|
Quote:
Originally Posted by ptyork
I consider myself to be extremely technical and I honestly would have assumed that the 250 GB cap would have been download-only, as well.
|
Hrm. Interesting. Maybe I was making an unfair assumption in thinking that most tech-savvy people realize that bandwidth is always used both ways; there's no such thing as "free bandwidth". Whether you're downloading a song or uploading a video, bits are flowing. Every ISP cares about upload usage because of torrents; until Netflix started streaming, that was the #1 usage of bandwidth (and is probably still the #1 use of upstream bandwidth).
Still, if you were warned you'd used up your bandwidth, you wouldn't think to check your upload usage?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ptyork
When your internet host quotes you bandwidth limits, those don't include inbound transfers. Only outbound.
|
This server is with The Planet (now SoftLayer) and I have 2500 GB of bandwidth per month total...they track outward AND inbound data transfers. I've never seen it any other way - I'd guess that the smaller shared hosts only mention outbound data transfers as being part of your plan, but I guarantee they're tracking inbound as well. If you had a Web site where people were uploading HD videos for instance, you'd most definitely hear from the host if you used up your bandwidth allocation. ISPs pay for their bandwidth both ways, unless it's intra-network traffic.
Does your ISP have a data usage tool? Does it only show you downloads, not uploads?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ptyork
What REALLY grinds my gears here is that they receive a government sanctioned monopoly over a vital utility (two or three, actually, counting television and phone) and they are allowed to run rampant over consumers. They need to be regulated in the same way that power, water, and gas are.
|
No arguments from me there. It needs to be regulated because, as you said, someone can't just step in and build out a coax network and start competing with the cable companies.
|
Threaded Mode