Praise AT&T!
I live in the middle of southern Indiana and i have nothing but 2 shitty satellite providers that have 15/3 with a cap of 12gb for like 60 a month. heh id be happy with 100mbps.
Lel what a shithole.
>rural retard
>mfw I get this included in my rent
>includes unlimited data
This shouldn't be a selling point
how will google fiber ever recover?
Nice school connection.
>90 burger$
lol, I pay 9 times less for 1Gbps. Fag
it's probably not unlimited, but rather "unlimited" where you can use it up to a certain point then every xx GB's after that adds fee's but you are never explicitly limited so they can make it sound better than it is in marketing.
>reminder that it doesn't matter how much nominal speed you contract now that ISPs are free to throttle your ass
>12 mo. agmt.
So it's $90/month for 12 months, then it's $300 a month after, right?
I was expecting them to throttle it to the point where its almost unusable after a certain amount of data.
Still waiting for a single example of throttling post NN. Or are they throttled too much to talk about it?
My ISP does it for $10 less, and while there's no caps or throttling, the upload is 50Mbps.
every company has their own way to falsely tout unlimited data, I was just describing the Comcast method.
I think they're doing this to differentiate from their 100mbps plan for $50/mo that has a 1TB cap.
I'm moving to an area with AT&T and xfinity and frankly I'm leaning more toward the AT&T plan because comcast can suck my nut
>plus taxes
>you have to pay it 12 times no matter what
>additional fees will happen and you can't do shit about it
how the fuck is this legal?
Google Fiber is $70 for fiber.
This. Same shit Comcast does.
Nobody should be paying that much for fiber.
I can get 800 mbps fiber for $40 on Long Island
like 12$ here for 100 up/down fiber
>burger internet
Lmao literally worse than third world countries
>additional fees apply
no thanks
I'm paying $80 per month for "up to 2" (aka 0.5) mbps down, and "up to 1" (aka 0.25) mbps upload.
It's from the local village/town "telephone" company - DSL. They block everyone else from coming here. The only other thing I could get was Satellite with a 10gb/month limit.
>inb4 ausfags come posting their 1mbps that the claim everyone in Australia has
I will have to suffer a bit of a downgrade shortly, from 115mbps to at best 100 on the NBN. Going to miss old HFC as I've never had the issue of congestion during peak hours, sits at close to 115mbps regardless of time of day (has gotten a bit slower due to more nbn work in area). Upload improvement will be nice though. Currently 115/5 and unlimited (people have used as much as 6TB a month before ISPs got a little pissy). Nbn is 100/40 but usually 96/38 at best with around 70-80mpbs during peak. For those on adsl2+ with averages of 12 and at best 20mbps its a huge improvement but still a bit shitty to see a speed drop nonetheless. Been on 100mbps cable for over 5 years now.
>he lives in a country without net neutrality
Ha Ha Ha, what a loser. best just get the slowest package possible.
>implying this has anything to do with net neutrality
I get the same thing for 30$ where I live
>living in us
>internet speed
didnt you amerifats just lose net neutrality?
it hugely relates wtf are you retarded?
50/25
£25 / $32
It's okay for what it is.
Is your rent also 20,000 dollars a semester? Lol
'Additional fees apply' is ISP speak for, 'You agree to let us fuck up your credit if you don't return our equipment.'
Stuck with Fibre to the Cabinet too user? UK internet has a long way to go till it even comes close to the big leagues.
Nah. I'm using a 4G LTE modem. It was only supposed to be temporary but just kept it since the upload speeds are good and I can connect a phoneline to it.
I don't think you can get 25mbit upload for £25 in the UK unless you have FTTC (rare)
You no network faggots wouldn’t know AT&T drop packets and have shit routing. Ever since I switched from them I couldn’t be happier.
Yea I couldn't even forward and open ports with them. Switched to xfinity and was able to do it in under a minute.
> Bragging about literally throwing your money away and keeping a landlord who isn’t you rich and landed.
Maximum cuck.
fiber is awesome
My ISP does gigabit with TV and phone for $5 more than that.
You'll always have a landlord and rent tho. You're pretty much renting shit from the government
How much hardware do I need to seed torrents at 1gigabit a second?
I bet you voted for Trump too.
