dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


view:
topics flat nest 
Comments on news posted 2012-09-18 11:17:09: Comcast has introduced caps as high as 600 GB in Tucson as the company moves forward with the idea of offering higher caps for faster services. ..

page: 1 · 2 · next

jjeffeory

join:2002-12-04
USA
reply to revenue neut

Re: Caps are not an issue for me

DirecTV. Dish. "Cable" is their core business.


Os

join:2011-01-26
US
reply to buddahbless

Re: good for comcast.. what about everyone else

No cable there? Any cable connection is better than AT&T DSL. It's one thing to handle slow speeds when they're not capped, but when they are? Forget it.



IowaCowboy
Iowa native
Premium
join:2010-10-16
Springfield, MA
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Verizon Broadban..
·Comcast

1 recommendation

reply to jjeffeory

Re: Caps are not an issue for me

Many times it is cheaper to bundle tv, Internet, and phone. In our area, Comcast has triple play bundles starting at prices not much more than standalone Internet and they give you faster speeds with bundling. I like having a home phone (try telling a 911 dispatcher your exact location when you are in the middle of an armed home invasion or have a child that is not breathing). And in our area, if you dial 911 on a cell phone, it goes to the state police dispatch in Northampton (MA) and you have to tell them the city or town where the emergency is and they transfer you to the local dispatch AND you have to give them the exact location. With a landline, it goes to the local dispatch AND they have your exact location on their screen. When someone is in cardiac arrest, every second counts.
--
I wish I still lived in Iowa; Everything there from rent and groceries to Cable TV is much cheaper in Iowa (especially with an overbuilder in town).


Crookshanks

join:2008-02-04
Binghamton, NY

4 recommendations

reply to jjeffeory

Re: Don't go cheap on me now

Private enterprise wanting a return on their investment? Say it isn't so!

You can combine my usage totals for the last six months and they don't add up to 300GB, let alone 600GB, so I'm hard pressed to feel any sympathy at all for the people who will be impacted by these caps.

600GB / 30 days = 20GB/day = 1.8mbit/s, sustained, 24/7

In actuality, someone who wants to use 600GB/mo will burden the network even more, the 95th percentile for such a user would likely be in the double digits of mbit/s.

A connection capable of supporting that would have cost thousands of dollars a decade ago (a dedicated connection STILL commands that kind of money) and here we have people bellyaching about connections that cost a fraction of that.


Crookshanks

join:2008-02-04
Binghamton, NY
reply to aaronwt

Re: Caps are not an issue for me

Not if the revenue from internet was to be relied upon to maintain and expand the HFC plant.


WernerSchutz

join:2009-08-04
Sugar Land, TX

3 edits
reply to IowaCowboy

" quality TV programming is to subscribe to cable. Streaming services still don't give you access to live tv such as the Weather Channel, Fox News, local newscasts,"

Quality, Weather Channel and Fox News in the same paragraph.

Coming from a cable rip off shill.

I was stuck in bed sick last Saturday watching the Military Channel on Comcast. 5 times in a row the same shit commercial for Star Furniture, some effeminate guys being towed to buy crap furniture, some weight loss crap and hair regeneration garbage over and over again every 10 min for 5 min.

I turned the TV off. Yeah, real quality programming chock full of idiotic adds.

Maybe I should watch the Weather Channel, much better. Paying $130 / month for the cable and $100 for Internet access to be bombarded with the garbage adds is real "value".

As far as "regulated monopoly", IowaCowboy, read up on regulatory capture.


Crookshanks

join:2008-02-04
Binghamton, NY
reply to IowaCowboy

said by IowaCowboy:

try telling a 911 dispatcher your exact location when you are in the middle of an armed home invasion

There's a solution to home invasions that includes the numbers '911', but it has an M and a 1 in front of them.

Joking aside, you make a great case for having a landline. My POTS line is a lousy $27/mo after taxes and fees, or 90 cents a day, why would I give up that peace of mind? I call 911, they have my location instantly. Even in areas with wireless E911 they don't necessarily get an accurate location, and it may take time for the location to resolve.

hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH

1 recommendation

reply to Crookshanks

Re: Don't go cheap on me now

SHHHHHH! that kind of talk on here won't be tolerated and you'll be flagged and your comments will be removed. Karl and his fan boys what tolerate it.


hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH
reply to buddahbless

Re: good for comcast.. what about everyone else

their right to keep them low. and your right to change services. if you can get DSL you can generally get cable. Change providers and won't have that. And ATT generally does NOT enforce their caps, especially on U-Verse.



