EVE Search - Internet by the Gig?

All Channels

Out of Pod Experience

Internet by the Gig?

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Max Queso	Posted - 2009.04.11 00:51:00 - [1] Are we all doomed to pay for our internet by the Gig? I've heard of this here and there but this is the first I've seen headliner on it. I know Cox last year or maybe the year lobbied to make it mandatory but failed,.. but I knew then that that meant it was only a matter of time, especially with the way kids frivolously spam youtube links to each other in game chats. [url=http://www.spamblockedrmationweek.com/news/services/data/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=216500302&subSection=News]Time Warner tests $150/mo Unlimited[/url] Do most people even know how much bandwidth they use? Probably not a whole lot, but since I've been using DU Meter for the last few years I know that a heavy user like myself that games, is always on voicecomms, and downloads alot of movies can hit around 30-40Gig/mo even though there are many months that I don't hit 20. I wouldn't expect your standard socialnetworking youtuber to hit that higher mark, but that's only one person, not the rest of the family. Discuss.
Brea Lafail	Posted - 2009.04.11 01:00:00 - [2] Edited by: Brea Lafail on 11/04/2009 01:02:10 Remember when you had to pay for the amount of time you were connected? Yeah, that sucked. Paying for bandwidth makes sense to me. People who have torrents running 24/7 should pay more than people who occasionally watch something on youtube. Now, the question is are the new prices actually going to be fair? Im guessing not. P.S. Problem is when your grandma's computer gets hijacked by a bot net and runs up her bill. In before Ralara.
Jana Clant New Dawn Tribe New Eden Research	Posted - 2009.04.11 02:24:00 - [3] Heh, my country's ISPs are actually heading the opposite direction, had my bandwidth limitations completely removed about a year ago. New Eden Research, where your research gets done!
Verone Gallente Veto Corp	Posted - 2009.04.11 03:37:00 - [4] What the HELL??! Am I missing something, or is that a horrible rip off and are American ISPs useless? I pay 24 Quid a month, for umlimited, un throttled 24 meg broadband... and when I say unlimited I mean I've regularly used >100GB of data allowance in a month and my ISP haven't even battered an eyelid. Funnily enough I reset my router yesterday, and it's currently showing the following statistics : Quote: Uptime: 0 days, 23:45:51 Bandwidth (Up/Down) [kbps/kbps]: 2,412 / 24,743 Data Transferred (Sent/Received) [GB/GB]: 8.41 / 14.09 RoutedEthoA Type: ETHoA Uptime: 0 days, 23:45:51 IP Address: xx.xxx.xxx.xxx Data Transferred (Sent/Received) [GB/GB]: 8.41 / 14.09 I can't understand how internet in the US costs so much, am I missing something? \o/ EON FICTION WRITER OF THE YEAR! \o/ >>> THE LIFE OF AN OUTLAW <<<
Dong Ninja	Posted - 2009.04.11 04:08:00 - [5] American ISPs are ****s, pure and simple. There is no competition here because they carve up suburbs or cities and you then have only 1 ISP in the entire area and no other option. Hopefully this is changing in the future, and it has in my area, but much of the country is getting screwed by Comcast (our version of Virgin, or Ccks) and to a lesser extent Time Warner, and I'm thinking ATT and Verizon will follow suit until they find just how far they can push customers. I envy Europe for it's ISPs if nothing else. Originally by: Xen Gin Indeed, upgrading an MS OS is like taking a **** into a cake mixture, then complaining that it doesn't taste good when it's all done.
