AT&T has started bandwidth monthly caps

[Timby]

How many gigs does a Skype conversation take (I am about to move overseas and wanted to use Skype to keep in touch with my family)?

I can't find any reliable data for in-home laptop / desktop usage, but some studies done on 3G mobile Skype usage indicate it consumes about 3.4 MB / minute on a video call, significantly less on voice-only. I would assume the numbers are similar for computers.

 

[Marc]

How many gigs does a Skype conversation take (I am about to move overseas and wanted to use Skype to keep in touch with my family)?

I can't find any reliable data for in-home laptop / desktop usage, but some studies done on 3G mobile Skype usage indicate it consumes about 3.4 MB / minute on a video call, significantly less on voice-only. I would assume the numbers are similar for computers.

The skype protocol could be more efficient using VoIP with a G.729 codec which compresses your audio will chew just under .5MB per minute.

G.711 which is uncompresssed is about 1.5MB per minute.

Given that Skype usable (just but I have seen it done) over a dialup connection) I'd hazard a guess it's similar to a G.729 with the life compressed out of it.

 

[Ro_Laren]

How many gigs does a Skype conversation take (I am about to move overseas and wanted to use Skype to keep in touch with my family)?

I can't find any reliable data for in-home laptop / desktop usage, but some studies done on 3G mobile Skype usage indicate it consumes about 3.4 MB / minute on a video call, significantly less on voice-only. I would assume the numbers are similar for computers.

The skype protocol could be more efficient using VoIP with a G.729 codec which compresses your audio will chew just under .5MB per minute.

G.711 which is uncompresssed is about 1.5MB per minute.

Given that Skype usable (just but I have seen it done) over a dialup connection) I'd hazard a guess it's similar to a G.729 with the life compressed out of it.

I'm not intelligent enough to understand what you are saying.

 

[Alidar Jarok]

Why does AT&T care where you watch TV shows, they don't provide cable or satellite, do they? Comcast I can understand, but I'm not positive there's truly this motive for AT&T.

Actually, AT&T UVerse is an IPTV service that provides TV channels to its subscribers. It is very much a motivation for AT&T.

So I would assume AT&T's IPTV service would be exempt? I don't know much about this thing (probably because it'll never catch on).

I still remember when you had to pay buy the minute for internet. I think this is bad, but only really bad if abused and there's no realistic alternative. Like I said, there are other, even shadier things, that they do.

 

[DBR]

250 GB? Now I feel especially ripped off with my 25 GB cap.

 

[Arrqh]

So I would assume AT&T's IPTV service would be exempt? I don't know much about this thing (probably because it'll never catch on).

I don't have a source anymore, but I recall reading when AT&T first announced this a while back that their IPTV service is exempt from the caps.

I still remember when you had to pay buy the minute for internet. I think this is bad, but only really bad if abused and there's no realistic alternative. Like I said, there are other, even shadier things, that they do.

No arguments there; this is just the latest in the long line of crummy behavior that hampers innovation and competition. Sadly, it's par for the course...

 

[Amaris]

I watch Netflix. If I recall correctly, Netflix runs just under 1 GB per hour for SD, and 2.5 GB per hour for HD, using the maximum bitrate available. If you meet the national average when it comes to number of hours watching television, and you watch TV and movies via Netflix, this cap will cut into that. That's just television for one person on one computer, and it doesn't count any internet usage for anything other than that. That's the plan. There's no other reason behind this than greed and monopoly.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

I watch MLB.TV almost every day. A cap would hurt that, I think.

 

[Spot's Meow]

Uverse is an absolute godsend so far. When it was introduced here about 3 years ago nearly everyone I know dumped Comcast to go to Uverse instead. I can't say any of us has regretted the decision. I could complain about Comcast for days, but I suppose I should stay on topic. I watch a lot of shows on Netflix instant streaming, but I don't play a lot of games online or anything else intensive. I do wonder how many hours of Netflix streaming a week you could get through (SD) on this. It sounds like the cap is high enough (for now) to not cause issues.

