Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 63

Thread: A happy message for Sava.. AT&T Bandwidth Caps.

  1. #1
    A+, S+, M+, C+, CySA+ Shinobi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    4,436
    Blog Entries
    1

    A happy message for Sava.. AT&T Bandwidth Caps.

    Sava700, what you posted is 100% correct in regards to the AT&T bandwidth caps. And I am happy that I did not go back to them as a end user. What also is alarming, is that it is illegal as well. Why? Because when you, the end user bought this service from the Internet Service Provider (ISP) and there was "no" clause in the Terms of Service (TOS) that said that you, the user agree to the bandwidth cap that AT&T and I'm sure others ISP will be following. People will argue this fact, and / or you'll find that the ISP "changed" the TOS without the acknowledgement of the end user. That is a 100% true fact.

    Another true fact that you pointed out, is ISP's like AT&T and also Comcast and other "do not" want end users to use streaming movie services like NetFlix and Hulu. They would rather over charge you for their service and make you pay "more" for that sort of service and charge you "more" for regular internet use. It's a WIN/WIN for the ISP companies. All of this wraps up with Net Neutrality that legal entities and groups have not reacted on enough and / or side stepped the issue when presented.
    _______________________________________________
    Vendor neutral certified in IT Project Management, IT Security, Cisco Networking, Cisco Security, Wide Area Networks, IPv6, IT Hardware, Unix, Linux, and Windows server administration

  2. #2
    Moderator YeOldeStonecat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Somewhere along the shoreline in New England
    Posts
    50,960
    250 gig monthly allotment for UVerse customers......even though my household is very heavy on internet usage....kid is torrenting his massive music collection pretty much 24x7, wife is transferring her real estate pictures and files all the time, I do lots of remote work and lots and lots of downloading of updates, files, drivers, and even uploading...it won't be a concern. 250 gigs is quite generous. It will only impact a small percentage of users that are really exceeding the intended use (like running dozens of torrent/p2p servers or something). Even if I had the 150 gig DSL cap, my household would have to try very hard to exceed that.

    If steps such as they're doing are what it takes to allow them to keep their prices down for the larger percentage of customers...that's fine by me, I stand up and applaud (and so does my wallet). Why let the small percentage of their customers that abuse their bandwidth..and impact performance for the rest of us, forcing the ISP to upgrade their infrastructure and pass the costs on to the other 97% of us normal users? It's a "lose-lose" for that high percentage of regular customers.

    Some stats: "a 150-GB DSL customer could receive 10,000 emails, download 2,000 digital songs, transfer 3,000 photos, stream a one-minute YouTube video 5,000 times, watch 100 hours of high-quality TV and still have enough bandwidth to stream 13 HD-quality movies or 25 standard-quality ones."
    MORNING WOOD Lumber Company
    Guinness for Strength!!!

  3. #3
    Administrator Philip's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Jacksonville, Florida, United States
    Posts
    10,663
    Blog Entries
    6
    Shinobi, it is legal, as you agree that they can make changes to the ToS when you sign up.

    As for the "generousity" of bandwidth caps, they're direct shots to video streaming, rather than p2p IMHO. P2P usage has dropped from over 20% of total traffic to 9% in the last few years (http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/n...2p-pirates.ars) while video streaming accounts for at least 30% of traffic... According to this article video streaming has jumped 600%!!! in the past year. A single HD movie streamed from Neftlix accounts for a couple of Gigabytes of data.

    I know I watch Netflix and some On Demand movies, I'm online all the time, I do some backup transfers from the website, the kids stream video to their computers, and we easily average over 100Gb/month, we've hit 200Gb+ once or twice. I believe many AT&T DSL subscribers that stream a lot of video will be hitting the 150Gb DSL cap.

    It would be interesting to see how Verizon FiOS and videostreaming sites like Netflix/YouTube/Hulu react next.