ceaon Gallente	Posted - 2009.04.11 04:22:00 - [6] i use since november 2008 year i user @ 585 gb
rValdez5987 Amarr 32nd Amarrian Imperial Navy Regiment.	Posted - 2009.04.11 04:50:00 - [7] copy pasting this first bit as it describes the situation Quote: As the government here in the US gets more and more controled by big business (rather than the people) this was bound to happen. Banks and home morgages; credit cards and 30% interest with hidden fees and surprise penalties; oil and power companies raising prices to extortionistic levels (while they make historical profits); heck even cell phones companies have pretty much followed the credit card companies lead (there are so many sneaky overage charges and hidden fees in my cell phone contract, I doubt even a lawyer could find them all). Sure, you can change services, but as each company sees how much money there is too be made by the above practices, they jump on the band wagon too. You can complain to the government (aka 65% companies 35% us), but they will just have a silent chuckle while they nod in agreement to playcate you. Heck, we can't even get a life and death service (hospitals, health care, health insurance and medicines) taken care of because the huge greedy corporations have such a foothold in the lawmaking process now that they block most reform laws, and put more and more loopholes in existing ones. So good luck with the internet stuff. Like president Obama said in a recent interview, "the sad thing is, all of this is legal". I think what he meant by that was, that over many years big business, using their vast influence in governement, has "changed" the laws to make and this type of "theft" technically legal. And since you can pretty much run any business from any part of the world now, greedy corperate owners pledge aleigence to no country, let alone it's citizens, they are only loyal to their profits and the power that brings with it. . . Ive used around 50 gbs in about 9 days, and that's bandwidth used LEGALLY. I am a power user that uses my computer for pretty much everything. I pay for the fastest internet connection in my area 15mbps/2mbps, and my particular isp has not instituted any limits or caps. As long as I obey the law and don't exceed excessive bandwidth (500gb-1TB per month for private connections) I'm fine. I am vehemently against bandwidth caps. You should only be required to pay for the speed at which you can access information, not the amount of information you access. There are better ways to crack down on illegal file sharing. Using caps against illegal file sharing is a clever excuse to charge users MORE for LESS while failing to upgrade infrastructure, which used to be REQUIRED UNDER LAW until George w Bush got in office. The republicans have done away with all laws pertaining to net neutrality, how isps have to use part of profits to improve their infrastructure. As such we are behind the rest of the world in our telecommunications development. The sooner that President Obama reinstates the laws the Bushs administration destroyed, the better. If he doesn't do it soon, then we will be fighting against aggressive caps, and filtering that prevents us from accessing web pages of companies that haven't paid the ISP to be preferred. This of course will eventually lead to censorship based on MONEY. Information must be kept free for all from those who have nothing to those who are rich. The only requirement should be a computer and a wifi hotspot. Current American companies will take everything they can get from the average citizen in terms of money. They don't care about us at all. Only their wallet. It's unacceptable, and if this is true capitalism, then I'm turning to socialism. Sorry if this is too political, I'm just getting fed up with how pathetic the businessmen in this country are. None of them seem to know how to properly run their companies as they are blinded by dollar signs.
HankMurphy Minmatar Pelennor Enterprises	Posted - 2009.04.11 06:16:00 - [8] Originally by: Max Queso Are we all doomed to pay for our internet by the Gig? If ISP customer's continue to pay for the service no matter what terms and conditions the ISP alters/implements, you betcha A companies customers have more power to shape their business/market than anyone. If we become unhappy and refuse to pay for some new crap deal then the companies are forced to adjust in light of consumer **yness. If we roll over and take it like the empathic sheeple we are (we do for most things) then yes, get ready to start budgeting your downloads. ---------- Hey, sewer rat may taste like pumpkin pie, but I'd never know 'cause I wouldn't eat the filthy motherf*er.
