Yup, or pay for a dedicated leased line with an SLA if 2.5Mb doesn't serve your extremely important Facebooking and YouTubing needs adequately.
I think what you're after is lower latency and ping times, as opposed to 100 times the bandwidth that you actually need. Once you get past about 15Mb/sec, assuming that you're not FTPing massive files in order to keep your job, that amount of bandwidth is fine. Again, what you then need to look into is stability of connection and/or ping times. A 30 second video, even in 1080p, of some bloke "reacting" to another YouTube clip, doesn't require a 200Mb line. Neither does updating your Facebook page to tell everyone what you had for dinner. If you're streaming films or telly (legally of course...) just plan ahead and download it all before you start watching it - that way it won't matter if your ISP is providing you with a 14.4Kb sevice when you actually sit down to watch it. Still no excuse for your ISP to provide you with an appalling service of course, and I would definitely complain to them (not here), but at least you get to sit down and watch your thing.
One last thing which is most probably irrelevant: What spec PC are you using? Anything pre-Core 2 wasn't really designed for stereaming/decoding and rendering video which maxes out a 16 Mb/sec connection, whilst you're Facebooking and doing whatever else in other tabs at the same time. "Netburst architecture" sounds brilliant but... well, it was rubbish, and its name bore no resemblance to its capabilities.
Edited by deleted (Fri 18-Oct-13 05:57:48)