I think a reducing speed as usage goes up type arrangement would be quite cool. Realise what it would take some implementation trickery, but if they can slow your connection already, I'd assume possible.
Just an example of scaling your speed (this would suit my personal family's usage, we average around 30 and have gone as high as 70 when I was in the last month of my Technet subscription :P).
eg FS/FS to 30GB 2mb/512 to 60GB 1mb/256kb to 80GB 512kb/128kb to 120GB 128kb/64kb onwards
It would stop connection abusers while allowing users that want a fixed price and all that.
It depends on what the market Telecom is seeeking. If they wanna target the families cool. Places certainly to not overblow the invoice.
I am not with BT but my views on it. Reduce the speed down to 4 or 2Mbit. That is fast enough for streaming, I had 1.8Mbit tested 3yr ago and youtube was fine. I am not sure about offpeak or peak b/c that would just shift the load and attract high users (again). Make it 80GB a month for maybe the same $59.95 or a bit more.
It's relative, look at what a city gym subscription cost - perhaps $20-25 per week. So the prices for BB is not excessive me thinks.
Ragnor: It would be fascinating to see them do something like this:
$30 / month, $1 per GB on peak (8am - 2am), free off peak
I don't count on it :D Some people pay $30 for 3GB data.
That the cheapest of the cheap afaik. My fear of peak and offpeak is that you get the heavy downloaders who set their download managers and their p2ps up while they get their beauty sleep.
That's the point, off peak capacity is under utilised... in the wee hours Telecom have spare bandwidth in Mbit/s and Gbit/s they've paid for that's going unused.
Ragnor: It would be fascinating to see them do something like this:
$30 / month, $1 per GB on peak (8am - 2am), free off peak
I don't count on it :D Some people pay $30 for 3GB data.
That the cheapest of the cheap afaik. My fear of peak and offpeak is that you get the heavy downloaders who set their download managers and their p2ps up while they get their beauty sleep.
Isn't that what the whole point of bigtime was (from a network usage pont of view)? Reduce the peaktime load and shift it to the offpeak load? It wouldn't be too hard to qualify the plan with 'best effort speed' during off peak times.
rayonline: My fear of peak and offpeak is that you get the heavy downloaders who set their download managers and their p2ps up while they get their beauty sleep.
Isn't that what the whole point of bigtime was (from a network usage pont of view)? Reduce the peaktime load and shift it to the offpeak load? It wouldn't be too hard to qualify the plan with 'best effort speed' during off peak times.
Agreed, and people setting download managers and torrent clients on a schedule to use this bandwidth seems an ideal situation. Frees up peak bandwidth for other users; and utilises off-peak bandwidth that is already paid for, but otherwise unused.
What happens when our new copyright laws come into play? When all the rapidsharer's / torrenters / "linux iso" hounds.. start getting their infringement/disconnection notices? Im thinking the need for 100gb plans will reduce. Of course there are legitimate users that need 100gb+ for online backups etc, but lets face it, the majority of users here wanting 100gb plans are p2p'ing the hell out of there connections :D
The copyright act could play a big part in broadband caps and telecom probably no it.. well until someone works out a solid way around this, here come all the dedicated vpn tunnels.
But when your average mum and dad, that have no idea what there beloved children are downloading, get an infringement letter with disconnection / court threats, then you can bet that will put a stop on downloading in that house..
What happens when our new copyright laws come into play? When all the rapidsharer's / torrenters / "linux iso" hounds.. start getting their infringement/disconnection notices? Im thinking the need for 100gb plans will reduce. Of course there are legitimate users that need 100gb+ for online backups etc, but lets face it, the majority of users here wanting 100gb plans are p2p'ing the hell out of there connections :D
The copyright act could play a big part in broadband caps and telecom probably no it.. well until someone works out a solid way around this, here come all the dedicated vpn tunnels.
But when your average mum and dad, that have no idea what there beloved children are downloading, get an infringement letter with disconnection / court threats, then you can bet that will put a stop on downloading in that house..
Anyways just my .2c
But there will always be people who use a lot of traffic legitimately, and even more who circumvent identification by copyright holders and continue to download whatever they please.
I personally don't think the copyright act will have a huge impact on the amount people download, and I'd be surprised if Telecom based their plans on what might happen.
But who knows, I've been wrong before :)
UPDATE: After rereading your post I'm wondering if I misunderstood. Are you suggesting that Telecom may have low capped plans to help prevent copyright infringement, or that they have low capped plans because they anticipate a substantial drop in downloads because of the new law?
