to be able to purchase one at a reasonable price right now. Bluray is 36mbitps AFAIK. With a 100mbitps at home, I can stream content from my home to anywhere on the globe through a VPN. I'll never need to carry a portable HD around every again. The world is my LAN. | |
|
| | jay_rm
join:2002-04-12
Netville
·Fox Valley Internet
·ViaTalk
| said by gpmoo7 :The problem is that people only use 10GB because they have caps ... if everyone were unlimited, they would use more data People don't want to check their bandwith usage every day to see if they can do or not do what they want. bah - I disagree.
My entire household uses an average of 8-12 Gb/mo. That's 2 young adults and their two tech savvy parents, one of which has a home office. We run our own mail server and a lightly used web server. We are NOT capped in any way.
The population as a whole uses WAY less then the average DSLR user. Frequent visitors to this site are probably all in the upper 10-15% of data volume.
--
3500/512 5.7 GHz Motorola Canopy Wireless; FoxValley.net
'It looks just like a Telefunken U47 !' | |
|
|
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| I would venture a guess that these numbers are inflated a little bit too. After all, Cisco wants to sell gear to ISPs so they can deal with all that traffic.
--
"What is conservatism? Is it not adherence to the old and tried, against the new and untried?" - Abraham Lincoln | |
|
| 
SLD
Premium
join:2002-04-17 | You really should change your screename to "Boss Hogg". | |
|
|
ZappaF
@verizon.net
| Well, with profit margins on Internet services at 80 percent and rising, I think the answer is more that those in the top percent maybe should pay more, but the rest of us should be paying less -- alot less.
Of course, in this market, prices only ever go up. | |
|
| | 
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
| Re: AVG off 11.4 GB/month shows caps not out of line said by ZappaF :
Well, with profit margins on Internet services at 80 percent and rising
Care to back up that estimate of profit margin? SEC filed financial statements come NOWHERE NEAR that number. | |
|
| | |
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| Re: AVG off 11.4 GB/month shows caps not out of line said by TKJunkMail :said by ZappaF :
Well, with profit margins on Internet services at 80 percent and rising
Care to back up that estimate of profit margin? SEC filed financial statements come NOWHERE NEAR that number. Gross margins aren't even close to that number.
--
"What is conservatism? Is it not adherence to the old and tried, against the new and untried?" - Abraham Lincoln | |
|
| | |
ZappaF
@verizon.net
 from:
gpmoo7
| It is estimated that Cablevision enjoys “80 percent margins for wired high-speed Internet services.” See Jeff Baumgartner, “Does Cable Really Need Wireless?” Cable Digital News, Dec. 5, 2008. | |
|
| | |
ZappaF
@verizon.net
| Link here:
»www.lightreading.com/document.as···site=cdn
"Moffett believes Cablevision can pay for the buildout through the subscribers gained or retained for its wired broadband service. At an ARPU (average revenue per user) of $35 per month and 80 percent margins for wired high-speed Internet services."
You don't see numbers like this, b/c most companies don't publish sub-segment data like this in their 10-Ks. They'll show "wireline", and "wireless", or if they have specific information for "data", it never discusses costs, only revenues. | |
|
| | iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO | Agreed. I'm sure I'm in the top 10%, though I'm not in the top 1%. I'll pay $80 per month for an internet connection. But my parents, who are the average case, sure as heck better be paying $20 for the same-speed connection. Oh wait...they aren't. | |
|
| | | 
Ebolla
join:2005-09-28
Dracut, MA | Re: AVG off 11.4 GB/month shows caps not out of line They may not use as much bandwidth as you but they can if they choose to. Do you pay less for a car if you decide not to drive it more then 1-2 miles a week? no you don't. | |
|
| | | | iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO | Re: AVG off 11.4 GB/month shows caps not out of line No, but you pay less for gas. A better analogy, which would hold true, is you don't pay more for a modem or router just because you use the service more. Though a more expensive router tends to go faster. | |
|
| | | | lastmile
join:2007-09-08
Robertsville, MO
·Cingular Wireless
| Although you wouldn't pay more for the same car, you would pay considerably more for wear && tear, usage, gas and insurance if you choose to use it (or the service) more often.
