Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > What do you guys consider "broadband" speeds?

What do you guys consider "broadband" speeds?
Thread Tools
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 10:45 AM
 
Surprisingly not a poll. I have a feeling there might be a divide among those who have been in rural areas where options are are hard to come by, and those in cities which tend to boast better infrastructure. Also asking because I heard the FCC is looking to redefine or update what qualifies as broadband speeds.

For me, I remember back in '04 when I upgraded from my 56k dial-up to 1Mb/386Kb DSL from Verizon. In the coming years I would later upgrade to 3Mb/768Kb, and then 7MB (which was 6.5Mb in actuality, but would slowly deteriorate to 4.75Mb currently).

Would you guys consider me broadband?
     
ShortcutToMoncton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Rock
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 11:02 AM
 
The minimum "hi-speed internet" my available ISPs offer is 15Mbps down, 2Mbps up. So I guess that.
Mankind's only chance is to harness the power of stupid.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 11:07 AM
 
Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton View Post
The minimum "hi-speed internet" my available ISPs offer is 15Mbps down, 2Mbps up. So I guess that.
That seems like a lazy answer.
     
Jawbone54
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Louisiana
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 11:21 AM
 
I've always considered anything DSL/Cable to be broadband, but as time goes by, 4.75 mbps seems to barely cut it.
     
Shaddim
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 11:25 AM
 
According to the ISPs in my area, it's 1.5Mb down/256kb up. They can actually say that with a straight face.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 11:25 AM
 
Originally Posted by Jawbone54 View Post
but as time goes by
That's exactly what this about. It makes sense that the FCC would update their definition, particularly when as the internet grows, bandwidth requirements get larger to load content in a timely manner. It's the same reason why having a fridge in 1910 isn't the same as having one in 2010. Or microwaves. Or computers, etc.

Here's a few questions: Does broadband have to be able to stream video? 720p HD Video? 1080p? Two people at 720p? Do you measure it by how long it takes to load the average web page? How long should it take to do so?
( Last edited by The Final Dakar; Sep 4, 2014 at 12:02 PM. Reason: Edited for freshness)
     
osiris
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Isle of Manhattan
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 11:27 AM
 
I think broadband refers to anything above telephone modem speed. So, technically I would consider your connection as broadband.

But content today is too rich, too heavy - even modest bandwidth like 5-10Mbps would be very pokey, never mind anything slower.

Installing Adblock and Ghostery will help get the most out of limited bandwidth by blocking the artery cloggers. It would be an improvement, I hope.
"Faster, faster! 'Till the thrill of speed overcomes the fear of death." - HST
     
sek929
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Cape Cod, MA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 11:33 AM
 
I wouldn't consider anything less than 4Mbps broadband in this day and age. 12 years ago in my area the base cable internet speeds were about 4, now the going minimum is 8 and I pay (far to much) for 16...which I consider the minimum for doing anything remotely useful on the web.
     
osiris
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Isle of Manhattan
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 11:37 AM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
That's exactly what this about. It makes sense that the FCC would update their definition, particularly when as the internet grows, bandwidth requirements get larger to load content in a timely manner. It's the same reason why having a fridge in 1910 isn't the same as having one in 2010. Or microwaves. Or computers, etc.

Here's a few questions: Does broadband have to be able to stream video? HD Video? Support one person doing so? Multiple people? Do you measure it by how long it takes to load the average web page? How long should it take to do so?
lol the FCC and their quant rules. just tossing it out, but why the hell am I still being charged for touch-tone service on my land line?!?

Being able to stream HD @ minimum 720p would be a good baseline. But multiple connections on the same line will have a tremendous impact on usage, so anything below 5-10 Mbps is going to suck - even with one other person.
"Faster, faster! 'Till the thrill of speed overcomes the fear of death." - HST
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 11:54 AM
 
Over here the standard theoretical max speeds started at 0.5Mbps, then went 1, 2, 8, 10, 18, 20 and in some areas 24. None of them got too near those maxima though. All those are DSL are some kind.

Now we have 20, 40, 50, 80 and 100 Mbps from fibre or cable lines. Leased lines run from 10 to 100 in 10Mb increments and then go up to 1000.

I think anything over 56Kbps/faster than dial-up can be sold as broadband band here. I'm not aware of any plans to redefine that.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 12:01 PM
 
Originally Posted by osiris View Post
lol the FCC and their quant rules. just tossing it out, but why the hell am I still being charged for touch-tone service on my land line?!?

