• floridaman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    I hate Comcast as much as the next guy but I feel like 1.5TB a month would be reasonable. Even at those speeds you probably wouldn’t be downloading more, just downloading whatever you do now but faster.

      • RonSijm@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        There should be, that’s just how fiber works. If they lay a 10 Gb line in the street, they’ll probably sell a 1 Gb connection to a 100 households. (Margins depend per provider and location)

        If they give you an uncapped connection to the entire wire, you’ll DoS the rest of the neighborhood

        That’s why people are complaining “I bought 1Gb internet, but I’m only getting 100Mb!” - They oversold bandwidth in a busy area. 1Gb would probably be the max speed if everyone else was idle. If they gave everyone uncapped connections the problem would get even worse

        • crystenn@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          you’re talking about a bandwidth cap, not a data cap. data caps are when you get throttled after downloading a certain amount of data or get charged extra. think phone data plans where you have 10 or 20gb or whatever per month

        • ArchAengelus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          You’re taking about data rates here, measured in bits per second.

          Data caps have to do with the total amount of data you are allocated over a longer period of time. Usually per month. In the case of Comcast, it’s 1.5 TB/month.

          If the customer exceeds that allotment during the month, they will be charged an additional “overage fee” per arbitrary unit, usually by the gigabyte.

          It has nothing to do with the speed they advertise on a line, but rather a way to charge “heavy users” more.

    • Sneezycat@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Why the fuck would I want that speed if I can only fully use it for less than a second before hitting the data cap? I’d rather have 100 times less speed with 100 times more cap, so I can actually fully use it however I want.

      Also it’s just ridiculous anyway because I don’t even think hard drive write speeds are that fast.

    • edric@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      I’m on pace for 0.60 TB this month and I’m no heavy user. I only have 1 4k TV and a laptop for work that I use all day. My wife is mostly on her phone but is a heavy TV user in the evening. I can imagine people who download and/or torrent most of the content they consume can easily hit 1.5TB

    • repungnant_canary@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Data caps are simply false advertising - if your infrastructure can only handle X Tb/s then sell lower client speeds or implement some clever QoS.

      There are plenty of users for whom 1.5TB is quite or very restrictive - multi member households, video/photo editors working with raw data, scientists working with raw data, flatpak users with Nvidia GPU or people that selfhost their data or do frequent backups etc.

      With the popularity of WFH and our dependence on online services the internet is virtually as vital as water or electricity, and you wouldn’t want to be restricted to having no electricity until the end of the month just because you used the angle grinder for a few afternoons.