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 > How much bandwidth per month can you 'live' on?

How much bandwidth per month can you 'live' on?
Thread Tools
The Placid Casual
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Switzerland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 24, 2009, 01:41 PM
 
I moved house recently after I got married earlier this year, and after living in a largish city in France with a nice and speedy uncapped bandwidth connection for €30 or so a month, I found out that the new house is too far out in the countryside to get DSL/Cable!

I tried everything to get it installed but no dice. The only thing I could get was a Satellite internet connection (Astra 2/3) via Nordnet. I didn't want to spend out €500 on my own equipment, so went for their buy as you use option... €65 per month, and the dish, decoder and wireless gear is yours to keep at the end of the 24 month contract.

What they didn't tell me was that I was limited to 5Gig bandwidth per month!!! Arghhh.

Incoming AND outgoing combined!!!!

It is amazing how much I have taken for granted with a good connection in the past;

No more app or OS X updates...
No more iTunes radio
No more Spotify
No more online gaming
Adblocker installed for all browsers
No more Youtube

With all of this, I still hit my 5Gig limit with a week of each month to go!

At the end of the 24 months, in 12 months time, they will 'upgrade' me to an unlimited connection for only €40 per month, but with pings of 1k+ gaming is still out.

Just wondering how much bandwidth you all think you could get by on per month?
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 24, 2009, 07:21 PM
 
Oh boy, I feel you, that sucks.

Marriage really screws you over in so many ways

I really don't know much much bandwidth I'd need, since I have no clue how much I use.

-t
     
Doofy
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 24, 2009, 07:34 PM
 
I get by on my 120 Gb ish. No quota but only 512/256 down/up.
Been inclined to wander... off the beaten track.
That's where there's thunder... and the wind shouts back.
     
Chuckit
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 24, 2009, 07:57 PM
 
Is that supposed to be 120 Gb (15 GB) or 120 GB?
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
voodoo
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Salamanca, España
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 24, 2009, 08:07 PM
 
I've got a pretty lousy 6 mbit down / 1 mbit up DSL and use about 50 GB per month (give or take)

I don't consider it internet without at least 50 GB per month.
I could take Sean Connery in a fight... I could definitely take him.
     
Laminar
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 24, 2009, 08:11 PM
 
Originally Posted by turtle777 View Post
Oh boy, I feel you, that sucks.

Marriage really screws you over in so many ways

-t
Rob?
     
Doofy
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 24, 2009, 08:11 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chuckit View Post
Is that supposed to be 120 Gb (15 GB) or 120 GB?
GB, sorry.
Been inclined to wander... off the beaten track.
That's where there's thunder... and the wind shouts back.
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 24, 2009, 08:23 PM
 
Originally Posted by Laminar View Post
Rob?
The newly-wed bliss still holding on ?

-t
     
imitchellg5
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Washington + Colorado
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 24, 2009, 08:46 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Placid Casual View Post
France... countryside
What a bummer.
     
kupan787
Senior User
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: San Jose, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 25, 2009, 12:38 AM
 
In my house, with 4 adults who all actively use the internet (WoW, Xbox Live, DirecTV On-Demand, AppleTV Rentals, surfing, etc) we use anywhere from 350 GB to 450 GB per month (my WRT54g has tomato, so I monitor our bandwidth usage). If I was on a 5 GB account, I would go crazy!

I have AT&T Uverse (18 Mbps/1.5Mbps), and with no advertised caps, we download lots of game demos for Xbox/PS3, do Netflix/DirectTV/AppleTV streaming. I hardly watch regular TV anymore because of all the internet video I can have access to. My lifestyle would drastically change if my internet usage suddenly slowed, or became capped.
     
EndlessMac
Senior User
Join Date: Dec 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 25, 2009, 03:30 AM
 
Bandwidth limits do suck. With the way people are starting to use the internet these days there really shouldn't be limits because I can see that in the future it is going to be normal for people to use up a lot of bandwidth for normal legal usage. For example streaming videos are really starting to catch on and downloadable updates are a lot bigger than they used to be.

This problem will only get worst as it becomes as common as tv and the telephone. ISPs have to keep up or they will lose business. I'm glad that in my area I can choose either DSL or cable internet. This way if one sucks then I can go with the other.
     