Scree
In the pipe 5 by 5

join:2001-04-24
Mount Laurel, NJ

hmm

Thought Blast became what Extreme 50 was, so which cap is right? (Not that I really care, I never check anyway. lol)


Os

join:2011-01-26
US
reply to hottboiinnc

Re: good for comcast.. what about everyone else

And troll, it's also my right to complain about the fact that I have little choice but to pay such fees.

The corporate trolls seem to forget they have us by the horns.



PapaMidnight

join:2009-01-13
Baltimore, MD
reply to Crookshanks

Re: Don't go cheap on me now

You've gotta be kidding me.

If that's the case, let's go back to the days of charging multiple dollars per gigabyte on a HDD.

Lets go back to the days of charging .25c per megabyte on mobile data plans.

After all, that was acceptable a decade ago right?

If it's not that much of a problem, then I'll pm you my address, phone number, and send you a round-trip plane ticket so you can come down and have Comcast change my service to the 105 tier at your cost.

After all, it's not that much money right?

If Comcast wants to sell me a 25Mb/s line, then I take that as the ability to use up to 25Mb/s however I see fit as much as I see fit. The onus is not on me to support that bandwidth. I'm paying for it. The onus is on Comcast to support it.

If Comcast can't support ONE user using 25Mb/s a month, then they're overselling their services; and if that's the case, caps are not the answer... a more robust backend and last-mile is.

BTW: I'm having a hard time believing Comcast for anything right now when they state that using the Xbox 360 for Xfinity TV on Demand does not count against you. How that doesn't fly in the face of our non-existent net neutrality rules that aren't enforced by the FCC blows my mind.


Crookshanks

join:2008-02-04
Binghamton, NY

2 recommendations

You seriously expect a connection with a 1 to 1 contention ratio at residential pricing? Good luck with that. As I said, dedicated connections that provide the type of bandwidth you desire still cost thousands of dollars.

Bellyache all you want, you're squarely in the minority, and nobody outside of that minority takes you seriously. A 250GB cap is a non-issue for the overwhelming majority of internet users, 600GB even less so, so I'm not seeing the problem. Next you'll whine about supposed regulatory capture, but good luck convincing the FCC or anybody else about the unfairness of a policy that impacts a miniscule slice of the internet population.

Usage totals/95th percentile from my last three DSL billing periods:

7/15: 22.93GB down/5.84GB up, 0.22mbit/s
8/15: 26.79GB down/9.54GB up, 0.32mbit/s
9/15: 18.92GB down/3.32GB up, 0.28mbit/s

Yeah, it's totally fair to expect me to pay the same as you, when you intend to use hundreds of gigabytes, while regularly imposing a megabit load measured in the double digits. 8-)


tanzam75

join:2012-07-19
reply to Nightfall

Re: Caps are not an issue for me

said by Nightfall:

Link? Source?

See page 50 of the Comcast 10-K: »files.shareholder.com/downloads/···t10K.pdf

2011 Residential video revenue: $8.7 billion
2011 Programming costs: $7.9 billion
Expand your moderator at work


THRILLHOU

@verizon.net

Crimecast economics

Let's see.

105 mbit/s extreme service is ( 1024 * 105 ) = 107520 megabits per second / 8 = 13.44 megabytes/second

Meanwhile, 1,073,741,824 bytes (1 GB) x 600 gigabytes (cap) = 644,245,094,400 bytes

And 644,245,094,400 bytes / 1024 / 1024 = 614,400 megabytes

So: 614,400 / 13.44 megabytes per second = 45714.28 seconds / 761.904 minutes / 12.698 hours

Only 12.7 hours of downloading to exhaust your entire monthly limit. Just wow. There is nothing generous about this at all. It's as offensive as before!

Oh, and just in case someone wants to bring up the MiB and GiB issue, it's 13.63 hours in that case.