Network gear && pipes are subject to wear and tear, maintenance costs and insurance I would suspect.
I don't think its out of line to charge more for the high-end bandwidth users. | |
|
| Sammer
join:2005-12-22
Canonsburg, PA
| said by TKJunkMail : And if you are in the TOP 10% you should pay more. Any caps set to affect pricing will surely affect more than just the top 10%! | |
|
|
tubbynet
reminds me of the danse russe
Premium
join:2008-01-16
Chandler, AZ
·Cox HSI
·Callcentric
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·FrontierNet Intern..
| said by TKJunkMail :The numbers have shown what many have said - that transfer caps at 250 GB/mo and above are very reasonable and not some anti-competitive throttle on the internet. The only ones complaining are those who SHOULD BE paying more per month if they use more than that. And if you are in the TOP 10% you should pay more. but, per the article (and the survey which the article is pulling information from), this is *global* usage, which could include areas that have little to no "local" web infrastructure (websites hosted within the country, providing faster responses); there is no point in surfing to youtube from lebanon if you can't get a decent video to play.
additionally, while the survey is quite light on details on which isps were in the survey and where they were located, this one fact makes me question the *true* accuracy of the article
Cisco collects anonymous, aggregate data about network usage from over 20 service providers worldwide participating in the Visual Networking Index Usage program. Participants in the program receive benchmarking reports comparing their traffic composition and growth to the average of the other participants.
without knowing the subscriber base size and location of each isp, i'd say there is room open for speculation. i'd be more interested in a breakdown of the usage *strictly* in the us by *all* hsi isps. this would be a little more relevant to how broadband policy in the us should be shaped. i mean, after all, weren't you just criticizing countries with "socialized" broadband and now you want to dictate your usage based on them? can't have it both ways
q.
--
"...if I in my north room dance naked, grotesquely before my mirror waving my shirt round my head and singing softly to myself..." | |
|
| MovieLover76
join:2009-09-11
·Optimum Online
 ·DIRECTV
| The critical error in your logic is that that ISP's are making very good profits with the current unlimited model they have, they may need to apply some QoS to busy nodes, but there is no network need for a limit on Bits per month.
Also it is anti-competitive, when looking to forecast future bandwidth usage, you don't look at what the average is today, you look at what the early adopters / High Bandwidth users are using. A HD netflix movie is easily 5GB alone, and they have a lot of room for improvement still (surround sound please)
I don't use P2P and I easily go through 250gb a month when you consider my bandwidth and my roommates as well. Caps are designed to prevent adoption of future higher bandwidth replacements for traditional cable services like netflix etc. | |
|
| |
| |
See 7 replies to this post |
|
| axiomatic
join:2006-08-23
Tomball, TX
| I'm in the top 10% with mostly business traffic, and I pay for a premium tier of service.
So since I pay more because I use more, shouldn't my cap be higher? Or no cap at all?
Also, I want to buy a plan without a cap. Hey Mr. ISP can I pay my way out of a cap?
Didn't think so. I'm the best customer Comcast has paying them $300 per month (without fail) and I'm treated like a fucking crook. How that for value? | |
|
|
vapor2314
@lexis-nexis.com | again why go back to paying for usage? That is like going back to candles instead of the light bulb. We had pay for usage billing with dial up we have move on billing for usage is obsolete | |
|
grydlok
join:2004-01-06
Richmond, VA | Hmm So now that a number been thrown out there will carriers need to place caps? | |
|
| 
n2jtx
join:2001-01-13
Glen Head, NY
·Optimum Online
| Re: Hmm said by grydlok :So now that a number been thrown out there will carriers need to place caps? Of course, at 11GB! Then charge $29.95 for each GB or fraction thereof over.
My sister and her family which comprise six people struggle under 60GB/month. That basically limits the household to 2GB/day shared amongst two parents and two teenagers with the other two being three and six years old.
