This is exactly what we've been saying this whole time. DL supporters think that for $3 a movie they're going to be able to just greedily gorge themselves on bandwidth.
-
Our native mobile app has a new name: Fora Communities. Learn more.
ISP's to push back on video downloads?
TWC is going to try to move to usage based billing, citing growing popularity of video based downloads as a cause. Will other ISP's follow?
http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssT...39580720080117
Much of the "downloads are the future, not disc" argument is based on the assumption of flat rate broadband Internet usage. If usage based billing takes off, it's going to put 3rd party providers like MS, Apple, and Netflix at a price disadvantage.
Originally with downloads, I knew the corporate bean counters would constantly apply pressure to save bandwidth costs on their end by compromising quality. Look at the Sat companies and even some cable companies. But with usage based billing the consumer also stands to save money with greater compression, so the pressure to save bandwidth may come from both sides. I have no desire to watch bit starved HD. It's bad enough on sat/cable already. Wire based delivery is only going to get worse. That's why I can't understand the rush to kill off disc based formats for downloads. They should be different markets, with disc catering to the high end, high quality market.
Anyway, rant aside, I thought it was worthwhile news given the amount of attention HD downloads have been getting in this forum recently.
http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssT...39580720080117
Much of the "downloads are the future, not disc" argument is based on the assumption of flat rate broadband Internet usage. If usage based billing takes off, it's going to put 3rd party providers like MS, Apple, and Netflix at a price disadvantage.
Originally with downloads, I knew the corporate bean counters would constantly apply pressure to save bandwidth costs on their end by compromising quality. Look at the Sat companies and even some cable companies. But with usage based billing the consumer also stands to save money with greater compression, so the pressure to save bandwidth may come from both sides. I have no desire to watch bit starved HD. It's bad enough on sat/cable already. Wire based delivery is only going to get worse. That's why I can't understand the rush to kill off disc based formats for downloads. They should be different markets, with disc catering to the high end, high quality market.
Anyway, rant aside, I thought it was worthwhile news given the amount of attention HD downloads have been getting in this forum recently.
1 - 20 of 160 Posts
I'm not sure that there's really any such thing as a true DL supporter. It's more like BD hater. The more you hate BD the more you believe everyone in the world has fiber running directly from the movie studios into their TV's and PC's.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ehaser /forum/post/12845421
This is exactly what we've been saying this whole time. DL supporters think that for $3 a movie they're going to be able to just greedily gorge themselves on bandwidth.
I'm not sure that there's really any such thing as a true DL supporter. It's more like BD hater. The more you hate BD the more you believe everyone in the world has fiber running directly from the movie studios into their TV's and PC's.
I am a Time Warner customer (roadrunner service).
I currently get 6mb down and something like 256k up (very slow upload).
Of course I currently have unlimited access and pay 44.95 (I think).
If they offer lower priced plans with restricted bandwidth, good for them, and the people that want them.
If they try to restrict the bandwidth I am already using for the same price, they are going to have one less customer.
BTW - I have had the exact same service for 8 years now, isn't it about time someone offered something that was faster? (can't get fios for the forseeable future)
I currently get 6mb down and something like 256k up (very slow upload).
Of course I currently have unlimited access and pay 44.95 (I think).
If they offer lower priced plans with restricted bandwidth, good for them, and the people that want them.
If they try to restrict the bandwidth I am already using for the same price, they are going to have one less customer.
BTW - I have had the exact same service for 8 years now, isn't it about time someone offered something that was faster? (can't get fios for the forseeable future)
Is the reverse also true, the more you love Blu-ray the less you believe that there are people who use and continue to use download based video services?
Let's stop making this a BD love or hate thing guys, there are simply more and more HD options becoming available to consumers. Being interested in or using those options doesn't by default make you a "hater" of Blu-ray.
To address the topic, I believe that this strategy is more to combat the kazaa/********** crowd where people don't just download but also become supernodes for everyone else to leech off of. People who use pay downloads services often do this in moderation as they only have so much money.
Quote:
Originally Posted by iceperson /forum/post/12845465
I'm not sure that there's really any such thing as a true DL supporter. It's more like BD hater. The more you hate BD the more you believe everyone in the world has fiber running directly from the movie studios into their TV's and PC's.
Is the reverse also true, the more you love Blu-ray the less you believe that there are people who use and continue to use download based video services?
Let's stop making this a BD love or hate thing guys, there are simply more and more HD options becoming available to consumers. Being interested in or using those options doesn't by default make you a "hater" of Blu-ray.
To address the topic, I believe that this strategy is more to combat the kazaa/********** crowd where people don't just download but also become supernodes for everyone else to leech off of. People who use pay downloads services often do this in moderation as they only have so much money.
When we tried doing VOD over IP at Enron, we had one secret weapon: our own nationwide fiber optic network that we got when we bought PG&E. We peered with all of our last mile partners (SBC, QWEST, etc.), bypassing issues like this.
Majority of ISP's these days are telcos. This is not unfair of them. Basically they want their peice of the pie. In the end, 1$ from that 3$ will have to go to the provider. This is nothing new.
