dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


view:
topics flat nest 
Comments on news posted 2013-08-09 09:50:24: In May of last year Comcast announced that the cable operator would be eliminating their 250GB monthly cap for all users -- and would instead be testing a number of new cap and overage fee options. ..


FFH
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ
kudos:5

3 recommendations

Just getting ready for an all streaming future

Comcast is just taking the 1st tentative steps getting ready for the day(still years away) that TV channels go away and all video is streaming over the Internet. When that day eventually comes Comcast will make enough on the Internet side of their business to make up for the loss of TV channels. And that can be thru tiers and overages or straight bill by byte. They have a nice platform to copy - wireless cell providers.
--
"If you want to anger a conservative lie to him.
If you want to anger a liberal tell him the truth."
devnuller

join:2006-06-10
Cambridge, MA

Re: Just getting ready for an all streaming future

Wireless cell providers have all similar upgrade costs for increased usage. Split towers/nodes, add spectrum/frequency, etc. Capacity additions have incremental costs and wireless is catching up on speeds. There is some logic in allocating basic usage components, but I would say wireless is pretty low where wireline is still reasonable

IPPlanMan
Holy Cable Modem Batman

join:2000-09-20
Washington, DC
kudos:1
As video content reaches even higher resolutions (4K, etc), the more expensive that "all streaming future" will be.

28619103
Premium
join:2009-03-01
21435

Re: Just getting ready for an all streaming future

As it would be for anyone carrying 4K on Internet or non-Internet networks

IPPlanMan
Holy Cable Modem Batman

join:2000-09-20
Washington, DC
kudos:1

Re: Just getting ready for an all streaming future

Looks like you're trying to justify something... Go ahead, say it.

dnoyeB
Ferrous Phallus

join:2000-10-09
Southfield, MI
Reviews:
·Comcast
Well yes but... If Comcast starts charging per byte consumers will demand control over the bytes that come and go. Companies will start taking law suits over 'auto update' things they love to install. Companies will have to adjust their policy about ads since consumers will effectively be paying to be advertised too. That includes television commercials. And finally, it will add weight to al la carte viewing plans.
--
dnoyeB
"Then said I, Wisdom [is] better than strength: nevertheless the poor man's wisdom [is] despised, and his words are not heard. " Ecclesiastes 9:16

tshirt
Premium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:4

Re: Just getting ready for an all streaming future

by including the first 300GB they've more than covered any "excess" bytes they(ComCast) might send, what you get from YOUR software, or the pages YOU visit is between you and those vendors.

Thespis
I'm not an actor, but I play one on TV.
Premium
join:2004-08-03
Keller, TX

1 recommendation

Re: Just getting ready for an all streaming future

They haven't "included" anything. They are selling blocks of bandwidth. If I buy it, it's mine and they shouldn't be able to use it for their own purposes. Anything an ISP needs to send to a subscriber's computer should come out of the ISP's pocket. Would you buy a house and allow the seller to come by whenever he wants to use the bathroom in perpetuity?
--
Fast. Cheap. Safe.
Pick two...
tmc8080

join:2004-04-24
Brooklyn, NY

target Comcast

Google should target Comcast in some of these high density geogrpahies and install Google Fiber. Time Warner and AT&T have or will feel the pain of competing with unlimited gigabit service. Now it's Comcast's turn.
Os

join:2011-01-26
US

Re: target Comcast

Some of the KC suburbs are Comcast. The network Google Fiber bought in Provo, UT is in a Comcast area as well.
Beans

join:2005-07-16
united state

Re: target Comcast

I wonder what would happen if Google just came right in and hit the heart of Philadelphia and surrounding areas with Google fiber?

IPPlanMan
Holy Cable Modem Batman

join:2000-09-20
Washington, DC
kudos:1

Comcast Congestion Debunked...

