3 ms·

> In the case of AT&T, pricing can start at $55 per month for a 25Gbps plan ... Cox internet is similar, with plans starting at $50 per month for a 100Gbps or 2

> In the case of AT&T, pricing can start at $55 per month for a 25Gbps plan ... Cox internet is similar, with plans starting at $50 per month for a 100Gbps or 200Gbps plan... I absolutely refuse to believe those speeds are offered at those prices. Otherwise, I'm getting totally ripped off.

activiation 3y ago
If you don't switch provider yearly, you are almost certainly getting ripped off. I was paying less than $55/month for 25mbps with Comcast.
- runako 3y ago
  > $55 per month for a 25Gbps plan > I was paying less than $55/month for 25mbps with Comcast The Comcast plan is ~1000x slower than the AT&T plan cited, FWIW I was not able to locate the 25Gbps plan on the linked AT&T site so likely a typo.
  - Goronmon 3y ago
    Screw the 25Gbps plan, I want that 200Gbps plan. That's 200 times fast than my current fiber connection.
    - activiation 3y ago
      Oops, I mistaken the G for a M... Thanks. Yeah, that would be extremely cheap then, but I'll believe it when I see it.
- chankstein38 3y ago
  The parent comment said 25Gbps not Mbps
  - activiation 3y ago
    More than likely a mistake in the article
- ihattendorf 3y ago
  Centurylink 100/10 mbps price for life @ $33/month. Golden handcuffs, I want faster but can't justify paying 3x the price.
userbinator 3y ago
I suspect that, as typical for ISPs, those are "up to" speeds they can set their throttling limits at. Possibly achievable under ideal conditions between you and your neighbor's house. Look up how much 100G NICs cost and the rest of the equipment required to reach those speeds, and it's clear that the vast majority of people using these plans are unlikely to ever get close to that limit.
flutas 3y ago
Yeah, that has to be someone not knowing what they are talking about and getting stuff confused... for example, in what world would 5Gbps upload speed be "teeny-tiny", while it would make sense to call it "teeny-tiny" if it's 5Mbps > teeny-tiny 5Gbps upload speed EDIT: Also, checking Cox, they have the exact plans the article mentions, but in Mbps not Gbps.
- kelipso 3y ago
  Lol 100% it's a typo and it should be Mbps and not Gbps throughout the article.
NoMoreNicksLeft 3y ago
Drop the "ps" abbreviation/suffix off of those, so they become data cap measurements?
Goronmon 3y ago
I absolutely refuse to believe those speeds are offered at those prices. Otherwise, I'm getting totally ripped off. Yeah, someone definitely didn't sanity check the units on those speeds. Especially the reference to the "...with a teeny-tiny 5Gbps upload speed" which is more than twice as fast as the fastest (2Gbps) plan that my local fiber company offers.
js2 3y ago
Sloppy reporting. The full sentence for context: > In the case of AT&T, pricing can start at $55 per month for a 25Gbps plan before going up to $65 per month or more after a year, and the company will charge $10 for every extra 50GB you use (unless you upgrade to unlimited for $30 per month or have a plan that’s already unlimited). Links to https://www.att.com/internet/internet-service-plans/ https://www.att.com/internet/internet-service-plans/ The pricing can start at $55 per month for a 25Gbps plan is clearly a reference to the "Internet 25" plan which is 25Mbps (not Gbps). There's a footnote on the price for the Internet 25, 50, and 100 plans indicating the data cap: "Incl. 1.5TB data/mo., overage charges apply." There's also "See offer details" link with this pop-up: https://imgur.com/a/mZBetsA https://imgur.com/a/mZBetsA It links to https://www.att.com/help/internet/usage/ https://www.att.com/help/internet/usage/ for info on data allowances. Internet 25 and Internet 50 have a 1.5TB allowance, but Internet 100 is unlimited. All of the AT&T Fiber plans are also unlimited data. I don't know why anyone would choose Internet 25 or Internet 50 over Internet 100 since all three are the same price, so it must be an availability issue. It's also weird to me that AT&T would price all three of these plans the same and apply a data cap only to the slower speed plans. I wonder if it indicates is more expensive for them to provide the lower tier plans for some reason? Disclosure: I've had AT&T Gigabit Fiber since Jan 2017. It's $70/month (total) which has included HBO Max as a freebee for several years now. No data cap. It's the best residential Internet service I've ever had, by far.
- xp84 3y ago
  Too bad AT&T is the world’s slowest to actually build out fiber. They advertise it to me on Facebook daily (too many dollars allocated to the marketing budget apparently), but they haven’t bothered to actually build it out. I’ve lived in their footprint all my life and they’ve never delivered FttP to anywhere I’ve lived. In many different cities and counties.
  - js2 3y ago
    Google Fiber has been advertising to me since 2015. I have the T-shirt to prove it: https://twitter.com/googlefiber/status/628651613637361665 https://twitter.com/googlefiber/status/628651613637361665 They finally trenched my neighborhood six months ago, a full six years after AT&T. But I still can't order service.
loeg 3y ago
It's almost certainly a typo for Mbps. 100Mbps and 200Mbps are common broadband offerings in the US. Rates in excess of 1Gbps are not -- certainly not 100Gbps. No consumer is going to have the expensive hardware required to terminate 100Gbps, much less utilize it, and there's no way in hell it would only cost $50/mo. 100Gbps+ is not even prevalent inside data centers; it's just super expensive and many applications don't need that kind of throughput.
- ihattendorf 3y ago
  Just want to point out it's not that far out there to terminate 100gbps without breaking the bank these days. 1x Mellanox ConnectX-5 Dual Port 100GbE NIC ~$400 (single port ~$200), Brocade ICX6610/6650 ~$150/$600, then a hardware router (pricey) or server with routing software. VyOS is fine up to maybe 40gbps depending on hardware (not line rate), anything more would need something like VPP+FRR/VPP+DPDK/DANOS/TNSR. More for homelab, but a road I would definitely go down if 100gbps service was available to me for $50/month.
  - seanp2k2 3y ago
    10gbps is ~800k-15m packets/sec. https://www.netgate.com/blog/tnsr-home-lab https://www.netgate.com/blog/tnsr-home-lab has a blog post about using their product to do 40gbps for someone with a home 100gbps lab setup (that uses a $30k switch among other things). Not sure what your financial situation is like, but getting even 10gbps across NAT is going to be at least a few grand (Netgate's HW solution that claims to saturate 10gbps with any packet size is $4k + $1k/yr software subscription https://shop.netgate.com/products/1541-base-tnsr https://shop.netgate.com/products/1541-base-tnsr ) and not many places would even support transferring at that speed, so what's the point unless you've got many heavy users?
    - ihattendorf 3y ago
      > so what's the point unless you've got many heavy users? There isn't really a point except some people like to push the boundary for fun. Agreed it's not anywhere close to necessary for normal home users. But we don't always do things just because they're necessary :) I mentioned VyOS won't handle line rate (it'll do ~5 Mpps on average hardware) but there are options like DANOS that will. 10 Gbps is do-able with < $1k in hardware, including the server. VPP+FRR or VPP+DPDK can handle 100 Mpps/100 Gbps across NAT. And with the new Linux Control Plane in VPP, it's possible VyOS will get support in the future (https://vyos.dev/T1797 https://vyos.dev/T1797). They're also considering using eXpress Data Path (XDP). Again, totally pointless but so are many other things we spend our time/money on.
solardev 3y ago
I think the article might've switched out the M for a G. Most home equipment, even the computers themselves, can't handle those speeds. Unless they're moving into the ultralow cost home data center segment, it's probably a mistake lol...
Nifty3929 3y ago
They're only 3 orders of magnitude off. Give them a break.
activiation 3y ago
They finally fixed the article. Of course they meant Mbps and not Gbps.