Lmao you fucking idiot
Nice free internet there. Did you pay $6000 per month for your free internet?
even with 1gbps internet, it's very rare to actually find a leech that can manage to do more than 10MB/s
I have been seeding on a 1gbps 24/7 for about a year and a half and I generally upload less than 20GB per day, even when seeding over 1.5TB of various torrents.
The hardware isn't really a factor as much as where you're seeding from (ISP peering), and the sites you're seeding to (public vs private tracker)
Give it time it will come for sure, they do not want to do it straight of the bad since it would encourage people to really against it, they want do it slowly but surely a bit like boiling a lobster
but you make 9 times less LOL
>90/month
For only the internet and then they charge you an additional 20-30 in hidden fees
>Same shit Comcast does
meh, sorta.
Comcast charges $89.95/month for their gigabit service for the first year, after that it goes up to $104.95/month.
$15 change after 12 months isn't as drastic as you're implying.
Why? If you use more you should pay more.
I dont understand this mentality
If I download 10TB a month between 2am and 6am, no one would ever notice, i'm not hogging the bandwidth that late at night, no one is effected by my large downloads. but with data caps, I'm seen as some terrible offender slowing down EVERYONE's connection just because I use 10TB a month.
The ISPs just want an excuse to charge more money. If they ACTUALLY wanted to try to stop peak evening hour slow downs on their network they'd implement a TIME BASED data cap that only counts for traffic between 5PM and 11PM.
That might actually do something for the evening network health.
My light night downloads don't effect anyone, and the ISPs implying that it does is just fucking retarded.
you should try seeding bdmv
only 9 times less?
What the fuck do you think my 1.5TB of seeding content is?
90% blurays.
your taste is shut then
There are ISPs that do that and it's fucking terrible because the second the clock rolls over every torrentfag in existence starts downloading shit.
Data caps should be abolished and all plans should just be a pay per megabyte rate.
Lol, no. I just don't seed on public trackers like some pleb.
>should just be a pay per megabyte rate
Why? The line is fixed, if it's used or unused, it costs the ISP the same amount of money.
Why the fuck should I be paying more because i'm using my pipe more often than others? The cost from the ISP perspective is again, identical.
What's the point of having speeds over 200MB/s?
Are you guys some kind of seeding cucks?
this, Netflix can fuck off
Netflix pays their ISP bill, just like you pay your ISP bill.
Now you think netflix should get charged more because they're popular?
Fuck off.
go back to
Where do you draw the line with this?
As the other user said, you and netflix both already pay your respective ISPs.
So where is line drawn? You want netflix to pay more because they use a lot of network traffic, but what about smaller websites that don't? When do they suddenly become big enough that they need to start paying extra on top of what they already pay?
I can't think of any clear line, picking netflix because they're the biggest offender is simply going after an easy target, but where does it stop? Is a site that gets 1% of total network traffic big enough? How about 0.5%? 0.1%? Etc, etc.
There is simply no clear way to say THIS company is big enough they need to pay more than they already pay (because reasons?)
Because the amount of bandwidth at any given time is fixed and the cost is a deterrent for overuse which can lead to slowdowns and blackouts for others. Furthermore you're not just using more bandwidth but you're using more resources overall to direct all your shit across the world compared to grandma checking her email. Why should she pay just as much as you when her usage contributes mere dollars to the upkeep cost of the ISP annually?
This would NEVER be implemented.
ISPs best customers are the old grannys who never touch their network except the 3 times a day for their email. $30-50/month for that.
If they moved to a fully metered bill, those customers would be down at $1 or $2 a month, if not less. At least if they're charging a reasonable price per MB (below $0.0001 per MB)
Fully metered pay for use is just not happening for consumer internet, ever.
I'm sorry what does the president of the United States have to do with this thread?
>gigabit download
>not even 1/20th upload
i like wow, but jesus christ guys
Nothing particularly because neither party gives a fuck about rural internet (or rural life in general) The republicans just pretend they do for the votes they know they'll get.
Ok someone give me a rundown. Is there some sort of monkey business involved? Do you get a bandwidth cap on certain services, or a data traffic cap?Or is it really 1 gbps no questions asked ? Does AT&T fuck your shit up by throttling you? Anyone with this service comment pls.
Of course they wouldn't implement it, that's why I said it SHOULD be that way. But unless it's legislated for them to they won't.
b-b-but muh freemarket
>southern Indiana
AT&Ts backhaul network is kinda shitty (depending on the region you're in).