Being able to stream HD @ minimum 720p would be a good baseline. But multiple connections on the same line will have a tremendous impact on usage, so anything below 5-10 Mbps is going to suck - even with one other person.
Oh you're right, I forgot to differentiate between 720p and 1080p streaming.
     
osiris
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Isle of Manhattan
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 12:20 PM
 
Yeah, I can't imagine doing 720p or anything on a 56K line. I'd rather go to a dentist AND a proctologist.
"Faster, faster! 'Till the thrill of speed overcomes the fear of death." - HST
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 12:24 PM
 
Originally Posted by Shaddim View Post
According to the ISPs in my area, it's 1.5Mb down/256kb up. They can actually say that with a straight face.
I don't think that's even up to the FCCs legal definition.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 12:28 PM
 
Originally Posted by sek929 View Post
I wouldn't consider anything less than 4Mbps broadband in this day and age.
Originally Posted by osiris View Post
Being able to stream HD @ minimum 720p would be a good baseline.
I think this is where I fall. I think 4.5Mb is going to be the bare minimum for 720p streaming, which is why I've been eying my connection quality for the past year.

For those who are interested:
The FCC currently defines broadband, or high-speed Internet, as 4 Mbps download speed and 1 Mbps upload speed
I guess mine doesn't qualify based on upload.

6% of Americans don't qualify under the current definition. It looks like the updated definition proposed is 10Mb down/2.9 up.
     
ShortcutToMoncton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Rock
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 12:29 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
That seems like a lazy answer.
It wasn't the answer you needed....it was the answer you deserved
Mankind's only chance is to harness the power of stupid.
     
osiris
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Isle of Manhattan
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 12:30 PM
 
oh no you didn't.
"Faster, faster! 'Till the thrill of speed overcomes the fear of death." - HST
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 12:30 PM
 
Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton View Post
It wasn't the answer you needed....it was the answer you deserved
Hey, you're Canadian, you should be apologizing to me
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 12:31 PM
 
Using video as a metric has its own issues.

The big one is it's compressed. Sometimes lightly, sometimes to within an inch of its life.

One could even argue bandwidth itself is something of an illusion considering what you get out of it is so highly dependent on how well things are compressed (not just video... everything).
     
reader50
Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: California
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 01:41 PM
 
Standard video is 1080p today, with 4K coming. It covers entertainment, and will cover standard communications soon enough. The telecoms are talking about ripping up the POTS network in favor of IP communications, so we might as well consider videochat as the new standard phone service.

And we need remote backups, against burglary/fire/flood/police raid. So my answer is 4M down and 4M up.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 01:45 PM
 
Originally Posted by reader50 View Post
Standard video is 1080p today
Standard? According to who?
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 01:50 PM
 
Do you have an alternate standard?
     
ShortcutToMoncton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Rock
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 01:54 PM
 
I dismiss anything less than 1080p as being "Dakar quality"
Mankind's only chance is to harness the power of stupid.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 01:58 PM
 
Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton View Post
I dismiss anything less than 1080p as being "Dakar quality"
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 01:59 PM
 
Originally Posted by reader50 View Post
And we need remote backups, against burglary/fire/flood/police raid. So my answer is 4M down and 4M up.
This. I'm paying out the ass for 100/10. I don't really need 100 down. I could use way more than 10 up.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 02:00 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
This. I'm paying out the ass for 100/10. I don't really need 100 down. I could use way more than 10 up.
You're paying for business internet, right? That's the real crime.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 02:01 PM
 
Comcast: "You owe us money because you send us more bandwidth then we send you!"
Comcast: "Our customers are lucky if their upload speed is 20% of their download."
     
akent35
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Kent, Washington (Up in God's Country!)
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 02:02 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
Surprisingly not a poll. I have a feeling there might be a divide among those who have been in rural areas where options are are hard to come by, and those in cities which tend to boast better infrastructure. Also asking because I heard the FCC is looking to redefine or update what qualifies as broadband speeds.

For me, I remember back in '04 when I upgraded from my 56k dial-up to 1Mb/386Kb DSL from Verizon. In the coming years I would later upgrade to 3Mb/768Kb, and then 7MB (which was 6.5Mb in actuality, but would slowly deteriorate to 4.75Mb currently).

Would you guys consider me broadband?
I am located near Seattle, WA, and Comcast is my ISP. My internet "iier" is Performance with PowerBoost. The "promised" speeds are 25 Mb for download speed, and 4 Mb for upload speed. I just ran a speed test on my service, and I got 28.38 MD download speed, and 5.77 Mb upload.

So, your "promised" upload speed of 7Mb is better than what I have.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 02:03 PM
 
Originally Posted by akent35 View Post
I am located near Seattle, WA, and Comcast is my ISP. My internet "iier" is Performance with PowerBoost. The "promised" speeds are 25 Mb for download speed, and 4 Mb. I just ran a speed test on my service, and I got 28.38 MD download speed, and 5.77 Mb upload.