 

[Amaris]

Uverse is an absolute godsend so far. When it was introduced here about 3 years ago nearly everyone I know dumped Comcast to go to Uverse instead. I can't say any of us has regretted the decision. I could complain about Comcast for days, but I suppose I should stay on topic. I watch a lot of shows on Netflix instant streaming, but I don't play a lot of games online or anything else intensive. I do wonder how many hours of Netflix streaming a week you could get through (SD) on this. It sounds like the cap is high enough (for now) to not cause issues.

75 SD movies, 30-50 HD movies total per month.

 

[the skullcowboy]

I don't think its a good idea, next cable companies will be charging you for how many hours of TV you watch, after all that draws bandwidth too...bad enough the MLB channel can rarely go 2 minutes without a " freeze "

Cable and broadband ISO's should just bite the bullet on this one

as a wise man once said " it's bullsh*t and it's bad for you "

 

[watermelony2k]

I do wonder how many hours of Netflix streaming a week you could get through (SD) on this. It sounds like the cap is high enough (for now) to not cause issues.

I think 1 hour of netflix typically uses up 1 GB of bandwidth. (not sure if this is HD or SD).

This will be a problem for families or anyone who lives with a bunch of roommates. I myself do a lot of bandwidth intensive stuff -- netflix, youtube, bittorrents, and online gaming -- and on average use 50 GB per month. If my three roommates use about as much as me, then we're going to be either hitting the limit or coming very close to it.

I recommend using this handy free tool to keep track the total download/upload of bandwidth you personally use:

http://codebox.org.uk/pages/bitmeterOs

 

[CaptMurdock]

I'm not crazy about this, as I have basically replace my sat-TV with Netflix.

Still, at $10 per every 50 GB over... still cheaper than cable.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

I don't think its a good idea, next cable companies will be charging you for how many hours of TV you watch, after all that draws bandwidth too...bad enough the MLB channel can rarely go 2 minutes without a " freeze "

Cable and broadband ISO's should just bite the bullet on this one

as a wise man once said " it's bullsh*t and it's bad for you "

Nah, it won't work that way. What Comcast and their ilk are trying to do is steer you toward their services and content, and away from competitors. Classic monopolist behavior, but apparently no one's going to do anything about it.

So, you can watch all the Comcast TV you want never hit a cap, and you can use their Fancast service without penalty, but if you decide to go and use Netflix, well, that's gonna count against your cap.

All the cable/Internet providers seem to be going this way: use our services, which are faster and don't count toward your cap; or use competitors and risk overage charges!

 

[Marc]

I don't think its a good idea, next cable companies will be charging you for how many hours of TV you watch, after all that draws bandwidth too...bad enough the MLB channel can rarely go 2 minutes without a " freeze "

Cable and broadband ISO's should just bite the bullet on this one

as a wise man once said " it's bullsh*t and it's bad for you "

Nah, it won't work that way. What Comcast and their ilk are trying to do is steer you toward their services and content, and away from competitors. Classic monopolist behavior, but apparently no one's going to do anything about it.

So, you can watch all the Comcast TV you want never hit a cap, and you can use their Fancast service without penalty, but if you decide to go and use Netflix, well, that's gonna count against your cap.

All the cable/Internet providers seem to be going this way: use our services, which are faster and don't count toward your cap; or use competitors and risk overage charges!

