MySpace Disables Autoplay to Reduce Costs

Status
Not open for further replies.

lifelesspoet

Distinguished
Jun 2, 2009
95
0
18,580
This is something that should have been done in the name of user friendliness. Next, could you not let any given copy pasta teenie bopper upload random bloated css. Myspace is worse then geocities could have ever dreamed of as for as horrible user pages are concerned.
 

scuba dave

Distinguished
Jun 1, 2009
253
0
18,930
[citation][nom]fooldog01[/nom]This would have been GREAT news... if I didn't quit using Myspace 5 years ago.[/citation]

Pretty much. I used MySpace in my drunken college-ish days, lol. Soon as i sobered up.. Found i just didn't care for it anymore. All it was ever good for was drunken comments anyway, lol.
 

megamanx00

Distinguished
Sep 3, 2008
712
0
18,960
Thank God. Some people tell me to look at their profile and they they have like six or seven things trying to play at the same time through my poor firefox browser. I only recently stated using myspace again so while I probably wouldn't have cared a month ago I currently find this to be good news :D.
 

duckmanx88

Distinguished
Oct 23, 2008
139
0
18,630
seriously it take 1 second to load a fb page. i go on myspace and one page has a million picture, backgrounds, bideos, and music that i have to load first. half the accounts on there are anime characters and fake celebrity profiles.
 

uronacid

Distinguished
Apr 3, 2009
19
0
18,560
[citation][nom]P_haze420[/nom]Myspace= WhoresFacebook= DouchebagsTwitter= Terrorist[/citation]

How did you make the correlation between them?
 

thejerk

Distinguished
Mar 7, 2009
169
0
18,630
"aurally excited"
"flicking the switch"

*Beavis and Butthead laughs...*

My GF is in her 3rd tri-mester.
I don't get any.
My male mind is sadly dirtier than ever.
 

cknobman

Distinguished
May 2, 2006
277
0
18,930
[citation][nom]AMDnoob[/nom]why the crap did i get a -1 for my previous comment?! It's not different than the other hating ones![/citation]

I gave you thumbs down on both your posts for being a whiney bitch!
 

Zingam

Distinguished
Mar 17, 2009
502
0
18,930
[citation][nom]AMDnoob[/nom]why the crap did i get a -1 for my previous comment?! It's not different than the other hating ones![/citation]

Coz you maybe suck?
 

marcus_br

Distinguished
Jun 5, 2009
28
0
18,580
Let's now check all these bloated numbers:

1 billion mp3 playbacks.
Supposing they are each 5 megabytes (hardly), then we get 5 billion megabytes, which is basically 5 million gigabytes... or 5000 terabytes.

Email marketing received from the planet this month:

"Get 10 TB of Bandwidth FREE With Your Dedicated Server"

That's basically 10 TB of bandwidth for each $500 considering a NICE dedicated server (lot of ram, disk and cpu power, pretty much quad core with 8 gb ram and some nice 2 or more 1 TB sized disks..the type you would not EVER need for streaming).

Now...5000 is 500 times what they are giving...

So, 500 times $500 equals $250.000.
I've maxed out every possible number and it's still 1/40 of what they are reporting.

Now let's look it the other and correct way (not abusing a promo received by email):

Streaming server price: $300 each (and that's already expensive, streaming the way they do is E-A-S-Y).

1 billion streams/month equals 385 streaming clients per second, let's say streaming takes a whole 5 minutes (wow, full 5 minute musics with 5 mb for EVERY page)...and that will give us a MAX of 385 * 300 clientes (5 minutes = 300 seconds)...which equals to 115.500 connections.
Let's say each of these specialized servers can handle 1000 connections? (easily)...that will take 100 servers.
Let's triple to be sure? 300 servers, costing $300 each, that will give us $90.000/month. But we still need the bandwidth (actually each server comes with AT LEAST 5 mbps, but let's assume they don't):

Then we have to actually calculate how many mbps would we need for 5000 TB/month.
First we make it Tbps, multiplying by 8, that is: 40000 Tb/month.
A month has 2592000 seconds, so 40000 Tb divided by 2592000 equals a minimum of 0,01543 tbps connection...that is actually 15 gbps connection.
Let's assume their peak traffic is 10 times bigger than night hours etc...then they'd need 150 gbps pipes.
I've bought high speed connections (370 mbps) at $4 per mbps.
So, assuming they pay for 15 gbps the same value i did for 370 mbps, that would be U$$ 614.400 per month on connection...plus $90 k for the servers...$700.

Well, not even making the numbers ABSURDLY high i could reach 1/10 of what they declare to be paying.
Maybe add 300 techs (1 per server? LOL) each doing $7k month? Well, that'd take us up to $2.1 mil...plus the server costs, it would go up to $2.8 mil.

So...whatever way you look and inflate the numbers you still can't justify a 10 million bill per month. Someone up there must be completely idiot...or simple a HUGE liar.

Most likely they are not spending even $100k month with it all.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.