The reason for Comcast's original 250GB cap for "excessive usage" is all too clear. This cap was never about addressing/preventing congestion, even though that's what Comcast wanted us to believe for years.... and even though there was an advertised "congestion management system" designed to address congestion. The "excessive usage" policy was a farce then, and it still is, even under different guise.

I posted this back in July 3, 2009 [»Re: The real reason for the cap ~by IPPlanMan~ about the "The Real Reason for the Cap":
"Comcast doesn't want alternative video sources gaining a foothold in the residential market. Hence, they have implemented a cap under the guise of excessive use. They are not applying this policy to the business tiers because these activities are not a threat in this space. Furthermore, the fact that the cap doesn't increase under Docsis 3.0 means that it's all about protecting Comcast's ondemand and premium channels. I find it very suspicious that excessive use under Docsis 3.0 is exactly the same."

Instead, Comcast removed the 250GB Usage Cap in Washington, DC and is now advertising how its speeds are "insanely" fast. Now it wants to charge for 50GB blocks in certain markets. Notice how there's there's not a single peep of "congestion" issues by Comcast or "excessive use"....

Gee... Maybe because this was all BS to begin with.
Not fooling me. Not at all.
--
"We're going to start at one end of (Fallujah), and we're not going to stop until we get to the other. If there's anybody left when that happens, we're going to turn around and we're going to go back and finish it."
Lt. Col. Pete Newell: 1st Inf. US Army
Darknessfall
Premium
join:2012-08-17
kudos:3

1 edit

Re: Comcast Congestion Debunked...

Look at Optimum's recent upgrades. A ton of customers are on 101/35 or 50/25. Some areas have some slight congestion based on the thread, but it isn't too bad.

It's obvious that Comcast has been lying about docsis congestion since D3.
axus

join:2001-06-18
Washington, DC
Reviews:
·Comcast
We can applaud Comcast for being transparent about their caps and the fees they charge. We need the information to do side-by-side comparisons, so that real competition is possible. Once the competition is there, prices can come down (or caps go up).
ophelus

join:2004-01-11
Kansas City, MO

Re: Comcast Congestion Debunked...

I do applaud it only cause their secret cherry picking program before that sucked..
Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO
Just out of curiosity.. When do you expect that competition to arrive and whom will it be?

IPPlanMan
Holy Cable Modem Batman

join:2000-09-20
Washington, DC
kudos:1

Remember these?

Remember this?:

»Cable Industry Finally Admits Caps Not About Congestion
(January 18, 2013)

"It only took the better part of a decade, but the cable industry has apparently realized they can no longer pretend that caps are really about congestion. Speaking at a meeting this week, former FCC boss turned top cable lobbyist Michael Powell finally acknowledged caps weren't about congestion, though he did continue pushing the myth that caps are about "fairness"":

National Cable and Telecommunications Association president Michael Powell told a Minority Media and Telecommunications Association audience that cable's interest in usage-based pricing was not principally about network congestion, but instead about pricing fairness...Asked by MMTC president David Honig to weigh in on data caps, Powell said that while a lot of people had tried to label the cable industry's interest in the issue as about congestion management. "That's wrong," he said. "Our principal purpose is how to fairly monetize a high fixed cost."

Glad that's cleared that up for us...

Here's another gem...
»corporate.comcast.com/comcast-vo···proaches
Posted by Cathy Avgiris, Executive Vice President and General Manager, Communications and Data Services, Comcast Cable (May 17, 2012)

"Over the last several years, we have periodically reviewed this policy, and for the last six months we have been analyzing the market and our process and think that now is the time to begin to move to a new plan. This conclusion was only reinforced when, in recent weeks, some of the conversation around our new product introductions focused on our data usage threshold, rather than on the exciting opportunities we are offering our customers."

Couldn't resist a swipe at the customers could ya Cathy? Sound like you got found out. You mad?
--
"We're going to start at one end of (Fallujah), and we're not going to stop until we get to the other. If there's anybody left when that happens, we're going to turn around and we're going to go back and finish it."
Lt. Col. Pete Newell: 1st Inf. US Army
Os

join:2011-01-26
US

1 recommendation

Cap/Overage Model in Weak Markets

Notice the markets listed here are all AT&T markets, where U-Verse is spotty in coverage and generally woeful.