--
I support the right to keep and arm bears. | |
|
| | Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
| Re: Hmm said by n2jtx :said by grydlok :So now that a number been thrown out there will carriers need to place caps? Of course, at 11GB! Then charge $29.95 for each GB or fraction thereof over. My sister and her family which comprise six people struggle under 60GB/month. That basically limits the household to 2GB/day shared amongst two parents and two teenagers with the other two being three and six years old. ouch i think i alone move close to 2gb a day sometimes, if running Hulu, World of Warcraft and Ventrilo.
and forget a patch day i can blow past 2gb like nothing.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports | |
|
| |
grydlok
join:2004-01-06
Richmond, VA | I know that feeling.
I have 2 laptops, 1 desktop, 1 netbook, a 360 and PMD drinking band down like vitamin water in my house hold. I know I blow past 11 gig a month. I don't think I make 250 gig though. | |
|
| | | 
scoopy03
join:2003-05-06
00000
 ·Verizon FIOS
| Re: Hmm said by grydlok :I know that feeling. I have 2 laptops, 1 desktop, 1 netbook, a 360 and PMD drinking band down like vitamin water in my house hold. I know I blow past 11 gig a month. I don't think I make 250 gig though. I go past 11GB easily every week not even really doing much. A few weeks ago I did one 3.5 Hour HD stream and it was 11GB for that one day. | |
|
Raphion
join:2000-10-14
Samsara | Guess I'm below average hmmm... I've used 86.3GB so far this year, for an average of 7.8GB per month. Only two users on my connection though. | |
|
| 
aaronwt
Premium
join:2004-11-07
Woodbridge, VA
·Verizon FIOS
1 edit | Re: Guess I'm below average said by Raphion :hmmm... I've used 86.3GB so far this year, for an average of 7.8GB per month. Only two users on my connection though. I've used over 15TB so far this year. Although there is only one user on my connection, but I have over 60 devices that use internet access.
I'm paying less now for my internet access than before. When I was on the 50/20 tier i was paying $90 a month. Now that I'm on the 25/15 tier, I'm paying around $47 a month.
I do miss the extra speed on a daily basis. But I don't miss the extra cost. | |
|
| | AstroBoy
join:2008-08-08
Parkville, MD
| Re: Guess I'm below average said by aaronwt :but I have over 60 devices that use internet access. Wow, could you list some of these devices? I must be deprived, I only have about 15 or so.  | |
|
| | |
aaronwt
Premium
join:2004-11-07
Woodbridge, VA
·Verizon FIOS
1 edit | Re: Guess I'm below average said by AstroBoy :said by aaronwt :but I have over 60 devices that use internet access. Wow, could you list some of these devices? I must be deprived, I only have about 15 or so. said by MovieLover76 :60 internet devices?? really? I have a lot of stuff myself but I don't think I could make it to 60 PS3,Xbox 360, Wii, 3 Laptops, 2 Computers, Xbox, Iphone, ATA adapter, Home Server This is for 3 people and I can only get to 12 I know it slightly off topic, but how do you get to 60, I'm just curious. seven Network cameras,
three laptps, one netbook, four desktops, one windows home server, four 360s, two PS3s, seven TiVos, nine HD DVD/BD players, two APs, four bridges, one receiver, three squeeze boxes, three VUDUs, six NAS drives, and I also have ten gigabit ethernet switches. I'm sure I'm still missing a few things. but that is all I can think of off the top of my head.
It's way too many devices but that is waht I have. | |
|
| | MovieLover76
join:2009-09-11
·Optimum Online
·DIRECTV
| 60 internet devices?? really?
I have a lot of stuff myself but I don't think I could make it to 60
PS3,Xbox 360, Wii, 3 Laptops, 2 Computers, Xbox, Iphone, ATA adapter, Home Server
This is for 3 people and I can only get to 12
I know it slightly off topic, but how do you get to 60, I'm just curious. | |
|
| | |
MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Southwest
| This validates everything the ISPs have been saying. That the average user is far, far below any of the proposed caps.
