[TriLUG] OT - TWC bandwidth caps on the way?

Tue Jun 3 14:59:59 EDT 2008

This isn't an endorsement for Sprint, but at a Raleigh IT show about a
year ago I attended an info-seminar put on by their wireless division.

They were touting EV-DO rev. A and with it, on-net ping times on par
with cable and DSL - IIRC in the 12-20 ms range.  Also, they would run a
relatively open network, i.e. possibly allowing uncertified, user
supplied devices.  EV-DO (no rev. A), as Verizon uses, has bandwidth but
delay at best around 150-200 ms.  I have no idea if Sprint has since
delivered but it sure sounded promising at the time.

On topic: as a TWC business class user, I sure hope they don't cap my
usage any time soon.  But I pay a multiple of the residential rate.
Here's hoping some decent FIOS coverage spreads in the Triangle...

Dave

Warren Myers wrote:
> Greg: would one of the broadband USB sticks from any of the cell providers
> work?
> 
> My employer just bought me one a couple months back, and I've ditched
> roadrunner because of it.
> 
> Just a thought :)
> 
> WMM
> 
> 
> On 6/3/08, Greg Brown <gwbrown1 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I don't have an alternative in my area.  I can't do satellite because of my
>> need for VPN and DSK is not available in my area.  I'm a sitting
>> duck.  This
>> sucks.
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 11:59 AM, <OlsonE at aosa.army.mil> wrote:
>>
>>> TimeWarner can suck it if this happens in our area. I'd even go as far
>>> as droping all of my services with them. I've had my finger on the
>>> trigger for a long time, until that last b/w increase ...which cooled me
>>> off for a bit.
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: trilug-bounces at trilug.org [mailto:trilug-bounces at trilug.org] On
>>> Behalf Of Greg Brown
>>> Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2008 11:36 AM
>>> To: Triangle Linux Users Group General Discussion
>>> Subject: Re: [TriLUG] OT - TWC bandwidth caps on the way?
>>>
>>> Fark it all.  Good thing I just spent $100 on the Roku and I'm sure glad
>>> I
>>> rent movies on my Apple TV.   Ted Stevens was right... the Internet
>>> isn't a
>>> big truck you can just dump something on.  At least not without paying
>>> the
>>> truck owner, the driver, the driver's union, the highway tax, the fuel,
>>> new
>>> tires for the truck, the driver's lunch, a tax for a worker to clean up
>>> the
>>> roadkill hit by the driver............
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 11:25 AM, Jason Watts <jsnonzzr at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Wasn't it posted by someone that when you guys got your rate increase,
>>> that
>>>> the bill increase was shortly to follow?
>>>>
>>>> Subscriber:  "WHAT, my bill just went up $64k"
>>>> TWC:  "True, but you can download things a 2k quicker."
>>>>
>>>> Heath,  if those numbers are right and they carry over to dsl... I
>>> guess
>>>> the
>>>> only surfing I do will be done at from work.
>>>> On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 10:58 AM, Nick Goldwater <trilug at dogstar1.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> If all of this is in the works and they are oversubscribed then why
>>> boost
>>>>> the speeds?
>>>>> I sort of like the idea of no speed caps and perhaps 0.15 per gig...
>>>>> similar to Amazon pricing.
>>>>>
>>>>> Nick
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ----- "Heath Roberts" <htroberts at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> | Interesting. For $54.90 per month, you can use 15 megabits per
>>> second
>>>>> | for 26
>>>>> | minutes (40-gigabyte cap, assumed 10 bits per byte). If you
>>> include
>>>>> | IP
>>>>> | overhead, maybe 20-23 minutes per month. After that it's $90/hr,
>>> or
>>>>> | $64K per
>>>>> | month. That should certainly help "finance the needed investment
>>> in
>>>>> | the
>>>>> | infrastructure".
>>>>> |
>>>>> | I know that broadband access has always been oversubscribed, and
>>> the
>>>>> | providers have been extremely close-lipped about by how much, but
>>> this
>>>>> | seems
>>>>> | to say it's by a factor of 2000 or so.
>>>>> |
>>>>> | On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 10:14 AM, Ben Pitzer <bpitzer at gmail.com>
>>>>> | wrote:
>>>>> |
>>>>> | > Suprised that no one has posted this here yet.  Could this be
>>> the
>>>>> | end of
>>>>> | > the
>>>>> | > basically unfettered server functionality on TWC's network?  I'm
>>>>> | thinking
>>>>> | > that it may be, for me at least.
>>>>> | >
>>>>> | >
>>>>> |
>>> http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jwm8wu3jZWZLcKfIlycqFqFegknwD9126HN8A
>>>>> | >
>>>>> | > Let the discussions begin.
>>>>> | > --
>>>>> | > TriLUG mailing list        :
>>>>> | http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug
>>>>> | > TriLUG FAQ  :
>>> http://www.trilug.org/wiki/Frequently_Asked_Questions
>>>>> | >
>>>>> |
>>>>> |
>>>>> |
>>>>> | --
>>>>> | Heath Roberts
>>>>> | htroberts at gmail.com
>>>>> | --
>>>>> | TriLUG mailing list        :
>>>>> | http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug
>>>>> | TriLUG FAQ  :
>>> http://www.trilug.org/wiki/Frequently_Asked_Questions
>>>>> --
>>>>>  TriLUG mailing list        :
>>>>> http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug
>>>>> TriLUG FAQ  : http://www.trilug.org/wiki/Frequently_Asked_Questions
>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> TriLUG mailing list        :
>>> http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug
>>>> TriLUG FAQ  : http://www.trilug.org/wiki/Frequently_Asked_Questions
>>>>
>>> --
>>> TriLUG mailing list        :
>>> http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug
>>> TriLUG FAQ  : http://www.trilug.org/wiki/Frequently_Asked_Questions
>>> --
>>> TriLUG mailing list        :
>> http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug
>>> TriLUG FAQ  : http://www.trilug.org/wiki/Frequently_Asked_Questions
>>>
>> --
>> TriLUG mailing list        : http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug
>> TriLUG FAQ  : http://www.trilug.org/wiki/Frequently_Asked_Questions
>>
> 
> 
> 