  4. #4
    SG MVP Lefty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    SG Tavern
    Posts
    18,882
    I have had months that I have gone over 250Gig. Its not all the time, but I have. I guess thats why I have so many external drives.

  5. #5
    Moderator YeOldeStonecat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Somewhere along the shoreline in New England
    Posts
    50,960
    Quote Originally Posted by Philip View Post
    P2P usage has dropped from over 20% of total traffic to 9% in the last few years (http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/n...2p-pirates.ars)
    I'd seen that article...and I don't believe it. I think they based those numbers on the big traditional p2p programs like old limewire...and they're not counting torrents. All I see and hear from kids and their massive iPod/MP3 music collections is that they got them on torrents.
    MORNING WOOD Lumber Company
    Guinness for Strength!!!

  6. #6
    Ohh Hell yeah.. Sava700's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Somewhere
    Posts
    24,051
    The funny thing about this is AT&T is claiming they said users WANTED a cap.. LMAO!! I mean wow... First Comcast then soon more to follow just as I said which kills innovation. More and more is coming in the form of digital and more bandwidth is needed but if you offer faster packages but cap the usage many could hit these caps in days let alone a month.

    This is the BS that AT&T is feeding people now after the cap was set:

    "Our approach is based on customers' feedback," said Mark Siegel, spokesman for AT&T. "They told us that the people who use the most should pay more, and they also told us we should make it easy for them to track their usage. We think our approach addresses these concerns."
    It all depends how you ask the question.

    If someone asked, "Do you believe people that use significantly more data than the average user and consequently slow down everyone else's connection should be charged more?" The answer will be majority yes.

    If someone asked, "Do you believe that data consumption should be capped and those who go over the cap should be charged more?" The answer will be majority no.

    You can point to greed plain and simple.. read this as posted on another site it shows it exactly how it is:

    What is not known how the information was communicated to AT&T, specifically, what question did they pose to gain such feedback. If they sent out a survey that asked, "Do you believe that the top 2% of broadband users should pay more than the remaining 98%" then of course you will hear consumers ask for higher premium to that demographic.

    Further, if AT&T were truly worried about their broadband being overrun by heavy downloading, why aren't consumers using under the cap being rewarded for their efforts or, at minimum, given "rollover" data as they do with their cellular service. AT&T needs to be honest and call the caps what it is, a tax on users to pad their bottom line. While that will never happen, they are trying to cover it up by saying users requested the data caps.
    I know Cat and I have argued this over and over...and it's not the amount of the cap but just the CAP in general. Once you allow one to do it others follow and soon we will see the caps get smaller and smaller. They increase packages, raise prices and drop a cap - all following in the line of the future.

  7. #7
    Ohh Hell yeah.. Sava700's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Somewhere
    Posts
    24,051
    Another article I read over on CNN

    Cisco recently forecast that video on-demand usage will double every 2 1/2 years. AT&T said its customers are using more broadband as data-intensive video services like Netflix become more popular. Video currently makes up 40% of all Internet traffic and will exceed 91% by 2014, according to Cisco.

    Though typical broadband users don't come close to approaching the caps now, the increase in average video consumption will undoubtedly cause a greater number of users to exceed their limits in the coming years.

    That could force broadband providers to raise their caps in the future if customers begin to complain.
    To head off a backlash, AT&T is sending customers alerts when they reached 65%, 90% and 100% of their data allotment each month. The company is also giving customers an undefined grace period before it charges them for another 50 GB. AT&T also is allowing customers to check their data usage online.
    I really enjoyed that last part.. the meter they will put up so you can monitor your usage.. hell mine with Comcast hasn't worked in half a year if not longer. I've called and complained and we walk through whatever trying to fix it for nearly 30mins or more and still don't work so as far as I'm concerned till the meter works I'll use whatever I want and never worry about the cap.

    http://money.cnn.com/2011/05/03/tech...caps/index.htm

  8. #8
    Moderator YeOldeStonecat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Somewhere along the shoreline in New England
    Posts
    50,960
    Quote Originally Posted by Sava700 View Post
    They increase packages, raise prices and drop a cap - all following in the line of the future.
    Yet their own example shows otherwise. Lets review shall we?
    DSL...lower speed (up to 6 megs), lower price, lower cap (150 gigs)
    U-Verse...higher speed (up to 24 megs where I am), higher price, higher cap (250 gigs)
    MORNING WOOD Lumber Company
    Guinness for Strength!!!