That a very small fraction of users create most of the traffic. 10% of users create 60% of the traffic. 1% creates 20%.
That P2P is a HUGE part of all traffic. 38% is not minimal, it's immense.
I would bet, btw, that if you cross-referenced high P2P usage against the 1% of users who create 20% of the traffic, you'd see a very large correlation. | |
|
| |
| | 
IPPlanMan
Holy Cable Modem Batman
join:2000-09-20
Washington, DC
1 edit | Re: This validates everything the ISPs have been saying. TB is a foreign concept to ISP's like Comcast. | |
|
| | | WernerSchutz
join:2009-08-04
Sugar Land, TX
| Re: This validates everything the ISPs have been saying. said by IPPlanMan :TB is a foreign concept to ISP's like Comcast. Except that they think tuberculosys when they see such heavy usage | |
|
| | MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Southwest
| said by bender :i do not use P2P except to download linux iso's and that is very rare. I still go far over 11gb. I can transfer 11gb in less than a week my friend. 11gb is less than 3 single layer dvds. its not much. we need to get out of the cd mindset. they should be worried about TB of transfer, not GB. Yes the developer/designer user, like you (and me by the way), who legally downloads lots of software, certainly exists. I would still bet that there's a large correlation between P2P usage and being in that tiny minority of users who create the bulk of the traffic.
Out of curiosity -- how much would you say you download? Or do you actually know (have some meter installed)? Personally I'm probably around 20GB/month, but that's a guess, and some months are higher. | |
|
| | | |
|
| Madtown
join:2008-04-26
Madera, CA
| Re: 11GB is a bit low said by pokesph :I think those numbers are purposely deflated. I'm a average user, youtube, websurfing, email and so on, yet have well over 11GB /mo traffic usage. [att=1] Image only show 1 computer.. How much traffic do you use for Xbox Live and Netflix, it doesn't count that.
btw, how did you post that on here?, I would like to do the same thing. | |
|
| 
Anonymous_
Anonymous
Premium
join:2004-06-21
127.0.0.1
clubs:
1 edit | i use upto 500GB permonth
depends if i fell like downloading stuff | HD Shows | |
|
Rob
In Deo speramus, God Bless the USA
Premium
join:2001-08-25
Kendall, FL
·Comcast
| Too low. I think 11GB a monthly is extremely low for an average home. I'm not where near a heavy users, but with 3 people using the Internet, we use on average 37GB a month (based on the data above in my image).
--
CheckSite.us | YourIP.us | Reverseip.us | |
|
|
See 13 replies to this post |
|
R4M0N
Brazilian Soccer Ownz Joo
join:2000-10-04
Glen Allen, VA
·Comcast
2 edits | Big push for Caps Of course... They see digital delivery in the horizon and want to set the low caps now before everyone and their mamas find out the convenience of downloading a movie on your Xbox360, PS3, Samsung HDTV, etc...
At about 3gb for an HD movie, I can go way past that 11gb average using my HDTV alone, no need for any other equipment. And before even turning my PC on for other internet-related tasks
Come on, people. Open your eyes.
Almost everything is getting "Internet-enabled" nowadays and some of those things will be bandwidth hogs. Letting caps be implemented now is just letting ISPs shackle you into high-prices later. | |
|
| |
|
DOGUser
@omcastbusiness.net
| R4MON,
You hit the nail square on the head!! People need to think ahead and realize most household devices will need to be connected to the internet in the near future. So will increase the amount of data flow to the average household. Just using Netflix watch instantly puts me over the 10 GB limit, not to mention all my other surfing and devices. | |
|
tek465
@frontiernet.net
| 11.4 GB That's just crazy Everyone knows you can't use that much bandwidth, My ISP Frontier told me so...