Expand your moderator at work


Atlas720

@comcast.net

caps

Really, if comcast was to go by the FCC definition of broadband these caps need to be 1500 gigabytes per 30 day period.


hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH
reply to Os

Re: good for comcast.. what about everyone else

Troll? hardly. You fail to see you have options. That's not my fault you don't change to those options. And its only your right until people get tired of hearing about those "complaints" when they're not valid. Typical Karl Fanboy- have options but fail to even move; you just take the easy way out and just bitch about what you decide to stay with.

Also again, nothing is stopping you from calling DSLX and creating your own DSL company. Nothing is stopping you from calling ATT directly and telling them you want wholesale access to their U-Verse network; which yes they do give.

Maybe instead of Corp trolls, there should be a thing called a customer troll. which is totally you.



IowaCowboy
Iowa native
Premium
join:2010-10-16
Springfield, MA
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Verizon Broadban..
·Comcast
reply to WernerSchutz

Re: Caps are not an issue for me

Here the commercials are for ambulance chasing lawyers, bad credit approved car loans, and free government funded cell phones for the welfare beneficiaries. These are during local newscasts and it's not like I am watching Jerry Springer (trailer trash cheating on their wives) or Maury Povich (teen moms seeking paternity tests to see who is the baby daddy). The trash on those shows are more entertaining that the lowlife products (such as guaranteed phone service for people who've been shut off for non payment and the same bad credit approved car loans aired during the evening news) advertised during those trash shows.

Recently, they have been playing political ad after political ad and they will play a Scott Brown ad and the next ad is for Elizabeth Warren. I have not seen any Romney-Ryan ads as Democrats always win Massachusetts like Republicans always win Alabama in presidential election. I am sure the ads regarding the ballot questions will be flooding the airwaves as we get closer to election day. As for my political views, we'll save that for the red room.
--
I wish I still lived in Iowa; Everything there from rent and groceries to Cable TV is much cheaper in Iowa (especially with an overbuilder in town).



skuv

@rr.com
reply to PapaMidnight

Re: Don't go cheap on me now

ALL ISP's oversell. All of them, every single one of them.

If they don't, then they will not stay in business. It's financially impossible.

No ISP can afford 1:1 connections for EVERY customer. They oversell because statistically that is what works. To do otherwise is stupid and business suicide.

Of course they can support "ONE user using 25Mb/sec a month." But they have millions of customers.

And using Xfinity on Demand shouldn't count against a user's cap, even if Net Neutrality is enforced. Their normal on demand doesn't get counted towards any data cap, even though it is data that is only being streamed to you, using finite resources to encode it and get it to you?

So what's the difference? The delivery method? That's trivial.



espaeth
Digital Plumber
Premium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
kudos:2
reply to THRILLHOU

Re: Crimecast economics

This is an entirely new argument never seen before here.

Thank you for sharing it.



buddahbless

join:2005-03-21
Premium
Reviews:
·AT&T DSL Service
reply to hottboiinnc

Re: good for comcast.. what about everyone else

said by hottboiinnc:

their right to keep them low. and your right to change services. if you can get DSL you can generally get cable. Change providers and won't have that. And ATT generally does NOT enforce their caps, especially on U-Verse.

Keep them low for who? the ever growing demand that they knew was coming, they want to nickel and dime us to death. Obviously you don't know ATT at all. AS I DO have there service and no cable is not available in this area of IL, Also so does my cousin ( I have DSL he has U-verse). The fact that you commented that ATT does not enforce caps shows how naive you are and you dont have there service, as my cousin and I have both paid overages to the death star on a number of occasions in the past months. hotboiinnc Please don't comment on things you know nothing of.


BottomsUp

@comcast.net

sigh...

I kinda feel bad for the people who don't push for higher limits even if they don't reach them now. I think most of them are likely single, living in a household mostly comprised of a generation that didn't grow up with the Internet, or are a bit short-sighted.

Once you have a family comprised fully of people raised in the "Internet Era" coupled with the rapidly increasing bit-rich media and increasing on demand platforms...you're gonna kinda wish you argued for less restrictions and/or better compromises. You've got the ISPs demonizing the super-minority "bandwidth hogs" to the average user and then they get away with pushing these blanket restrictions and hefty overage fees with people cheering them on.

They're just establishing a billing infrastructure that bodes well for them in the future. But hey, maybe they'll scale their pricing back once a large portion of their consumer base and technology start to catch up....riiiiiight. It probably depends on how competition evolves, so cross your fingers.



nlew

@comcast.net
reply to THRILLHOU

Re: Crimecast economics

This isn't really a fair comparison.

