Device performance is limited.
Device performance is limited.
Advertising in Mbps is the proper method. While the result appears bigger, it's accurate because data travels in bits. Browsers and similar tools display it as MB/s since they reflect stored information. This can be confusing for many, and I hope people always show downloads, uploads, etc., in Mbps by default.
I've heard similar complaints from friends with 100 Mbps connections, noting the frustration over steam downloading at 12 Mbps. To simplify, I just multiply by 8. My DSL setup is similar, and often the maximum speed offered by the provider is around 10/1 down/up, which is usually the only choice. As of May, my provider stopped maintaining copper lines, but I expect gigabit fiber to arrive this fall—though there might be a few challenging months ahead.
In many torrent applications, you have the option to control the download rate.
It's not our duty to. Since OSes chose bytes, the ISP bears the blame?
Advertising speed refers to how quickly information travels, but it can be presented in a way that doesn't fully reflect the actual performance. This approach might not capture real-world conditions, making it misleading to claim data transmission speed accurately.
I didn't mean to make that sound deceptive; I was referring to other actions they've taken. At most, they rely on Mbps to appear as though they offer a genuine high-speed connection to those who aren't informed. Everyone makes such choices, it's not a big deal. The choice between Mbps and MBps was clearly intentional, with a solid reason behind it. Is it misleading? Not at all.
I noted that you mentioned Mbps versus MBps can be confusing. IEEE follows mbps as a standard, not something misleading.
It seems the system is confusing users by using MiB units while previously stating MB. This inconsistency led to widespread misunderstanding about HDD sizes compared to their rated capacity. Many people are experiencing unnecessary simplification that hides important details.