Webware

DSL Reports has gotten word that Comcast will soon be offering its Internet subscribers a bandwidth usage meter as early as the first week of January. With the new system users would presumably be able to see how much bandwidth they've used, akin to cellular service providers offering estimates to keep customers from going over their allotted limit. Such a tool for Internet bandwidth would let customers adjust their usage habits accordingly.

Back in October the communications company imposed a limit on user downloads to 250 GB a month without providing any monitoring tools of its own short of installing special software. Additionally, customers are only given one verbal warning before a one-year service suspension if they go over that limit.

Oddly enough when the cap was first announced, we had gotten a confirmation that Comcast would indeed be offering a bandwidth tracking tool of its own. This was later recanted by a Comcast spokesperson who said "there are numerous free or fee-based meters that are widely available on the Internet to anyone who wants one." Comcast's excessive use FAQ still urges people to use McAfee's security suite, but now notes that "we are in the process of creating a usage meter that will measure consumption for the Comcast account which will be available in the coming months."

Comcast spokesperson Charlie Douglas tells us the meter must first undergo an employee trial: "When that testing is complete, we plan to launch the meter to all of our high-speed Internet customers. It will be available for free via a customer's Comcast.net account and it will enable them to very easily keep track of their aggregate data usage each month."

Also, if you're looking to track your usage, worth checking out is my CNET colleague Seth Rosenblatt's look at half a dozen different bandwidth monitoring tools.

Related: Comcast's 50 Mbps service comes to OR, WA next month

Facebook might not be a photo-sharing site, per se, but there are a heck of a lot of pictures uploaded to it.

On Tuesday night, engineer Doug Beaver wrote a blog post announcing that the total count of photos on the site now stands at about 10 billion. The social network announced informally in August that it has hit 100 million active users worldwide.

To compare, the News Corp.-owned Photobucket, which has a real-time ticker of photos uploaded, stood at slightly less than 6.2 billion photos on Wednesday morning. Flickr, which is owned by Yahoo, hit 2 billion photos just less than a year ago.

"To celebrate (the photo-hosting milestone), we got a bunch of cupcakes and handed them out to our engineering and operations groups," the post read. "One of our engineers calculated that if we had gotten one cupcake for each of our photos, and lined them up side by side, the line could reach halfway to the moon."

Facebook's popularity may indeed reach the moon, but the news is a bit troubling too. Beaver noted that Facebook stores four sizes of each image, meaning that it has more than 40 billion images stored on its servers. That's a lot of storage space required, and though it's much cheaper than it used to be, hardware simply isn't free.

Facebook reportedly borrowed $100 million in May to cover server costs, and while the company is still pretty much swimming in venture capital, it's not clear that revenues will be up to par with server demands any time soon. Founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg said last week that the company hopes to be profitable in three years.

Comcast has thrown down the bandwidth gauntlet. Starting in October, Comcast broadband users will be restricted to 250GB worth of downloads per month. When asked whether the cable company was planning on offering a bandwidth meter to customers, a Comcast representative stated that it hopes to, eventually, but until then Google would be a nice place to find one.

So, I've come up with a list of free bandwidth monitoring software for Windows and Mac that should tide you over until Verizon brings some Fios action to your hood.

First off, let's look at BitMeter. When running, it lives in your Windows Taskbar, so the features are accessible only through the context menu. Halfway down the lengthy list is the knockout punch: ISP Restrictions. This lets you set a limit that can be based on downloads only, or total traffic. It also offers notification based on the percentage of your quota that has been downloaded, and the start date of the quota.

It's more than a one-hit wonder, offering a live graph of upload and download usage, a usage calculator that can work based on transfer time or file size, and hourly, daily, weekly, and monthly statistics. This data can also be exported and saved. However, BitMeter lacks polish in the interface. The main screen is a live usage graph. All features are hidden in the context menu, so it's not going to win any design contests soon.

Despite the promising name, I found Bandwidth Monitor Lite to be a disappointment as far as monthly quotas were concerned. Similar to BitMeter in layout, although the look of its graph is slicker, the actual tools that the Lite version offered were slim. You can track the amount of data downloaded and set a day of the month to start counting, but there was no way to set the quota or configure an alert.

The persistent emphasis on themes and skins was irritating, since the features that they were meant to put on display were less than stellar. The upgrade version does offer a lot more, but paying for a bandwidth tracker strikes me as a bit insulting, since we're already throwing cash at Comcast that we might not have had we known there would be a post-contract download cap.

Two other promising tools that I looked at were Axence NetTools and FreeMeter. Axence was the more advanced one by far, with a well-organized and professional-looking layout, but neither has bandwidth-monitoring capabilities that Comcast users will be looking for. Axence does have a "bandwidth monitor," but it can only check on user-specified connections, not overall up/down traffic.

