# Broadband Caps Come Back



## jp1203 (Jul 21, 2005)

[WEBQUOTE="http://www.pcworld.com/article/147153/article.html?tk=nl_texnws"]Bandwidth hogs, beware: Cable operators are targeting power users who transfer massive media (and other) files.

Comcast is testing a technique that slows traffic to and from heavy users during peak periods. Time Warner Cable is trying a usage-based (or tiered) pricing system in Beaumont, Texas; and BendBroadband of Bend, Oregon, now charges customers a usage penalty if they exceed a monthly data-transfer quota. Even some noncable ISPs, such as DSL giant AT&T, are mulling usage-based pricing.

Why the crackdown? "The cable companies are feeling the pain the most from heavy-bandwidth users," says IDC analyst Amy Harris Lind. That's because all cable broadband subscribers in a neighborhood share a single pipe to their ISP; each DSL user has a dedicated link...[/WEBQUOTE]

If Verizon does that with their DSL, I'll be ticked off.


----------



## TechGuy (Feb 12, 1999)

That's pretty scary. If all of the big companies do it, it might give some smaller ones a good way to compete. The problem is that the cable company or phone company own that last mile. Maybe we'll need to go to wireless or satellite to get to the competition?


----------



## new tech guy (Mar 27, 2006)

Oh they better not do it with dsl, i need that bandwidth so i can upload stuff to my offsite backup server. If they do that there basically breaking my emergency backup system (which is to be used incase of either a server breakdown or if there is a disaster that destroys the house's computer equipment). What about users who need large amounts of bandwidth and run utilities like that during the night? I have a right to back up my home's computer data, regardless of who else is using the internet. Fortunately i have verizon as well and they dont do that but i have to agree with j stergis if they do im gonna be stewing. Is there any way to decalre that your data is a backup and needs bandwidth priority to make sure it goes across the ineternet ok?


----------



## jp1203 (Jul 21, 2005)

new tech guy said:


> Oh they better not do it with dsl, i need that bandwidth so i can upload stuff to my offsite backup server. If they do that there basically breaking my emergency backup system (which is to be used incase of either a server breakdown or if there is a disaster that destroys the house's computer equipment). What about users who need large amounts of bandwidth and run utilities like that during the night? I have a right to back up my home's computer data, regardless of who else is using the internet. Fortunately i have verizon as well and they dont do that but i have to agree with j stergis if they do im gonna be stewing. Is there any way to decalre that your data is a backup and needs bandwidth priority to make sure it goes across the ineternet ok?


I dunno if they'd allow exceptions. I also have Verizon and I've gotta call and harass them, but for a different reason. They told me my modem was probably half shot because my DSL's been dropping at night, but a neighbor just e-mailed me saying his was dropping too. Something's not right, and they're going to fix it.

I have a server here running dual 160 GB drives, so one stores everyone's documents, all the music, photos, etc. and the other is the backup destination. I do download a lot though. I play around with a lot of Linux distros, and just about every night I download one, not to mention there are 5 PCs here and 5 people, so generally there's a lot of surfing going on.

It'd tick me off, I'd have a very hard time keeping my connection under 10 GB/month. I downloaded a little app the kept track of it for me and I was approaching 50 on average for three different months.


----------



## jp1203 (Jul 21, 2005)

TechGuy said:


> That's pretty scary. If all of the big companies do it, it might give some smaller ones a good way to compete. The problem is that the cable company or phone company own that last mile. Maybe we'll need to go to wireless or satellite to get to the competition?


I was actually considering wireless or satellite about two years ago, because as far as lines go, all we had was dialup at the time. I looked at the prices, though, and thought better of it.

Currently, DSL is my only option, so I really hope nothing happens to it.


----------



## DarqueMist (Jan 16, 2001)

It's not just cable ... here in Canada Bell has been under fire for a while over a stunt it recently pulled with it's DSL service. They throttled the bandwidth being provided to resellers (like Aliant whom I purchase from) but never told them. In April an investigation was begun by the Canadian Radio and Telecommunications com. And acording to this article Comcast is under the same sort of investigation by the FCC in the US

*CRTC to debate on Bell's unpopular 'bandwidth throttling'
*


----------



## JohnWill (Oct 19, 2002)

It would be pointless for me to have the big pipe if they put bandwidth caps in place, I'll drop back to the minimum FiOS service. Hard to imagine that happening universally, what a giant step backwards that would be! :down:


----------



## new tech guy (Mar 27, 2006)

JStergis said:


> I dunno if they'd allow exceptions. I also have Verizon and I've gotta call and harass them, but for a different reason. They told me my modem was probably half shot because my DSL's been dropping at night, but a neighbor just e-mailed me saying his was dropping too. Something's not right, and they're going to fix it.
> 
> I have a server here running dual 160 GB drives, so one stores everyone's documents, all the music, photos, etc. and the other is the backup destination. I do download a lot though. I play around with a lot of Linux distros, and just about every night I download one, not to mention there are 5 PCs here and 5 people, so generally there's a lot of surfing going on.
> 
> It'd tick me off, I'd have a very hard time keeping my connection under 10 GB/month. I downloaded a little app the kept track of it for me and I was approaching 50 on average for three different months.


Pointless question, how do you have a destination backup. Here i have the 1TB NAS which holds the big backup which is everything the user uses then i use a critical only version of that for the offsite. I did hear and like Johnwill's idea of putting the unit in a fireproof safe and considered it though...


