Average Usage Per Month By Tier

[keepitretro]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

I can only work with what I'm given sadly.

It's not an insult it's a statement of fact, my 9 year old has better punctuation and grammar.

Make an English course part of next month's 1.7TB+, it may lead to a better job so you can buy the Blu-Rays you're downloading instead of taking them for free from the internet then getting all offended when someone mentions it.

Now if you're done trying to pretend that you aren't upset by the person at the end of the wire that you can't help but respond to and that your at least 1.7TB per month is all legitimate let's get back to the thread topic of the average usage per month on VM.

Thanks you've made my point exactly. Small petty insults / or statments as you call them........lol.

Anything more to add lol...

Back on topic, please.

[Chrysalis]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

Very true so why you felt the need to get so upset by what I said is beyond me. I'll console myself with the thought that I can write English at primary school level.

---------- Post added at 14:41 ---------- Previous post was at 14:40 ----------



Yes, every ISP will want to keep network usage as close to 100% as is feasible, many do it through business usage balancing out the lighter residential usage periods.

I can understand 70-80% maybe even 90% but not 100%. Unless QOS doesnt matter to them. As inevitibly there will be natural spikes and unexpected periods of utilisation so 100% will mean congestion and explains the peak time tbb issues etc.

I know isps who consider anything above 60% as over utilised. So to say every isp is a bit of a stretch.

I remember entanet trying this experiment and it didnt exactly work out well for them (the other way round using residental to fill business off peak), even aaisp have hit trouble trying to share business and consumers together using this method. It seems isps just want peak to be 24/7. Greed to squeeze every bit of revenue possible from capacity.

[Ignitionnet]

Hence 'as is feasible'.

[joglynne]

I'm on 10Mb and the amount I download in an average month is extremely low but I must admit to finding the increased upload of 1Mb useful. I can understand how some people can rack up the downloads, especially with all the legitimate streaming available now but I can't get my head around what it would take to use 1.7TBs and what effect that could have on the other users in that area?

Please forgive the possibley naive question.

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

Ya I'm running at 1-2GB/day with the odd burst into the 5 - 10GB range. We use around about the average for a 50Mb household, last time I measured we downloaded 60GB/month or so, it'll have increased a bit due to increased use of certain online services.

Daughter uses about 500MB/day streaming, myself and Mrs use maybe 1 - 1.5GB browsing and streaming, the bursts being things like XBox Live demos or longer periods of streaming media.

EDIT: I would quite like to see the median usage as well, that'd be interesting as it'd remove the skew from people like Mr Blu Ray a Day (at least) above's outlying usage pulling the average up.

Well i seem to have slowed down, only 500 gig this month so far

---------- Post added at 17:08 ---------- Previous post was at 17:07 ----------

Originally Posted by danielf

It's all linux distros and game demos. Honest Guv...

Not for me i download useful stuff that's entertaining

---------- Post added at 17:10 ---------- Previous post was at 17:08 ----------

Originally Posted by keepitretro

(Makes hand gesture as he leaves the room)

[kwikbreaks]

Originally Posted by joglynne

I can't get my head around what it would take to use 1.7TBs and what effect that could have on the other users in that area?

It would take some dedication to maintain that for sure. Unless collecting for collecting sake and assuming it's video then fitting in eating alongside all the downloading, burning (assuming it's not filling a hard drive a month) and viewing might be difficult too. If it's Linux distros then there wouldn't be enough hours in the month to install them all let alone customise and test.

What impact on others? Possibly none - you can just about do that on 8Mbps ADSL. Where problems would occur would be if it were torrents because the associated upstream would royally screw up the neighbours.

[Chrysalis]

I average I think 50-100 gig a month.

Usually I got for numerous days doing nothing bur browsing, ssh and streaming. Granted streaming can chew up moderate bandwidth. Then I will go on a downloading spree, could be xbox content or games/tv etc. (yes i occasionally download american tv shows in low xvid format tho not silly 1080p stuff). That spree might last 4-5 hours or so but then I be idle for numerous days again.

[Skie]

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

also from those figures its clear 100mbit is underpriced and the removal of STM on it wasnt logical.

I dunno. If there were huge numbers of linux users I would have expected them to jump on the cheaper and also not STM'd 50meg rather than pony up more for limited benefit. After all you are still limited by the P2P throttle and whatever upload speed other people can supply.

I'm averaging 110GB a month on 50 meg.

[Chrysalis]

I could download many TBs of content without using p2p easily, and I am sure others do the same. Plus it seems the p2p throttle can even be invaded on p2p if what I have read is true.

[horseman]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

Hence 'as is feasible'.

….but is "business" also "best effort" ?

[buckleb]

28GB a month on average (50mb product).

I'm obviously not trying hard enough!

[philwhite100]

I am on 50meg and download very little on average which include game updates etc which are the biggest files apart from that it's just gameplay or browsing.

[danielf]

Originally Posted by Sirius

Not for me i download useful stuff that's entertaining

[cough]

Nature Documentaries

[/cough]

Originally Posted by horseman

….but is "business" also "best effort" ?

Reasonable efforts, surely?