For Macs users, iStat Menus and MenuMeters both sounded promising. Neither offer the robust bandwidth management tools that this Comcast problem is calling for, though.

I did that find a little-known app called SurplusMeter does precisely what we need it to do. Like BitMeter for Windows, it gives users the ability to set a bandwidth limit, a start day of the month, and the connection type--PPP Modem or Network Card, for example.

SurplusMeter also calculates a daily allowance, and reconfigures that depending on how much you've actually used for the month. It lacks the not-quite-fancy graphs that I encountered in its PC counterparts, but SurplusMeter also lacked something they had: an alarm or notification that would tell you when you were approaching your limit.

Fortunately, the interface is dead simple. All the options are presented in an uncluttered layout--you'll get exactly what you need from this app with a minimum of hassle. Handy progress bars give a slight visual flair to the days left in the month, the download megabyte count, and the total downloaded and uploaded.

Clearly, there's no killer app for either operating system, but there's at least one for each out there that most users should be able to get by on. It's an imperfect stop-gap to a problem that has the potential for wide-ranging consequences far beyond mere file sharing.

Thursday's news about the upcoming 250 GB monthly cap for Comcast data subscribers left some questions unanswered. I shot a few of my own, as well as some from readers over to Comcast to get them answered. These are mostly items that did not appear in both the post about the amendment, or the otherwise comprehensive FAQ page.

Update at 5:05 p.m. PDT: In a bizarre twist, the previous answers to my questions were answered by someone named Bill G., who Comcast says is not an authorized spokesperson for the company, despite answering my e-mail sent through the company's press contacts page. Charlie Douglas, who is Director of Corporate Communications for Comcast's Online & Voice Services, wrote me back to let me know the "correct" answers to these questions. I've highlighted where the previous unofficial answers differed for the sake of continuity, although the only major differentiation from the unofficial contact is the mention of Comcast developing its own bandwidth monitoring and notification service for its customers, which is apparently not happening.

Q: Will people who go over for the second time be able to challenge the account suspension, or is the two strikes and you're out policy the standard?
Charlie Douglas: If a customer receives a call that he/she has exceeded 250 GB in a month, then we ask them to please moderate their usage. The vast majority of customers do so voluntarily. During that first call, however, we also explain that, per our Acceptable Use Policy, if they are among our heaviest users for a second time in the following six months, that we reserve the right to suspend their account for 12 months. Again, this is an extremely small number of customers--far less than 1 percent--and is a policy that does not affect more than 99 percent of our customers.

Will there be a usage meter available on Comcast subscriber's online account information?
Douglas: There are numerous free or fee-based meters that are widely available on the Internet to anyone who wants one.
(Editor's note: This differs from our unofficial contact who said "Comcast is developing a meter to track your bandwidth." We've got a write-up of ways to do this using various software tools.)

Will you be offering larger bandwidth packages for home businesses or "excessive users?"
Douglas: Our excessive use policy is only for residential service customers. As of today, this policy does not apply to our commercial services customers.

How does this factor in with users of your Digital Voice service? On average how much bandwidth does that service take up?
Douglas: Comcast Digital Voice is a completely separate service and is not a factor.

We've also had some questions about the bandwidth averages cited on this page. 2-3 GB median monthly bandwidth seems incredibly low, as does the figure for how large an e-mail is (0.05KB/e-mail). Most messages in my inbox hover between 10-50k. Was it a typo for 0.05MB?
Douglas: 2 to 3 GB/month is the median monthly amount used by our residential high-speed Internet customers. The examples we provided at www.comcast.net/networkmanagement are illustrative of how much activity would be required to reach 250GB in a month. More than 99 percent of our customers do not come close to using more than that amount.

Got any other questions you feel are unanswered? Leave them in the comments and we can send out a second round.

Starting October 1 customers of Comcast's residential data services will have an invisible barrier on their monthly data usage. Under the new guidelines of Comcast's Acceptable Use Policy announced Thursday, that cap will be set at 250 gigabytes per month, per account.

Users who go over the limit will get a courtesy call from Comcast's customer service for the first instance. However, under the new policy a second-time offense means the service is immediately suspended for an entire calendar year.

Surprisingly the company is not providing any tools to help users monitor their current usage. An FAQ on Comcast's support site simply suggests that customers do a "Web search" for bandwidth metering software that will track this amount for them. Going forward there may be plans to set up alerts over certain thresholds, or bundle some official tool as part of the company's starter software.