" We all love the Internet, and Frontier is committed to offering you all the bandwidth you need and want to take full advantage of the Web! Our basic residential Internet packages offers 5GB usage -- that's the equivalent of 500,000 basic text e-mails, 2,500 Photos, 40,000 Web Pages, over 300 Hours of Online Game Time, 1,250 downloaded songs, or a mixture of the above!
How many gigabytes do I currently use per month?
Customer usage varies by household and by market. Our typical Frontier household uses less than 1.5GB or 1,500 megabytes a month. Many of our customers use a lot less than this amount and we only have a small number of customers who use more than this amount. "
»www.frontier.com/5GB/
In fact, since internet usage is so low, my ISP hasn't bothered to upgrade speeds for my area in over 5 years. Anyone coming over from Verizion is in for a real treat! | |
|
|
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
·Comcast
·Qwest.net
·magicjack.com
·BeeCreek Communica..
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
| My Situation I could never live on a 5GB per month MBB connection. While I was doing work on such a connection back home, I used ~1GB in a day. So 30GB in a month just for me.
Granted, looking at DD-WRT logs, the rest of the family (four people) used ~12GB in the month, without me home. However that was on a crapy 512k connection. I GUARANTEE they would've used more if the connection was 1.5/512 with high quality. YouTube won't even load on it.
Then again, every family member has their own computer, and my brothers like to play various games.
On my 22/5 connection I've used 73.2 GB so far this month. Yes I'm sure I'm in the top 10% but OTOH I'm not int he top 1%. Yes I download HD TV shows but I do my torrent seeding elsewhere and download only two TV shows per week, or about an hour of high quality video. The rest is YouTube or similar, with other folks using my connection on a periodic basis. Mostly just me though.
I transfer files over the connection for my job at school, upload large-ish PDFs, etc. over my cable internet. I'm using under 250GB per month and not hosting any public-facing servers on the connection, so I'm not going to sign a business-class contract that I'll have to break in a little over a year when I graduate.
Last month I used 164GB.
I have two laptops, a desktop, a Wii and an iPhone that tend to be on the network on a regular basis. One laptop tends to serve as an HTPC. The other is what I take to class, so maybe 20% of its internet traffic is on my campus network. If you add in file transfers on the campus LAN, the number is actually more like 80%.
I'm definitely not the normal case for internet usage; I think the rest of the guys in my apartment complex use ~50GB per month on a Qwest DSL connection, and there are about twenty of them. OTOH they also ahve the campus network, which is a lot faster than a 5/896 DSL connection...and none of them are gamers or the like. | |
|
djeremy
join:2004-07-12
San Francisco, CA
| Cisco is just trying to sell equipment My guess is that they have some new device they are trying to peddle to ISPs that does some sort of data tallying per connection and needed a study/survey to help sell it.
Remember, Cisco came out with AT&T and Verizon a while back as being against network neutrality because they sell traffic prioritization and shaping devices. | |
|
Selenia
join:2006-09-22
Pittsfield, MA
·Verizon Online DSL
·RoadRunner Cable
| Seems fishy Are the ISPs providing this data or is Cisco measuring traffic being routed from the ISPs for this claim? I am down to about 80 GB/month use. I am unthrottled/unlimited. I use Free Open Source software(Linux ftw) and do frequent audio/video streaming(most of it not HD). I also keep one small folder synced with my other house(uses less than 10 GB, at most, but usually in the MBs/month) I don't download alot of large files(maybe a few CD images and 1 DVD image per month, legally). My computers regularly check repositories and update daily, which uses minimal bandwidth 99% of the time). Most apps I download from the repos are XX MB max, most are X MB(and still many are in the KBs in size). Other than that, I browse the web , play my fav MMO(FFXI) on a console(it can use several GBs on its own in a month just updating X 2 consoles), and chat like most people. Most of my intensive work is done locally.
