|
Diamond Member Username: NydasPost Number: 20589 Registered: Jun-06 | Understanding difference between Satellite transmission and Wired Internet transmission. When there is a satellite out there with necessary equipment and a life span, there is a set price for each minute of transmission, which remains unaltered. There is the additional cost of transmission of programming to it and that is the only changing variable. So when more and more people receive the signals, the cost per minute of usage per person decreases. It is very different with cable based TV programming and the newer Internet based TV programming. The more people use the signals the more are the distribution cost. The cost per minute keeps on increasing, not proportionately but significantly. Ultimately there are bottlenecks and freezing of picture. We all know what happened to IKS as more and more people joined IKS. The Internet service providers were first upset about large file and music downloads. http://www.suite101.com/content/bandwidth-throttling-in-canada-a124859 "Given the widespread popularity of Peer-to-Peer (P2P) file sharing programs such as Limewire, internet users are capable of sharing music, movies, etc. over their internet connections. These files are typically very large, and tend to slow down the entire server for everyone, even those not sharing files via P2P programs. The ISP's in Canada Therefore, Internet Service Providers (ISP`s) in Canada such as Bell Sympatico have taken it upon themselves to protect the internet speed of their users that are not sharing files through P2P programs." Note that this article was written in June 2009, under the heading "Bandwidth Throttling in Canada" Therefore, Internet Service Providers (ISP`s) in Canada such as Bell Sympatico have taken it upon themselves to protect the internet speed of their users that are not sharing files through P2P programs. They do this at peak internet times during the day (4:30 pm to 2:00 am) by targeting internet users who are sharing these files through P2P programs. Bandwidth Throttling in Canada: How Internet Service Providers Protect Your Internet Speed |
|
Diamond Member Username: NydasPost Number: 20590 Registered: Jun-06 | Sandvine is a Waterloo based Canadian company and they are a world class expert on deep packet inspection technology. Basically their hardware is designed to inspect and identify streaming media content as opposed to pure data. I know a couple of their employees traveling from St. Catherines to work in Waterloo. http://www.zdnet.com/blog/networking/the-internet-belongs-to-netflix/265 Interested persons whould read the full article titled "The Internet belongs to Netflix By Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols | October 22, 2010, 9:27am PDT" "Netflix!? Yes, Netflix. To be exact, according to Sandvine, "20.6% of all peak period bytes downloaded on fixed access networks in North America are Netflix." That's one in five bytes devoted to streaming Star Trek or The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo. Who knew? You may think of Netflix as that mail-order DVD business, but the company's growth as an Internet video-on-demand (VoD) service has been explosive. Now, if only the Internet can keep up with the demand. I've said before that technically the biggest problem that Netflix, Hulu, and the other Internet video streaming sites is not enough Internet bandwidth to go around. ....." "In Canada, for example, where Netflix recently launched an online VoD service, Sandvine reports that at its peak, around 9:30 PM local time, Netflix takes up more than 95% of all bandwidth in use. Sandvine calls this "shocking levels of success," I can only agree." Now let us get the fact straight. during that period none of decreased our other internet usage. That means that suddenly a major portion of Internet traffic is gone to Netflix. who pays for it? I think that it is the users who have to pay for it. How do they pay for it? Bandwidth usage charges. |
|
Gold Member Username: HardrockstrikerPost Number: 1101 Registered: Apr-06 | Anyone who writes an article on bandwidth can spin it anyway that they want. Some people overuse the system with p2p, bittorrnet and others underuse - it evens out in the end. They typically throttle the connection (i.e. technique called "traffic shaping") according to what plan you are on. You can download at your max speed all day and night. But now to add a download limit - just another way of milking the market for more $$$. Their shareholders are not poor. |
|
Diamond Member Username: NydasPost Number: 20591 Registered: Jun-06 | "As Steve Jobs did once, that Internet TV was just a hobby. It's not anymore" The only way to pay for it would be through graduated usage charges, so that ordinary people, who do not use too much streaming media, do not pay and heavy users of wired Internet users pay for what they use. 25GB ceiling is plenty for the average user. He won't have to pay extra. heavier users will pay for it. Do you know how much bandwidth movies take up? With 25GB, you can watch about 8 Netflix HD movies per month. |
|
Gold Member Username: HardrockstrikerPost Number: 1102 Registered: Apr-06 | So what if the 8 Netflix movies where distance education movies or courses. What about online seminars, or video meetings. What about online house security cameras, baby monitors. Doctors are now doing online meeting with patients via the Net. The point is that the Internet has many more uses than just watching Netflix movies. The internet has changed our lives and we'll be using it more and we won't be stopping at the point we currenly we are at in terms of usage. So putting a cap on how much you can download is simply a cash grab. Also, this p2p crap is all about copy right infringement and NOT bandwidth usage. |
|
Diamond Member Username: NydasPost Number: 20592 Registered: Jun-06 | "The point is that the Internet has many more uses than just watching Netflix movies. " That is exactly the point I am trying to make. If you allow unlimited access then there would be such an unreasonable demand on Internet that the other essential services that you mentioned would suffer. You have to understand some basic facts. 1. The more users on Internet the more congestion there is. The more users on satellite reception the less it costs per user and there is no congestion. 2. If a doctor is trying to reach a patient on Internet and ten neighbours use up a lot of bandwidth watching Netflix movies, he wont be able to function. The only way he might be able to function would be to give him priority and penalize or charge the Netflix users. 3. I hope you have gathered enough information from my posts to realize that a new problem has been introduced in wired Internet, problem of an enormous use of resources by streaming media. |
|
Diamond Member Username: WingmanaliveWww.stainles... .ecrater.com Post Number: 24333 Registered: Jun-06 | "With 25GB, you can watch about 8 Netflix HD movies per month." Wow. Then in my particular case it would mean I'd have to wait only 4 days per movie? Seeing as I love movies I would @#!$ing hate to wait that long for a "paid" for product. Mind you I watch, on average, a film every night off my own DVD collection. Bought and paid for only once. Those who think that a pay as you go watch mentality will work are in for a big surprise. In today's world, you HAVE to remember those who created PPV, HBO, ect..PPL please. |
|
Platinum Member Username: PlymouthCanada Post Number: 15953 Registered: Jan-08 | Nydas I use over 40 GB/month without any downlowding, sometime 6 computers, Blue ray, Xbox, Wii and I-Phone are hooked on my Internet, I have my childrens with their boy friends using it then with the new HD on You tube it is very hard to use only 25 GB! With all hardware which work on Internet, they must adapted their plan to the realty of today! |
|
Silver Member Username: KrishnPost Number: 487 Registered: Sep-06 | There is no detailed billing from my ISP- you just have to believe what they say your usage is. I think the same holds true for all ISP's, I would be surprised if I am wrong on this. |
|
Platinum Member Username: PlymouthCanada Post Number: 15954 Registered: Jan-08 | Subash With Oricom, I have my daily bandwith on my internet account! |
|
Silver Member Username: KrishnPost Number: 489 Registered: Sep-06 | Plymouth I also can get it, updated next day at around 7am for usage upto midnight previous day. But no further details |
|
Gold Member Username: HardrockstrikerPost Number: 1103 Registered: Apr-06 | In response to point #3: Nalin, you are a condescending little #$@*. You're what I call an information cow. You have four stomaches that can hold a lot of info that you've digested. You can only regurgitate the info. As a cow, your brain is weak and you don't know what to do with all that info. In response to point #2: ISPs always overprovision so that won't/shouldn't happen. Why don't you regurgitate that and process it, because it doesn't help to make your 'argument'. If you're going to proselytize about having to pay extra for a service that many people deem to be infrastructure then you can't having 20,000 posts of which half of them are helping people get stolen TV. That's just being a hypocrite (so what you don't steal satellite bandwidth - point #1- you're okay with stealing wine while you want to pay for water that you need to drink!). |
|
Gold Member Username: HardrockstrikerPost Number: 1104 Registered: Apr-06 | Nalin, do you have any original thoughts that are your own?... |
|
Platinum Member Username: PlymouthCanada Post Number: 15955 Registered: Jan-08 | Subash I have the bandwith for each day saved in my account! I check it because it cost me 6,95 for each 1GB over for the first 5 GB exceed! |
|
Diamond Member Username: NydasPost Number: 20593 Registered: Jun-06 | 1A. Packets are put on the fibre network. At nodes they are amplified, at subnodes they are re amplified, and further even at the node round the corner from you house they are re-amplified. The amplification is necessary as more users take advantage of it. All these switch routers have to be bought, housed and maintained. There is therefore ample justification for ISPs to ask for usage charges. 1B. Satellite packages are broadcast. After that YOU the user amplify using your LNB, and if necessary with a further device. There would be no justification on the part of satellite services to ask for further usage charges. 2. When you watch movies on a TV as supplied by Internet TV such as, BUT NOT RESTRICTED TO, Netflix, there is a great tendency to leave the channel on even when you are not watching. This habit alone would cause unreasonable demand if there was no band width charge. How often have you a picked up a free brochure, pamphlet, newspaper, barely glanced at it and thrown it away? How ofter have you picked up two- three paper towels at a mall food court and used only one throwing away the remaining two. I have done both these and anybody who has not done that is lying. You take the attitude that you have already paid for it with the meal so you can waste paper. If there is a charge, you would think twice before even wasting paper. Unlimited bandwidth video streaming is just that - prone to wasteful usage if there is no charge for amount used. 3. Let us average 10 movies an hour in a day on one channel. Let us further assume 10 channels per transponder. Let us further assume 50 transponders in a satellite. That is a broadcast of 5000 movies a day or 150,000 movies a month from one satellite. If you want movies, let us agitate for just one satellite showing movies as outlined above. Then, if it is free or there is no further usage charge per movie/day/month, I will be glad to join your revolt and agitate with you for the privilege of forgetting to switch off the television at night. I will still be paying for the electricity, but that's OK with me. All this and a lot of what I posted earlier in this thread, and in many threads, my dear Jason, is based on logical thinking and reasoning. For the dis-believers, I have to produce third party confirmatory evidence. Many a person, including professors, have shown revulsion against my gaul, and you are no exception. Then those amongst them, who are intellectuals see the reasoning or convince me otherwise with their logic. That is what a discussion and debate is about. THERE IS NO PLACE FOR RIDICULE IN A DEBATE. I have to reluctantly use ridicule in this forum, because there are too many idiots posting here. So far I do not consider you as one of them. If you recall, a certain party had too much negative advertising in the last major US election, and it turned sour against them. Negativism and ridicule in debate never pays. I learnt that in grade 6 at school Q.E.D. |
|
Silver Member Username: MrgregPost Number: 608 Registered: Dec-07 | Everybody just give up you can't win a battle against the Queen! |
|
Gold Member Username: HardrockstrikerPost Number: 1105 Registered: Apr-06 | Oh god... I'm trying so hard not to vomit into my own mouth. Nalin, I don't care what you think about me. You come off as condescending which pisses people off and you always have to have the last word. I'm sorry if I lost my cool - that was ungentlemanlike of me. But I think that I'll follow Greg's advice. Good luck with your quest for higher usage fees... Btw, you're using up Internet bandwidth. |
|
Diamond Member Username: WingmanaliveWww.stainles... .ecrater.com Post Number: 24335 Registered: Jun-06 | You can't forget in this debate the fact that the internet, as educational AND corrupt as it is, is killing institutions like libraries, music stores, newspaper agencies, and even the good old USPS. While it may be the inevitable leap into the future it also comes at a price which will be unavoidable. Remember having to do a book report in school? It involved checking out books at the library, doing the research and thumping yourself through the process of putting into words what you've learned. Today? It's a 10 minute C/P 0rgy of text and pics that does the "author" no good in retention. It's simply too easy to cheat. Mind you the net costs $$ while the good old fashioned library was free. Somehow I get the feeling in the future we'll be paying someone to think just because they found out a way to patent it. |
|
Silver Member Username: KrishnPost Number: 492 Registered: Sep-06 | It is also interesting to see how easy it is to make a fool of people, just not those who are high school drop outs, but even those with advanced college degrees All that is needed is for big money to fund a think tank, cherry pick only those that supports the agenda, totally ignore those that do not support it, bingo you have followers. People will even believe that there is no global warming. Recall a time when even Warren Buffet and Bill Gates Sr. were against drastic reduction in Estate taxes since they felt it was not morally right. The Republicans rephrased Estate Taxes as Wealth Tax and suddenly polls indicated nearly 75% support for reduction in Wealth Tax from African Americans, even though it would benefit only about 0.25% of the African American population. |
|
Diamond Member Username: NydasPost Number: 20594 Registered: Jun-06 | Hey guys! Read this story from Ottawa, the Canadian capital. http://www.canada.com/business/CRTC+good+guys+Really/4184769/story.html The CRTC are the good guys. Really! By Vito Pilieci, Ottawa Citizen January 28, 2011 And if anybody gets upset, he/she can read the comments posted by the unlimited broadband lobby.... and feel happy, |
|
Diamond Member Username: WingmanaliveWww.stainles... .ecrater.com Post Number: 24336 Registered: Jun-06 | I do not support a tax curve for ANY income level. You owe what you owe. The sad fact is that the upper 2% of tax payers have the resources and means to dodge their tax liabilities allowing them to keep more of their $$, while middle America suffers the burden of the short fall. That makes this place a rich man's cave! The $$ that makes the law prospers by it. It has always been so and always will be. That is why I'm a Democrat as opposed to Republican. Honest, hard working middle class Americans build this country and fund its' insatiable thirst of the corrupt and greedy. Republicans are just there to line their pockets and create laws that protect their own best interests. In my own twisted world I define both parties as this: Democrat: Supports middle class America and frowns on spending outside our own means. Republican: Supports (and funds) any cause that ensures their elevated lifestyle and opposes all actions that hurt their bottom line. Problem with this scenario? The republicans have the $$ to influence Washington, thus controlling the game, right? Maybe we need a revolt here in the states as well. |
|
Silver Member Username: Cheap_trickPost Number: 244 Registered: Oct-09 | If words suffice not, blows must follow. ....Aesop |
|
Gold Member Username: HardrockstrikerPost Number: 1106 Registered: Apr-06 | I'm not a hardcore socialist by any means, but I don't believe that any one person should be so wealthy (like rich shareholders, company VPs etc) while others in the world have to go without something or must have a service of lesser quality. The same goes for things like the Internet. ISP shareholders are not suffering. If most ISPs were just 'getting by' then I'm sure that a lot more people (including myself) would support a fee-per-use type service. It's well-know that Canada has one of the best Internet backbones in the world. |