So, your "promised" upload speed of 7Mb is better than what I have.
7Mb is my latest advertised download speed. I'm currently getting 4.5Mb out of it.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 02:03 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
You're paying for business internet, right? That's the real crime.
In what sense?
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 02:05 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
In what sense?
One could argue that the typical consumer doesn't need parallel speeds, but business in the digital age is a whole 'nother animal.
     
Jawbone54
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Louisiana
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 02:05 PM
 
Originally Posted by reader50 View Post
And we need remote backups, against burglary/fire/flood/police raid. So my answer is 4M down and 4M up.
Originally Posted by subego View Post
This. I'm paying out the ass for 100/10. I don't really need 100 down. I could use way more than 10 up.
Bingo.

Personally, considering America's economic power (waning or not), it is an embarrassment that we don't have an average of 50 down, 50 up, synchronous broadband.

But as for Dakar's initial question, I don't see why anything less than 10 mbps should be legally considered broadband.
     
Jawbone54
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Louisiana
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 02:08 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
This. I'm paying out the ass for 100/10. I don't really need 100 down. I could use way more than 10 up.
I pay about $75 per month for 50 down, 2.5 up, with no options for a higher upload speed. I don't understand the disparity, but I'm not learned in such matters.

Also, a data cap of 350 GB per month, which I routinely exceed at a cost of $10 per extra 50 GB. We usually top out at around 400 GB.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 02:09 PM
 
Originally Posted by Jawbone54 View Post
Bingo.

Personally, considering America's economic power (waning or not), it is an embarrassment that we don't have an average of 50 down, 50 up, synchronous broadband.
What about the argument that we don't have the luxury of a country as densely populated as European of Asian states?
Or the argument that it's very expensive to invest in?
Or, my favorite, that no one actually wants or needs higher speeds?
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 02:10 PM
 
Originally Posted by Jawbone54 View Post
Also, a data cap of 350 GB per month, which I routinely exceed at a cost of $10 per extra 50 GB.
Tell me, is it advertised as "unlimited" with fine print? That's another thing the FCC should be cracking down on.
     
osiris
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Isle of Manhattan
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 02:23 PM
 
Originally Posted by Jawbone54 View Post
I pay about $75 per month for 50 down, 2.5 up, with no options for a higher upload speed. I don't understand the disparity, but I'm not learned in such matters.

Also, a data cap of 350 GB per month, which I routinely exceed at a cost of $10 per extra 50 GB. We usually top out at around 400 GB.
all the carriers screw you... Time Warner Cable is screwing me over with $170 for premium tv and 100Mbps/20Mbps, no cap limit. (Actual speed 70-80/12)
"Faster, faster! 'Till the thrill of speed overcomes the fear of death." - HST
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 02:30 PM
 
Originally Posted by osiris View Post
all the carriers screw you... Time Warner Cable is screwing me over with $170 for premium tv and 100Mbps/20Mbps, no cap limit. (Actual speed 70-80/12)
If its any consolation, it's $70 a month for my not7Mb down/768Kb up with a land line.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 02:30 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
One could argue that the typical consumer doesn't need parallel speeds, but business in the digital age is a whole 'nother animal.
Oh... yeah. You nailed it. A normal upload for me is in the 100GB range.

My options are 10Mbps, or drop $100K+ to get the street torn up and fiber put in.

There's not much of a middle ground there.
     
osiris
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Isle of Manhattan
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 02:34 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
If its any consolation, it's $70 a month for my not7Mb down/768Kb up with a land line.
My condolences.
"Faster, faster! 'Till the thrill of speed overcomes the fear of death." - HST
     
mattyb
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Standing on the shoulders of giants
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 02:47 PM
 
My ISP said that I was at the limit of getting TV via internet. I don't get any HD channels via the internet. Downloading I never get above 800K, and if the TV box is on it makes online gaming painful. YouTube only ever wants to show vids in 360p.

Then again, its a 30 minute walk to the nearest shop - any type of shop.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 02:48 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
What about the argument that we don't have the luxury of a country as densely populated as European of Asian states?
Or the argument that it's very expensive to invest in?
Or, my favorite, that no one actually wants or needs higher speeds?
It goes against my libertarian leanings, but I think we need to deal with some of those problems by declaring broadband to be a utility.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 02:53 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
It goes against my libertarian leanings, but I think we need to deal with some of those problems by declaring broadband to be a utility.
Goes against is putting it likely. I feel like there's a world of difference between trying to regulate it and relegating it to utility status. (I agree however)

The last time there was flooding in my area, I was without water for a week, and I honestly was glad because being without internet for a week would have been worse (I showered at a friends).
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 03:10 PM
 
Ironically, the flooding story kinda supports the other argument. The utility went out, the non-utility didn't. I realize a flood is going to disparately affect these things, but I had to think about what you were arguing for a second.