There's a reason these ones are being selected, they're captive to Comcast for speeds over 24 Mbps.

AnonMan

@comcast.net

Caps are nothing but an excuse

Caps simply are an excuse to make more money or defend services.

The whole point of DOCIS 3 was to improve capacity and speed to get rid of the need for caps.

Now here is the thing. These 100+ Mbps plans WILL have congestion issues in busy nodes simply because current setup is only 8 channels for a max of 320Mbps to ALL customers on the node. So if that 100+Mbps user uses all that bandwidth and the other 20-40 customers on 20-50Mbps plans start getting online of course congestion will happen. But with that said the price we are charged for the plans they should split the nodes better or add additional channels. While our modems may only do 8 channels the system can have more. They have plenty of spectrum for DS, US on the other hand is a bit tighter.

300Gb is way to low. To me a TRUE fair CAP should be like in the 1TB range for lower plans and maybe 2 for higher plans. Anyone using more is probably using it for business or other needs and in that case it should ONLY be enforced on nodes with higher usage. If it has free bandwidth, why care?

It's not common these days to see a Comcast user who has speed issues be because congestion, it's generally due to noise or other issues, further showing that caps are not needed.

These companies claim they can cap internet but not TV, VoIP etc because that data is all on net. Well guess what, MOST my traffic is on-net too. Many servers I talk to are directly peered with the comcast network. So what's the excuse? That's on net just as much as VoIP or IPtv...

I think this is all going to far.

Landline based broadband should be unlimited but of course have a policy built in to protect a single user or two from impacting a majority but this shot gun effect/excuse is total BS.
If you are going to charge by usage time to become regulated and tested to vet your numbers are accurate. It's also effectively a price hike. I paid for unlimited at this price and now I am getting less, will my bill go down by all this money/bandwidth you claim to save??? Nope, but I bet you in 6-12 months it will go up with some BS excuse of them having a great network and the cost of management of the network etc.. These caps if anything save you needing network management because you punish us all...

n2jtx

join:2001-01-13
Glen Head, NY

Automatic?

Screw that. Why can't they implement a shutdown of your service if you hit your cap (yes I know it is all about money)? If I were stuck with one of these providers I would rather have my line shutdown until I contact them for more data or decide to wait it out. I hate the "we will automatically add more" that all these providers (and cell companies) are doing.
--
I support the right to keep and arm bears.
davidhoffman
Premium
join:2009-11-19
Warner Robins, GA
kudos:2

Re: Automatic?

Irony there. I remember years ago when a person got shut down by an ISP for excessive usage and the heavy bandwidth users crowd demanded that only an access slowdown or added usage charges be implemented. Cutting off access was considered unfair.

anondownload

@comcast.net

give us a fully metered option

if comcast wants to offer metered internet than they should go all the way. offer a plan with a small($5 sounds about right to me) monthly admin fee plus pre gig charges. month i use a lot i will pay more., if i am out of town for a month using nothing i only pay the admin fee. what they are offering is not metering but overages on top of a monthly plan, there is a big difference.

sbrook
Premium,Mod
join:2001-12-14
Ottawa
kudos:13
Reviews:
·WIND Mobile
·TekSavvy Cable

1 recommendation

Re: give us a fully metered option

You'd like to pay $$$ per gb that costs them pennies to deliver?

Metered billing is a scam. They already cope with that with different prices for different speeds. If you download say 20GB per month, it costs them no more to deliver it to you at 5Mbps or 100 Mbps!
axus

join:2001-06-18
Washington, DC

Re: give us a fully metered option

Metered billing (like on a water bill) will never happen, because there will be people who get by on $10/month. Not enough $100/month people to balance that out, it's more profitable to charge everyone $60/month and overages.