Rawr Cristina Caldari Naqam Exalted.	Posted - 2009.04.11 07:51:00 - [9] Quote: The new pricing options included $15 per month for 1 GB of data a month That makes UK ISPs look bad... Well, I suppose they are bad, they're just cheap (you can even get it for free on phone package deals) - Contagious -
Brea Lafail	Posted - 2009.04.11 13:10:00 - [10] Edited by: Brea Lafail on 11/04/2009 13:15:46 Edited by: Brea Lafail on 11/04/2009 13:11:13 Originally by: rValdez5987 Ive used around 50 gbs in about 9 days, and that's bandwidth used LEGALLY. I am a power user that uses my computer for pretty much everything. I pay for the fastest internet connection in my area 15mbps/2mbps, and my particular isp has not instituted any limits or caps. As long as I obey the law and don't exceed excessive bandwidth (500gb-1TB per month for private connections) I'm fine. I disagree entirely. Why should one customer that uses 160GB/month be charged the same as another who uses 20GB/month? Better to give everyone the top-tier connection speed (as far as I know, this doesn't cost the ISP any extra) and bill by the GB so people who put more strain on the network pay for a larger portion. A reason for north american ISPs charging so much more, other than because they can, is that the average population density is much lower than the UK and most of europe and there is government pressure for them to offer service to rural areas, so more infrastructure is required for the same number of customers. P.S. I do agree about forcing ISPs to invest in new infrastructure. In Canada, they're trying to get the government to pay for upgrades and everyone was like "lolwut? So you can charge us $40/month for basic service?" 2nd edit: Now that the link in the op has been fixed, the new pricing structure appears to be fair and competitive with what I currently get. In before Ralara.
Draeca Tharri and Co.	Posted - 2009.04.11 14:39:00 - [11] That's quite damn messed up. I'd get a vdsl2 connection with unlimited bandwidth for 150 per month from my ISP here in europe
ceaon Gallente	Posted - 2009.04.11 14:54:00 - [12] Edited by: ceaon on 11/04/2009 15:00:05 Originally by: Draeca I'd get a vdsl2 connection with unlimited bandwidth for 150 per month from my ISP here in europe depend where you live you can get 2xvdsl2 connections for 150 eidt i want share whit you some Romanian prices http://rdslink.ro/fiber/fiber.htm first 3 months 50Mb/s 28 LEI/month 1Ç=4.1189 lei that are 7Ç (no vat included) after first 3 months you pay ÿÿ15Ç
ReaperOfSly Gallente Zetsubou Corp	Posted - 2009.04.11 14:56:00 - [13] Honestly, I'd rather have a pay-by-the-gigabyte system than a FUP. I use the internet far more than the average person, and would rather pay more for a better service, rather than get punished when I exceed what the ISP thinks is "fair". 15 dollars per gigabyte is insane though. If it was a pound a gigabyte (not unreasonable, given that a lot of ISPs cap at ~50GB/month on services costing less than ú50/month), I'd be happy. ____________________
Brea Lafail	Posted - 2009.04.11 15:14:00 - [14] Originally by: ReaperOfSly Honestly, I'd rather have a pay-by-the-gigabyte system than a FUP. I use the internet far more than the average person, and would rather pay more for a better service, rather than get punished when I exceed what the ISP thinks is "fair". 15 dollars per gigabyte is insane though. If it was a pound a gigabyte (not unreasonable, given that a lot of ISPs cap at ~50GB/month on services costing less than ú50/month), I'd be happy. The $15 thing is their basic service, the over-limit charge is $2/GB. All their other monthly plans it's only $1/GB to a max of $75. In before Ralara.
