AfterDawn: News

That video you're watching just might break the internet

Do you use your broadband internet connection for video? If so you might partly responsible for "breaking" the internet within the next few years according to more than half of the 372 telecommunications professionals surveyed by Tellabs and research firm IDC. More than 10% think it will happen within the next 2 years.

So what's the solution? It seems that nearly half of those surveyed believe it's up to ISPs, either through traffic inspection and prioritization or simply charging more for using "excess bandwidth."



"The findings of this survey make it very plain that bandwidth is not infinite," said Lee Doyle, Group Vice President and General Manager, Network Infrastructure and Security Products and Services, IDC. "Unless there is sufficient investment into new infrastructure, the increased bandwidth demands of new advanced services could well outstrip capacity."

Dan Kelly, executive vice president of global products for Tellabs is quick to point the finger at consumers for causing the problem. He said "Internet access has become essential for millions of Americans and the appetite for bandwidth is putting pressure on service provider networks."

But it's hard to feel much sympathy for ISPs. How many times have you seen a TV commercial for broadband internet that didn't mention online video?

Written by: Rich Fiscus @ 18 Jun 2008 21:18

• Previous article

• TidalTV brings look and feel of TV to your web browser

• Next article

• TI demonstrates lamp-free 1080p DLP projector

• 37 comments

• canuckerz

  Its not we the consumers fault its cheap isp's relying on ageing infrastructure. This is comcast's HD TV all over again.

  18.6.2008 21:44 #1

• amf0802

  "Unless there is sufficient investment into new infrastructure, the increased bandwidth demands of new advanced services could well outstrip capacity."
  
  Then why the hell is it the consumer's fault? It would be the providers fault for not investing in a more capable infrastructure. If I pay for limitless bandwidth, I expect that. If they don't have enough bandwidth to go around, then find a way to make more, i.e. build a better infrastructure. If they are so scared something so essential will 'break' then take the necessary steps, don't simply point fingers.

  18.6.2008 22:08 #2

• chaos_zzz

  ppl will demand more as time goes by, i just this takes a long time so isp's all over the world can handle it

  18.6.2008 22:29 #3

• iluvendo

  Either kiss streaming HD goodbye or pay extra for it.

  18.6.2008 22:59 #4

• Finnisher

  Pay to get certain bandwidth, then pay some extra for actually using it. Makes perfect sense (not).
  
  Yes, sure it's the consumers fault for demanding more quantity and quality. It's called "progress" but ISP's don't seem to be too familiar with it.

  18.6.2008 23:21 #5

• navi1199

  with quality comes price, broadband isn't cheap i want to get what i paid for.
  
  Quote:"Unless there is sufficient investment into new infrastructure, the increased bandwidth demands of new advanced services could well outstrip capacity."
  hey smart ass... people wants faster internet i see perfect investment opportunity there and plenty of money to be made. those guys are just lazy bums who want money by just sitting around offering us various things then blaming us for taking the offer. good job.
  
  EDIT: hmm.. just noticed someone in here said the same thing xD

  19.6.2008 00:09 #6

• snowlock

  Originally posted by canuckerz: Its not we the consumers fault its cheap isp's relying on ageing infrastructure.qft
  
  
  isp's should quit complaining and start making changes immediately.

  19.6.2008 00:13 #7

• DTN107

  I wish the idiots running North Carolina would make up their mind and allow Verizon Fios to be here.
  
  Roadrunner (aka Comcast) is already showing signs of limiting bandwidth in the future.

  19.6.2008 00:16 #8

• jellaby

  Just you watch...it will be cheaper to hire the lawyers and lobbyists to "regulate for consumer equal access" than it will be for these companies to make the necessary investments for the future, and the current congress we have will happily accomodate.
  
  The ending of this story probably won't be good.

