BlueYonder Capping

[Ignition]

That got your attention.

Just noticing things like this:

http://bbs.adslguide.org.uk/showthre...Number=2201586

The lucky people using the service in his area aren't going to be too brilliantly off.

I also know and have seen other threads referencing people downloading in the TB range, and uploading 50+ GB/month on their connections.

I'm also seeing threads here and elsewhere regarding BY having network congestion on upstreams and downstreams.

Anyone still think that BY are great with their 'we must remain absolutely unlimited and not care regardless of how much people download even if they are clearly ripping the ****' attitude.

Or is it time to draw a line?

Originally Posted by Ignition

That got your attention.

Just noticing things like this:

http://bbs.adslguide.org.uk/showthre...Number=2201586

The lucky people using the service in his area aren't going to be too brilliantly off.

I also know and have seen other threads referencing people downloading in the TB range, and uploading 50+ GB/month on their connections.

I'm also seeing threads here and elsewhere regarding BY having network congestion on upstreams and downstreams.

Anyone still think that BY are great with their 'we must remain absolutely unlimited and not care regardless of how much people download even if they are clearly ripping the ****' attitude.

Or is it time to draw a line?

You know my feelings on caps. Lets face it you have seen my traffic stat's

[Ignition]

Interesting votes, distinct lack of interest on commenting mind.

---------- Post added at 22:45 ---------- Previous post was at 22:06 ----------

Check out the other threads in this forum sections dudes / dudettes. A lot of these problems would probably be eliminated if TW were to take option 2 in the poll.

That's about all I've to say on this issue

[Derek]

Originally Posted by Ignition

Interesting votes, distinct lack of interest on commenting mind.

I'll give my 2 cents then.

I predict that within this year the unlimited options will die out as more and more of the bandwidth leechers move onto unlimited ISP's and then cause them to give up the unlimited options or have horrendous issues and have to implement traffic shaping.

Option 2 is the fairest as it lets the amount of traffic used grow with increased options like video streaming while punishing the people who feel the need to download multiple Linux ISO's every day.

[Stuart]

Voted.. Of course, I currently download 3.2 Terrabytes a day.. All linux distros.

[Rillington]

The internet should not be capped and ISPs should offer an ulimited service for residential customers.

[ian@huth]

Originally Posted by Rillington

The internet should not be capped and ISPs should offer an ulimited service for residential customers.

You would have to pay the true cost of having such a service or suffer the consequences of traffic shaping and contention.

[Derek]

Originally Posted by Rillington

The internet should not be capped and ISPs should offer an ulimited service for residential customers.

And in a perfect world it wouldn't be capped.

Alas it is an imperfect universe and the way ISP's can afford to supply packages at the current prices is by sharing bandwidth.

If you lived on a street with 20 people constantly hammering their connection would you be happy your speed was far lower than it would be if they were gently reminded to calm things down?

If you want to research the costs of a dedicated 1:1 leased line compared to a residential service feel free.

EDIT:

Infact I'm bored right now so I'll do it

http://www.business.ntl.com/internet...cess/index.php

2MB uncontended at a bargain £5500 a year. Slightly more than the £299.88 that a 2MB Ntl:Home connection costs for a year.

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by Rillington

The internet should not be capped and ISPs should offer an ulimited service for residential customers.

In a perfect world. However, in this imperfect world, it's not economically viable to do so.

[Ignition]

Originally Posted by Stuart C

Voted.. Of course, I currently download 3.2 Terrabytes a day.. All linux distros.

Only 3.2? N00b! Learn 2 Leech!

Says the guy who does perhaps 5 - 10GB a month between 3 PCs now

Nothing worth downloading really.

Seems as though however the people who are interested prefer that TW stay absolutely unlimited, we'll see if they would be happy to live with the consequences.

One of them they already are living with, a 384k upstream on 10Mbit not the 512k that ntl are able to offer, and that without the congestion TW users are seeing on their upstreams.

---------- Post added at 16:16 ---------- Previous post was at 16:15 ----------

Originally Posted by Rillington

The internet should not be capped and ISPs should offer an ulimited service for residential customers.

So why are you only on 1Mbit?

If uncapped download amounts surely the speeds should be absolutely unlimited as well?

---------- Post added at 16:22 ---------- Previous post was at 16:16 ----------

I am actually hoping that someone who voted that it should be absolutely unlimited regardless of anything also posted complaining about speeds at some point, the two are kinda related

---------- Post added at 17:12 ---------- Previous post was at 16:22 ----------

Wonder if someone here can leech the maximum 3TB that it's possible to download on a 10Mbit connection in a month, or if there is anyone in the 1.5+TB range....