Well it seems that Netflix isn't going to do anything about it because there CEO isn't sure that would survive the battle.

http://money.cnn.com/2011/05/03/technology/netflix_streaming_growth/index.htm

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- Netflix CEO Reed Hastings is pleased with his company's massive growth, but he fears that getting too large will start "an Armageddon" with cable networks.
Hastings talked about Netflix's "niche" philosophy -- a Goldilocks-esque business plan of staying "not too big, not too small" -- in a panel discussion Tuesday at the Wired Business Conference in New York City.
Panel moderator Chris Anderson, the editor in chief of Wired magazine, asked Hastings who is "most threatened" by Netflix as it expands its streaming video content.

which leaves who? We know the politicians on both sides a) lack the balls do anything, b) don't understand the truth of the issues and c) are too deep in the pockets the lobby groups.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

I don't think its a good idea, next cable companies will be charging you for how many hours of TV you watch, after all that draws bandwidth too...bad enough the MLB channel can rarely go 2 minutes without a " freeze "

Cable and broadband ISO's should just bite the bullet on this one

as a wise man once said " it's bullsh*t and it's bad for you "

Nah, it won't work that way. What Comcast and their ilk are trying to do is steer you toward their services and content, and away from competitors. Classic monopolist behavior, but apparently no one's going to do anything about it.

So, you can watch all the Comcast TV you want never hit a cap, and you can use their Fancast service without penalty, but if you decide to go and use Netflix, well, that's gonna count against your cap.

All the cable/Internet providers seem to be going this way: use our services, which are faster and don't count toward your cap; or use competitors and risk overage charges!

Well it seems that Netflix isn't going to do anything about it because there CEO isn't sure that would survive the battle.

http://money.cnn.com/2011/05/03/technology/netflix_streaming_growth/index.htm

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- Netflix CEO Reed Hastings is pleased with his company's massive growth, but he fears that getting too large will start "an Armageddon" with cable networks.
Hastings talked about Netflix's "niche" philosophy -- a Goldilocks-esque business plan of staying "not too big, not too small" -- in a panel discussion Tuesday at the Wired Business Conference in New York City.
Panel moderator Chris Anderson, the editor in chief of Wired magazine, asked Hastings who is "most threatened" by Netflix as it expands its streaming video content.

which leaves who? We know the politicians on both sides a) lack the balls do anything, b) don't understand the truth of the issues and c) are too deep in the pockets the lobby groups.

Cases like this are exactly why we need real Net Neutrality in the US. Anti-competitive behavior like what's happening to Netflix should be illegal and is precisely what we have antitrust laws for. But we can't invoke them without accusations of being "anti-business."

 

[Marc]

Nah, it won't work that way. What Comcast and their ilk are trying to do is steer you toward their services and content, and away from competitors. Classic monopolist behavior, but apparently no one's going to do anything about it.

So, you can watch all the Comcast TV you want never hit a cap, and you can use their Fancast service without penalty, but if you decide to go and use Netflix, well, that's gonna count against your cap.

All the cable/Internet providers seem to be going this way: use our services, which are faster and don't count toward your cap; or use competitors and risk overage charges!

Well it seems that Netflix isn't going to do anything about it because there CEO isn't sure that would survive the battle.

http://money.cnn.com/2011/05/03/technology/netflix_streaming_growth/index.htm

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- Netflix CEO Reed Hastings is pleased with his company's massive growth, but he fears that getting too large will start "an Armageddon" with cable networks.
Hastings talked about Netflix's "niche" philosophy -- a Goldilocks-esque business plan of staying "not too big, not too small" -- in a panel discussion Tuesday at the Wired Business Conference in New York City.
Panel moderator Chris Anderson, the editor in chief of Wired magazine, asked Hastings who is "most threatened" by Netflix as it expands its streaming video content.

which leaves who? We know the politicians on both sides a) lack the balls do anything, b) don't understand the truth of the issues and c) are too deep in the pockets the lobby groups.

Cases like this are exactly why we need real Net Neutrality in the US. Anti-competitive behavior like what's happening to Netflix should be illegal and is precisely what we have antitrust laws for. But we can't invoke them without accusations of being "anti-business."

and those people who make the accusation then prove they actually have no idea of the issues and if they were truly pro-business/pro-free market they'd been oppose mopolistic behaviour instead of supporting it.