I can narrow my utility statement a bit. I'm not sure the whole deal needs to be treated that way, it's providers owning the pipe which leads to consumers getting screwed over the most (IMO).
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 03:11 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Ironically, the flooding story kinda supports the other argument. The utility went out, the non-utility didn't. I realize a flood is going to disparately affect these things, but I had to think about what you were arguing for a second.

I can narrow my utility statement a bit. I'm not sure the whole deal needs to be treated that way, it's providers owning the pipe which leads to consumers getting screwed over the most (IMO).
My power was out for three days, I just didn't mention that part.
     
Laminar
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 03:30 PM
 
Originally Posted by Jawbone54 View Post
I pay about $75 per month for 50 down, 2.5 up, with no options for a higher upload speed. I don't understand the disparity, but I'm not learned in such matters.
$56/month for 50 down/2 up, regularly tests out at 104 down/10 up. Of course, my ISP claims they don't do any throttling, but for some reason even when my computer will test at 100+ Mb, at the same time my AppleTV plugged into the same router spends 30+ seconds buffering Netflix and ends up playing it at low resolution.

But updates from Apple download pretty quick.
     
Jawbone54
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Louisiana
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 03:34 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
What about the argument that we don't have the luxury of a country as densely populated as European of Asian states?
Or the argument that it's very expensive to invest in?
Or, my favorite, that no one actually wants or needs higher speeds?
I know you're playing devil's advocate, but the perfect counter-argument: Chattanooga.

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
Tell me, is it advertised as "unlimited" with fine print? That's another thing the FCC should be cracking down on.
In my case, nope. Suddenlink has been a pretty good ISP to deal with, actually.

My situation is likely about to change. They just laid fiber along by back fence a few weeks ago.

Originally Posted by osiris View Post
all the carriers screw you... Time Warner Cable is screwing me over with $170 for premium tv and 100Mbps/20Mbps, no cap limit. (Actual speed 70-80/12)
I'd kill for 12 up. Also, it's worth noting that I don't subscribe to TV or phone services. Internet only.

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
If its any consolation, it's $70 a month for my not7Mb down/768Kb up with a land line.
Dear God in Heaven.
     
Jawbone54
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Louisiana
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 03:39 PM
 
Originally Posted by Laminar View Post
Of course, my ISP claims they don't do any throttling, but for some reason even when my computer will test at 100+ Mb, at the same time my AppleTV plugged into the same router spends 30+ seconds buffering Netflix and ends up playing it at low resolution.
Happens to me too — usually around 8:00-11:00 PM.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 03:46 PM
 
Most of the US has no broadband competition at 25Mbps, FCC chair says | Ars Technica
About 80 percent of Americans homes could buy 25Mbps broadband, but generally from only one provider, he said. “At 25Mbps, there is simply no competitive choice for most Americans,” Wheeler said. “Stop and let that sink in... three-quarters of American homes have no competitive choice for the essential infrastructure for 21st century economics and democracy. Included in that is almost 20 percent who have no service at all! Things only get worse as you move to 50Mbps where 82 percent of consumers lack a choice.”

At 4Mbps and 10Mbps download speeds, “the majority of Americans have a choice of only two providers,” Wheeler said. “That is what economists call a ‘duopoly,' a marketplace that is typically characterized by less than vibrant competition.” The situation is especially bad in rural areas, he said.
That applies to me perfectly. I could get faster cable internet, however it's capped. (150 MB at 5Mbps, 300MB at 25 Mbps and more). It's cheaper too, but **** caps.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 03:47 PM
 
Originally Posted by Laminar View Post
$56/month for 50 down/2 up, regularly tests out at 104 down/10 up. Of course, my ISP claims they don't do any throttling, but for some reason even when my computer will test at 100+ Mb, at the same time my AppleTV plugged into the same router spends 30+ seconds buffering Netflix and ends up playing it at low resolution.

But updates from Apple download pretty quick.
Obviously Netflix is offering degraded service and needs to pay for interconnects.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 03:48 PM
 
Originally Posted by Jawbone54 View Post
Dear God in Heaven.
Obviously there is no god, because what kind of god would allow this?!
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2014, 03:54 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
If its any consolation, it's $70 a month for my not7Mb down/768Kb up with a land line.
I'm wrong, its $60 a month, just after all the bullshit, it hits $70-something.
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:26 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,