Bandwidth caps and SL

I listen to various tech podcasts and have become interested in the prospect of ISP companies beginning to impose caps on bandwidth by charging a fee based on the amount requested/used/etc. I have no idea how this would affect SL, thinking about those situations where one stays logged on for hours on end or utilizes graphics-intensive apps within SL or ... whatever ...

Has anybody in LL land or elsewhere considered this prospect? Is my apprehension ill-founded?

Answers?

Thanks!

Maybe the new pricing plan that some ISPs are pondering over is designed to hit the folks that download movies 24/7. and hopefully if you're just an average user then the monthly fee will be roughly the same as the current flat fee.

Second Life doesn't use that much bandwidth if you're just standing around cybersexing or building. It's only when you're exploring and all those textures are being downloaded does the bandwidth take a hit. I doubt that many people explore SL because of the poor performance. So thanks to SL being a bit crap we shouldn't have to worry too much.

This is normal in Australia

All ISPhave caps as standard for internet connections. The ability to have an unlimited connection is there however the fees are so excessive for most people.

My internet costs $70 a month for 40 gigs

I am 15 gigs for $40 here in Sydney. When I am out of gigs, (I always run out too. ) I rezz up slow but once I am rezzed I can chat or build fine, a TP somewhere is impossible.

I have internet access via cable modem as part of my total TimeWarner-Roadrunner package (cable modem, digital/HDTV, no premium channels ... I've paid 110US per month for years without regard to bandwidth. I've heard that, in other parts of the world, like Australia and Europe, there is a cap of sorts. As I said, I'm humbled and thankful for what may be an oversight here in the US ... but if there's money to be made, I'm sure we'll be hit, too.

It's depressing to think that, in addition to server lag in SL, a bandwidth cap would slow things down even more!

Thanks for your insights!

Maybe not, our net here in Oz is getting cheaper and cheaper. Hopefully the USA deal will be the norm.

I don't think it costs per gig for the isp companies or does it, I always thought it was price fixing? I could be wrong.

TWC has introduceed caps in some locations already. Comcast has done the same, however Comcasts caps are much higher that TWC is.

Here in Holland we use Tele2 with a 20Mb cable line and no bandwidth restrictions or caps and it costs with the TV package 49 Euros a month not to bad although I believe some companies cap over here it is not the norm

That US$110 per month is expensive compared to the UK. Here, cable services come packaged with phone and TV and costs a lot less than that - the price depends on download speed, of course, but it's unlimited download. I'm on a 20M line to avoid getting slowed down for a few hours each day. That, together with the phone line and all the non-premium cable TV channels, costs me £54 (~US$81). I do think that Virgin does a good job

Have they got the 50Mb line out yet Phil? Virgin that is.

This thread inspired me to create a poll:

Yep. I've thought about having it but decided I have no need for it. I don't download any music or TV, let alone tons of it, and my SL use is limited by my hardware - not by the download speed. I also wonder if the SL serverside system would deliver files fast enough for 50M to be noticeably better.

I'm using one of the oldest internet providers for households in holland (XS4ALL) and seeing that they originated from a group of hackers they are very much against any form of limitation, they do not cap, don't block ports, don't limit usenet usage and groups and for some also important, they do not give account information to private organisation combating filesharing unless by courtorder.

Sometimes it pays to pick an ISP by reputation rather then by being the cheapest *shoots frank*

Thats true I didn't think about the Hardware lol, its still incredible when you think we used to run an adult website front page (the content was in the USA as it was illegal in the UK then) in the early 90's when our hosting company only had 2 x 2Mb lines that served their hosting company in the UK and our bandwidth costs were astronomical at that time and now look what you get so cheap for home

Way wrong.

MY SL bandwidth bill runs between 25-40gigs a month, for SL alone.

Lots of people explore SL. It is one of the most popular things to do.

Yep. It's not all that long ago that I had a 512k line. They kept increasing it at no extra cost. I don't know what the current low end is now - maybe 4Mb or 8Mb. The download speed is dependant on the line speed, the speed at which the other end can send it out, and how busy the network is at the time. 50Mb sounds great but I doubt that I would see much difference, if any, as I'm not a big downloader of files.

/me agrees. It's tons of fun to explore SL! If I couldn't do that, I wouldn't bother coming back. If my ISP starts charging by the gig, I'll have some tough decisions to make. I'm on Comcast and I think they've been coming down on people who use over 100 gigs a month. I must not be because I haven't gotten a notice from them, either that or they're not doing it in my area yet.

Editing: I figured I'd actually go look up some facts, since I haven't been paying much attention: The cap is 250GB per month, for all Comcast customers in the U.S. I'd have a really hard time going over that!
http://www.comcast.net/terms/network/amendment/

I think of bandwidth caps as something that only happen in certain parts of the world that can't get it together... If an ISP tried to do that in America... I guess they'd lose business!

I have a few friends in Australia that have to deal with bandwidth caps and it sounds miserable. They have to constantly watch out for things that make the viewer download large batches of textures or sounds and consider whether they've used too much of their allowance to risk it.

I'm waiting for them to figure it out, not for it to spread to the rest of the world

As comcast - we have a 250gig cap.

They are primarily hunting Torrent/Movie/Music people who use newsgroups and stuff to keep a constant stream of data flowing to their never ending terabytes of storage.

I am hard pressed to use more than 60 gigs. I'd have to sign up with a newsgroup service and start downloading music non-stop or something. And I would rather buy the music I like.

They are.

And they are not losing business.

Yeah, kinda hard for an ISP to lose business when they're the only viable option for reliable high speed in the area, which is the case in many areas.

I just read an article THIS week about how the TWC is dropping its experiment with tiered download charges. I'll try to find the article again. Aparently it didn't work too well in America.

I think its abuse by the ISP's myself.

In fact I think access to the internet should be free and unlimited to everyone!

Handy

I think TWC backed off only in Rochester... nd just for the time being

Here's what I found, seems its just a temporary backing off while they restructure:

Time Warner Cable Chief Executive Officer Glenn Britt said, “It is clear from the public response over the last two weeks that there is a great deal of misunderstanding about our plans to roll out additional tests on Consumption Based Billing. As a result, we will not proceed with implementation of additional tests until further consultation with our customers and other interested parties, ensuring that community needs are being met. While we continue to believe that Consumption Based Billing may be the best pricing plan for consumers, we want to do everything we can to inform our customers of our plans and have the benefit of their views as part of our testing process.”



Time Warner Cable also announced that it is working to make measurement tools available as quickly as possible. These tools will help customers understand how much bandwidth they consume and aid in the dialog going forward.



Britt added, “We look forward to continuing to work with Senator Schumer, our customers and all of the other interested parties as the process moves forward, to ensure that informed decisions are made about the best way to continue to provide our customers with the level of service that they expect and deserve from Time Warner Cable.”

Handy