The ISP's have already been fighting with VoIP providers like Vonage for a year or so for the same reason. It's easy for Vonage to provide you with unlimited voip calling at a cheap price.. while the ISP foots your bandwidth bill.
In Canada, where I live.. Rogers just launched their own VoIP service and throttled the competitions.
The ISPs would LOVE for digital downloads to become the reality.. they just want a cut. Don't be surprised if the person offering you bajillions of movie downloads on an unthrottled port is your cable co and not some 3rd party.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ehaser /forum/post/12845421
This is exactly what we've been saying this whole time. DL supporters think that for $3 a movie they're going to be able to just greedily gorge themselves on bandwidth.
Majority of ISP's these days are telcos. This is not unfair of them. Basically they want their peice of the pie. In the end, 1$ from that 3$ will have to go to the provider. This is nothing new.
The ISP's have already been fighting with VoIP providers like Vonage for a year or so for the same reason. It's easy for Vonage to provide you with unlimited voip calling at a cheap price.. while the ISP foots your bandwidth bill.
In Canada, where I live.. Rogers just launched their own VoIP service and throttled the competitions.
The ISPs would LOVE for digital downloads to become the reality.. they just want a cut. Don't be surprised if the person offering you bajillions of movie downloads on an unthrottled port is your cable co and not some 3rd party.
Dark Fiber FTW!
Unfortunately at my place of business (where I am a network engineer), we can only get access to dark fiber for building to building access, not city to city.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JosephShaw /forum/post/12845569
When we tried doing VOD over IP at Enron, we had one secret weapon: our own nationwide fiber optic network that we got when we bought PG&E. We peered with all of our last mile partners (SBC, QWEST, etc.), bypassing issues like this.
Dark Fiber FTW!
Unfortunately at my place of business (where I am a network engineer), we can only get access to dark fiber for building to building access, not city to city.
![]()
too true
Quote:
Originally Posted by iceperson /forum/post/12845465
I'm not sure that there's really any such thing as a true DL supporter. It's more like BD hater. The more you hate BD the more you believe everyone in the world has fiber running directly from the movie studios into their TV's and PC's.
I can tell you that the company I work for (telco/isp/iptv provider) has no plans to begin nickle and dimeing our broadband customers. We have customers ranging from dialup to fiber (FTTP and MetroE) with FTTP speeds up to 20Mbps, and MetroE speeds up to 1 GigE. We are also allocating 60Mbps to each of our iptv customers (just for Video), which are all on GPON networks.
We peer at 4 points in the Eastern US and are at this time not seeing anything that would make us rethink our position. In fact, if our competitors begin to cap monthly usage, we will likely use that to our advantage from a marketing standpoint.
We peer at 4 points in the Eastern US and are at this time not seeing anything that would make us rethink our position. In fact, if our competitors begin to cap monthly usage, we will likely use that to our advantage from a marketing standpoint.
ISP business is highly profitable. Don't think for a moment people will do things that would cause them to lose customers....
That's true. It's not so much the downloads, but the uploads that can go 24/7. When there's pressure to keep the share ratio over 1:1, and even to build up some wiggle room, more bandwidth is used for uploads. I'm surprised it's gone on this long without usage-based charges.
Quote:
Originally Posted by griffon2k /forum/post/12845564
To address the topic, I believe that this strategy is more to combat the kazaa/********** crowd where people don't just download but also become supernodes for everyone else to leech off of. People who use pay downloads services often do this in moderation as they only have so much money.
That's true. It's not so much the downloads, but the uploads that can go 24/7. When there's pressure to keep the share ratio over 1:1, and even to build up some wiggle room, more bandwidth is used for uploads. I'm surprised it's gone on this long without usage-based charges.
This is a much more reasonable strategy than Comcast's strategy of threatening to cut off customers who use too much bandwidth, and then actually cutting them off for a year without notice.
If a customer uses more than the secret bandwidth limit, which has been estimated at around 100GB a month, bill the customer an additional surcharge, instead of threatening them with goons. If the customer insists on continuing to use excess bandwidth, then the customer pays more for it. Most customers would cut back after the first time.
If a customer uses more than the secret bandwidth limit, which has been estimated at around 100GB a month, bill the customer an additional surcharge, instead of threatening them with goons. If the customer insists on continuing to use excess bandwidth, then the customer pays more for it. Most customers would cut back after the first time.
comcast also has a similar system already setup they are just afraid to use it but if TW succeeds then comcast will follow and those who think restricted access will be cheaper your SOL it will become like canada
They just don't want people fully using the services they've contracted for, just the same way your insurance company doesn't want to pay out on claims. Business is all about giving you as little as possible in exchange for your money.
Ooooh, 6mb/s unlimited!! Oh, what's that? you actually want to use that bandwidth to download video? Oh heck no, we have to get paid more, we didn't think you were actually going to use your bandwidth!
Ooooh, 6mb/s unlimited!! Oh, what's that? you actually want to use that bandwidth to download video? Oh heck no, we have to get paid more, we didn't think you were actually going to use your bandwidth!