Comcast notes that the median usage for most residential customers falls somewhere between 2GB and 3GB, a number that is regularly broken within a matter of hours and sometimes minutes by customers taking advantage of streaming HD video and online backup services. The company breaks down basic usage numbers similar to what's seen on the marketing materials on a consumer hard drive:

* Send 50 million e-mails (at 0.05KB/e-mail)
* Download 62,500 songs (at 4MB/song)
* Download 125 standard-definition movies (at 2GB/movie)
* Upload 25,000 high-resolution digital photos (at 10MB/photo)

A far greater problem may be the slighting of cloud storage services that offer file transfer and backup. Services like Carbonite and Mozy let you back up and transfer the entirety of your computer's storage several times per month, which on many standard consumer machines can be in the hundreds of gigabytes.

Apple, too, is just at the beginning stages of MobileMe, a service that offers sync and file backup to multiple devices. Additionally, the rumored all-you-can-eat iTunes could drastically change how much downloading users are doing on a monthly basis.

So what do you think about this new limit? Let us know in the comments and the poll below.

There's a dangerous trend afoot: U.S. wired broadband providers are looking at setting up tiers of service, not based on bandwidth (speed), which many already have, but rather based on amount of data received or transmitted in a given time period. Some Internet service providers are running experiments right now; see Comcast targets bandwidth hogs in test.

It's not, on the face of things, an unfair concept. In some parts of the world, pay-by-the-bit bandwidth (or penalties for overage) is the norm. But adding capped bandwidth services to existing U.S. plans could be disruptive to the economics of the Web here, in more ways than one.

Let's start by looking at an analogous situation in a different industry. Airlines are reacting to high fuel prices by finding ways to tack on charges to tickets. The most recent change: Fees for checked luggage. It doesn't take a genius to predict what some of the consequences of this fee will be on airlines that adopt it: Longer check-in times, since they now become cash transactions; even more crowded overhead bins; and more gate-checked luggage (which is exempt from the fee) cramming the boarding ramp. The new fee will change how we travel and inconvenience everyone, even the people who never check luggage.

A growth in capped broadband services will have similar far-reaching inconveniences.

First, before any ISP starts to charge for usage or shape traffic based on it, they owe it to their customers to provide them with a meter, and preferably historical data, so they know which plan they should subscribe to. This meter really needs to provide users with data showing which applications and sites are their big bandwidth users. Otherwise, customers will have to choose plans based on best guess. But assuming the ISPs implement such a plan (and I'm not sure they will), there will be confusion from many customers trying to decipher the data, and worse, potential domestic discord caused when family members start to quiz each other about their browsing habits.

My biggest concern with penalizing heavy users for bandwidth is that it changes the economic equation not just for users, but for Web site managers and publishers. If every bit has a cost (or even a potential cost), then advertisements may become an unacceptable way to pay for viewing content and using Web sites. The ad blocker software business will flourish, and the economics for content sites and advertising providers could be affected. Hence Google's announcement of a broadband network monitoring service.

Another potential change capped broadband could inspire: Companies that send lots of data into the system and that want to make sure users continue to use it, rate cap or no, could volunteer to foot the extra bill for carriage, exempting their services from users' bandwidth allotments. For example, suppose Netflix wants to be sure its users don't have to worry that watching streaming HD movies will push them over their limit. Maybe Netflix will make a deal with the ISPs to exempt its traffic from counting towards users' limits. But once a deal like that is struck, there goes Net neutrality.

Finally, let's talk quality of service. Some of the plans won't charge users for excess use, rather they'll throttle transmission speed temporarily when high use is detected. That punitive action may affect VoIP (voice over Internet Protocol), games, and other low bit rate, but latency-sensitive applications. Who will field the support calls or foot the bill for lost revenue while people try to figure out why their once-good services no longer work acceptably well?

As I said, overage fees are not inherently unfair. But when you build a business without them and run it that way for years, adding extra fees afterward can be extremely disruptive. And not just to the heavy users of the services, but possibly to the fundamental economics the business relies on.

The last panel sessions for day two of the Web 2.0 Expo just wrapped up. One of my favorites was global design trends, a panel discussing the Web design around the world. In my less than two years of tracking Web apps, I've seen a huge shift in the look and feel of mainstream sites, as well as seeing a slew of services that have pushed what I thought was possible on the browser.

There can, however, be huge differences between two versions of the same site in different countries. A good deal of what's important is localizing a service to folks who are using it, which is one of the reasons the Korean version of MySpace looks different from its U.S. counterpart.

Jimmy Kim from Nexon, who was on the panel noted that Google has just a 5 percent take in Korea's search engine market, while other flashy services get more clicks because of updated looks. Kim compared it to two competing gas stations on opposite corners of the street with gas that's the same price. Kim says the one with more "bling" gets the extra customers--and it works the same way for Web apps that attempt to get into the Korean market.