Eriamjh
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: BFE
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 25, 2009, 06:06 AM
 
I have no idea how much I need because Comcast won't tell me how much I have used. I have searched for how to find out, but no luck, just useless help menus about resetting my modem and worthless crap like that.

I'm a bird. I am the 1% (of pets).
     
Phileas
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 25, 2009, 05:00 PM
 
We use between 60 to 90 GB a month, that includes all TV viewing since we've cut cable.
     
hayesk
Guest
Status:
Reply With Quote
Nov 25, 2009, 05:06 PM
 
Is there a cooling off period law where you live? If so, cancel the contract.

But don't expect it to have the same cap as DSL/cable - the bandwidth is more limited with satellite Internet.
     
dzp111
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Sudbury, ON
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 25, 2009, 06:46 PM
 
My wife and I have been looking for a cozy home in the country. We've found a few that we really like. Before even negotiating the price my question is "Is there High Speed?". So far none of them did. So it's an automatic no-go. (I think my wife's starting to feel bitter)

Satellite's still too expensive for my taste.

Can you spell 'addiction'?

: )
.................................................. .................................................. ..................................www.DNCH.com

.................................................. .................................................. .......................www.daniel.poirier.com
     
Andy8
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Hong Kong
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 25, 2009, 08:29 PM
 
Are you living on top of a hill?

How about a line-of-sight microwave link to somewhere with decent wired speed?
     
moonmonkey
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Australia, the greatest country in the world, (Australians keep telling me).
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2009, 04:27 AM
 
Microwave Andy?

He wants porn, not macaroni cheese.
     
mattyb
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Standing on the shoulders of giants
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2009, 04:38 AM
 
Free.fr does have its benefits, eh Placid? No idea how much bandwidth I use per month. TV, phone, porn and games all come down through the same pipe. When not playing on the Xbox, the iMac is on downloading 'stuff'.

I like unlimited downloads.
     
Doofy
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2009, 05:25 AM
 
What's wrong with Minitel?
Been inclined to wander... off the beaten track.
That's where there's thunder... and the wind shouts back.
     
downinflames68
Baninated
Join Date: Jun 2009
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2009, 05:46 AM
 
Get a divorce, move back.
     
mattyb
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Standing on the shoulders of giants
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2009, 11:02 AM
 
Originally Posted by Doofy View Post
What's wrong with Minitel?
Its ... uh ... sh1te?
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2009, 11:27 AM
 
For a time, my sis lived just at the edge of the high-speed support area, barely outside it. My sis toughed it out, but her neighbour one block down actually got the local telco to lay down fibre just to his own home, at his expense.

I wonder how much that cost. You could look into it, if you're anywhere near the supported area.

Mind you, I think it cost her neighbour a small fortune, so that's probably out.
     
EndlessMac
Senior User
Join Date: Dec 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2009, 03:58 PM
 
Originally Posted by Eug View Post
For a time, my sis lived just at the edge of the high-speed support area, barely outside it. My sis toughed it out, but her neighbour one block down actually got the local telco to lay down fibre just to his own home, at his expense.

I wonder how much that cost. You could look into it, if you're anywhere near the supported area.

Mind you, I think it cost her neighbour a small fortune, so that's probably out.
It just goes to show how important the internet is becoming for some people. The infrastructure is really developing slower than the increase in demand. That needs to change.
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2009, 04:08 PM
 
Infrastructure that's built by private capital almost always develops slower than demand increases. It has to do with bean counters in suits not "getting" that "if you build it, they will come." The "wait for plenty of demand" approach loses money for the bean counters too.

I have unmetered DSL with a real-world downlink of about 5Mbps and uplink of around 600+kbps. I have no idea how I'd find out how much bandwidth my wife and I use in any given time period. But I do know that when we had a local area outage, it was a royal pain; we both learned how much we depend on the Internet for a lot of things.

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2009, 04:17 PM
 
Originally Posted by ghporter View Post
Infrastructure that's built by private capital almost always develops slower than demand increases. It has to do with bean counters in suits not "getting" that "if you build it, they will come." The "wait for plenty of demand" approach loses money for the bean counters too.
As compared to what ? Government infrastructure projects, that waste millions of dollars, blow every budget 10 fold, are always 5 years late and never deliver what they originally promised ?