  19.6.2008 00:19 #9

• ZippyDSM

  the ISPs are doing it to them selfs
  
  looky 50Mbps fios at a cheap rate
  http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/200...fios-party.html
  
  ----
  The US is not helping itself letting the corporations run the net infrastructure they put off badly needed upgrades and are now crying they can't handle the bandwidth now its quite sad....they need to slow down and start charging more for bandwidth faster than 500KBPS and charge less for 300 and under.
  
  it might suck to pay more but land lines are headed for over saturation like satlite net is,while its not that ridiculous yet (150$ a month for 200KBPS that switches to 5KBPS when you dare use it)
  
  We are getting to a point where we need reasonable plan rates to distribute bandwidth for the entire populace for the coming decade until they either realize they HAVE to upgrade or invest in wireless.

  19.6.2008 01:52 #10

• nobrainer

  as already stated its the isp's greed and faliure to upgrade that is causing this. we need many more isp's to create competition to force them to upgrade across the USA, here in the uk its not as bad as BT (uk telecom) was forced to unbundle the local loop, which was paid for by tax payers monies, so now many isp's offer an llu service of upto 24mbps and soon fiber will be more common place offering upto 100mbps.
  
  the thing in the uk that really sucks, is net neutrality, as throttling, usage allowances, traffic shaping, deep packet inspection's are common place, so you have this unbelievably fast connection but you are not allowed to use it to protect isp's profits.
  
  if you reside in the UK and your local exchange is unbundled BE Unlimited is by far the most net neutral isp out there.
  
  UK exchange Performance checker: http://usertools.plus.net/exchanges/
  Exchange Search services: http://www.samknows.com/broadband/search.php
  
  

  The BPI Are: SONY, UNIVERSAL, WARNER GROUP, EMI.
  The RIAA Soundexchange Are: SONY, UNIVERSAL, WARNER GROUP, EMI.
  The IFPI Are: The same anti consumer lot as listed above!
  The MPAA Are: SONY, UNIVERSAL, WARNER GROUP, DISNEY, PARAMOUNT, FOX.

  19.6.2008 04:22 #11

• gallagher

  where is my $100 + monthly bill for comcast going? They are rolling in the dough

  19.6.2008 04:32 #12

• mspurloc

  A. I've been saying this for five years. Glad somebody is finally realizing it.
  B. The ISPs are lazy, cheap and greedy. It's their fault. Don't charge us more, just CREATE MORE BANDWIDTH! This moronic idea that charging people more for a resource they'll keep using anyway is the same stupid crock you get from the drooling cretins that argue for higher gas taxes. They're all either idiots who don't think, or they're just trying to cash in.

  19.6.2008 10:10 #13

• xempler

  How about the ISP's take action before problems occur. Instead of reacting to problems, be proactive.
  
  The internet is constantly changing...with YouTube, Facebook, etc online useage is growing at a massive rate.
  
  ISP's can't point the finger at the consumer for THEIR lack of insight to update their infrastructre to meet demand.
  
  Here's a thought, how about spending those millions of dollars on advertisement stating how FAST, and RELIABLE their interenet is and actually use that money to lay down some pipes so we the consumer actually have FAST and RELIABLE service.

  19.6.2008 10:10 #14

• ZippyDSM

  Originally posted by mspurloc: A. I've been saying this for five years. Glad somebody is finally realizing it.
  B. The ISPs are lazy, cheap and greedy. It's their fault. Don't charge us more, just CREATE MORE BANDWIDTH! This moronic idea that charging people more for a resource they'll keep using anyway is the same stupid crock you get from the drooling cretins that argue for higher gas taxes. They're all either idiots who don't think, or they're just trying to cash in.
  and in order to do that they have to spend millions to build the infrastructure and in some cases millions more to rebuild it.
  
  anyway you look at it they are going to have to start charging more money for bandwidth.

  19.6.2008 10:54 #15

• emugamer

  If they advertise high speeds and that's what I am paying for, and I decide to use what I am paying for, then they shouldn't charge me more when I can't have it. They should cap my bandwidth and charge me less.
  
  If they told everyone that it is going to cost more to use the bandwidth, and everyone pays more, thereby expecting to use all of their bandwidth, then we will all be in the same boat. Not enough bandwidth. First - they need to get a plan together for infrastructure upgrades, find out what the total cost will be, begin the upgrades and then spread the cost of increased bandwidth to the customers. They should only charge for what they actually have available. And they should only charge the customers who are actually tied to larger pipes. For example, if in a year they plan on opening up larger pipes for 500 of their customers, then they shouldn't be charging all 1,000 of their customers increased rates.