I do realize I utilize the internet more than most and maybe for a few more things, but I don't do anything unusually bandwidth intensive. I only use torrents and such maybe a couple-few times/month. Most of them are not huge files. I'd hate to see what daily downloaders consume. I used to use them a bit more, which is why my usage used to be much greater than 80 GB. | |
|
IPPlanMan
Holy Cable Modem Batman
join:2000-09-20
Washington, DC
| Comcast Usage Data Supposedly Shows 2-4 GB Median Use... »customer.comcast.com/%28X%281%29···1#normal
Comcast usage data supposedly shows 2-4 GB median use to justify 250 GB cap.
I call BS on this...
--
"We're going to start at one end of (Fallujah), and we're not going to stop until we get to the other. If there's anybody left when that happens, we're going to turn around and we're going to go back and finish it."
Lt. Col. Pete Newell: 1st Inf. US Army | |
|
skuv
@rr.com
| Not a lot of bandwidth When you look at this in terms of bandwidth (data rate per second) instead of total transfer per month, you see a very low bandwidth average.
If you take a month as being 30 days, a normal billing cycle, then you get:
35kbits/sec as the average.
That jives with real data I have seen from a major ISP for 2008, which I have posted before, where their average per customer was 42k/sec. | |
|
nevtxjustin
join:2006-04-18
Dallas, TX
| 11 GB max sounds right for average user Reading over the responses, I see a lot of people saying how much more they use past 11 GB. The fact you are even posting that here in DSLReports would indicate you're more than just a cut above the average user, so of course your usage is going to be greater.
But what is an average user? Or even a light user? After I gave an example of a light user as someone in a Phoenix retirement community that uses the web to download pics of the grandkids and for Socialist Insecurity and Medicare forms, Rory pointed out it is those users that download tons of NetFlix and become heavy users.
Caps aren't about truly unlimited bandwidth, it isn't about the average user...its about limiting the small percent of users that can take down a system. | |
|
Madtown
join:2008-04-26
Madera, CA
| Hmm wonder if that includes Netflix, Hulu • Internet "prime time" usually runs from about 9 pm to 1 am globally, in contrast to TV prime time which spans the hours between 7 p.m. and 11 pm. 25% (or 93.3 megabytes per day per connection) of global Internet traffic is generated during this period.
TV Primetime is between 7pm and 11pm, I wonder if anyone watching The Office on Hulu or Dexter on Netflix during those times? | |
|
chimera
join:2009-06-09
Washington, DC
| Just Ran the Numbers I got bored and ran the numbers on this. According to those statistics the top 1% of users consume an average of 228GB per month while the bottom 99% consume an average of 9.21GB per month. To me this isn't actually that bad a spread. It means that top 1% only use 25 times the bandwidth of the bottom 99% of users. Assuming that they charge everyone the cost of providing 1.5 normal users access per month that means that they still make a healthy profit and can continue to expand their network. Knowing these numbers makes me support metered billing less.  | |
|
Madtown
join:2008-04-26
Madera, CA | Netflix Traffic How much traffic does Netflix use on the Instant Watch? Let say I watch a movie that is 2 hrs long. | |
|
| slckusr
Premium
join:2003-03-17
Maumee, OH
·Verizon BroadbandA..
·AT&T Midwest
| Re: Netflix Traffic said by Madtown :How much traffic does Netflix use on the Instant Watch? Let say I watch a movie that is 2 hrs long. between that and hulu i think were killing the 11 gb average | |
|
duder
@rr.com
| bull some one said The reality is that most people don't need a full throttle connection 24x7 which is why we can have affordable broadband for home use. bull tell the Japanese that crap 100 up 100 down
all about how much they can get and most people believe this shit .....
have a nice day saps......... for caps | |
|
landysaccoun
join:2008-10-10 | 20GB every other day I have a client that uses aprox 20GB every other day. | |
|
| chimera
join:2009-06-09
Washington, DC
| Re: 20GB every other day So that's 10GB per day or roughly 300GB per month correct? That puts him in roughly the 99.5th percentile of all users according to this information. So, do you have over 199 other users that use less than him like these numbers would suggest? | |
|
|
|
|
Cisco: Average Connection Consumes 11.4 GB Per Month
AVG off 11.4 GB/month shows caps not out of line
