BF2S Forums Bandwidth Caps.. continued

usmarine wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

usmarine wrote:

So if you use massive amounts of room, shouldnt you pay more than those who dont?

Considering that most of the current infrastructure used by cable companies began as publicly funded infrastructure, no.

Considering the fact that it doesn't really cost them anything more that you're using the full bandwidth, no.

This is clearly an abuse of power by an industry that is highly oligopolistic and spends more on lobbyism than any other industry.

its doesnt cost cell phone companies anything for text messages....ever go over your limit?  i dunno.  it happens all over i imagine.

Yep.  I actually mentioned a parallel with the cell phone industry a few posts above. 

But yes, in a way, this is typical.  It doesn't make it right though....

We have loads of bandwidth caps in the UK. Virtually all ISPs. But most offer unlimited packages for slightly more money, which gets round that. I pay £17.50 for my unlimited connection each month. There will always be a market for cheap unlimited service providers, so they will always be there.

Where's this 'kiss your online gaming goodbye' come from anyway?


It's very hard to hit a cap by just gaming unless it's an exceedingly low cap.

Turquoise wrote:

Flecco wrote:

Where's this 'kiss your online gaming goodbye' come from anyway?


It's very hard to hit a cap by just gaming unless it's an exceedingly low cap.

...like 40 GB

No, like 10GB.


Mine's capped at 25GB and because I don't run torrents 4-6 hours a day or anything similar I never hit the cap. A typical gamer's month of playing will not have them hit the cap. A typical gamer's month of torrenting will bust it.

Flecco wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Flecco wrote:

Where's this 'kiss your online gaming goodbye' come from anyway?


It's very hard to hit a cap by just gaming unless it's an exceedingly low cap.

...like 40 GB

No, like 10GB.


Mine's capped at 25GB and because I don't run torrents 4-6 hours a day or anything similar I never hit the cap. A typical gamer's month of playing will not have them hit the cap. A typical gamer's month of torrenting will bust it.

A single HD movie can be as much as 6 GB.

Torrenting would bust your cap (lol)  pretty quickly.  I can't believe the cap is so low for you guys.  Wow...

As for gaming, it depends on what game you're playing.  The more advanced the game is, the quicker you'll hit your cap.  For example, Call of Duty 4 would hit your cap faster than most.

No I just realise how hard it is to maintain a quality of service when your network is being overloaded by tossers.

Turquoise wrote:

Flecco wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

...like 40 GB

No, like 10GB.


Mine's capped at 25GB and because I don't run torrents 4-6 hours a day or anything similar I never hit the cap. A typical gamer's month of playing will not have them hit the cap. A typical gamer's month of torrenting will bust it.

A single HD movie can be as much as 6 GB.

Torrenting would bust your cap (lol)  pretty quickly.  I can't believe the cap is so low for you guys.  Wow...

As for gaming, it depends on what game you're playing.  The more advanced the game is, the quicker you'll hit your cap.  For example, Call of Duty 4 would hit your cap faster than most.

Cap is low because we don't pay for a higher one. It's not mandatory. We could get unlimited if we wanted. We don't need it so we don't pay extra.

I play TF2 which uses afaik about 25KBps (each TF2 server requires 25KBps connection per player to be able to run properly) a second and is one of the most data heavy network games out there. Between us my Dad, little bro and I can rack up a pretty big tally of hours a month for gaming time. You said you'd have to kiss online gaming goodbye. I pointed out you are incorrect and that caps don't affect it much unless you are torrenting things/downloading data heavy shit/spend your entire month streaming video about 18 hours a day. Thanks and have a nice day.

Last edited by Flecco (2009-04-09 15:07:26)

TheEternalPessimist wrote:

No I just realise how hard it is to maintain a quality of service when your network is being overloaded by tossers.

Well, that logic might work for the U.K. because a lot of your networks need repair, but here, there's no excuse.

usmarine wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

I guess you don't download anything HD.

You wouldn't mind getting capped by a company that is already making loads and has no logical reason to cap you other than to possibly hit you with more fees?

Wow...  nice complacency you got there.

like stated above by others.  no i dont care since it wont really affect me.

That logic could be applied to the Patriot Act too.  A slippery slope, don't you think?