  19.6.2008 11:53 #16

• ZippyDSM

  emugamer
  thats coming to be a huge problem they can not sale super high speeds on the cheap without the infrastructure to back it up for thousands if not millions of consumers.
  
  They should slot off the KBPS to plan rate, under 300KBPS is under 20, over 1000KBPS is over 50$, slowing the rate of high speed user growth will help balance out the things for a while while they try and fix them.

  19.6.2008 12:00 #17

• plutonash

  Originally posted by ZippyDSM: the ISPs are doing it to them selfs
  
  looky 50Mbps fios at a cheap rate
  http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/200...fios-party.html
  
  ----
  The US is not helping itself letting the corporations run the net infrastructure they put off badly needed upgrades and are now crying they can't handle the bandwidth now its quite sad....they need to slow down and start charging more for bandwidth faster than 500KBPS and charge less for 300 and under.
  
  it might suck to pay more but land lines are headed for over saturation like satlite net is,while its not that ridiculous yet (150$ a month for 200KBPS that switches to 5KBPS when you dare use it)
  
  We are getting to a point where we need reasonable plan rates to distribute bandwidth for the entire populace for the coming decade until they either realize they HAVE to upgrade or invest in wireless.I can't agree with that statement. All the service providers were giving money by the government (our money) for upgrades. I'm certain that part of the AT&T mergering back together deal hinged on this. If thats the case why is my dad only option for high speed internet is a crap 1.5 MB DSL connection when he lives in a suburb of Cleveland. The speeds here in the US are awful and some consider me lucky because I get 15MB down from Time Warner and that still sucks ass.

  19.6.2008 12:01 #18

• 21Q

  Well considering that America is behind in technology, it's not surprising. In japan what we pay for dsl is what they pay for T1. And most other countries have a better infrastructure then America. It isn't the consumer's fault for demanding something that should already exist. In my opnion the internet should be free in the first place.

  19.6.2008 12:05 #19

• ZippyDSM

  plutonash
  And because of lack of oversight that money has been mostly "misplaced" and they do not "have" to do a damn thing abotu the current situation and the way the can't see past today profits corps run they would rater scuttle the current infrastructure to the point they can charge 100 times as much for bandwidth, there is also a chance can use the "antaquitaed" infrastructure as a fulcrum to make the tiered net happen.
  
  What I am suggesting is slow the growth of super high speed (anything above 20000KBPS) by making it more costly, on the back end of it lower the price for anything below 300KBPS, the US infrastructure needs to get rid of dailup more than it needs 30$ 10Mbps fios.......
  
  Of coarse what will probably happen is they create caps and limits and remove the unlimited aspects from all services so they then can artificially create pro plans which are not so limited at 4X the cost.
  
  Something bad is coming, a balancing act is better than all the main ISPs getting together and selecting the lube....
  
  21Q
  
  *head desk*
  
  You do realize that Asia has a quarter or less of the surface area to pipe lines in, there is a logical reason why most of the Asian countries flogged using speed and serviceable areas in less than 5 years it dose not have anything to do with government or business you have a small area with huge population centers making it ahell of alot easier to do.
  
  In the US not only to do you have large areas of nothing but sparace population centers, no one company has the money to put the pipes in to provide the services that are not there or under serviced right now, while they have screwed up the truth of the matter is they can not afford to keep giving away supper fast connections on the cheap.
  
  There are MANY issues in the US net infrastructure one of the key things coming up is a balance of bandwidth, the cheaper you make the super high speed the more people will be on it and the quicker it will be used up.
  
  I am not calling for metered rates or heavy caps or what not just anything over 1000KBPS needs to be over 50 a month, anything under 300KBPS needs be under 20 a month, you can't build infrastructure on the money you have for maintanace and what you run your business on.
  
  They are greedy but only a bit more than sheeple and almost as dumb, but the fact remains we don't want them to move to something like Satilite DSL caps there needs to be a balance, and price plans to speeds will do it.