  9. #9
    Ohh Hell yeah.. Sava700's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Somewhere
    Posts
    24,051
    Quote Originally Posted by YeOldeStonecat View Post
    Yet their own example shows otherwise. Lets review shall we?
    DSL...lower speed (up to 6 megs), lower price, lower cap (150 gigs)
    U-Verse...higher speed (up to 24 megs where I am), higher price, higher cap (250 gigs)
    It's as of now.. you add a cap while not increasing bandwidth but at the same time higher price each year for the same speeds and you stifle innovation and the ability for the internet to grow or the digital usage to increase. Same setup with Comcast..they increase my monthly fee, don't increase my speed package but still keep a cap that may sound generous to many but is still a cap. It's not all about little jimmy and his torrent usage.. torrents are hardly a issue any more when you compare it to video streaming and HD content.

  10. #10
    Between Light & Shadows Unholy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Somewhere Over There
    Posts
    2,819
    I dropped them for Sonic.net. Uncapped 20Mbps ADSL2+ depending on distance & POTS for about $53 a month still using AT&T's lines. No caps yet and better service through the same lines.
    "I was once banned from a bookstore for moving all the bibles to fiction"

  11. #11
    Assistant Admin Ken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Tampa
    Posts
    12,112
    Just some curiosities... (And when I say cable TV, I'm using it as a generic for Cable, FIOS, Satellite, etc...)

    I wonder how much bandwidth cable TV uses...

    I wonder if they will soon adjust cable TV prices according to how much time a person has their TV on... I actually know people that haven't turned their TV off in ...a couple of years...

    How does cable TV compare to internet TV... Is the amount of bandwidth different...

    Just some things for you guys to think about...

  12. #12
    Ohh Hell yeah.. Sava700's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Somewhere
    Posts
    24,051
    Quote Originally Posted by Ken View Post
    Just some curiosities... (And when I say cable TV, I'm using it as a generic for Cable, FIOS, Satellite, etc...)

    I wonder how much bandwidth cable TV uses...

    I wonder if they will soon adjust cable TV prices according to how much time a person has their TV on... I actually know people that haven't turned their TV off in ...a couple of years...

    How does cable TV compare to internet TV... Is the amount of bandwidth different...

    Just some things for you guys to think about...
    Depends if the cable TV is commercial free or not.. I'm sure there are a lot of factors that come into play for differences but a pay per use scale for internet is NOT what we need cause you can bet the amounts will be really inflated for what they should be. Biggest problem most don't understand is broadband (3mbps downspeed average) isn't available to many people in this country alone. There are people in this area that are still on dialup cause that is all they can get unless you go with a Sat co and pay an insane amount for a very VERY low capped usage not to mention it isn't much better than dialup. I would imagin if the DSL/Cable providers push more into these rural area's they would acquire more customers which would help keep the prices low from a higher subscriber rate.

  13. #13
    A+, S+, M+, C+, CySA+ Shinobi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    4,436
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Philip View Post
    Shinobi, it is legal, as you agree that they can make changes to the ToS when you sign up....

    Hi Philip.. I read what you wrote, but here is the deal.. when I signed up with AT&T.. like 2 year ago, thier was nothing stated in regards to a "cap" in there TOS, nor that they could change the TOS without contacting me (the end user). And that is another thing. AT&T and other companies very rarely make there TOS known in the open, or send updates to their users as well in regards to TOS modification. A little song and dance? A little slight of hand? Very much so..