88615298
Premium
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness
said by anondownload :

if comcast wants to offer metered internet than they should go all the way. offer a plan with a small($5 sounds about right to me) monthly admin fee plus pre gig charges. month i use a lot i will pay more., if i am out of town for a month using nothing i only pay the admin fee. what they are offering is not metering but overages on top of a monthly plan, there is a big difference.

ISPs are not going to implement a plan that will reduce revenue. And from a business standpoint who can blame them. YOU wouldn't deliberately make LESS money.
Kearnstd
Space Elf
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
kudos:1

I see even more adblocking in the future

if ISPs go fully metered we know the prices will not even be close to fair market value. Which means much to the horror of website operators I forsee a major increase in adblocking in the future. In part because ad companies do not get it, They do not get that nobody wants virus laden rich media ads. I think this is also where metered billing fails, Is while you do pay for Cable TV and that has ads, You do not increase your costs due to the ads.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports
silbaco
Premium
join:2009-08-03
USA

Re: I see even more adblocking in the future

Ads really don't amount to much data.
Os

join:2011-01-26
US

Re: I see even more adblocking in the future

But if every KB counts, it certainly does matter, even if it's negligible.
Cravon

join:2004-06-16
St Catharines, ON
All those video ads on sites like youtube and hulu certainly do.
axus

join:2001-06-18
Washington, DC
The reason they wouldn't be fair market value is because there's no fair market. With real competition, metered billing price would drop to "fair market value". Right now, the only question is "how much are you willing to pay".

88615298
Premium
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness
said by Kearnstd:

if ISPs go fully metered we know the prices will not even be close to fair market value. Which means much to the horror of website operators I forsee a major increase in adblocking in the future. In part because ad companies do not get it, They do not get that nobody wants virus laden rich media ads.

I think people that use Ad Block don't get what when advertisers no longer pay for ads because they are being blocked then websites will have no choice but to charge for subscriptions. This fantasy world were website owners gladly spend their time and money to provide you with free content with no expectation of being reimbursed or god forbid make a profit doesn't exist.

Even THIS site I am 100% positive would go to a subscription based if they could not make any revenue by selling ad space. And before anyone says "Well the number of visitors would drop" Who cares? Those visitors aren't making them any money anyway. Trust me if you're coming to my website and I'm not making something off of you I don't want you on my site.

•••
ILOVEBIRDS

join:2013-08-09
Lombard, IL

still not good enough

I do about 700/800 GB a month from illegal downloads, movies, tv, games and software. I am not counting xbox, playstation and streaming. This simply will not work for me Comcast. You guys need to find a new plan to meet my needs. I am incredibly disappointed with these 300 GB. I mean I don't have cable or satellite, how else am I going to watch Game of Thrones and True Blood and Boardwalk Empire and all the other shows I like, plus there are movies such as Oblivion with pretty boy Tom Cruise and all the other movies I like. I gots to download these in 1080p, then they look really good on my computer monitor, but they also look good on my tv. They sound awesome too because they come packed with DTS sound. It really sounds good on my 5.1 system. 300 GB will simply not do it for me. Damn it!!! You guys need to sit down and you need to look at this realistically. Ask yourselves what can you do for a guy like me, and I know there are others who agree with me. Raise this limit to 999 GB a month. If we go over it, you guys send a letter asking us what else you could do and how better you can serve us.

I am asking this nicely. You can not say I did not ask nicely. I mean, I mean we need to work on this together as a team. This is the only way our nation can grow stronger, so we can beat everybody else. Are you guys not ashamed that those damn japs are beating us again? Or who is it that has better internets than us over there on that side of the world. I mean I know we are the only ones who matter on this planet but we must be better we must.

Ok so let me know when you guys have next meeting. I have other really good ideas. No charge I promise.