rValdez5987 Amarr 32nd Amarrian Imperial Navy Regiment.	Posted - 2009.04.11 18:03:00 - [15] Edited by: rValdez5987 on 11/04/2009 18:05:05 Originally by: Brea Lafail Edited by: Brea Lafail on 11/04/2009 13:15:46 Edited by: Brea Lafail on 11/04/2009 13:11:13 Originally by: rValdez5987 Ive used around 50 gbs in about 9 days, and that's bandwidth used LEGALLY. I am a power user that uses my computer for pretty much everything. I pay for the fastest internet connection in my area 15mbps/2mbps, and my particular isp has not instituted any limits or caps. As long as I obey the law and don't exceed excessive bandwidth (500gb-1TB per month for private connections) I'm fine. I disagree entirely. Why should one customer that uses 160GB/month be charged the same as another who uses 20GB/month? Better to give everyone the top-tier connection speed (as far as I know, this doesn't cost the ISP any extra) and bill by the GB so people who put more strain on the network pay for a larger portion. A reason for north american ISPs charging so much more, other than because they can, is that the average population density is much lower than the UK and most of europe and there is government pressure for them to offer service to rural areas, so more infrastructure is required for the same number of customers. P.S. I do agree about forcing ISPs to invest in new infrastructure. In Canada, they're trying to get the government to pay for upgrades and everyone was like "lolwut? So you can charge us $40/month for basic service?" 2nd edit: Now that the link in the op has been fixed, the new pricing structure appears to be fair and competitive with what I currently get. I pay top dollar for my speed of information access. I have the knowledge to find what im looking for quickly. I have fluent with how PC's work and the internet is extremely useful for what I do. Why should the average joe who knows nothing when it comes to computers be given the same speed of access when he cant possibly use all of it. There are multiple factors when it comes to what bandwidth can be handled in terms of data transmission, and multiple metrics that can be used to determine whats excessive. In a way 500gb is a bandwidth cap. It's whats considered excessive. Personally I use no more then 100GB a month. This month has been extremely heavy as I have purchased a few games on steam (3-10gb each ) My point is that you should only have to pay for the speed at which you access information, not for the amount of information you access. Allowing people to restrict the amount of information or data you access due to financial cost is just one more step towards censorship (beyond the US being the only country to have gotten rid of its net neutrality law in order to turn the internet into a big commercial ****pile ) If they are gonna do a bandwidth cap, then they should put a cap on the GB's of torrents that you can download per month. I know they can filter the traffic, much less record the amount of it. They could also limit rapid shares and the like. The important thing is that those of us who rely on online digital distribution of video games through providers such as steam, ealink, or impulse stores, are not penalized by new caps would essentially kill these businesses. (edit: my english sucks, im not correcting the errors just ignore them lol)
Brea Lafail	Posted - 2009.04.11 18:32:00 - [16] Originally by: rValdez5987 I pay top dollar for my speed of information access. I have the knowledge to find what im looking for quickly. I have fluent with how PC's work and the internet is extremely useful for what I do. Why should the average joe who knows nothing when it comes to computers be given the same speed of access when he cant possibly use all of it. Why shouldn't the average joe get the same access? If he only uses 1GB/s of his 30GB/s allotment, it doesn't affect you at all. Originally by: rValdez5987 My point is that you should only have to pay for the speed at which you access information, not for the amount of information you access. Allowing people to restrict the amount of information or data you access due to financial cost is just one more step towards censorship (beyond the US being the only country to have gotten rid of its net neutrality law in order to turn the internet into a big commercial **pile ) Oh, please. How much data could someone need in order to be an informed citizen? You sound like one of these computer engineer types who think "access to technology" is a fundamental human right. Originally by:** rValdez5987 If they are gonna do a bandwidth cap, then they should put a cap on the GB's of torrents that you can download per month. I know they can filter the traffic, much less record the amount of it. They could also limit rapid shares and the like. You know a lot about computers, so you must know that it would be easy to get around such limits unless ISPs put considerable resources into it; many torrent clients already encrypt packet headers for exactly this reason. Originally by: rValdez5987 The important thing is that those of us who rely on online digital distribution of video games through providers such as steam, ealink, or impulse stores, are not penalized by new caps would essentially kill these businesses. You mean those businesses that already save massive amounts of money by not having to produce and ship physical copies? Yeah, they might have to cut prices to stay competitive, but that's far from pushing them under. In before Ralara.
KingsGambit Caldari Knights	Posted - 2009.04.12 10:56:00 - [17] Originally by: Verone I pay 24 Quid a month, for umlimited, un throttled 24 meg broadband... and when I say unlimited I mean I've regularly used >100GB of data allowance in a month and my ISP haven't even battered an eyelid. Are you with Be? If so, out of curiosity, what is your actual max download speed? The 24mbit as I understand it is not actually possible in real-world and goes down with distance from exchange and line quality, etc. Are they a good ISP? What are your pings/latency times like for gaming? And do you know off-hand roughly how far you are from your exchange? I'm desperate to leave Virgin Media. Though I can see 20mbit download speeds I'm paying 1.5x more than you are and believe I'm getting the worst, most unreliable service in UK ISP history. -------------
Dred 'Morte New European Regiment Southern Cross Alliance	Posted - 2009.04.12 15:01:00 - [18] Edited by: Dred ''Morte on 12/04/2009 15:06:34 Picture I used to have 40GB monthly limit and 10Mb connection, with 1am-9am being HappyHours (download/upload) not counted. Now neither uploads nor downloads are counted. Speed is 20-30Mb (can't recall...), though in practise I never get more than 8MB(16Mb)/s. I'm quite happy. The service is ge[/url]tting better, not worse.