Localization's not as easy as changing the language, though. Kelly Goto of Gotomedia noted that every culture uses the Web in a different way, and sometimes you need to fine tune a site to make it match whoever's viewing it. Sites like Facebook who are just now beginning to expand on foreign language support and conversion have begun to tweak small items by having users to some of the legwork to translate--making sure your motto isn't accidentally insulting the mothers of your users.

Also discussed: bandwidth, and more importantly--designing your apps with it in mind. Bandwidth has been one of the deciding factors in iPhone Web apps, with the limitations of AT&T's EDGE network keeping some richer, media-centric apps from working without a Wi-Fi connection. Likewise developers who are aiming to create sites in other markets need to not only localize their sites for the country, but also its data networks.

You can read more about the panelists on the description page here. Stay tuned for more Web 2.0 Expo coverage on Webware and on CNET News.com.

Related: Twitter Japan launches, with ads

Just about everybody who uses the Internet these days has broadband access. Whether it's DSL, cable, or a direct high-speed LAN connection, most people choose a faster connection to make files download faster, videos stream smoother, and online gaming much more enjoyable. But what if something is eating up bandwidth that you don't know about? Particularly when you have a superfast connection or Wi-Fi, how do you know there isn't something or someone leeching off your bandwidth when everything seems to be working smoothly?

Though I have my Big Three security apps running on every Windows machine I use, I know I can never be too careful about malware. Though it is not a fullproof system for detection, knowing how much bandwidth your computer is using can be a clue into possible issues. One of the best ways to detect an issue is to watch for changes in your computer's behavior, and a bandwidth meter can detect changing trends as an early indicator. Even if it's not malware, a good bandwidth meter can tell you if a new program is sucking up too much bandwidth or if another user is leeching your Wi-Fi connection.

I've rounded up a few freeware and shareware bandwidth meters you can download and check out right away. At the very least, you'll have a window into how fast your Internet connection runs over time to find out the best time to download large files. But if you notice a trend of sustained decreases of bandwidth, it might be an indicator for malware or possible Wi-Fi hackers.

Line Speed Meter is a free program that's great for getting bandwidth stats and following trends in your connection speed. After a quick setup process, you can run a test to get basic info about upload and download speeds. But to get more information, you can click the My Results button to get in-depth information online with graphs and diagrams showing your connection speed and trends over time. I like the way the information is set up at the online site, but an included animated window showing real-time connection speeds would have made this free app even better.

Net Meter is a shareware alternative ($19.95) that includes all the information you need within the interface. A small window shows real-time connection speeds for multiple network connections and a right click to the interface lets you bring up stats for daily, weekly, and monthly trends. You can use the options to change display graphics and choose which stats you want shown in the window. This one also lets you set alarms for when your bandwidth exceeds your specified limit.

BitMeter could be my favorite of the bunch, but it might be more about aesthetics than functionality. This free app offers everything you need right in the interface like Net Meter, but the smaller window and the way it displays stats seems more appealing. Just like Net Meter, you can access a contextual menu with a right click to bring up connection statistics, but with BitMeter, stats are displayed graphically. You can then drill down further to get a summary of network activity by the hour, day, or month. BitMeter lets you set alarms for both speed and volume alerts, including ISP restrictions if you have a time-based volume limit.

Keeping track of your bandwidth usage can be an indicator of malicious software and can notify you of possible Wi-Fi leechers. If you have a better app for the job please let us all know in the comments! For a more general connection speed indicator to compare your connection with other services, try the CNET Bandwidth Meter (Yahoo Widget).

Listpic, the visual searching and browsing tool for Craigslist has been blocked from the service as of yesterday. Craigslist creator Craig Newmark posted on the Craigslist user forums to alert the community to the shutdown last night, citing bandwidth drains and Listpic's attempts to "monetize" Craigslist by piggybacking off its services and using its own advertising. Newmark claimed that so much bandwidth was being used by the third-party service that it was "making it harder for the vast bulk of people who visit our site."

Listpic provided its users with a fairly simple way to sort and browse through listings on Craiglist by displaying items as picture thumbnails as opposed to Craigslist's pages full of plain text links. The site also featured its own ads, which went against Craigslist's terms of service.

One of the most interesting tidbits that's come out of this is a vague mention of Craigslist potentially building its own visualization tool in this follow-up post by Newmark. Some of the most useful applications of Craigslist have been the ones that take the data and present it in different ways. One of the clearest examples of this are the house and apartment hunting mash-ups like MapsKreig and HousingMaps.com. Both let you browse for places to live by exploring a Google Map.

The saga continues to unfold over on this Craigslist forums thread.

[via DownloadSquad]