    To all of my IT colleagues, it does not help You, or anyone else by agreeing, supporting, accepting this sort of TOS modification and Caps. The majority of You get "unlimited" bandwidth now, and rather than these ISP's expanding their infrastructure (which they do not want to spend money on) and adding movie services and lowering their prices to be competitive, they would rather follow an unethical practice by undermining their competitors services and jacking up prices for you, the consumer, and give you far less.

    And as I have said to many supporters of this sort of ISP action(s), You don't think this will affect you.. down the road.. it will.
    _______________________________________________
    Vendor neutral certified in IT Project Management, IT Security, Cisco Networking, Cisco Security, Wide Area Networks, IPv6, IT Hardware, Unix, Linux, and Windows server administration

  14. #14
    Certified SG Addict
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    29,515
    I signed up for Netflix streaming on Saturday; found out about the new caps on Sunday. I'm sure I'll be paying $10 for extra 50 GB chunks for a good while.

  15. #15
    A+, S+, M+, C+, CySA+ Shinobi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    4,436
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Burke View Post
    I signed up for Netflix streaming on Saturday; found out about the new caps on Sunday. I'm sure I'll be paying $10 for extra 50 GB chunks for a good while.
    I love Netflix streaming.. and I'm sorry man that you have to spend more,, I'm sure shortly we all will, if this BS keeps up.
    _______________________________________________
    Vendor neutral certified in IT Project Management, IT Security, Cisco Networking, Cisco Security, Wide Area Networks, IPv6, IT Hardware, Unix, Linux, and Windows server administration

  16. #16
    Ohh Hell yeah.. Sava700's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Somewhere
    Posts
    24,051
    Quote Originally Posted by Burke View Post
    I signed up for Netflix streaming on Saturday; found out about the new caps on Sunday. I'm sure I'll be paying $10 for extra 50 GB chunks for a good while.
    They are stating that there is a undisclosed grace amount beyond the cap but that still doesn't make the cap right. As I stated a while back, how come those that don't hit the cap don't have adjustments done or what you didn't use isn't rolled over each month?

  17. #17
    Second Most EVIL YARDofSTUF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    70,003
    Quote Originally Posted by Shinobi View Post
    Hi Philip.. I read what you wrote, but here is the deal.. when I signed up with AT&T.. like 2 year ago, thier was nothing stated in regards to a "cap" in there TOS, nor that they could change the TOS without contacting me (the end user). And that is another thing. AT&T and other companies very rarely make there TOS known in the open, or send updates to their users as well in regards to TOS modification. A little song and dance? A little slight of hand? Very much so..
    I remember when FiOS and Uverse came out and we talked about caps, and the TOS was worded in a way to allow for future changes. Like most, they say they can edit it at anytime without warning. The ways that count as notifying customers are pretty vague as well. Its shady, but its not illegal.

  18. #18
    Moderator YeOldeStonecat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Somewhere along the shoreline in New England
    Posts
    50,960
    Quote Originally Posted by Shinobi View Post
    To all of my IT colleagues, it does not help You, or anyone else by agreeing, supporting, accepting this sort of TOS modification and Caps. The majority of You get "unlimited" bandwidth now, and rather than these ISP's expanding their infrastructure (which they do not want to spend money on) and adding movie services and lowering their prices to be competitive, they would rather follow an unethical practice by undermining their competitors services and jacking up prices for you, the consumer, and give you far less.

    And as I have said to many supporters of this sort of ISP action(s), You don't think this will affect you.. down the road.. it will.
    My views come from working with ISPs, their engineers, sales, being in their datacenters, and working as a strategic partner/reseller with them. With broadband, it never officially was an "all you can eat" package you could use 24x7, it was designed (as any ISP sells bandwidth) as an oversubscribed model. There is an understanding of accepted use. If an ISP has 500,000 customers...and every single one of those 500,000 customers gets online and starts doing bandwidth intensive stuff all at once..the ISP will have a meltdown of equipment...it cannot, literally, and business wise, dedicated full bandwidth to every single client it has. It's not financially feasible.