  19.6.2008 12:24 #20

• simpsim1

  Speaking as a UK user, we're being completely conned by our ISPs. The ISPs have absolutely no interest in what quality of service we get, just as long as they can keep the new 12 month contracts coming in (24 months in some cases) It's all about them making money by squeezing as many users into our already overcrowded networks and then making people feel guilty about using the bandwidth they paid for so that the networks don't go into complete meltdown.
  
  So the next time your ISP gives you a load of bull***t saying that it's your fault, remember all the advertising about "Unlimited" bandwidth services that they used to suck you in.
  
  Want somebody else to blame? All the UK's telecommunications network is owned and run (With the exception of Hull) by BT. They have invested none very little of their vast profits into making any major improvements in our telecoms infrastructure, so it's no wonder we're at the situation we are at now. Note also, that BT themselves are pushing Video-on-demand over the 'net.

  19.6.2008 12:59 #21

• ZippyDSM

  simpsim1
  this is true to a point the main trouble right now if MAKING them deal with infrastructure issues from there money can be found but without a stick to flog them with its pointless.

  19.6.2008 13:02 #22

• glassd

  The Type SCSC 48 strand optic trunk cable that we use cost @ $11.00 per foot. Each splice box cost around $1,200.00 . Of course each house, block, road, etc does not need 48 strands. The cost of outfitting one small town is crazy. Some one has to pay for this. As ZippyDSM stated, a wireless future may be the way to go.
  
  I live in a town with @ 220 homes. If everyone in my town decided that they wanted a fiber optic connection and a service provider decided to lay fiber optic cable and equipment in our town; for material alone just to get to each property, it would cost $387,000. That would have a ROI of over 7 years. You figure in the Lease of land lines, labor, equipment for burial, connection to your house, modems etc... The Return On Investment would be 20+ years. Banks are looking for a RIO of 3 to 5 years. What kind of monthly bill would you be willing to pay to make this feasible?
  
  In a Large City where hundreds of people live in 1 building and multiple buildings per block, Fiber is feasible to install. For us who live in rural areas, we are out of luck. It may be that if larger cities convert to fiber, it will lift the load on copper land lines. Nothing is for free. Does not mater who foots the initial bill, the users and possibly non users through Taxes if the government pays for it.

  19.6.2008 13:24 #23

• xSModder

  haha..the first bad thing is to point the finger at the consumer..

  19.6.2008 13:59 #24

• SProdigy

  Quote:Originally posted by ZippyDSM: the ISPs are doing it to them selfs
  
  looky 50Mbps fios at a cheap rate
  http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/200...fios-party.html
  
  ----
  The US is not helping itself letting the corporations run the net infrastructure they put off badly needed upgrades and are now crying they can't handle the bandwidth now its quite sad....they need to slow down and start charging more for bandwidth faster than 500KBPS and charge less for 300 and under.
  
  it might suck to pay more but land lines are headed for over saturation like satlite net is,while its not that ridiculous yet (150$ a month for 200KBPS that switches to 5KBPS when you dare use it)
  
  We are getting to a point where we need reasonable plan rates to distribute bandwidth for the entire populace for the coming decade until they either realize they HAVE to upgrade or invest in wireless.I can't agree with that statement. All the service providers were giving money by the government (our money) for upgrades. I'm certain that part of the AT&T mergering back together deal hinged on this. If thats the case why is my dad only option for high speed internet is a crap 1.5 MB DSL connection when he lives in a suburb of Cleveland. The speeds here in the US are awful and some consider me lucky because I get 15MB down from Time Warner and that still sucks ass.I can't agree more, being in NE Ohio myself. I have the Time Warner 15mb down, and sometimes I'm lucky to get 5-6 down, which is the STANDARD packages speeds. Honestly, these companies should know what's up when I pay them MORE MONEY for a FASTER connection: I'm going to use MORE of their service.
  
  I'm not "Joe Consumer" that will see negligible differences in checking my email, and even if I were, I feel bad for those people, as they are being raped of $40-$50 a month for speed/bandwidth they do not use. In all, it SHOULD balance out, but these telcos are always looking for excuses to make a buck.