[Pø†øƒGøL�]

Still waiting on my upgrade (West Mids and we're at the bottom of the list ) but would honestly prefer more upload than the additional download we keep being given.

I haven't noticed any speed issues - perhaps that's because we've not been upgraded yet, or mebbe the people in my immediate area don't abuse it

I have a problem with paying for a service then being told I can only use part of it - which to me is what capping is about. You don't buy a car and then get told you can only drive xx miles a day/month (then again, I have a serious problem with the proposals for road pricing - which is prolly on another topic somewhere).

There is only so much people will want to download, they will just get the information quicker.

[Derek]

Originally Posted by Pø†øƒGøLÐ

There is only so much people will want to download, they will just get the information quicker.

But there are some people who will download everything just in case they want to watch/play/listen to it at some point.

I know someone with an external HDD filled with 200GB of music. He freely admits that he'll never listen to the majority of it but downloads all he can just in case.

Some people are like that with movies and games as well which are a lot bigger than a 50-60MB album download. With DVD-R's dropping in price it makes it possible to download and archive the full DVD then pop it into a folder in case its needed to be watched in the future.

And most offices have at least someone who will 'helpfully' provide colleagues with DVD's of the latest movies and TV shows. Thats easily a good few large downloads a day.
Where do you think these come from?

[ian@huth]

Originally Posted by PÃÃâ€*’¸ÃÆ⠀™Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¢ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚¬Ãâ⠂¬Å¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ ÃÃâ€*’Âƚ¸Ãƒâ€Â ââ‚ ¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢GÃÃâ€*’Ã ¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¸LÃÃâ€*’ÂÂà ‚Â�

Still waiting on my upgrade (West Mids and we're at the bottom of the list ) but would honestly prefer more upload than the additional download we keep being given.

I haven't noticed any speed issues - perhaps that's because we've not been upgraded yet, or mebbe the people in my immediate area don't abuse it

I have a problem with paying for a service then being told I can only use part of it - which to me is what capping is about. You don't buy a car and then get told you can only drive xx miles a day/month (then again, I have a serious problem with the proposals for road pricing - which is prolly on another topic somewhere).

There is only so much people will want to download, they will just get the information quicker.

Blueyonder giving you more upload speed would create more problems for themselves and their customers unless they invest more in their network which they will not do with the merger being just around the corner.

You are paying for a service which has conditions applied to it in order to give it at the price you pay. There have to be restrictions on use to make the service profitable for the provider, they are a business after all and not a charity.

Some people download just for the sake of it because they can. I would bet that only a small fraction of what is downloaded by some people is actually used by them after it is downloaded.

[Pø†øƒGøL�]

Originally Posted by ian@huth

Blueyonder giving you more upload speed would create more problems for themselves and their customers unless they invest more in their network which they will not do with the merger being just around the corner.

But NTL are able to give 512k upload?

Originally Posted by ian@huth

You are paying for a service which has conditions applied to it in order to give it at the price you pay. There have to be restrictions on use to make the service profitable for the provider, they are a business after all and not a charity.

Sure... and the condition on the service is that there are no capping restrictions - that is what I signed up to and that is what I pay for.

Originally Posted by ian@huth

Some people download just for the sake of it because they can. I would bet that only a small fraction of what is downloaded by some people is actually used by them after it is downloaded.

You will get that whatever service you offer - it's just as likely those people would "share" the downloading and then make copies for each other!!

[ian@huth]

Originally Posted by PÃÃâ€*’¸ÃÆ⠀™Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¢ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚¬Ãâ⠂¬Å¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ ÃÃâ€*’Âƚ¸Ãƒâ€Â ââ‚ ¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢GÃÃâ€*’Ã ¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¸LÃÃâ€*’ÂÂà ‚Â�

But NTL are able to give 512k upload?

Perhaps it's because NTL spent more money on the network than TW did and didn't just jump in to become the first to offer 10Mbps.

Originally Posted by PÃÃâ€*’¸ÃÆ⠀™Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¢ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚¬Ãâ⠂¬Å¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ ÃÃâ€*’Âƚ¸Ãƒâ€Â ââ‚ ¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢GÃÃâ€*’Ã ¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¸LÃÃâ€*’ÂÂà ‚Â�

Sure... and the condition on the service is that there are no capping restrictions - that is what I signed up to and that is what I pay for.

AFAIK Blueyonder don't have any download restrictions unless you are downloading things which their T&C's prohibit. Giving an unlimited service will attract the really heavy bandwidth users with service levels suffering if the network cannot cope with their usage levels.