View Single Post
  #59 (permalink)  
Old January 28, 2011, 03:54 AM
sswilson's Avatar
sswilson sswilson is offline
Moderator
F@H
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Moncton NB
Posts: 14,416

My System Specs

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ipaine View Post
As far as I'm concerned there should be a change in the way we are charged but not based on usage. Call me crazy but they should not be selling you a certain speed without the ability to use it. As an example if they are advertising a 20Mb/s connection then theoretically you could download (upload left out of total for simplicities sake):

20Mb x 8 = 2.5MB/s
2.5MB/s x 86400 = 216GB/day
216 x 30 = 6480GB Monthly

So on a 20Mb/s connection you could at full speed download 6480GB in 30 days. Now do I think you should be allowed to do that much no, but there should be just a simple percentage, about say 25%. That would leave your limit at 1620GB/month. Now that is only using the connection you are paying for at full speed 1/4 of the time. Hell even 12.5% would still be 810GB a month. This is showing how much we are getting ripped off for the product we are purchasing. As it is right now most ISPs would have a cap of roughly 100GB/month, well that equates to only 1.5%. Even going to a measly 5% would still get you 324GB/month which at least is a little better.

How can anyone think it is ok to only allow you to use 1.5% of the connection you are paying for? If the CRTC wants to do anything useful then use this as a base for caps and force the companies to do at least say 10% and if they say their network can't handle that then they need to upgrade their network or not offer such speeds.

So again, at a simple 10% of an actual connection these are the monthly caps you would have to deal with:

5Mb/s = 162GB
10Mb/s = 324GB
15Mb/s = 486GB
20Mb/s = 648GB
25Mb/s = 810GB
50Mb/s = 1620GB
100Mb/s = 3240GB

But of course this would mean actually providing customers with the ability to use their connections and we all know it would not generate more profit and therefore won't happen.
I could get behind the idea of a fairly low percentage cap, although from the numbers you've thrown out, 10% is probably too high. Cut that in half and we might have what I would consider a reasonable compromise.

That said, your initial premise is flawed WRT offering high speeds with low(er) caps. I rarely go over 40G / month, but I still want the highest speed I can possibly get because I want to be able to get those 40G downloaded without having to wait overnight.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Perineum View Post
Uhhh..... why? There is absolutely nothing for you to be happy about. It's not going to impact you in any positive way whatsoever.

There is plenty for low(er) bandwidth users (like myself) to be happy about when it comes to putting a price on usage. Without a price on usage, folks like myself who don't even have a torrent program installed will end up paying more than our fair share for the upgrades required to service the 24/7 high bandwidth users.

The basic assumption of folks who want unlimitted bandwidth is that the big ISPs will just accept the lower profits.... not going to happen. If they're currently getting a 10% return, they'll continue to get a 10% return, but those costs will end up being spread out amongst all users regardless of actual use.

Why should I want to pay the same price for my 40G usage as somebody who uses 2T / month downloading pirated copyrighted content?
__________________
MSI Z87I Gaming AC / i5 4670K / 2X 4G Gskill 1866 DDR3 / XFX XTR 750 / EVGA GTX 680 SC+ 2GB / Intel DC S3700 200G / random 160G Sata HDD
Inwin 904 / Swiftech MCP655-b / Alphacool NexXxos XT45 120 Rad / 2X Scythe GT AP-15 / EK Supreme HF / Dell UltraSharp U2412M

Asrock AM1H-ITX / AM1 Athlon 5350 / 2X4G Gskill PC3-14900 / Intel 6235 Wi-Fi / 90W Targus Power Brick / 320G Seagate Momentus / Mini-Box M350 / 1X 22" Dell IPS / 1X 22" HP
Reply With Quote