Hey guys. Quick post here about satellite and the cloud. With Satellite, you're strictly limited on bandwidth. For example with my plan I'm restricted to 375MB per day. I'm wondering what the implications will be if cloud computing becomes the norm and satellite stays the same. Disaster? :-\
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Satellite, fair access, and the cloud
- Thread starter wjlafrance
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Then you'll use 375 MB worth of bandwidth, after which you'll incur penalties or some sort of denial of service for exceeding your limits. Why would it be any different than if you went over your limit now?
That's what I'm getting at. If everything on my computer (except perhaps the OS) is remote.. my music, videos, documents, etc, I'll be out 375MB very quickly, and effectively won't be able to "access my computer" for the next day, as the limit is on a 24 hour cycle.
For many folks in rural locations, the odds of other technologies providing broadband speeds are remote at best. Miles is correct, if you are limited on bandwidth usage, cloud services is not a good option for you then.
Yep, he's talking about a service that fully lives in the cloud like Spotify or Google maps on the iPhone.
I'm just worried about the direction of this technology. More and more I'm hearing "cloud computing" this, "cloud computing" that, especially in netbooks. Just wanted to throw out there one (of the many) reasons not having your data locally is a bad idea.
Basically, you are already "penalized" for living in a rural area by being forced to get satellite instead of terrestrial internet service. The question is whether you will effectively become "more penalized" as urban area residents are able to use cloud services. My guess is "yes", but you might still be able to use cloud services.
Satellite internet service providers can raise the bandwidth limit (and charge you more for it). They can either deploy better technology (to use their satellite licenses more efficiently) or more technology (buy more licenses and satellites). They'll just pass the cost on to you.
I'm sure the 2010 USA census will show a higher percentage of Americans living in urban areas, but the rural market is still large enough to attract niche companies.
Satellite internet service providers can raise the bandwidth limit (and charge you more for it). They can either deploy better technology (to use their satellite licenses more efficiently) or more technology (buy more licenses and satellites). They'll just pass the cost on to you.
I'm sure the 2010 USA census will show a higher percentage of Americans living in urban areas, but the rural market is still large enough to attract niche companies.
Satellite service sucks, but the providers know they have a monopoly over the people who use it. Until something comes along to make them change their policies, it won't change. And it really sucks for people forced to use them.
The problem isn't just limited to sat services. Several ISPs have implemented bandwidth caps. Comcast has a 250GB/month cap, and Cox or Time-Warner (I can't remember which) has a pathetic 40GB cap. Cable providers are afraid of things like streaming Netflix, Hulu, etc, and will do everything in their power to block their customers from using them. I fully expect AT&T to introduce caps. I'm not sure about Verizon.
I find it funny when I see all these wonderful technologies like Netflix and Hulu while the U.S. ISPs are so far behind the times. It's kind of hard to enjoy HD streaming with painfully slow and capped internet.
The problem isn't just limited to sat services. Several ISPs have implemented bandwidth caps. Comcast has a 250GB/month cap, and Cox or Time-Warner (I can't remember which) has a pathetic 40GB cap. Cable providers are afraid of things like streaming Netflix, Hulu, etc, and will do everything in their power to block their customers from using them. I fully expect AT&T to introduce caps. I'm not sure about Verizon.
I find it funny when I see all these wonderful technologies like Netflix and Hulu while the U.S. ISPs are so far behind the times. It's kind of hard to enjoy HD streaming with painfully slow and capped internet.
My guess would be that if cloud computing "really" takes off, something or other will get worked out because it will eventually affect a lot of users of satellite service, and they will complain. But there will be a period of time when it will be increasingly uncomfortable for them. I mean, already, if one had the 375MB cap the OP mentioned, using things like Hulu and Netflix VoD would already be iffy, let alone using iTunes to buy movies. And all of those things are "today" internet things to which a small set of rural customers have diminished or very expensive access.
OTOH, to be fair, the fact that rural users are adversely affected isn't really a good reason to reject a technology in itself. People who live in rural areas have always been faced with the fact that they won't have access to certain things, be they 3G data networks, dedicated cupcake restaurants, or opera houses. It's a sacrifice one makes when they live in the middle of nowhere.