rValdez5987 Amarr 32nd Amarrian Imperial Navy Regiment.	Posted - 2009.04.12 15:20:00 - [19] Originally by: Brea Lafail Originally by: rValdez5987 I pay top dollar for my speed of information access. I have the knowledge to find what im looking for quickly. I have fluent with how PC's work and the internet is extremely useful for what I do. Why should the average joe who knows nothing when it comes to computers be given the same speed of access when he cant possibly use all of it. Why shouldn't the average joe get the same access? If he only uses 1GB/s of his 30GB/s allotment, it doesn't affect you at all. Originally by: rValdez5987 My point is that you should only have to pay for the speed at which you access information, not for the amount of information you access. Allowing people to restrict the amount of information or data you access due to financial cost is just one more step towards censorship (beyond the US being the only country to have gotten rid of its net neutrality law in order to turn the internet into a big commercial **pile ) Oh, please. How much data could someone need in order to be an informed citizen? You sound like one of these computer engineer types who think "access to technology" is a fundamental human right. Originally by:** rValdez5987 If they are gonna do a bandwidth cap, then they should put a cap on the GB's of torrents that you can download per month. I know they can filter the traffic, much less record the amount of it. They could also limit rapid shares and the like. You know a lot about computers, so you must know that it would be easy to get around such limits unless ISPs put considerable resources into it; many torrent clients already encrypt packet headers for exactly this reason. Originally by: rValdez5987 The important thing is that those of us who rely on online digital distribution of video games through providers such as steam, ealink, or impulse stores, are not penalized by new caps would essentially kill these businesses. You mean those businesses that already save massive amounts of money by not having to produce and ship physical copies? Yeah, they might have to cut prices to stay competitive, but that's far from pushing them under. You get what you pay for. Im already paying 115 dollars a month for the best internet in my area. id be **ed if they simply capped me at 50gb and started telling me how to use my internet access. Id also be **ed if suddenly average joe had the same speed available. Mankind only has the rights that they fight for, but access to technology, and access to information should be unrestricted. But no matter. I'm far from poor, any bandwidth cap that they institute can be defeated by paying the ISP enough money. I just pity the people who cant afford to pay as much as I can. Then again I guess thats their fault, not mine.
Atomos Darksun Damage Incorporated.	Posted - 2009.04.12 16:00:00 - [20] K, for those who are defending this... If it's such a grand idea, why isn't the rest of the world practicing this idea like us? Originally by: Amoxin My vent is talking to me in a devil voice... CONVERT TO LINKIFICATION! http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameb
Grez Minmatar Core Contingency	Posted - 2009.04.12 17:11:00 - [21] Thank god I'm on a business package - no such rubbish for me! --- Grez: I shot the sheriff Kalazar: But I could not lock the Deputy BECAUSE OF FALCON
rValdez5987 Amarr 32nd Amarrian Imperial Navy Regiment.	Posted - 2009.04.12 17:55:00 - [22] Originally by: Atomos Darksun K, for those who are defending this... If it's such a grand idea, why isn't the rest of the world practicing this idea like us? The rest of the world isn't as greedy. Then again I could be wrong and all of humanity could just be one worthless blob of people.
Taedrin Gallente Nabaal Engineering of Haarsuk	Posted - 2009.04.12 19:12:00 - [23] The market price for bandwidth is approximately 1 USD per GB of bandwidth. If you are willing to pay an inordinate amount of money for a dedicated line, the price goes down to .14 USD per GB. I would LOVE to be able to pay per GB at a fair price. This is also the last thing that ISPs want, as their profits would plummet since the average user only uses a couple GB of bandwidth a month.