Turquoise wrote:

Flecco wrote:

Cap is low because we don't pay for a higher one. It's not mandatory. We could get unlimited if we wanted. We don't need it so we don't pay extra.

I play TF2 which uses afaik about 25KBps (each TF2 server requires 25KBps connection per player to be able to run properly) a second and is one of the most data heavy network games out there. Between us my Dad, little bro and I can rack up a pretty big tally of hours a month for gaming time. You said you'd have to kiss online gaming goodbye. I pointed out you are incorrect and that caps don't affect it much unless you are torrenting things/downloading data heavy shit/spend your entire month streaming video about 18 hours a day. Thanks and have a nice day.

Team Fortress 2 is one of the most basic games you can play online.  It uses very little bandwidth compared to more advanced games.

Thanks and have a nice day yourself, internet tough guy.

http://api.ning.com/files/CN3s74alOU6l3 … ughGuy.jpg

Hmm?

Source please?

What about EVE? WoW? WAR? C&C3?


Btw used to play CoD4 on a 30GB cap. Never got to 20GB in a month back then. I understand you're pissed about caps being introduced but seriously, it will not affect gaming. Downloading movies and such yes, but not gaming. Possibly gaming if you play 24 hours a day for the entire month. Turq, have they even released the pricing schemes? If capped costs less why should you care? Or are they capping your current service and charging you more to upgrade to uncapped?

Btw that pic is kinda ironic.

Last edited by Flecco (2009-04-09 15:26:06)

Turquoise wrote:

usmarine wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

That logic could be applied to the Patriot Act too.  A slippery slope, don't you think?

no turq.  just because it will hurt all the "internet sharing" of movies and such does not make it a slippery slope.

It also hurts hulu, youtube, itunes, and every other file delivery service on the internet.  You know all that software and media content you can buy online and have it transferred onto your computer without having to bother with a plastic disc?

One single Blu-Ray is 40 to 50 GB.

You're defending logic that is equivalent to taxing people for the miles they drive on the highway.  Highways are thousands of times more expensive to maintain than internet networks.

But tell me...  would you be ok with taxing people for the miles they put on their cars?

hulu, youtube, itunes....so what?  idc about those either.

and i prefer to buy the discs.

well, if they drop the fuel tax and tax miles then maybe i could look at it and see.  i dunno on that one.

Last edited by usmarine (2009-04-09 15:35:00)

Flecco wrote:

Hmm?

Source please?

What about EVE? WoW? WAR? C&C3?


Btw used to play CoD4 on a 30GB cap. Never got to 20GB in a month back then. I understand you're pissed about caps being introduced but seriously, it will not affect gaming. Downloading movies and such yes, but not gaming. Possibly gaming if you play 24 hours a day for the entire month. Turq, have they even released the pricing schemes? If capped costs less why should you care? Or are they capping your current service and charging you more to upgrade to uncapped?

Btw that pic is kinda ironic.

The bandwidth consumption of online gaming is only part of the equation of the failure of bandwidth capping.  I was not saying that everyone in the U.S. that does online gaming doesn't download movies, songs, software, and browse the web.  All of that pulls from the same bandwidth cap and penalty system.

Imagine how much of a pain in the ass it would be if you wanted to download something off of Steam instead of going out and getting a physical copy.  See how fast you'd hit your cap then?

It's also typical for HD movie trailers in 1080p to be 100s of MBs for a few minutes of video.

Basically, what's being pushed here is that ISPs are pushing higher prices on consumers for the use of infrastructure already paid for by taxes.

Remember what Enron did in California with fake power outages?  ISPs did that in Australia to justify raising rates and placing bandwidth caps on its consumers.

Everyone knows that the U.K. government gave a lot of tax money to ISPs to improve infrastructure, but all they did was pocket it and raise rates while implementing caps.

These are the kind of companies we're dealing with.  They will do whatever they can to make their shareholders happy.  It doesn't matter to them how they get the money.  They just do whatever increases profit.  And they only implement these caps because too many people accept these policies.

These companies aren't losing money from heavy usage of the net.  If they ever lose money, it's from speculation bubbles deflating.

Turquoise wrote:

I suppose you would care if you worked for a company affected by caps.

oh pish posh.  these companies get so many tax breaks and such.  fuck they can prolly find a way to write off the expense anyway.