Amazon's Fire TV Can Be a Data Hog

[exfileme]

There's a current problem with the screen saver.

Amazon's Fire TV Can Be a Data Hog : Read more

 

[Christopher1]

Time for companies to improve internet infrastructure.

More time to ban caps. You get X level of service 24/7 in Mbps and any other 'fiddling' is banned.

 

[razor512]

Transfer caps are not an infrastructure issue, they are completely made up as a way to oversell, and discourage the use of the internet in a way that will take advantage of the speed you are paying for.

Think of it as a politician restricting air travel to an altitude of 20 feet. It will effectively ban air travel without violating the the right to travel.

Networks are limited by throughput, e.g., a Gigabit connection can give 10 customers a 100mbit connection. An ISP builds out infrastructure to provide a certain amount of throughput, they then price based on throughput, e.g., a 100mbit connection will cost more than a 50mbit connection. The issue is what happens if you want to sell more than you have? Well you cannot technically do that, but you can still make it work if you find a way to make customers not use what they pay for.

 

[Guest]

80gb screensaver, not bad!

 

[David Cruit]

Transfer caps are not an infrastructure issue, they are completely made up as a way to oversell, and discourage the use of the internet in a way that will take advantage of the speed you are paying for.

Think of it as a politician restricting air travel to an altitude of 20 feet. It will effectively ban air travel without violating the the right to travel.

Networks are limited by throughput, e.g., a Gigabit connection can give 10 customers a 100mbit connection. An ISP builds out infrastructure to provide a certain amount of throughput, they then price based on throughput, e.g., a 100mbit connection will cost more than a 50mbit connection. The issue is what happens if you want to sell more than you have? Well you cannot technically do that, but you can still make it work if you find a way to make customers not use what they pay for.

Fun fact, there are massive sections of "dark fiber" (unused fiber) between cities, the problem lies with the last mile connection. Even then, DOCSIS 3.1 allows for 10 gig down/1 up over copper, and fiber is far from a bottleneck, so I don't see the logic in claiming that they're imposing bandwidth caps because they don't have the throughput.

 

[teh_chem]

Honestly? A screen saver can plow through gigabytes of data? What is it doing, transferring an entire bitmap at full res at 60Hz? I can't fathom how--even if this bug of images not being cached--it could use 80GB in a single day.

 

[clonazepam]

Transfer caps are not an infrastructure issue, they are completely made up as a way to oversell, and discourage the use of the internet in a way that will take advantage of the speed you are paying for.

Think of it as a politician restricting air travel to an altitude of 20 feet. It will effectively ban air travel without violating the the right to travel.

Networks are limited by throughput, e.g., a Gigabit connection can give 10 customers a 100mbit connection. An ISP builds out infrastructure to provide a certain amount of throughput, they then price based on throughput, e.g., a 100mbit connection will cost more than a 50mbit connection. The issue is what happens if you want to sell more than you have? Well you cannot technically do that, but you can still make it work if you find a way to make customers not use what they pay for.

Exactly, I can buy 100mbit PER second, but I can't use it EVERY second of the month.

 

[coffeecoffee]

This sounds like a load of turd.... how does a "mosaic background" gulp 80GB of data a day? This sounds like something an idiot in their PR department would say. Unbelievable...