Average monthly broadband usage in U.S. homes is 190 gigabytes per month, according to a new report from iGR Research. More than 95% of this traffic is video, researchers said.“TV has become a personal activity,” said Iain Gillott, president of iGR research, in an interview. “If you have four people in a household now, that means four times the data going in.”In the past all members of a four-person home might watch the same thing on the same TV set at the same time. But today, each family member may be watching his or her own Netflix or YouTube choice.
Showing posts with label Data Caps. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Data Caps. Show all posts
Tuesday, September 27, 2016
Household Data Consumption
Interesting article on average US household data consumption:
Wednesday, June 1, 2016
Data Caps vs Speed Limits
"Should broadband data hogs pay more? ISP economics say 'no"."
I'm of the opinion that a broadband provider should either limit a subscriber by a data cap or a bandwidth speed but not both. If you are utilizing a service based upon time usage such as a cell or satellite based network then data caps can make sense. If you are using a wired network then fixed "up to" speeds make sense.
Most wired ISP costs are fixed. The ISP has to pay for those costs whether the network is being used or not. The price the subscriber pays for trying to use the network at busy times of the day is congestion. If your supposed 50 Mbps Internet only gets 10 Mbps when the kids get out of school or at night when everyone is downloading their Netflix choices for the evening - you don't expect a rebate from your provider do you? Likewise it would be equally unfair for providers to charge subscribers for exceeding "data caps" when no "data cap" actually exists.
The wired ISP speed is limited by their backhaul Internet connection. If that connection is say 10 Gbps then that's the theoretical "data cap" for the ISP. If I'm paying for an "up to" 50 Mbps connection then the ISP is imposing a "speed limit" on my connection. If I want a higher speed - then I can pay a higher cost to get a faster tiered service. For the service provider to try and charge additional for exceeding randomly selected "data caps" is just plain gouging.
The problem is for many subscribers there is no choice. The first one with a wire to your house (fiber or coaxial) will probably be the only one with a wire to your house.
I'm of the opinion that a broadband provider should either limit a subscriber by a data cap or a bandwidth speed but not both. If you are utilizing a service based upon time usage such as a cell or satellite based network then data caps can make sense. If you are using a wired network then fixed "up to" speeds make sense.
Most wired ISP costs are fixed. The ISP has to pay for those costs whether the network is being used or not. The price the subscriber pays for trying to use the network at busy times of the day is congestion. If your supposed 50 Mbps Internet only gets 10 Mbps when the kids get out of school or at night when everyone is downloading their Netflix choices for the evening - you don't expect a rebate from your provider do you? Likewise it would be equally unfair for providers to charge subscribers for exceeding "data caps" when no "data cap" actually exists.
The wired ISP speed is limited by their backhaul Internet connection. If that connection is say 10 Gbps then that's the theoretical "data cap" for the ISP. If I'm paying for an "up to" 50 Mbps connection then the ISP is imposing a "speed limit" on my connection. If I want a higher speed - then I can pay a higher cost to get a faster tiered service. For the service provider to try and charge additional for exceeding randomly selected "data caps" is just plain gouging.
The problem is for many subscribers there is no choice. The first one with a wire to your house (fiber or coaxial) will probably be the only one with a wire to your house.
Friday, January 4, 2013
Tiered Cable Data Plans
Interesting look at possible tiered data plans for heavy data users. My initial reaction is "big deal".
Near the end of the article it is mentioned that Comcast has a data tier that allows for "300 gigabits per month - or about 130 hours of Netflix HD videos." Think about that for a minute. That's 4.33 hours of HD video a day. Good chance someone doing that is probably a cord cutter - and why should the cable company subsidize Netflix? Plus - as encoding algorithms advance less and less bandwidth will be needed for the same amount of video.
If in the future both cable and telcos will be the equivalent of dumb pipe providers - why shouldn't they get to charge for how much you drink from the pipe?
Near the end of the article it is mentioned that Comcast has a data tier that allows for "300 gigabits per month - or about 130 hours of Netflix HD videos." Think about that for a minute. That's 4.33 hours of HD video a day. Good chance someone doing that is probably a cord cutter - and why should the cable company subsidize Netflix? Plus - as encoding algorithms advance less and less bandwidth will be needed for the same amount of video.
If in the future both cable and telcos will be the equivalent of dumb pipe providers - why shouldn't they get to charge for how much you drink from the pipe?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)