So while it IS 1gbps, that doesn't mean you'll actually see 1gbps in practice while downloading from common services (steam, microsoft, google, etc)
I'm not paying $1080 for AT&T, you are either retarded or have some form of tumor that makes you incapable of have a coherent thought if you think fucking AT&T is a good ISP.
Give me whatever you are smoking because that shit seems pretty good if it gets me out of reality and into the ignorant bliss you are in.
If your other option was 10mbps DSL I'd bet you would.
What about latency and TTL issues? And is their automatic routing good? Or do they just redirect you ad infinitum before reaching the final datacenter/box ?
>their automatic routing good
Called peering generally. And it's pretty shitty in some areas.
Latency again, depends on the region. North east and mid-west is generally better than the south.
haven't paid much attention to TTL, sorry. You could probably look on DSLreports for that stuff.
It's okay to be wrong, feel free to believe whatever you'd like.
>I'm not paying $1080 for AT&T
wut
$90*12
He was presumably talking about yearly cost of the service, not monthly.
This pretty much. Imminent domain is a thing after all.
Thank you user.
>90$ + taxes
>12 months before you can quit
>Additional fees apply
I literally pay 16.99€ for 200k no strings attached and can quit every month. What the fuck is wrong with your shithole country.
Definitely not, I can probably get better prices and speeds from Xfinity than AT&T overpriced up the ass bullshit.
You are each year while on that plan.
>Definitely not
>get better prices and speeds from Xfinity
Wew, it's like you're mentally ill.
Okay, let me give you the real scenario, you have two ISP choices, Windstream DSL, or AT&T 1gbps.
Windstream maxes out at 10/2Mbps for $40/month
AT&T does full FTTP 1gbps fiber for $90/month
No question, you'd go with AT&T.
Infinity isn't a factor because they don't offer service to that address.
>Infinity
xfinity, autocorrected.
The problem is if they do people will switch to a different ISP. Unless you live in commiefornia and only have one ISP in your area like 90% of cali. The southeast is investing into fiber which is threatning att and cox.
NN was just the government letting ISPs fuck people over while they get more regulation of the internet. Look at what GPDR is doing making memes illegal.
something like 40% of american households have access to only a single ISP that offers more than 25Mbps.
So there really isn't an option to switch for a large swath of the country.
Do you pay extra in your sewerage bill if you shit too much in a month?
I never mentioned areas, read my post again, I stated the prices are less, I never mentioned better coverage of areas.
Prices ≠ Coverage
Then reread MY post
>If your other option was 10mbps DSL I'd bet you would.
This post says IF (key word), your other option was 10mbps DSL.
Then you fire back with xfinity? THEN you fire back saying I didn't read the post? Come the fuck on, you're ignoring MY post.
>something like 40% of american households have access to only a single ISP that offers more than 25Mbps.
That sounds like a load of bullshit. If you live in the southeast theres atleast three isps. But states also have there own isps or smaller ones which people will switch to especially if there being throttled. There was alot of bullshit being flung during the NN mess. Your stat is based on population and not location.
from last year, maybe it's improved a bit, but you're still looking at literally dozens of millions of households without any other options.
This costs me $30 USD a month and comes with cable TV
>Because the amount of bandwidth at any given time is fixed and the cost is a deterrent for overuse which can lead to slowdowns and blackouts for others.
Do we live in e-leninism, so we have a communal internet that we need to share?
It's not a finite resource, like phosphorus or anything.
Again population doesn't equal location you moron. West coast and the northeast have huge populations which are cucked by single isps. The southeast has much more isps and are investing into fiber. The reality is that when an ISP throttles (which none of them have since 2007) they will lose customers.
>It's not a finite resource
Yes and no
It's a fixed finite size for the pipe at any given moment, but that pipe never runs out, so it's infinite supply with a finite amount of bandwidth at any given moment.
a 10gbps backhaul link obviously has a capacity of 10gbps, but that 10gbps will never become 8gbps, or 5gbps, it will always remain 10gbps. (unless infrastructure is upgraded)
You love being a retard don't ya, I said prices and you fire back with a quote of the network speed.
Remember,
Speed ≠ Coverage
Prices ≠ Coverage
I'll leave my internet speed report, and you can do as you please with it, be my guest.