dslreports logo
spacer

spacer
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


view:
topics flat nest 
Comments on news posted 2014-08-27 10:18:13: The writing has pretty clearly been on the wall as Comcast slowly but surely has expanded their usage-cap trials throughout less competitive Southern markets. ..

page: 1 · 2 · 3 · next


pumpkinhead7

join:2002-06-14
Clarksburg, WV
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable

10 recommendations

It's not a CAP its "pay more for less"

They can market speak it any way they want, but you are going to be paying more for less service. Anyone who doesnt see through that is foolish. To think a corporation is doing this for anything except profit is insane.

Oh, and screw you comcast, you giant turd.


buzz_4_20

join:2003-09-20
Limestone, ME

1 recommendation

Who the Hell

Would agree to this?


Kuro

@75.151.50.x
People who have no choice. I am stuck with Comcast and a 300GB cap or nothing. Only way around it is to pay for business class that gives half the speed for twice the price but its uncapped.

78036364

join:2014-05-06
USA
reply to pumpkinhead7

Re: It's not a CAP its "pay more for less"

Well if one doesn't go over 300 GB they won't be charged overages so there isn't any price increase.

That being said the plan with 5 GB for only $5 less is a joke especially with $1 per GB overage. One the 300 GB plan it's 20 cents per GB.

Also 250 GB was the cap in 2009. Even if one assumes the average amount of data used has only gone up by 20% per year( it's MUCH higher than that ) The caps should be over 600 GB not 300.


IPPlanMan
Holy Cable Modem Batman

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

Never about congestion...

So it was never about congestion was it Comcast?
More clear than ever.

Remember this? »corporate.comcast.com/comcast-vo ··· proaches

"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."

Nice swipe there at your customers "Comcast Cathy"... Stay classy.
--
"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

davidhoffman
Premium
join:2009-11-19
Warner Robins, GA
kudos:3

Comcast leadership?

You would figure some PR consultant would have gotten Comcast to give up policies unnecessary to their continued existence in order to secure acquisitions of other companies. No more data caps, no data thresholds, no ridiculous retention operations, and a more ubiquitous low cost internet plan that any potential subscriber could sign up for.

silbaco
Premium
join:2009-08-03
USA

Caps

In a way they have a point. They don't have a true cap (ex. Centurylink.) They basically have usage-based billing and give you 300GB bonus GBs included in the base cost of your service.

That doesn't make the practice any more acceptable. But we should have adopted new terminology to describe this method of billing a long time ago.


Jason Levine
Premium
join:2001-07-13
USA

13 recommendations

Caps Are To Kill Internet Video

The real purpose of the caps (or "data thresholds") aren't to manage network congestion. They are to hurt Internet video. Without caps, you could watch as much Internet Video as you wanted and might be able to cancel cable thanks to this. With caps and overages, you are limited in how much Internet Video you can watch before you need to pay more money (to Comcast - thus helping them profit off of their competitors).

With a 300GB cap, you can watch 300 hours of Netflix at Standard Definition and 130 hours at High Definition. This means, if you don't use your connection for ANYTHING else, you can watch around 10 hours of Standard Definition Netflix a day or 4.3 hours of HD Netflix a day. While the SD Netflix seems fine (few people probably watch more than 10 hours of TV a day), the HD Netflix could easily find you hitting your cap. Especially if you use your connection for other purposes besides just Netflix.
--
-Jason Levine


IPPlanMan
Holy Cable Modem Batman

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

2 recommendations

Yup. I said this almost 5 months ago... »We all knew the real reason for Caps...

And over 5 years ago: »The real reason for the cap ~by IPPlanMan~


Clu42

@50.185.137.x

If caps are necessary...

Why did Comcast suspend it for most of the country back in 2012? Before they said they needed caps because it was a strain on their network. So for 2 years they let almost everyone have unlimited downloading, because all of sudden there was no strain? Wouldn't it be more logical if they had kept the caps in place and then instituted different methods of caps in those select towns to see which works best, if there really was a strain? It's just a cash cow. They want to reverse the damage of their bleeding tv and voice customers, by putting it on the backs of their internet customers.


Jason Levine
Premium
join:2001-07-13
USA

1 recommendation

reply to IPPlanMan

Re: Caps Are To Kill Internet Video

Yup. I've been saying this for years also. Here's a reply of mine on Slashdot to someone who thought that the ISPs would just upgrade their infrastructure due to increasing demand for Netflix: »tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?si ··· 34126258

Of course, since that posting, they've not only instituted caps but have also messed with peering arrangements to slow Netflix down and proposed "fast lanes" (really a "pay us or your site slows down" arrangement).

--
-Jason Levine

Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO
reply to Jason Levine
You need to account for multiple people as well.

DVR a few shows, watch a few others live and times that by 2 or 3 people and then even standard becomes an issue.

elefante72

join:2010-12-03
East Amherst, NY
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS

2 recommendations

reply to Jason Levine
The issue is back when comcast dreamed up the original caps back in 2009 they were reasonable because there was no superhd, steam was just getting steam:), there was no XBO or PS4, cloud backup was unknown, youtube was just a baby, music streaming was just getting started, etc.

The problem is the world has changed and 300GB is not even table stakes for an average family anymore.

Also since 2009, intercon costs have gone down dramatically and so has the cost of switching hardware. Sure labor costs have risen, but that has nothing to do with bits coming out of the pipe relativistically... Not to mention DS3.1 is a minor update w/ vast increases in bandwidth.

So comcast gobbles up time warner. Their "scale" as they tout will cause their costs to go down even more.

And that is the result of a monopoly. Charge more offer less.

So while people say merger doesn't matter in fact it does for TWC customers, so now they will have "thresholds" coming where none existed and this overage honeypot comes....

Interestingly enough Canada used to have ultra sky high rates, and then the CRTC came in and mandated third party access. They came up w/ UBB bulk reseller rates based upon peak usage. So guess what happened, the incumbents had to lower rates, and raise speeds. TPIA said, rock it in the evening--no caps because their bill was based on peak (say 6PM) and in the AM torrent or steam away. Oh and UPLOAD, no caps.

How cool is that!

78036364

join:2014-05-06
USA

1 recommendation

reply to Jason Levine
said by Jason Levine:

The real purpose of the caps (or "data thresholds") aren't to manage network congestion. They are to hurt Internet video. Without caps, you could watch as much Internet Video as you wanted and might be able to cancel cable thanks to this. With caps and overages, you are limited in how much Internet Video you can watch before you need to pay more money (to Comcast - thus helping them profit off of their competitors).

With a 300GB cap, you can watch 300 hours of Netflix at Standard Definition and 130 hours at High Definition. This means, if you don't use your connection for ANYTHING else, you can watch around 10 hours of Standard Definition Netflix a day or 4.3 hours of HD Netflix a day. While the SD Netflix seems fine (few people probably watch more than 10 hours of TV a day), the HD Netflix could easily find you hitting your cap. Especially if you use your connection for other purposes besides just Netflix.

Your post kind of contradicts your whole point. If they wanted to kill off video the cap would be 30 GB not 300 GB. Seriously 130 hours of Netflix per month. That's a lot. I'm sure people are also watching regular TV and possibly DVD/blu-ray too. I'd say some people need to find a hobby or a life or something.

FiOS doesn't have caps and yet people have FiOS internet AND TV. So this "Without caps, you could watch as much Internet Video as you wanted and might be able to cancel cable thanks to this." Doesn't really hold water.


diablo1892
R.I.P. Donald Lee Wise

join:2011-04-21
Friendly, WV
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Frontier Communi..

Comcast here

Comcast there, comcast everywhere. Comcast customers having issues with tech support, billing, etc. and then there's the TWC and comcast merger and now this.

Why isn't anything like frontier or hughesnet being mentioned as much as comcast? I bet it would grab more people's attention and make them interested if it were instead of comcast.


keithps
Premium
join:2002-06-26
Soddy Daisy, TN

Wonder why...

Comcast doesn't have enough bandwidth and thus needs caps in Nashville, Knoxville and Memphis, yet seems to have plenty in Chattanooga... Hmm... Competition perhaps?
--
RIP Dad (10-28-1955 to 4-10-2010)


newview
Ex .. Ex .. Exactly
Premium
join:2001-10-01
Parsonsburg, MD
kudos:1
Reviews:
·DIRECTV
·Comcast
reply to Jason Levine

Re: Caps Are To Kill Internet Video

said by Jason Levine:

The real purpose of the caps (or "data thresholds") aren't to manage network congestion. They are to hurt Internet video.

With a 300GB cap, you can watch 300 hours of Netflix at Standard Definition and 130 hours at High Definition. This means, if you don't use your connection for ANYTHING else, you can watch around 10 hours of Standard Definition Netflix a day or 4.3 hours of HD Netflix a day.

For a family of 4 ... that's ONE movie per day per person. Yup ... caps are all about killing any other video besides Comcast's brand of crap cableTV


Jason Levine
Premium
join:2001-07-13
USA
reply to 78036364
That was 130 hours of Netflix per month if you didn't use your connection for anything else. If you used ONLY Netflix, you would get around 4.3 hours of Netflix use per day on a 300GB cap. If you use your connection for other things (e-mail, downloading programs, tablet/phone application updates, etc), you might find you only have around 2 or 3 hours per day of Netflix usage before your cap is hit. At that rate, one long movie will kill your Netflix time for the day.

They've tried smaller caps. Time Warner Cable tried instituting a 5GB cap with overages (in trials) and they got so many complaints that they were forced to back off. (It was revived as "agree to a 5GB cap and you get $5 off your bill... oh, and $1/GB overages.") Thus, they set the caps higher. They're ok with some Internet video usage so long as you can't use enough to cancel your TV.

It's nice that FIOS doesn't have caps. Verizon isn't primarily a cable TV provider so they're not looking at cable TV as a sacred cow the way Comcast does. (Incidentally, FIOS isn't available everywhere. I can't get FIOS so I'm stuck with Time Warner Cable.)

Finally, the cord cutting trend is just getting started. Many people still pay for cable TV without realizing that they could save money by using Internet video sources instead. As time goes on, without any interference from the cable companies, cord cutting will increase more and more. This will hurt cable company revenues. Cable companies may be many things, but they aren't stupid. They see this trend (even if they refuse to publicly acknowledge it) and want to squash it before it starts. Therefore, they are capping service and allowing peering connections to flood so that Netflix and other video providers won't be as attractive as the cable companies' own video offerings.
--
-Jason Levine


Jason Levine
Premium
join:2001-07-13
USA
reply to newview
And that's without any other Internet use. If someone starts checking e-mail or downloading app updates, a family of 4 will need to pick and choose who gets to watch Netflix each day.
--
-Jason Levine


diablo1892
R.I.P. Donald Lee Wise

join:2011-04-21
Friendly, WV
kudos:1
dont forget about video gaming on MP(multiplayer) mode. MMO(massive multiplay online) is even worse.

Every second, anywhere from 60 to 120 updates gets performed. With lag, it might as well be called a bandwidth hog


IPPlanMan
Holy Cable Modem Batman

join:2000-09-20
Washington, DC
kudos:1
reply to Jason Levine
There are two key things apologists omit....

They seem to forget that multiple people live in a house.

They also assume you don't use your connection for anything but video streaming.

silbaco
Premium
join:2009-08-03
USA
reply to 78036364
said by 78036364:

FiOS doesn't have caps and yet people have FiOS internet AND TV. So this "Without caps, you could watch as much Internet Video as you wanted and might be able to cancel cable thanks to this." Doesn't really hold water.