Beyond illegal downloading, the ISPs have no say or any right to how we use the bandwidth. The bandwidth has been paid for by the customer. If we choose to use bandwidth to email Aunt Edna or download a movie from Apple, it's our business. They sold us the bandwidth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anotheraviator /forum/post/12845589
Majority of ISP's these days are telcos. This is not unfair of them. Basically they want their peice of the pie. In the end, 1$ from that 3$ will have to go to the provider. This is nothing new.
The ISP's have already been fighting with VoIP providers like Vonage for a year or so for the same reason. It's easy for Vonage to provide you with unlimited voip calling at a cheap price.. while the ISP foots your bandwidth bill.
In Canada, where I live.. Rogers just launched their own VoIP service and throttled the competitions.
The ISPs would LOVE for digital downloads to become the reality.. they just want a cut. Don't be surprised if the person offering you bajillions of movie downloads on an unthrottled port is your cable co and not some 3rd party.
Beyond illegal downloading, the ISPs have no say or any right to how we use the bandwidth. The bandwidth has been paid for by the customer. If we choose to use bandwidth to email Aunt Edna or download a movie from Apple, it's our business. They sold us the bandwidth.
I agree completely. this will just drive me away from them if they do this in Austin. I've got 10mpbs down and 1mbps up and I game alot. I have a hard enough time keeping track of cell phone minutes...now they want me to keep track of Kilobytes? Ummm No -**** off on that...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jiffylush /forum/post/12845481
I am a Time Warner customer (roadrunner service).
I currently get 6mb down and something like 256k up (very slow upload).
Of course I currently have unlimited access and pay 44.95 (I think).
If they offer lower priced plans with restricted bandwidth, good for them, and the people that want them.
If they try to restrict the bandwidth I am already using for the same price, they are going to have one less customer.
BTW - I have had the exact same service for 8 years now, isn't it about time someone offered something that was faster? (can't get fios for the forseeable future)
I agree completely. this will just drive me away from them if they do this in Austin. I've got 10mpbs down and 1mbps up and I game alot. I have a hard enough time keeping track of cell phone minutes...now they want me to keep track of Kilobytes? Ummm No -**** off on that...
I wouldn't say they are footing the bill, YOU are paying for a service so it is no of their business what you use your bandwidth for. That's the way free markets work. If the telcos want to get voice customers back, find better solutions to do so, or introduce your own VOIP service at a better price as many have.
It really doesn't cost an ISP more per amount of bandwidth you are using. The issue is when it becomes cumulative from the number over users using alot of bandwidth. That would also mean they probably have a lot of customers and therefore should have the revenue to upgrade their network.
Charging by the bandwidth is just pure greed and will certainly lead to loss of customers. I for one and gone if this happens.
Quote:
The ISP's have already been fighting with VoIP providers like Vonage for a year or so for the same reason. It's easy for Vonage to provide you with unlimited voip calling at a cheap price.. while the ISP foots your bandwidth bill.
I wouldn't say they are footing the bill, YOU are paying for a service so it is no of their business what you use your bandwidth for. That's the way free markets work. If the telcos want to get voice customers back, find better solutions to do so, or introduce your own VOIP service at a better price as many have.
It really doesn't cost an ISP more per amount of bandwidth you are using. The issue is when it becomes cumulative from the number over users using alot of bandwidth. That would also mean they probably have a lot of customers and therefore should have the revenue to upgrade their network.
Charging by the bandwidth is just pure greed and will certainly lead to loss of customers. I for one and gone if this happens.
This is news to me. I have downloaded much more than 100Gb in a month before, and never received any notification I had exceeded any "limit". I live in the Chicagoland area.
Art
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeattleAl /forum/post/12845855
This is a much more reasonable strategy than Comcast's strategy of threatening to cut off customers who use too much bandwidth, and then actually cutting them off for a year without notice.
If a customer uses more than the secret bandwidth limit, which has been estimated at around 100GB a month, bill the customer an additional surcharge, instead of threatening them with goons. If the customer insists on continuing to use excess bandwidth, then the customer pays more for it. Most customers would cut back after the first time.
This is news to me. I have downloaded much more than 100Gb in a month before, and never received any notification I had exceeded any "limit". I live in the Chicagoland area.
Art
DLing has nothing to do with hating BD. I know plenty of people who like to download movies (legally or illegally, I have no idea and don't ask), and for the most part, they don't know what BD really is. Some have heard of the name, and just mention the PS3.
Quote:
Originally Posted by iceperson /forum/post/12845465
I'm not sure that there's really any such thing as a true DL supporter. It's more like BD hater. The more you hate BD the more you believe everyone in the world has fiber running directly from the movie studios into their TV's and PC's.
DLing has nothing to do with hating BD. I know plenty of people who like to download movies (legally or illegally, I have no idea and don't ask), and for the most part, they don't know what BD really is. Some have heard of the name, and just mention the PS3.
1 - 20 of 160 Posts
- This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
AVS Forum
A forum community dedicated to home theater owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about home audio/video, TVs, projectors, screens, receivers, speakers, projects, DIY’s, product reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Top Contributors this Month
View All
WilliamR
858 Replies
BASSAHOLIC
472 Replies
bass addict
396 Replies
Recommended Communities