  19.6.2008 15:31 #25

• mspurloc

  Quote:Originally posted by mspurloc: A. I've been saying this for five years. Glad somebody is finally realizing it.
  B. The ISPs are lazy, cheap and greedy. It's their fault. Don't charge us more, just CREATE MORE BANDWIDTH! This moronic idea that charging people more for a resource they'll keep using anyway is the same stupid crock you get from the drooling cretins that argue for higher gas taxes. They're all either idiots who don't think, or they're just trying to cash in.and in order to do that they have to spend millions to build the infrastructure and in some cases millions more to rebuild it.
  
  anyway you look at it they are going to have to start charging more money for bandwidth.No.
  There's a world of dark fiber and bandwidth out there.
  Not reinvesting their ill-gotten gains in infrastructure is just their way of extorting more money from the people who AREN'T GETTING WHAT THEY PAID FOR as it is.

  19.6.2008 17:50 #26

• defgod

  I agree with everyone that says don't blame the consumer. I also understand it will cost a** loads of cash to update the current infrastructure. But does anyone know where that cash is going now! To their overpaid execs sitting on their respective a**es doing as little as possible in a day. They could really care less what Joe consumer pays for internet access.

  19.6.2008 18:14 #27

• david89

  just like gas cost allmost $5.00 for gallon of gas and everything in usa costing more now the isps trying find away get peiece of the action to bad our goverment in usa said that Network neutrality not needed they are very wrong it's sure is because soon we will be paying for speed and bandwidth and that not all how much is really enough money for us to pay $50 $100 $1000 per month for internet. if they do put caps they should be made give us a fair amount like 250 gigs+ per month not no silly 40gig cap like time warner wants do. anyway if the isps never fix the backbone of the internet it going crash not our faults it's billions dollar isps fault not invastion the money where it was needed. what are they going do when everyone wants High Definition videos not Standard-definition for youtube etc that really going push there limits in few years.

  19.6.2008 18:44 #28

• beanos66

  isp's should stop selling bandwidth that they hav'nt got and the word "upto" should be banned

  19.6.2008 19:02 #29

• richpuke

  Originally posted by simpsim1: Speaking as a UK user, we're being completely conned by our ISPs. The ISPs have absolutely no interest in what quality of service we get, just as long as they can keep the new 12 month contracts coming in (24 months in some cases) It's all about them making money by squeezing as many users into our already overcrowded networks and then making people feel guilty about using the bandwidth they paid for so that the networks don't go into complete meltdown.
  
  So the next time your ISP gives you a load of bull***t saying that it's your fault, remember all the advertising about "Unlimited" bandwidth services that they used to suck you in.
  
  Want somebody else to blame? All the UK's telecommunications network is owned and run (With the exception of Hull) by BT. They have invested none very little of their vast profits into making any major improvements in our telecoms infrastructure, so it's no wonder we're at the situation we are at now. Note also, that BT themselves are pushing Video-on-demand over the 'net.
  
  Hmmmm....what about the cable companies an their networks covering 65% of the country ?
  
  What the UK needs is a completely new FTTx network.....invested in like the cable companies did in the late 90's.
  
  With the likes of BBC iplayer, youtube and facebook (and IPTV on the horizon), etc expanding at an alarming rate ....it will be no time at all before the infrastructure overloads....and Brosdbsnd will become the equivalent of DialUp.

  19.6.2008 19:30 #30

• canuckerz

  Originally posted by beanos66: isp's should stop selling bandwidth that they haven't got and the word "upto" should be bannedQuite right, its false advertising or purposefully misleading anyway.

  19.6.2008 20:37 #31

• ZippyDSM

  Quote:Originally posted by beanos66: isp's should stop selling bandwidth that they haven't got and the word "upto" should be bannedQuite right, its false advertising or purposefully misleading anyway.well they have it and they don't have it, they are trying to backup on extra services they should have never put out to start with.

  19.6.2008 22:42 #32

• Bozobub

  I recently upgraded to the most expensive, fastest non-commercial Comcast service (15 mbit down/2 mbit up) available in my area and I pay roughly $110/month for my net + TV. Roughly $65 of that is my net, and the rest is my digital cable. In a few months, it'll go to around $125/mo., when my "introductory package" expires.
  