----------



## jp1203 (Jul 21, 2005)

new tech guy said:


> Pointless question, how do you have a destination backup. Here i have the 1TB NAS which holds the big backup which is everything the user uses then i use a critical only version of that for the offsite. I did hear and like Johnwill's idea of putting the unit in a fireproof safe and considered it though...


One 160 GB has several folders holding each user's documents, music, photos, etc. and every night I have a batch script run that copies everything to the other drive.

I don't bother with an offsite. If something happens that destroys everything including the server, I figure I have a lot more to worry about than getting some pictures and music back. Besides, with a 128K uplink and over 40 GB to backup, it'd be pretty hard to do over the internet, and any other way wouldn't be recent enough in case I needed it.


----------



## ~Candy~ (Jan 27, 2001)

Might cut down all of those illegal downloads and P2P sharing


----------



## jp1203 (Jul 21, 2005)

Maybe, I'm baffled as to how people still use P2P networks without fear. There's no way anyone's going to beat the music industry's lawyers if they're tracked down, so why take the chance of paying a quarter million dollars for a few songs.


----------



## ~Candy~ (Jan 27, 2001)

Just take a look at all of the idiots who post hijack this logs 

Oops, did I just say idiots?


----------



## new tech guy (Mar 27, 2006)

Oh ok i realize that too. But we have family photos and whatnot. I also run it all through batch scripts (thanks for the idea again as i have used it extensively). Only problem is that it is being very unreliable cause he seems to keep running into server trouble. I figured just incase somthing like that happens, irreplaceable family stuff is safe and can be recovered. Music is not what im worried about as it can be replaced. But everyone's photos are another story. And i set up with a complete restore kit on a webmail account. I can at this point restore the system anywhere with an internet connnection. Just get an external hd. Although as you said J i have more to worry about at least that is one less thing . And yes, ACA i beleive that is the reason for the first crackdown of bandwidth use. It was to discourage illeagal p2p file trading.


----------



## jp1203 (Jul 21, 2005)

Sure, we have family photos too, but we have at least 20 times more film photos, which are much more difficult to save. The digital photos I have are within the past few years, the film ones go back 20+ years to the present, which is why I'm not too awfully concerned about saving the digital ones. 

I use the batch scripts a lot too, I wrote a backup one, a shutdown one, and a logon script for domain users.

I guess I'm just not too concerned about fires. Heck, the smoke alarms went off yesterday morning around 5, but I ignored them and went back to sleep--really didn't see where a fire could be and I could hear my father in the kitchen, so it couldn't have been a problem, I think it was smoke from him cooking breakfast to get ready for work.


----------



## farstrider2001 (Aug 2, 2007)

DarqueMist said:


> It's not just cable ... here in Canada Bell has been under fire for a while over a stunt it recently pulled with it's DSL service. They throttled the bandwidth being provided to resellers (like Aliant whom I purchase from) but never told them. In April an investigation was begun by the Canadian Radio and Telecommunications com. And acording to this article Comcast is under the same sort of investigation by the FCC in the US
> 
> *CRTC to debate on Bell's unpopular 'bandwidth throttling'
> *


i used to have bell but it started to suck because of the constant throttling because they let their customers use as many computers as they want on one ip address instead of charging people for extra addresses. so when i moved we went with rogers which is now enforcing banwith caps & is now replacing 404 error messeges with RogersYahoo search resualts not to mention none of the cdn. isp's are giving people upgraded speeds like US providers do. there saying buy upgraded speeds. US isp's faze out older speed rates with new ones


----------



## new tech guy (Mar 27, 2006)

JStergis said:


> Sure, we have family photos too, but we have at least 20 times more film photos, which are much more difficult to save. The digital photos I have are within the past few years, the film ones go back 20+ years to the present, which is why I'm not too awfully concerned about saving the digital ones.
> 
> I use the batch scripts a lot too, I wrote a backup one, a shutdown one, and a logon script for domain users.
> 
> I guess I'm just not too concerned about fires. Heck, the smoke alarms went off yesterday morning around 5, but I ignored them and went back to sleep--really didn't see where a fire could be and I could hear my father in the kitchen, so it couldn't have been a problem, I think it was smoke from him cooking breakfast to get ready for work.


That is the thing, lately we have relied heavily on the digital camera for photos. For family ones like vacations and all, i set up a shared directory on the local NAS on which they are all uploaded to and all users of the network can view. I back that up manually as it is not updated oftenly and more or less just viewed or used to swap files between users. /and then personal ones are saved locally and backed up by the batch script system. Only trouble is that sister's files are very big and im trying to get her to cut down but she wont do it. What i want to do is move some of those pictures to ftp permanently and have them so they do not delete and then remove the local copies. This way i have them saved and there always safe. But i just keep having problems with ftp reliability. If the server ran reliably i would not mind her slowdown as the system works.


----------



## Melinda_B (Jul 29, 2008)

I work from home as a sub contractor for a call center and have been experiencing slow page loads and response times. I contacted our help desk and when questioned about my ISP (Comcast) he stated that due to the large amount of bandwidth this company transfers (copany I contract for) that I need to contact my ISP and have them fix the problem. There were articles in our local paper that cable ISP providers do not have enough bandwidth to handle the increased flow of traffic from everyone and their mothers especially since alot of people are tlecommuters now. Need suggestions for where to ask for help since I am getting written up for too long of time for call....any ideas


----------



## ~Candy~ (Jan 27, 2001)

Doesn't Comcast have an option to upgrade to a higher service?


----------

