It looks like AT&T gets to join the ISPs that cap downloads - starts May 2011.

shrike4242

shrike4242

CAGiversary!
Feedback
1043 (100%)
Apparently, AT&T will join the ranks of the ISPs that will be capping monthly downloads:

http://www.engadget.com/2011/03/13/...ternet-and-impose-overage-fees/#disqus_thread

Starting in May, it'll have 150GB / month limits on DSL customers and 250GB / month limits on U-Verse customers, regardless of speed grade of the service. You get two months' worth of overages without penalty, and then you get penalized $10 / 50GB additional bandwidth usage per month. They're supposed to set up a monitoring tool so you can see usage, plus there's emailed reminders when you hit 65% usage, 90% usage and 100% usage. Unsurprisingly, U-Verse TV usage won't count towards the bandwidth cap.

Letters are supposed to go out starting on March 18th letting people know about this change. Since this is a material change in contract terms, you should be able to break a contract if you're under a contract with AT&T.

Being an AT&T DSL customer for 7 years and a U-Verse customer for almost a year, I'm less than pleased with this turn of events. The lack of graded bandwidth caps corresponding to speed grades isn't something I find enjoyable either, being on a 18Mbps U-Verse connection.
 
We're in almost the same situation with time having the service and all. I knew this was coming thouh, it's going to hit all the ISPs. If one decides not to however, and they advertise that fact, I see that as being a pretty big boost to them.The whole reason I got U-verse was to download more in less time, now this comes up, brilliant.
 
It'll hit anyone who does lots of downloads, as well as heavy streaming users for Netflix or Hulu Plus.

XBL / PSN usage shouldn't be much to hit caps, since there's only heavy usage when you're downloading demos or XBL games / PSN games.

It's 8.06 GB per day, which should be enough for most people, yes.

Time to start check my router's bandwidth meter once this goes live to see how AT&T compares to what my router says is going up and down.
 
Yeah, a 250GB cap is pretty reasonable IMO. Very few users will go over that as that's a ton of streaming video or downloading big files.
 
I'm guessing none of you use steam. Games can be huge sometimes. Plus keep in mind this is a cap per account, not per person. Everyone using the connection is eating up your monthly data allotment.
 
[quote name='Clak']I'm guessing none of you use steamt.[/QUOTE]


I do but I seldom d/l 10 games a month. Could be a problem during a huge steam sale but download them when you want.
 
[quote name='JJSP']250GB of data per month is a TON for someone who isn't pirating an assload of material.[/QUOTE]

Agreed. If you need to download some large files do it between now and the time the cap is set. I've never had to monitor my usage but I guess I'll see what it looks like now.
 
[quote name='Clak']I'm guessing none of you use steam. Games can be huge sometimes. Plus keep in mind this is a cap per account, not per person. Everyone using the connection is eating up your monthly data allotment.[/QUOTE]


A DL dvd is about 8.5 G right? You'd have to download one per day to hit the limit.

I think if Hulu or Netflix was smart, they'd work out a deal with the ISPs to make their bandwidth exempt.
 
I'm starting to use Steam more and I know how much some games (Aliens vs Predator, Dragon Age Origins UE, HL2 Orange Box, Warhammer 40K Dawn Of War 2, just to name a few) can chew up 8GB or more in one sitting in downloading.
 
I really wish I could find a free bandwidth monitor that can monitor every connection to my router so I know what the xbox is taking, my PC (for STO), my gf's laptop and so on.
 
Yeah, but how many Steam games do you download a month?

Same with Netflix. I read somewhere than an HD streaming movie was 2-3GBs while the SD stuff was less than 1.

So that's still a ton of streaming content.

Fair point above for people with big families or living with roommates etc. If you've got 4 or 5 people streaming content and downloading crap then it may go faster. But 250GB should still be fine for most of those.

It's really only an issue for pirates/others that download a ton of big files or people who stream TONS of video.
 
Probably ISP's are projecting that they can't handle the traffic with more and more smaller devices becoming net connected.
 
[quote name='62t']Next thing you know they will start charging internet by the hour[/QUOTE]


and AOL will rise up and become the dominant ISP in the world!!!
 
I am curious of how much data is passed during an hour session of Black Ops or other fps game? No way it can be a 1gb.
 
Yeah, it has to be a tiny amount for online gaming. I mean online gaming worked ok on the Dreamcast on dial up for god's sake.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']Yeah, it has to be a tiny amount for online gaming. I mean online gaming worked ok on the Dreamcast on dial up for god's sake.[/QUOTE]


It's small, but it is most likely bigger than than whatever was sent back then. I am thinking maybe 100mb per hour? Too much?
 