  Not only do I pay them all this loot, when they offered me the faster account I immediately upgraded. Literally within moments of seeing the email they sent me, I was on the phone to order the new service.
  
  I'd say I'm a damn valuable customer. MOST companies, when faced with a similar situation, will treat you like Caesar returning home to Rome in triumph, and wisely so, no?
  
  So do I get pleasant treatment? Well, the nice lady who took my order for the new account was all right, but the asshat WHO CALLED ME UP IN TWO MONTHS KVETCHING ABOUT BANDWIDTH USAGE -- *ahem* sorry, but you see my point? How much was used? Circa 450 GB.
  
  "Oh, *gasp*, he's a py-rate, lynch him!"
  
  Wrong.
  
  I watch streamed video off the net and fansubbed anime (which, admittedly, is pretty "grey-area" in copyrights but, ehh... That's it. Seems like a lot, until you realize that ONE HD movie stream is gonna run 4-5 GB (720p) to 8+ GB (1080p).
  
  If these idiots keep it up I'll just get pokey ol' ADSL and blissfully ignore 'em all. And save about $100/mo. -.-' It's not like I watch much TV anyway. Oo, sounds like a big win for Comcast, huh?

  20.6.2008 02:59 #33

• SProdigy

  Hmm... metering your service would kill off cable tv alternatives such as YouTube and Xbox Live Marketplace... even DirecTV's on demand service, which all need that precious bandwidth... is it a conspiracy to thwart their competition and force consumers to rely on cable tv service?

  20.6.2008 12:56 #34

• vudoo

  Don't believe the hype folks do the math. Cable TV companies also sell Internet. Many customers opt out of subscribing to HBO, CINEMAX, and PPV because they can Download all they want from Graboid for $25/Mo. So they are making up all this crap about breaking the Internet. Get real if it messes up their equipment they need to upgrade. They just don't like the fact that Cable TV customers are not willing to pay more for less with Cable TV. Not to mention many cable operators don't transmit HDTV. Well on Graboid you get all the HD you want.

  9.7.2008 20:00 #35

• mspurloc

  Originally posted by ZippyDSM: Originally posted by mspurloc: A. I've been saying this for five years. Glad somebody is finally realizing it.
  B. The ISPs are lazy, cheap and greedy. It's their fault. Don't charge us more, just CREATE MORE BANDWIDTH! This moronic idea that charging people more for a resource they'll keep using anyway is the same stupid crock you get from the drooling cretins that argue for higher gas taxes. They're all either idiots who don't think, or they're just trying to cash in.
  and in order to do that they have to spend millions to build the infrastructure and in some cases millions more to rebuild it.
  
  anyway you look at it they are going to have to start charging more money for bandwidth.We already gave them millions.
  The infrastructure is there.
  They're sitting on acres of dark fiber.
  They've already charged us for it.

  17.7.2008 18:10 #36

• ZippyDSM

  Originally posted by mspurloc: Originally posted by ZippyDSM: Originally posted by mspurloc: A. I've been saying this for five years. Glad somebody is finally realizing it.
  B. The ISPs are lazy, cheap and greedy. It's their fault. Don't charge us more, just CREATE MORE BANDWIDTH! This moronic idea that charging people more for a resource they'll keep using anyway is the same stupid crock you get from the drooling cretins that argue for higher gas taxes. They're all either idiots who don't think, or they're just trying to cash in.
  and in order to do that they have to spend millions to build the infrastructure and in some cases millions more to rebuild it.
  
  anyway you look at it they are going to have to start charging more money for bandwidth.We already gave them millions.
  The infrastructure is there.
  They're sitting on acres of dark fiber.
  They've already charged us for it.Browse by topic
  
  * Blu-ray
  * Consoles
  * Gadgets
  * HD DVD
  * HDTV
  * Home Theater
  * IPTV
  * Lawsuits & Legislation
  * MP3 & Digital Audio
  * Online music services
  * Online video
  * Phones
  
  Show topics
  Click here to find out more!
  
