Too Cool for Internet Explorer

Saturday, May 13, 2006

What Does the “No Server” Rule Really Mean?

I just had a conversation with someone about Roadrunner’s recent bump (at least in my area) to 7 megabit downloads. I lamented that upload speed was still 380-some kilobit. While be both agreed the reasons ranged all the way from most people not needing more than that, to the cost of providing it, to the wish to throttle people trying to run servers, the simple fact is that Roadrunner should either qualify their “no server” clause, or eliminate it.

A definition I found of the word, “server” states:

A computer that delivers information and software to other computers linked by a network.

The other:

A computer, program or process which responds to requests for information from a client.

Well, hells bells, that’s EVERY FREAKING COMPUTER connected to the internet! This seems to knock holes in the first and third reasons I am deducing. As for the second, cost, by now you may have heard of Verizon’s Fios service. It’s $10/month cheaper than what I pay for the Earthlink flavor of Roadrunner. But most importantly, it offers 2 megabit upstream speed. At 5 megabit downstream, it’s a bit slower than what Roadrunner now offers, but if I pay that extra $10 back to Fios, I get the 2 megabit upstream and 15 megabit down!

That pretty clearly blows the cost issue to smithereens.

So, Roadrunner, I think it’s high time you either pony up some additional upstream bandwidth for the benefit of those of us who derive benefit from remotely retrieving files from their home computers, or at the very least modify your “no servers” rule because while we all know you are referring to things like web and FTP servers, even things like Remote Desktop or even just direct Instant Message links can be construed as servers.

» Posted by ALBj at 03:55 PM (ET)
Category: Musings


Service costing is a complicated thing. The company has to weigh per byte costs, employees, and other costs of doing business against the price each user will pay for that service on a per monthly basis. And then they have to turn a profit or what’s the point? Our economics work fine as long as there is competition. The problem is that there isn’t enough competition between bandwidth owners to drive down costs and increase speeds.

» Posted by Queue
May 17, 2006 01:23 AM

Sorry, due to comment spam abuse, new comments on this entry are closed until I find time to upgrade Movable Type and enable registration and moderation.