The top 2 percent of residential subscribers uses about 20 percent of the bandwidth on our network. Just one of these high-traffic users can utilize the same amount of data capacity as 19 typical households.
Click to expand...

I hate these bullshit caps companies are trying to put on bandwidth because a few people abuse the bandwidth. Go after these 2% and see what they are doing to use so much. If they are pirating movies, games, and music then report them to RIAA(?).
 
[quote name='PenguinoMF']I hate these bullshit caps companies are trying to put on bandwidth because a few people abuse the bandwidth. Go after these 2% and see what they are doing to use so much. If they are pirating movies, games, and music then report them to RIAA(?).[/QUOTE]

The cap will probably only currently affect those 2 percent or so anyway if they keep them as high as 250GB.
 
[quote name='ITDEFX']I am more wondering if these ISP's are trying to piss off Netflix and other streaming services as well.[/QUOTE]
Ultimately they'd liek to charge companies like Netflix to have their traffic delivered at a certain rate. Partially because it's cutting into their on demand movie business.
 
[quote name='Clak']Ultimately they'd liek to charge companies like Netflix to have their traffic delivered at a certain rate. Partially because it's cutting into their on demand movie business.[/QUOTE]

Yep, but they can't.

The recent FCC net neutrality ruling stated that cable/dsl etc. providers could not prioritize net traffic or charge for it.

But they did allow cellular data providers to do so due to their more limited bandwith etc.

At least that's what I recall from the ruling.
 
Yeah, look for them to find some way of doing it or something like it though. In this case they can advertise how their movies don't count toward your internet usage.
 
[quote name='Clak']Yeah, look for them to find some way of doing it or something like it though. In this case they can advertise how their movies don't count toward your internet usage.[/QUOTE]

No they can put caps on all internet traffic which could hurt streaming services. Streaming can and will count toward the caps.

The ruling just made it so they can't can't slow down streaming traffic in favor of other traffic, or put caps only on streaming traffic etc.

It's net neutrality. Any policies have to affect ALL net traffic, just not that from certain sites etc.
 
That's what i meant, they still have ways of hurting services like Netflix even without being able to pick out their traffic specifically. Now they can advertise how their on-demand services won't count toward your data cap.
 
Oh, got you. I read it as meaning netflix etc. could advertise that their streaming didn't count toward their caps. Just a misreading on my part as I'm exhausted! :D
 
I just got AT&T too :/.I don't download movies or anything and right now just pretty much webbrowse/games/youtube and stuff but I was thinking about maybe eventually getting Netflix Streaming but hearing this makes me rethink it a bit since if I did I'd wanna watch a bunch then assuming I did.

I doubt I use near either of the two limits listed for those but there's something in my head making me feel a little uneasy about "limits" even though I see why they're there and consider them fair.

Small question though to anyone that knows about how much certain games use, even though its not possible for me to be awake to game this much,but about how much data would it be to be playing something like a shooter like Call of Duty all day for 24 hours or for the whole entire month lol?

Also I hear that for Comcast their on demand stuff goes into your internet.Although it was mentioned that for Uverse it won't affect their tv usage.It makes me curious if their on demand will be counted as apart of tv usage or internet.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You'd have to watch a ton of streaming to get anywhere near 250gb a month.

From what I've read, even the HD movies are only 2-3 GBs apiece, SD are less than 1gb.

The online gaming usage was asked earlier, not good answer, but it has to be small. Online gaming worked fine on dial up in past generations. I'm sure it's more data now, but I can't image you'd even hit 1gb a day if you gamed all day.
 
Comcast has a 250GB cap as well. I use XBL, stream lots of Netflix in HD, and usually average around 150GB a month. It really is hard to come close to 250 unless you are pirating a lot.
 
It's really not so bad as long as they keep the caps in the 200/300GB per month level.

I don't think that even with heavy netflix/steam/XBL use you could surpass that unless you had to download all your steam games and XBLA/ originals because you lost them.

I think it's awful but it has a good side effect of discouraging piracy. I don't think I'd ever use more than 8GB/day, and if I did it'd be a random occurance.

My parents use sattelite internet because they live in a rural area and my dad needs it for his business - their caps are 300 MB a day.

That's right - MEGABYTES. You couldn't download many music CDs on Itunes with a satellite connection. It's pretty bullshit.
 
[quote name='ITDEFX']and AOL will rise up and become the dominant ISP in the world!!![/QUOTE]

All hail AOL!!
 