    There's a logical reason that "business grade connections" cost someone more than a home grade connection....primary reason is that it's expected you will use more of the ISP resources...you're using a much larger percentage of their bandwidth than the common home user.

    From a network management point of view, say you're in charge of the network for an office building of 500 staff. Over a few days, you notice a huge degradation in performance in your network...a very high percentage of employees are having problems getting their work done...in the line of business applications they run. You start troubleshooting the network in this building....and you find that 2 employees happen to have computers that are doing something that is generating exceptionally high amounts of traffic...bringing the network to its knees.
    Your options are:
    *fix those 2 computers so that they calm down....thus allowing the network to regain functionality, and the other 498 employees can now get back to productive work
    *or create a huge capitol expense for the business and upgrade the entire network with 10 gig fiber connections to each desktop...figuring that if you throw enough money and bandwidth into the network...it will become fat enough to accomodate those 2 heavy users and still allow the regular users to do their work. But...what's to prevent those 2 users from realizing they now have more bandwidth and doing more to go suck all of that up now..and you're back to square one?

    Being an ISP is not lucrative. In the early days of broadband..there were many smaller ISPs around. Most people are just familiar with the big phone company and whatever cable provider is in their area. But there were usually many DSL ISP options. Years ago. Those numbers have dwindled. I miss those smaller ISPs....I had a lot of friends that worked at them, and I spent a lot of time in those data centers. I wish they were still around, but it's gotten too tough for them.

    Big bandwidth is expensive. A lot of people just say "Ah give us more bandwidth..oh yeah..but don't raise our prices". You work with in IT..you probably have an idea of what an DS3 costs...but with broadband speeds commonly getting above 20 megs now ...heck a DS3 will barely float 2 to 3 households. I sure as heck don't want to divide that 6 grand or higher monthly bill with just 2 of my neighbors!

    Something has to be maintained to keep traffic in check as things slowly grow. And due to our country being very large...and our infrastructure being old and poorly designed, our bandwidth infrastructure across our country has some difficulties. How many different carries does a packet have to travel across from one coast to another? Now compare this to some countries overseas that many people admire....due to having gigabit internet. It's probably a small country, with just a few large cities...dense population, easy to connect, and probably gov't subsidized..one ISP. Fairly easy to provide fat bandwidth for everyone.
    MORNING WOOD Lumber Company
    Guinness for Strength!!!

  19. #19
    SG Enthusiast horsemen_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Edwards Air force base Ca
    Posts
    1,488
    i dont see the cap listed on the dsl sites

    and my bill still say unlimited

    http://www.att.com/dsl/shop/compareD...nkLocation=BDY


    i have the dsl elite plan

  20. #20
    Administrator Philip's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Jacksonville, Florida, United States
    Posts
    10,663
    Blog Entries
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by YeOldeStonecat View Post
    I'd seen that article...and I don't believe it. I think they based those numbers on the big traditional p2p programs like old limewire...and they're not counting torrents. All I see and hear from kids and their massive iPod/MP3 music collections is that they got them on torrents.
    I generally believe it (with some degree of error, as with any study).
    P2P is mostly torrents, and not everyone is doing it. Even if there are 30% of internet users who actively use p2p for pirated content, and amass a couple of 100Gb of mp3s/movies/pr0n/etc. in the long run, most of it is just stored, and not using bandwidth once transferred.

Similar Threads

  1. Applying bandwidth caps
    By JohnCover in forum Networking Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 10-03-07, 06:36 PM
  2. Verizon Online Bandwidth caps?
    By Joel in forum General Broadband Forum
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 02-13-04, 04:35 PM
  3. Roadrunner Bandwidth Caps!!!!!!
    By molm in forum General Broadband Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-02-03, 07:01 AM
  4. Say no to bandwidth Caps.
    By Bob Carrick in forum General Broadband Forum
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 02-12-02, 07:03 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •