1badmf wrote on Jun 6, 2016, 00:19:descender wrote on Jun 5, 2016, 19:51:That make me sad and mad, you're not allowed to post here anymore and ruin my afternoon like that.
Ask him what his latency is like, you'll feel better.
why would his latency be high? you know, other than internetting from pluto?
descender wrote on Jun 5, 2016, 19:51:That make me sad and mad, you're not allowed to post here anymore and ruin my afternoon like that.
Ask him what his latency is like, you'll feel better.
Bopper wrote on Jun 5, 2016, 17:30:
Holy moly I am lucky here in Finland I have 350/20 Mbps and 4G wireless on the house (that I don't even use) for 30 Euros a month.
Pigeon wrote on Jun 5, 2016, 14:08:Depends on the math. If you are downloading enough to go over caps all the time, and you are in the situation described by Saboth above, it might be. If that's not you, then yeah it might not fit. Internet isn't one size fits all.Dev wrote on Jun 5, 2016, 13:45:Saboth wrote on Jun 5, 2016, 12:58:Or, people with a clue have the option to get Comcast business for $70 and have no caps at all. (at least in areas where it's available)
Exactly. They are trying to make up for the loss in TV subscriptions by creating arbitrary limits and fees. Whereas in the past you might have paid $100-$120 for TV+internet, people are dropping TV and going with internet-only, so the companies are maybe getting only $60-$80. So now they implement caps and start charging $35-$50 if you go "over" your false cap, so they still make $100+ on the consumer. So the consumer thinks: "Hmm, I can pay $40 a month for Hulu, Netflix, Sling, then $50 for overage charges, and $75 for internet for a total of $165, or I could just sign up for that Comcast TV deal for $125, and my streaming would go back down to 200-300 GB a month and I don't have to deal with those overage fees. Essentially when you buy TV, your "streaming" (transfer of data to watch TV) is free. When you use cable to stream from other sources, you are now charged for it, meaning Comcast is giving themselves a big advantage over competitors. We were using 200-300 GB when we had internet and cable TV. Now that we cut the cord, that's more like 600-700. I would think someone would point out exempting their cable service from data transfer rates while charging all other sources of TV streaming is anti-competitive.
For a 16Mbps/3Mbps connection and 2 year agreement. It would be $110 for me to keep the same speed I currently have, so lets not pretend that's a deal...
Dev wrote on Jun 5, 2016, 13:45:Saboth wrote on Jun 5, 2016, 12:58:Or, people with a clue have the option to get Comcast business for $70 and have no caps at all. (at least in areas where it's available)
Exactly. They are trying to make up for the loss in TV subscriptions by creating arbitrary limits and fees. Whereas in the past you might have paid $100-$120 for TV+internet, people are dropping TV and going with internet-only, so the companies are maybe getting only $60-$80. So now they implement caps and start charging $35-$50 if you go "over" your false cap, so they still make $100+ on the consumer. So the consumer thinks: "Hmm, I can pay $40 a month for Hulu, Netflix, Sling, then $50 for overage charges, and $75 for internet for a total of $165, or I could just sign up for that Comcast TV deal for $125, and my streaming would go back down to 200-300 GB a month and I don't have to deal with those overage fees. Essentially when you buy TV, your "streaming" (transfer of data to watch TV) is free. When you use cable to stream from other sources, you are now charged for it, meaning Comcast is giving themselves a big advantage over competitors. We were using 200-300 GB when we had internet and cable TV. Now that we cut the cord, that's more like 600-700. I would think someone would point out exempting their cable service from data transfer rates while charging all other sources of TV streaming is anti-competitive.
Saboth wrote on Jun 5, 2016, 12:58:Or, people with a clue have the option to get Comcast business for $70 and have no caps at all. (at least in areas where it's available)
Exactly. They are trying to make up for the loss in TV subscriptions by creating arbitrary limits and fees. Whereas in the past you might have paid $100-$120 for TV+internet, people are dropping TV and going with internet-only, so the companies are maybe getting only $60-$80. So now they implement caps and start charging $35-$50 if you go "over" your false cap, so they still make $100+ on the consumer. So the consumer thinks: "Hmm, I can pay $40 a month for Hulu, Netflix, Sling, then $50 for overage charges, and $75 for internet for a total of $165, or I could just sign up for that Comcast TV deal for $125, and my streaming would go back down to 200-300 GB a month and I don't have to deal with those overage fees. Essentially when you buy TV, your "streaming" (transfer of data to watch TV) is free. When you use cable to stream from other sources, you are now charged for it, meaning Comcast is giving themselves a big advantage over competitors. We were using 200-300 GB when we had internet and cable TV. Now that we cut the cord, that's more like 600-700. I would think someone would point out exempting their cable service from data transfer rates while charging all other sources of TV streaming is anti-competitive.
Supporters of internet data caps want to have things both ways: admitting that the monthly usage limits have nothing to do with congestion, while simultaneously arguing that those who use the most should pay more (but not that those who use the least should get any discount).