-t
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2009, 04:30 PM
 
You're exaggerating and overgeneralizing. I saw two overpass projects done on streets over I35 in Austin back in the 80s. One contract was let by the state using standard bidding practices and the other with completion and under-cost incentives. The second was done quite a bit earlier than the first (duh!), but they both got done within the original time frame and budget. The second was just faster and cheaper.

In the 1930s the federal government built a program called "rural electrification," which was intended to provide electricity to the 90% of the rural population that had none. It worked, and resulted in a lot of side effects. Farmers bought electric appliances, so standards of living improved. Improved standards of living led to improved health and more important, improved access to medical and preventive health care. Improved health status led to a more productive rural population. Better productivity paid for better education. Those healthier, better educated farm boys then became the majority of the US Army in WWII. Funny thing is that the government just provided seed money, and supported the creation of electric utility cooperatives, with the co-ops themselves paying for the infrastructure construction. The interstate highway system worked in a similar way, and continues to pay dividends in improved mobility, accessibility and efficiency in transportation. If the feds would fix the railroad system the way Ike fixed the national highway system in the 1950s, we wouldn't have to depend on long-haul trucking for so much bulk transport of goods, which would be good for everyone (even long-haul truckers, who could specialize or work closer to home).

The difference is that infrastructure funded by private capital is inefficient with time in producing a single end result, while infrastructure funded by government capital is overall quite efficient in producing a number of end results, though individual stages in the process may indeed be slower or more expensive than is absolutely necessary.

Derail ended. Sorry for bringing it up.

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2009, 04:57 PM
 
Originally Posted by ghporter View Post
The difference is that infrastructure funded by private capital is inefficient with time in producing a single end result, while infrastructure funded by government capital is overall quite efficient in producing a number of end results, though individual stages in the process may indeed be slower or more expensive than is absolutely necessary.
As a general rule, I think you are wrong.

Private capital is *always* invested with the hopes of yielding a proper return. Now, it does not always turn out that way, but at least, at the time of decisions, this was the plan. Of course things can change, they often do.

However, compare this to government investments, where even at the time of decision, there are myriads of decision factors, of which time and cost are only two out of many. Politics most often play a much larger role, and there is no evidence whatsoever that once you bring politics into the mix, high efficiency can be achieved.

-t
     
lpkmckenna
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2009, 07:56 PM
 
My iPhone is my only home internet access, so that's about 6 Gigs a month, which I haven't hit in months. About once a month, I drag my laptop to the mall to d/l updates and stuff.
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2009, 07:59 PM
 
Originally Posted by lpkmckenna View Post
My iPhone is my only home internet access, so that's about 6 Gigs a month, which I haven't hit in months. About once a month, I drag my laptop to the mall to d/l updates and stuff.
You have a laptop, but no internet ht home ? Weird.

-t
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2009, 08:24 PM
 
Originally Posted by turtle777 View Post
As a general rule, I think you are wrong.

Private capital is *always* invested with the hopes of yielding a proper return. Now, it does not always turn out that way, but at least, at the time of decisions, this was the plan. Of course things can change, they often do.

However, compare this to government investments, where even at the time of decision, there are myriads of decision factors, of which time and cost are only two out of many. Politics most often play a much larger role, and there is no evidence whatsoever that once you bring politics into the mix, high efficiency can be achieved.

-t
Gotcha. We're addressing different faces of similar issues. Private capital is intended to get a good return on investment, but lately unless it provides an immediate kick to "shareholder value," then too few suits are willing to risk doing anything expensive. On the other hand, I didn't mean to suggest that governmental investment was in any way "efficient," only that it tended to generate a lot of effects that are not part of the original plan-and I think you do a pretty good job of capturing how complicated that sort of thing is.

Now if there were a way to get government to establish standards for coverage and available bandwidth (based on population density not "established customers" or whatever chicken guts the network provider executives use to decide these things), then I think those suits would be more willing to spend some money because they'd see the mandate as a pretty sure bet that they'd make money.

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2009, 10:17 PM
 
Originally Posted by ghporter View Post
Now if there were a way to get government to establish standards for coverage and available bandwidth (based on population density not "established customers" or whatever chicken guts the network provider executives use to decide these things), then I think those suits would be more willing to spend some money because they'd see the mandate as a pretty sure bet that they'd make money.
It will not work. The government has too many agendas. You have to be very careful about what powers should be given to it.