Dred 'Morte New European Regiment Southern Cross Alliance	Posted - 2009.04.12 21:19:00 - [24] Edited by: Dred ''Morte on 12/04/2009 21:22:13 Originally by: rValdez5987 Originally by: Atomos Darksun K, for those who are defending this... If it's such a grand idea, why isn't the rest of the world practicing this idea like us? The rest of the world isn't as greedy. Then again I could be wrong and all of humanity could just be one worthless blob of people. No, the rest of the world is just as greedy. The rest of the world however, doesn't have the same ****ty laws and taxes and there is actually COMPETITION between ISPs. I know it. Just in my zone here in the city of Evora (Portugal) which is fairly poor, there are 3 or more ISPs to choose from, some places more than 5. In fact, competition is so fierce, that recently my ISP got bought by a Canadian corp who's paying it's debts. Other ISPs are already upgrading their lines with fiber optics and HD TV is arriving now aswell, this in a country with 4(!) channels for normal TV (cable has 30+).
Chainsaw Plankton IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE	Posted - 2009.04.13 03:27:00 - [25] Originally by: Atomos Darksun K, for those who are defending this... If it's such a grand idea, why isn't the rest of the world practicing this idea like us? you pay for electricity based on how much you use, you pay for fuel based on how much you use before it was just too much a pain the ass to monitor every single customers up/down speed all the time and record how much bandwidth they were using. Now 1TB hard drives are now under $100 and I doubt it is too hard to find database monkeys to put the system in order. My issues are how did they come up at their current price per gb claim. Also they have a government protected monopoly on cable services. only competition coming from $20 for a 5gb/month could certainly take users away from dial-up (do people still use that **?) services, where many users pay I think around $40/month, and dont use 20gb/month and end up paying less. I think it is just a we provide ty service (movies/tv on demand) and people are downloading movies/shows/games from the internet (legally and illegally) lets ** in their cheerios (and make a bunch of money). how their business model will scale with the internet is anyone's guess.
AlleyKat Gallente Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams	Posted - 2009.04.13 14:45:00 - [26] Originally by: KingsGambit Are you with Be? If so, out of curiosity, what is your actual max download speed? The 24mbit as I understand it is not actually possible in real-world and goes down with distance from exchange and line quality, etc. Are they a good ISP? What are your pings/latency times like for gaming? And do you know off-hand roughly how far you are from your exchange? I'm desperate to leave Virgin Media. Though I can see 20mbit download speeds I'm paying 1.5x more than you are and believe I'm getting the worst, most unreliable service in UK ISP history. Not to answer Verone, but I am with Be and as I may have said before: it's very good and if you have an annual contract, it's ú21.50 for the 'pro' arrangement. Virgin are terrible. No discussion required. AK EVE-ONLINE VIDEO-MAKING TUTORIALS
MyOwnSling Gallente Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2009.04.13 14:56:00 - [27] I'm not sure where you other Americans live, but where I am I have the choice of at least three (3) different ISP's. I see TV commercials of one ISP insulting the other. The only thing is that each one requires a different infrastructure (DSL vs cable vs sattelite). I have yet to see a BW cap and I'm a little skeptical of such an idea. ------------- Originally by: Puupuu dude... your face...
Ginako Southern Cross Empire	Posted - 2009.04.13 19:22:00 - [28] Looks like Congress is gettin in on this. http://www.tomshardware.com/news/time-warner-cable-isp-congress,7535.html#xtor=RSS-181 Please resize sig to a maximum file size no greater than 24000 bytes - Mitnal BAH! - Me
Max Queso	Posted - 2009.04.16 04:15:00 - [29] Good find Ginako, maybe Congress will do their job?
Aricaan Gallente Playboy Enterprises Dark Taboo	Posted - 2009.04.16 08:54:00 - [30] does anyone know how to measure how much you have transferred in a month? I dont have cable TV, so I end up watching a lot of YouTube and movies off Netflix. Would be curious to know how much I use. Down with the Caldari devils!

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.