Thank you kindly,

I LOVE BIRDS
Dan_in_FL

join:2010-03-23
Lake Worth, FL

Re: still not good enough

I loved reading this. Thank you.
davidhoffman
Premium
join:2009-11-19
Warner Robins, GA
kudos:2
The hourly cloud backup promoters are not happy with you. You will be visited by these experts, who will explain why all the data in a household should be backed up hourly That includes all legally downloaded video content and all those home videos people make in their lives.

This issue is similar to the "sufficient power" statements by Rolls-Royce about the engines they used. Does that "sufficient power" take into reasonable account all the reasonably predictable real world situations the operator may encounter?

A 100Mbps connection can theoretically download about 33TB of information per month, if it runs continuously. Offering about 10% of that, or 3TB, per month would seem more in line with the short to medium term projections of how the internet might be used by a family of always connected cloud people. Similar allocations could be made for other speed tiers. The 250GB cap was established when much video access via the internet was for 4:3 SD resolution content. The increase to a 300GB cap does little to address the increasing use of 720p and 1080p for legal video content. The increasing use of Netflix and Hulu type services for streaming HD content to HDTVs means the relatively low caps are only going to frustrate subscribers. Ideally, like in a Google Fiber Gigabit service area, the monthly cap would be whatever the connection is capable of. But we live in a world of services based on the oversold model, and have for decades. Airline seats, cellular mobile device services, internet access, POTS, restaurant reservations, hotel reservations, and other services are all based on an oversubscribing business model to some extent. The question is how much oversubscribing is too much oversubscribing. 300GB on a 100Mbps connection is probably indicative of 10x too much oversubscribing.

88615298
Premium
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness

What happened to Tuscon trial?

No expansion of that trial?

Economy 300 GB
Economy Plus 300 GB
Internet Essentials 300 GB
Performance Starter 300 GB
Performance 300 GB
Blast 350 GB
Extreme 50 450 GB
Extreme 105 600 GB

michaelp95
Premium
join:2001-08-23
Tucson, AZ
Reviews:
·Comcast

Re: What happened to Tuscon trial?

Its still going on, the last 6 months or so I have come within 5gb of hitting the 300gb cap. You get annoying pop up on all your screens that your close to you cap and you cant get rid of it till you go to comcast website to acknowledge that your close to going over. Its annoying as hell, now I keep getting on to the kids not to leave the computers running anything in the background and to shut everything down so were not sucking down internet when nobodys using a device. I feel like my dad telling us to go turn off the lights if your not in the room.

And they keep raising up the speeds so we use more quicker it seems, think i just need to downgrade to the lowest possible speed to keep from hitting and paying more....so in the end they lose $$$ anyway.

88615298
Premium
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness

Re: What happened to Tuscon trial?

said by michaelp95:

Its annoying as hell, now I keep getting on to the kids not to leave the computers running anything in the background and to shut everything down so were not sucking down internet when nobodys using a device. I feel like my dad telling us to go turn off the lights if your not in the room.

Well that's not a bad idea. Why waste bandwidth?

antdude
A Ninja Ant
Premium,VIP
join:2001-03-25
United State
kudos:4

Other ISPs will follow.


••••••••
zefie

join:2007-07-18
Hudson, NY
Reviews:
·DSL EXTREME

Profit

Its nothing more than a profit grab. I'd rather have no cap, with the caveat that once in a while my internet will not be the full speed promised, than have caps. I wonder, if they surveyed their customer base, how many would agree? Why not ask your customers "would you rather have slowdowns, or be limited to how much you can use a month?" .. simply because they don't care. They are placing value in something that has no value. The wire and fiber has value, the data traveling through it does not.

Why isn't it like satellite? If satellite internet providers, who are servicing multiple states with the same bird in space, can manage a fair usage policy that allows a bonus at night, why can't a local cable provider, or a local cellular tower, that only services a small area?