  Forums
  Forums
  
  Reply
  Start a new thread
  Unsubscribe from this thread
  That video you're watching just might break the internet
  Jump to:
  
  The following comments relate to this news article:
  That video you're watching just might break the internet
  article published on 18 June, 2008
  
  Do you use your broadband internet connection for video? If so you might partly responsible for "breaking" the internet within the next few years according to more than half of the 372 telecommunications professionals surveyed by Tellabs and research firm IDC. More than 10% think it will happen within the next 2 years. So what's the solution? It seems that nearly half of those surveyed ... [ read the full article ]
  Please read the original article before posting your comments.
  Posted Message
  Page: < Previous 1 2
  mspurloc
  Junior Member
  _ 19. June 2008 @ 14:50 _ Link to this message Report an offensive post Send private message to this user
  
  Quote:
  
  Originally posted by mspurloc: A. I've been saying this for five years. Glad somebody is finally realizing it.
  B. The ISPs are lazy, cheap and greedy. It's their fault. Don't charge us more, just CREATE MORE BANDWIDTH! This moronic idea that charging people more for a resource they'll keep using anyway is the same stupid crock you get from the drooling cretins that argue for higher gas taxes. They're all either idiots who don't think, or they're just trying to cash in.
  
  and in order to do that they have to spend millions to build the infrastructure and in some cases millions more to rebuild it.
  
  anyway you look at it they are going to have to start charging more money for bandwidth.
  
  No.
  There's a world of dark fiber and bandwidth out there.
  Not reinvesting their ill-gotten gains in infrastructure is just their way of extorting more money from the people who AREN'T GETTING WHAT THEY PAID FOR as it is.
  [ + quote]
  defgod
  Newbie
  _ 19. June 2008 @ 15:14 _ Link to this message Report an offensive post Send private message to this user
  I agree with everyone that says don't blame the consumer. I also understand it will cost a** loads of cash to update the current infrastructure. But does anyone know where that cash is going now! To their overpaid execs sitting on their respective a**es doing as little as possible in a day. They could really care less what Joe consumer pays for internet access.
  [ + quote]
  david89
  Newbie
  _ 19. June 2008 @ 15:44 _ Link to this message Report an offensive post Send private message to this user
  just like gas cost allmost $5.00 for gallon of gas and everything in usa costing more now the isps trying find away get peiece of the action to bad our goverment in usa said that Network neutrality not needed they are very wrong it's sure is because soon we will be paying for speed and bandwidth and that not all how much is really enough money for us to pay $50 $100 $1000 per month for internet. if they do put caps they should be made give us a fair amount like 250 gigs+ per month not no silly 40gig cap like time warner wants do. anyway if the isps never fix the backbone of the internet it going crash not our faults it's billions dollar isps fault not invastion the money where it was needed. what are they going do when everyone wants High Definition videos not Standard-definition for youtube etc that really going push there limits in few years.
  [ + quote]
  beanos66
  Newbie
  _ 19. June 2008 @ 16:02 _ Link to this message Report an offensive post Send private message to this user
  isp's should stop selling bandwidth that they hav'nt got and the word "upto" should be banned
  [ + quote]
  richpuke
  Newbie
  _ 19. June 2008 @ 16:30 _ Link to this message Report an offensive post Send private message to this user
  
  Originally posted by simpsim1: Speaking as a UK user, we're being completely conned by our ISPs. The ISPs have absolutely no interest in what quality of service we get, just as long as they can keep the new 12 month contracts coming in (24 months in some cases) It's all about them making money by squeezing as many users into our already overcrowded networks and then making people feel guilty about using the bandwidth they paid for so that the networks don't go into complete meltdown.
  
  So the next time your ISP gives you a load of bull***t saying that it's your fault, remember all the advertising about "Unlimited" bandwidth services that they used to suck you in.
  
  Want somebody else to blame? All the UK's telecommunications network is owned and run (With the exception of Hull) by BT. They have invested none very little of their vast profits into making any major improvements in our telecoms infrastructure, so it's no wonder we're at the situation we are at now. Note also, that BT themselves are pushing Video-on-demand over the 'net.
  
  
  
  Hmmmm....what about the cable companies an their networks covering 65% of the country ?
  
  What the UK needs is a completely new FTTx network.....invested in like the cable companies did in the late 90's.
  
