

Subscribers now have a visible limit on their internet usage











Comments     Threshold


Still no servers though?
By n0b0dykn0ws on 8/29/2008 7:58:54 AM , Rating: 2
I'm curious to know if they will still forbid running a server at home that communicates over the internet.

Yes, I realize that they still want you to sign up for their higher-priced business class model for that, but if they're going to have a limit in place, why not let you run how you want?

Let the people who want faster response times/speeds still sign up for the business class.


RE: Still no servers though?
By blaster5k on 8/29/2008 8:21:07 AM , Rating: 2
Technically yes, but the server policy is a bit Nazi-ish to me. They don't want people hosting big web sites, FTP sites, etc. since they have lower upload bandwidth available.

With the advent of home servers though, I can see a lot of people using relatively low bandwidth servers in their homes just to do remote desktop, file transfers, and such. I know I'd rather have my data at home than up in the "cloud".

RE: Still no servers though?
By Ordr on 8/29/2008 8:35:26 AM , Rating: 1

What, exactly, does their policy have in common with Nazism?

RE: Still no servers though?
By Zandros on 8/29/2008 10:55:01 AM , Rating: 2
Authoritarianism seems like a candidate.

RE: Still no servers though?
By bodar on 8/29/2008 9:29:39 PM , Rating: 3
Are you dense? It's just a figure of speech. Here's a hint: The Soup Nazi also never committed genocide or started a World War.

RE: Still no servers though?
By vapore0n on 8/29/2008 8:29:01 AM , Rating: 2
I have set up a FTP and HTTP server and both worked great.
Even better since they increased uploads speeds.
Mine are not public though.

The new "cap" should take care of any concerns of servers taking too much bandwidth.