activiation 3y ago

If you don't switch provider yearly, you are almost certainly getting ripped off. I was paying less than $55/month for 25mbps with Comcast.

runako 3y ago
> $55 per month for a 25Gbps plan > I was paying less than $55/month for 25mbps with Comcast The Comcast plan is ~1000x slower than the AT&T plan cited, FWIW I was not able to locate the 25Gbps plan on the linked AT&T site so likely a typo.
- Goronmon 3y ago
  Screw the 25Gbps plan, I want that 200Gbps plan. That's 200 times fast than my current fiber connection.
  - activiation 3y ago
    Oops, I mistaken the G for a M... Thanks. Yeah, that would be extremely cheap then, but I'll believe it when I see it.
chankstein38 3y ago
The parent comment said 25Gbps not Mbps
- activiation 3y ago
  More than likely a mistake in the article
ihattendorf 3y ago
Centurylink 100/10 mbps price for life @ $33/month. Golden handcuffs, I want faster but can't justify paying 3x the price.

userbinator 3y ago

I suspect that, as typical for ISPs, those are "up to" speeds they can set their throttling limits at. Possibly achievable under ideal conditions between you and your neighbor's house. Look up how much 100G NICs cost and the rest of the equipment required to reach those speeds, and it's clear that the vast majority of people using these plans are unlikely to ever get close to that limit.

flutas 3y ago

Yeah, that has to be someone not knowing what they are talking about and getting stuff confused... for example, in what world would 5Gbps upload speed be "teeny-tiny", while it would make sense to call it "teeny-tiny" if it's 5Mbps > teeny-tiny 5Gbps upload speed EDIT: Also, checking Cox, they have the exact plans the article mentions, but in Mbps not Gbps.

kelipso 3y ago
Lol 100% it's a typo and it should be Mbps and not Gbps throughout the article.

NoMoreNicksLeft 3y ago

Drop the "ps" abbreviation/suffix off of those, so they become data cap measurements?