With 4G, we don't get a bonus at night. When I use my 4G at 2am while everyone else is likely in bed, why does it still cost me the same as if I use it when 100+ others are on the network? It should be unlimited off-peak, or at the very least, only count half towards your cap. If I 'whore' the tower at 2am, who am I hurting? The other guy who might have the same idea? So what? When more users start accessing the service, and it starts dropping the quality of the service below a certain threshold, then you can limit our throughput. No need to limit our total transfer. Have a special reserve or priority system for emergency management services, so they are guaranteed access. No one loses in this instance, not even the provider. They just don't profit as much as they could with these scams. Same with cable.

Nothing about caps is for the greater good of the people, only the greater good of the company's bank account.

•••••
Aah1003

join:2013-08-10
Skokie, IL

Comcast is run by inteligentlly challenged, thieves.

Mr. Roberts,

I am absolutely certain that when shareholders and board of directors appointed you as CEO, you deserved it. I am also certain that as someone in leadership role you always look for, believe, and practice the mission that keeps you motivated and provides you with leadership position you deserve.

However, I am writing to you with how your vision is being muddied every day in the trenches, you call customer service area. I just finished my excruciating conversation ( second conversation and third live chat) with those on your payroll that execute your vision everyday. All I can say is " shame on them" .

I grew up with Comcast and it's predecessor. Had been a client since 1993, I finally severed my and my parents tie . Feel like I a, breaking up a relationship, because I believe you have superior product. I believe I would pay more than AT&T, VERIZON, CLEAR , and other providers for your services, but what a shame that your followers destroy what you built.

To summarize my experience, I will narrow it down to treatment with following bullet points comments from your followers / employees/ and if they have 401k, then shareholders who provided me with:

. Slammed me into a package when I moved to my new place and raised the price
. Hung up on me ( live chat ) When had no answer
. Provided me with an answer that included " let me set your expectations straight" ( all on live chat available for your review , I am sure )
. Kept me on hold ( when I called ) for 45 minutes, after talking to me and inability to solve my problem
. Telling me that 30 day guarantee doesn't apply to me because I am not a new customer ( that really won me over.... Been with you since 1993)
. Offering to solve my problem ( price driven ) by INCREASING THE PRICE!!!

And finally loosing me forever. I have to tell you, I feel released. I don.t know why my family and I both paid over 100 dollars a month ( jointly) to receive the abuse. I wanted to write to you on my last remaining 24 hours of Comcast Internet to have a closure. I am sorry for your business, but you can't sustain growth on subpar service your staff is providing. In today's works with increased competition with Roku, Apple Tv, WiFi and other tools, I don't know where you are heading.

I feel like I am leaving an old friend, but I think I owe you an explanation, as I am sad but relieved to be free from abusive front line "service providers" . You can search all the context of my desperate venture for solution and service if you wish.
truasian16

join:2003-11-10
Jersey City, NJ

con castic

I want to know how comcast win's city contracts when they don't provide any service to city at all. Even the way the workers work they don't know anything about the city. Lately comcast has been providing x1 boxes which you should only demand the DVR because the others just don't work completely..always missing the fm tuner to listen to local NYC radio stations and tuner so I can take advantage of the new antenna or spire that was installed on the Freedom Tower the plug must be still out on ABC and NBC gets shakey when music comes on with drums from the East come in.

We should start gathering some other information because I realized one thing people just aren't aware who to complain to when Comcast just s tramples your rights based on preferences they don't want to share but everyone sees it.

1-800-comCast funny how the operating system has automatic updates without people knowing much like android father google son motrola bastard scientific atlanta rebadged as X finitiy just in time for X-mas at Rockfeller with Jay Z might just win this year.
neufuse

join:2006-12-06
James Creek, PA
Reviews:
·Comcast

Re: con castic

always missing the fm tuner to listen to local NYC radio stations and tuner so I can take advantage of the new antenna or spire that was installed on the Freedom Tower the plug must be still out on ABC and NBC gets shakey when music comes on with drums from the East come in.
wait..... what?! what does an FM tuner have to do with Comcast? these are cable boxes not radios