It was pure speculation obviously.. I threw in the comment on telecom holding back plans (in the future) as telecom are in the best position of anyone to know, who does what on the internet. Im of the opinion theres probably a 80/20 ratio of illegitimate to legitimate use when it comes to people pulling more than say 80gb a month.. Once again, there are people that are doing this legitimately but they are definitely the minority.
Your average joe bloggs user won't know about vpn tunnels, encryption etc etc, so when the infringement notices start rolling in they will simply stop doing what they are doing, that or investigate ways around it. Now in saying all this i doubt telecom will base plans off knowing this but as i said in my opening paragraph, i believe that your average user once hit with said notices, wont be requiring a 100gb plan anymore.. Who knows how hard it will be to get around the technology surrounding the incoming copyright laws, theres generally a way around everything but it always requires a certain level of competence..
Can someone educate me re: peak and offpeak traffic?
I just thought that Telecom buys some bandwidth and they can dsitribute how they see fit. I thought that a unit not used at offpeak can be used at peak time, apples for apples.
Can you buy diff bandwidth given diff times of the day at different prices?
SauronJones: But there will always be people who use a lot of traffic legitimately, and even more who circumvent identification by copyright holders and continue to download whatever they please.
I personally don't think the copyright act will have a huge impact on the amount people download, and I'd be surprised if Telecom based their plans on what might happen.
But who knows, I've been wrong before :)
UPDATE: After rereading your post I'm wondering if I misunderstood. Are you suggesting that Telecom may have low capped plans to help prevent copyright infringement, or that they have low capped plans because they anticipate a substantial drop in downloads because of the new law?
I honestly don't think Telecoms current plans were set with any thought to the laws that are being looked at in reference to Copyright material.
Telecoms current BB plans appear out of touch when you compare them to other providers especially when you have the likes of Snap, Slingshot etc etc offering plans around the 100GB mark.
With currernt BB usage averages looking around the 15GB to 60GB range there isn't much reason for offering plans much larger than 80GB especially at subsidised or discounted rates. Therefore if you want to download 100's of GB's then you will need to pay for it at what ever the ISP wants to charge for that traffic.
rayonline: My fear of peak and offpeak is that you get the heavy downloaders who set their download managers and their p2ps up while they get their beauty sleep.
Isn't that what the whole point of bigtime was (from a network usage pont of view)? Reduce the peaktime load and shift it to the offpeak load? It wouldn't be too hard to qualify the plan with 'best effort speed' during off peak times.
Agreed, and people setting download managers and torrent clients on a schedule to use this bandwidth seems an ideal situation. Frees up peak bandwidth for other users; and utilises off-peak bandwidth that is already paid for, but otherwise unused.
Would people overload the offpeak times? From what I read some people complain about offpeak service being too crummy.
rayonline: Can someone educate me re: peak and offpeak traffic?
I just thought that Telecom buys some bandwidth and they can dsitribute how they see fit. I thought that a unit not used at offpeak can be used at peak time, apples for apples.
Can you buy diff bandwidth given diff times of the day at different prices?
Telecom doesn't buy bandwidth in terms of GB's a month, it buys it in terms of GBits/second.
Because of this, it has to buy bandwidth equal to its peak usage, and then it receives that 24/7. As a result, during 'off peak' times, the bandwidth used by its members is theoretically lower than the peak usage, so it had bandwidth unutilised.
There's a lot of possible plans submitted in this thread, and I just can't help but add some more :)
This is what I'd like to see(and not just from telecom):
512kbps/128kbps 25 GB peak, free offpeak(to set limit). $60-70 ish a month. Rate limit to 128kbps/64kbps or overage charges at customers choice. Fair use policy of 150 GB max off peak traffic or be moved off the plan.
Why?
This will be enough bandwidth for heavy downloaders and still enough to be useablefor familys wanting price seurity. With enough heavy users on this type of plan, the congestion isps have been facing would be greatly reduced.
Daytime/peak speeds will be stable due to the peak transfer limit. Apart from the hard limit to the speed attainable, there shouldn't be any shaping of the traffic, as it would not be needed.
Surely somthing like this is possible?
Currently slingshot offers fullspeed like above(which I currently have) but I beleive the limited speed version would be more beneficial to the wider internet community while still working out ok for the heavy/large family users.
Perhaps even higher speed versions of the above plan would be possible too(for higher charges also).
Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly
to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.
Trusted