For example, my car has a top speed of 202 mph.

At full throttle, I only get 8 mpg. My gas tank holds 16 gallons.

Therefore I have to put gas in my car every 38 minutes.

At face value, this is true. If I drive at full throttle, I will have to refuel every 38 minutes. This is the same example you used to calculate bandwidth, but in the car context you realize how absurd it is.

At the end of the day, most people don't drive at full throttle nor do most people use their bandwidth at full capacity. The selling point is the speed. I didn't buy a GT500 to use up gas in 38 minutes. I bought it because it makes 650 hp, so at the times I "choose" to go fast, I can.



Nightfall
My Goal Is To Deny Yours
Premium,MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI
Reviews:
·ooma
·Comcast
·Callcentric
·Site5.com

1 edit
reply to Anon

Re: Don't go cheap on me now

Sounds like there are "morons and shills" on both sides. Especially those who have done no research on where we have come from and where we are now. The best thing we can do is to inform ourselves as best as we can and to debate the facts. So far, there are very few, if any, facts being tossed around here.
--
My domain - Nightfall.net


Crookshanks

join:2008-02-04
Binghamton, NY

said by Nightfall:

Especially those who have done no research on where we have come from and where we are now.

Well, I got my start in the ISP business, so I do have that perspective to take into account. On the other side of things, I've on the customer side of business connections ranging from T-1s to gigabit MAE connections, and of course my own experience with residential connectivity.

Speaking personally, and going from memory, my own connectivity to the internet has gone something like this:

1996: 14.4kbit/s - dialup - $20/mo
1998: 36.6kbit/s - dialup - $20/mo
1999: 256kbit/s - WISP - $40/mo
2002: 3mbit/s DS/256kbit/s US - TW cable - $35/mo
2003: 1.5mbit/s DS/384kbit/s US - Verizon DSL - $30/mo
2005: 3.0mbit/s DS/768kbit/s US - Verizon DSL - $40/mo
2009: 10mbit/s DS/1mbit/s US - TW cable - $45/mo
2011: 10mbit/s DS/1mbit/s US - Verizon DSL - $60/mo
2012: 6mbit/s DS/1mbit/s US - Frontier DSL - $60/mo

I've gone backwards at times, depending on what's available when I've moved, but the bottom line is I'm currently getting 24 times the speed of my first broadband connection, for $20/mo more, and if you take inflation into account that's really not a bad deal. $40 in 1999 is worth about $54 today, so I'm paying $6/mo more for 24 times the speed.

That's just my perspective, YMMV, but we've come a long way, and I wish people would consider that when they are inclined to complain about the state of American broadband.

tanzam75

join:2012-07-19
reply to PapaMidnight

said by PapaMidnight:

If Comcast wants to sell me a 25Mb/s line, then I take that as the ability to use up to 25Mb/s however I see fit as much as I see fit. The onus is not on me to support that bandwidth. I'm paying for it. The onus is on Comcast to support it.

Ah, but Comcast doesn't want to sell you an uncapped 25 Mb/s line. They want to sell you a 25 Mb/s line with a 250 GB monthly cap.

If you want an uncapped 25 Mb/s line, you can feel free to buy Metro Ethernet service from a business-class provider for $1000. If you max it out for every second of every day, they won't care -- because you've actually paid for dedicated bandwidth.

Once you have that dedicated connection, you can feel free to start your own ISP with it. See how long you can stay in business offering uncapped 25 Mb/s service for $50 a month.

elray

join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·EarthLink
reply to tmc8080

Re: ?

said by tmc8080:

I guess it sucks to live where these companies have free reign to screw over the consumer with usage based billing AND have a franchise lock on the communities they serve. No wonder the population is moving to the eastern half of the country instead of moving west.. wher infrastructure is more developed.

What abject nonsense.

No one is moving east, or west, based on broadband availability.
Nor is the east "more developed".
Nor is any location "franchise locked".

Where do you get this stuff?


THRILLOUS

@verizon.net
reply to espaeth

Re: Crimecast economics

Please explain your sarcasm. If you were on a jury in a theft case and the prosecutor pointed out the evils of theft, would you blow him off by demeaning the time-tested immortality of his argument?