  With the likes of BBC iplayer, youtube and facebook (and IPTV on the horizon), etc expanding at an alarming rate ....it will be no time at all before the infrastructure overloads....and Brosdbsnd will become the equivalent of DialUp.
  [ + quote]
  canuckerz
  Senior Member
  
  3 product reviews
  _ 19. June 2008 @ 17:37 _ Link to this message Report an offensive post Send private message to this user
  
  Originally posted by beanos66: isp's should stop selling bandwidth that they haven't got and the word "upto" should be banned
  
  Quite right, its false advertising or purposefully misleading anyway.
  [ + quote]
  ZippyDSM
  AfterDawn Addict
  _ 19. June 2008 @ 19:42 _ Link to this message Edit message
  
  Quote:
  
  Originally posted by beanos66: isp's should stop selling bandwidth that they haven't got and the word "upto" should be banned
  
  Quite right, its false advertising or purposefully misleading anyway.
  
  well they have it and they don't have it, they are trying to backup on extra services they should have never put out to start with.
  [ + quote]
  Bozobub
  Newbie
  _ 19. June 2008 @ 23:59 _ Link to this message Report an offensive post Send private message to this user
  I recently upgraded to the most expensive, fastest non-commercial Comcast service (15 mbit down/2 mbit up) available in my area and I pay roughly $110/month for my net + TV. Roughly $65 of that is my net, and the rest is my digital cable. In a few months, it'll go to around $125/mo., when my "introductory package" expires.
  
  Not only do I pay them all this loot, when they offered me the faster account I immediately upgraded. Literally within moments of seeing the email they sent me, I was on the phone to order the new service.
  
  I'd say I'm a damn valuable customer. MOST companies, when faced with a similar situation, will treat you like Caesar returning home to Rome in triumph, and wisely so, no?
  
  So do I get pleasant treatment? Well, the nice lady who took my order for the new account was all right, but the asshat WHO CALLED ME UP IN TWO MONTHS KVETCHING ABOUT BANDWIDTH USAGE -- *ahem* sorry, but you see my point? How much was used? Circa 450 GB.
  
  "Oh, *gasp*, he's a py-rate, lynch him!"
  
  Wrong.
  
  I watch streamed video off the net and fansubbed anime (which, admittedly, is pretty "grey-area" in copyrights but, ehh... That's it. Seems like a lot, until you realize that ONE HD movie stream is gonna run 4-5 GB (720p) to 8+ GB (1080p).
  
  If these idiots keep it up I'll just get pokey ol' ADSL and blissfully ignore 'em all. And save about $100/mo. -.-' It's not like I watch much TV anyway. Oo, sounds like a big win for Comcast, huh?
  [ + quote]This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 20. June 2008 @ 00:00
  SProdigy
  Member
  
  5 product reviews
  _ 20. June 2008 @ 09:56 _ Link to this message Report an offensive post Send private message to this user
  Hmm... metering your service would kill off cable tv alternatives such as YouTube and Xbox Live Marketplace... even DirecTV's on demand service, which all need that precious bandwidth... is it a conspiracy to thwart their competition and force consumers to rely on cable tv service?
  [ + quote]
  vudoo
  Member
  _ 9. July 2008 @ 17:00 _ Link to this message Report an offensive post Send private message to this user
  Don't believe the hype folks do the math. Cable TV companies also sell Internet. Many customers opt out of subscribing to HBO, CINEMAX, and PPV because they can Download all they want from Graboid for $25/Mo. So they are making up all this crap about breaking the Internet. Get real if it messes up their equipment they need to upgrade. They just don't like the fact that Cable TV customers are not willing to pay more for less with Cable TV. Not to mention many cable operators don't transmit HDTV. Well on Graboid you get all the HD you want.
  [ + quote]
  Advertisement
  _ __
  
  _
  mspurloc
  and the point deary millions wont cover it *lick* =^^=
  you are looking at 5-10M a city 2-3 times that for a large city that covers house to house or at least block to block.
  

  For all the console/game fanboys out their.
  http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles...Console-Rundown
  Oh god I can't stop laughing!!!
  ---
  And for the format nazi's I bring you HHD DVVD BVD's!!
  

  18.7.2008 01:49 #37