You either let the markets play it our through competition, or you resort to centralized government planning. The problem is, there is no good middle ground.

Here is how F. A. Hayek puts it in his classic "The Road To Serfdom":

The idea of complete centralization of the direction of economic activity still appalls most people, not only because of the stupendous difficulty of the task, but even more because of the horror inspired by the idea of everything being directed from single center. If we are, nevertheless, rapidly moving toward such a state, this is largely because most people still believe hat it is must be possible to find some middle way between "atomistic" competition and central direction.

Nothing, indeed, seems at first more plausible, or is more likely to appeal to reasonable people, than the idea that our goal must be neither the extreme decentralization of free competition nor the complete centralization of a single plan but some judicious mixture of the two methods. Yet mere common sense proves a treacherous guide in this field. Although competition can bear some admixture of regulation, it cannot be combined with planning to any extent we like without ceasing to operate as an effective guide to production. Nor is "planning" a medicine which, taken in small doses, can produce the effects for which one might hope from its thoroughgoing application. Both competition and central direction become poor and inefficient tools if they are incomplete; they are alternative principles used to solve the same problem, and a mixture of the two means that neither will really work and that the result will be worse than if either system had been consistently relied upon.

Or, to express it differently, planning and competition can be combined only by planning for competition but not by planning against competition.
The last sentence highlights what's wrong with the current (and partially the last) administration. Their efforts were more and more focused on "planning against competition", rather than truly leveling the playing field (a.k.a. planning for competition).
The current thrust (like in health care, mortgagees, student loans) is to give more and more power to centralized government bodies, and thereby, planning against the free market players.

-t
     
JoshuaZ
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Yamanashi, Japan
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2009, 10:26 PM
 
Seeing as how my wife and I would probably go crazy here in rural Japan without internet, I'd say we couldn't survive on 5 gigs a month.

Five gigs a week maybe. That might cover our TV shows as long as I don't play any games.

But man, 5 gigs a month sucks.
     
Shaddim
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2009, 10:45 PM
 
We use about ~180-200GB /month.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
The Placid Casual  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Switzerland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 27, 2009, 05:18 AM
 
Originally Posted by lpkmckenna View Post
About once a month, I drag my laptop to the mall to d/l updates and stuff.
I have discovered that McDonalds is my friend for updates... Coffee for €1 and free wifi in all restaurants. The shame of it!
     
Laminar
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 27, 2009, 07:18 AM
 
Originally Posted by The Placid Casual View Post
I have discovered that McDonalds is my friend for updates... Coffee for €1 and free wifi in all restaurants. The shame of it!
The McDonaldseseses around here charge for wi-fi.
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 27, 2009, 08:27 AM
 
One benefit of my DSL contract with AT&T is that I get free WiFi in a lot of places, including McD's, Starbucks, and Barnes and Noble. And Borders, I think... Very handy. But people who don't have AT&T DSL service (or UVerse) can't get the free WiFi deal...

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
mattyb
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Standing on the shoulders of giants
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 27, 2009, 08:31 AM
 
Originally Posted by Laminar View Post
The McDonaldseseses around here charge for wi-fi.
So McDonaldseseses in France are actually better than McDonaldseseses in the US ?????
     
osiris
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Isle of Manhattan
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 27, 2009, 09:33 AM
 
At least a couple of hundred gigs per month.

I'm not really sure, but between downloads, movies, skype, must be huge.
"Faster, faster! 'Till the thrill of speed overcomes the fear of death." - HST
     
Phileas
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 27, 2009, 11:14 AM
 
We get all of our movies and TV through our DSL line that's shared with our two tenants who are doing the same. Also, updates, software downloads etc. As far as I know we've never even been above 100 GB.

I called our ISP recently and asked, they told me it was between 60 and 90GB a month.
     
Andy8
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Hong Kong
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 27, 2009, 11:44 AM
 
Originally Posted by moonmonkey View Post
Microwave Andy?
2.4 GHz point-to-point microwave link

TrangoLINK® Apex - All-Outdoor RF Microwave Link - Outdoor Point-to-Point IP-Native Bridge

It is possible, it just depends on how much you want to invest.
     
   
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 02:45 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.,