Goronmon 3y ago

I absolutely refuse to believe those speeds are offered at those prices. Otherwise, I'm getting totally ripped off. Yeah, someone definitely didn't sanity check the units on those speeds. Especially the reference to the "...with a teeny-tiny 5Gbps upload speed" which is more than twice as fast as the fastest (2Gbps) plan that my local fiber company offers.

js2 3y ago

Sloppy reporting. The full sentence for context: > In the case of AT&T, pricing can start at $55 per month for a 25Gbps plan before going up to $65 per month or more after a year, and the company will charge $10 for every extra 50GB you use (unless you upgrade to unlimited for $30 per month or have a plan that’s already unlimited). Links to https://www.att.com/internet/internet-service-plans/ https://www.att.com/internet/internet-service-plans/ The pricing can start at $55 per month for a 25Gbps plan is clearly a reference to the "Internet 25" plan which is 25Mbps (not Gbps). There's a footnote on the price for the Internet 25, 50, and 100 plans indicating the data cap: "Incl. 1.5TB data/mo., overage charges apply." There's also "See offer details" link with this pop-up: https://imgur.com/a/mZBetsA https://imgur.com/a/mZBetsA It links to https://www.att.com/help/internet/usage/ https://www.att.com/help/internet/usage/ for info on data allowances. Internet 25 and Internet 50 have a 1.5TB allowance, but Internet 100 is unlimited. All of the AT&T Fiber plans are also unlimited data. I don't know why anyone would choose Internet 25 or Internet 50 over Internet 100 since all three are the same price, so it must be an availability issue. It's also weird to me that AT&T would price all three of these plans the same and apply a data cap only to the slower speed plans. I wonder if it indicates is more expensive for them to provide the lower tier plans for some reason? Disclosure: I've had AT&T Gigabit Fiber since Jan 2017. It's $70/month (total) which has included HBO Max as a freebee for several years now. No data cap. It's the best residential Internet service I've ever had, by far.

xp84 3y ago
Too bad AT&T is the world’s slowest to actually build out fiber. They advertise it to me on Facebook daily (too many dollars allocated to the marketing budget apparently), but they haven’t bothered to actually build it out. I’ve lived in their footprint all my life and they’ve never delivered FttP to anywhere I’ve lived. In many different cities and counties.
- js2 3y ago
  Google Fiber has been advertising to me since 2015. I have the T-shirt to prove it: https://twitter.com/googlefiber/status/628651613637361665 https://twitter.com/googlefiber/status/628651613637361665 They finally trenched my neighborhood six months ago, a full six years after AT&T. But I still can't order service.

loeg 3y ago

It's almost certainly a typo for Mbps. 100Mbps and 200Mbps are common broadband offerings in the US. Rates in excess of 1Gbps are not -- certainly not 100Gbps. No consumer is going to have the expensive hardware required to terminate 100Gbps, much less utilize it, and there's no way in hell it would only cost $50/mo. 100Gbps+ is not even prevalent inside data centers; it's just super expensive and many applications don't need that kind of throughput.

ihattendorf 3y ago
Just want to point out it's not that far out there to terminate 100gbps without breaking the bank these days. 1x Mellanox ConnectX-5 Dual Port 100GbE NIC ~$400 (single port ~$200), Brocade ICX6610/6650 ~$150/$600, then a hardware router (pricey) or server with routing software. VyOS is fine up to maybe 40gbps depending on hardware (not line rate), anything more would need something like VPP+FRR/VPP+DPDK/DANOS/TNSR. More for homelab, but a road I would definitely go down if 100gbps service was available to me for $50/month.
- seanp2k2 3y ago
  10gbps is ~800k-15m packets/sec. https://www.netgate.com/blog/tnsr-home-lab https://www.netgate.com/blog/tnsr-home-lab has a blog post about using their product to do 40gbps for someone with a home 100gbps lab setup (that uses a $30k switch among other things). Not sure what your financial situation is like, but getting even 10gbps across NAT is going to be at least a few grand (Netgate's HW solution that claims to saturate 10gbps with any packet size is $4k + $1k/yr software subscription https://shop.netgate.com/products/1541-base-tnsr https://shop.netgate.com/products/1541-base-tnsr ) and not many places would even support transferring at that speed, so what's the point unless you've got many heavy users?
  - ihattendorf 3y ago
    > so what's the point unless you've got many heavy users? There isn't really a point except some people like to push the boundary for fun. Agreed it's not anywhere close to necessary for normal home users. But we don't always do things just because they're necessary :) I mentioned VyOS won't handle line rate (it'll do ~5 Mpps on average hardware) but there are options like DANOS that will. 10 Gbps is do-able with < $1k in hardware, including the server. VPP+FRR or VPP+DPDK can handle 100 Mpps/100 Gbps across NAT. And with the new Linux Control Plane in VPP, it's possible VyOS will get support in the future (https://vyos.dev/T1797 https://vyos.dev/T1797). They're also considering using eXpress Data Path (XDP). Again, totally pointless but so are many other things we spend our time/money on.

solardev 3y ago

I think the article might've switched out the M for a G. Most home equipment, even the computers themselves, can't handle those speeds. Unless they're moving into the ultralow cost home data center segment, it's probably a mistake lol...

Nifty3929 3y ago

They're only 3 orders of magnitude off. Give them a break.

activiation 3y ago

They finally fixed the article. Of course they meant Mbps and not Gbps.