Keep in mind that as things get even more sophisticated online and downloads become larger, they may either have to increase the cap or people could begin running into problems. I mean think about how small game demos used be back in the 90s compared to now, files aren't getting any smaller.
 
Yeah, they will have to move caps up as time goes on and internet speeds rise and file downloading averages move up.

But that should be a pretty slow process. I don't think we'll see a huge jump in internet speeds anytime soon from the 6-25mbs that are typical today in big cities. The main focus on broadband currently seems to be on expanding coverage to areas that currently don't have any broad band options and those that have outdated options like 1.5mbs DSL as the only option etc.
 
Yeah, this is ridiculous, but then, does the consumer really have any choice nowadays? I mean Comcast, does it as well, so now AT&T sees this as another revenue stream, what with their 'overages' charges. It's time for an Internet Bill of Rights or something.
As customers, we're paying an average of ~$40 a month, for capped data, just so they can now make MORE money off the top. I mean really? It's 2011, and these ISPs want to claim their infrastructure cannot support all these users on broadband. Really? GTFO!

It's not just pirating, there are those of us that have legitimate use for more than 250GB a month. But the average consumer, is just gonna sit here and 'meh' shrug shoulders, while we watch them take away ANOTHER option, and just take it. With that mindset, the Gov't might as well, take away your rights, one by one, and we'll just grin and take it...... Wait, they ARE, oh well, 'Meh' -> shrugs shoulders.

Hey remember when fighting games CAME with alternate costumes? Yeah, we're gonna make you pay for that now. 'Meh'
 
So what if a year later ATT and Comcast decided that the new cap is 200GB? Then 150GB? It is true that most people won't use 250GB, but where do we draw the line?
 
[quote name='62t']So what if a year later ATT and Comcast decided that the new cap is 200GB? Then 150GB? It is true that most people won't use 250GB, but where do we draw the line?[/QUOTE]

that's where you vote with your wallet.
 
Heh, I'm pretty sure we don't go over 150GB in a month. All my dad does is ebay, and I download maybe 10GB (games, programs, etc) a month. Online gaming shouldn't be a problem either since I don't do much of it. I guess I'll just have to wait and see if this is bad news (for me) once they start this.
 
I'm not liking this. My dad and I are big internet users. Netflix, Hulu, XBL, PSN, NBA League Pass Broadband... I don't know what our usage is, but I hope I'm not close to the 150GB.

Are there any tools I can use to track something like this before they put it into effect?
 
[quote name='advanced']I'm not liking this. My dad and I are big internet users. Netflix, Hulu, XBL, PSN, NBA League Pass Broadband... I don't know what our usage is, but I hope I'm not close to the 150GB.

Are there any tools I can use to track something like this before they put it into effect?[/QUOTE]Your router might have stats built into it, depending on the model of router.

They'll have monitoring tools once the caps are put into effect, though beforehand, I'm not sure. Not that I can see from logging into my account.
 
I was ready to be all pissed off and say that I'm switching to Charter right now!

...Except 250GBs sounds fairly reasonable for $15 a month. I don't even know how someone would hit 250GBs.
 
Wow, that really sucks. Sure you probably wont use all 250 GB's now, but lets realistically lets put this at 5-10 years from now. Who knows what you will be downloading and how big it will be.

But of course the isp's are too fucking lazy to just go after the people who use the most bandwidth. It would be most cost effective and probably easier for them to just add in this cap. Hell I am not surprised that certain services like netflix or bittorrent have not been severely slowed down yet.
 
I currently run at about 80-90GB per month on Charter; of course that's already more than triple my usage at this same time last year. Charter at least has tiered caps at 100GB/250GB/500GB for
 
[quote name='BlueLobstah']

Now I'm living by myself, so the cap isn't too much of an issue at the moment. But if I had a wife and kids who streamed content as well, that's another story.

My concern is for the future. 250GB may be okay now for 90% of the people, but that's definitely not going to be enough in the next couple of years as streaming content (via video or cloud) becomes more prominent. I have a feeling telcos are going to lock us in at the cap and not take future usage into account.[/QUOTE]

The other problem is not only are they capping, but they are not even giving a fuck about everyone in america right now. For example, my grandmother can't get DSL service because Verizon has been too lazy to come and install the DSL lines in her area. She has to use 28.8k dialup which gets seriously 1kb/sec downloads. This point ties into the fact that telcos wont upgrade shit and so we will see this nice cap and probably not see it get bigger because they don't care to even make their services more efficient that they don't need to cap. They just want money and us the consumer loses. Especially when the fucking government is not voting in net neutrality policies that would stop this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top