No, and it never has. At&t U-Verse is both internet and TV and is essentially uncapped (unenforced). And their TV service is growing incredibly fast, adding nearly 200k subscribers just last quarter. Meanwhile At&t highspeed DSL is capped and they do not even provide a TV service to those customers.

Even the uncapped legendary Google Fiber has both internet and TV.


camper
Premium
join:2010-03-21
Bethel, CT
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Comcast
reply to Jason Levine
said by Jason Levine:

The real purpose of the caps (or "data thresholds") aren't to manage network congestion. They are to hurt Internet video. Without caps, you could watch as much Internet Video as you wanted and might be able to cancel cable thanks to this. With caps and overages, you are limited in how much Internet Video you can watch before you need to pay more money (to Comcast - thus helping them profit off of their competitors)....

 
Once 4K UHDTV video becomes more prevalent, Comcast will have a revenue windfall.

silbaco
Premium
join:2009-08-03
USA
reply to Jason Levine
If cable companies wanted to prevent cord cutters they could simply refuse to offer internet-only packages.


Jason Levine
Premium
join:2001-07-13
USA

1 recommendation

Many of the cable companies make the Internet-only packages more expensive than Internet+TV. So, to save money, a cord cutter needs to sign up for cable TV and get a cable box. Even if they stick it in their closet and never use it, the cable company gets to claim that this person is a cable TV subscriber and not a cord cutter.
--
-Jason Levine


Jason Levine
Premium
join:2001-07-13
USA
reply to camper
By then the caps will go up... to 350GB.
--
-Jason Levine


PatchTues

@73.160.110.x
reply to 78036364

Re: It's not a CAP its "pay more for less"

said by 78036364:

Well if one doesn't go over 300 GB they won't be charged overages so there isn't any price increase.

Also 250 GB was the cap in 2009. Even if one assumes the average amount of data used has only gone up by 20% per year( it's MUCH higher than that ) The caps should be over 600 GB not 300.

Not so sure comcast will turn to caps again in a big way. Even now, with their trials in several locations, a very small % of their users are capped. And from a marketing perspective, as opposed to a competitive perspective, it is in comcast's best interest to remain uncapped. Google is keeping the marketing pressure on them even if they don't compete with them head to head. comcast has a long history of keeping up with technology and moving to Docsis 3.1 will take the heat off capping needs.

Also, comcast merger processes has found them agreeing to terms to gain regulatory approvals. It wouldn't surprise me in the least that gaining approvals from FCC and DOJ and state PUCs for twc merger ends up with them agreeing to not apply caps.

Papageno

join:2011-01-26
Portland, OR
reply to Jason Levine

Re: Caps Are To Kill Internet Video

This is SUCH a transparent money grab. If they have network congestion at peak hours, FINE, bring down throughput for customers during said hours. But between midnight at 6 AM you should be able to download terabytes if you're so inclined because you're not "using up" anything and you're not interfering with other customers' use.


Kuro

@75.151.50.x

1 recommendation

reply to silbaco
Comcast kind of does this where an internet alone package is $5-$20 a month more expensive than the bundle (at least in my area). They price out the internet option and then hope you watch cable and order more of it.

78036364

join:2014-05-06
USA
reply to Jason Levine
said by Jason Levine:

That was 130 hours of Netflix per month if you didn't use your connection for anything else.

Just checking e-mail and sports scores uses next to nothing. Most of these other uses people use their smartphones for now.

If you used ONLY Netflix, you would get around 4.3 hours of Netflix use per day on a 300GB cap.



The average person watch 150 hours of TV a month. That's 5 hours a day so basically 90% of ones TV watching is Netflix? Does Netflix even have 130 hours of shit worth watching every month?

If you use your connection for other things (e-mail, downloading programs, tablet/phone application updates, etc),

As I said these thing use very little data. less than 10 GB per month.

They're ok with some Internet video usage so long as you can't use enough to cancel your TV.

I think other factors like lack of content have more to do with people keeping cable than 300 GB caps.

It's nice that FIOS doesn't have caps. Verizon isn't primarily a cable TV provider so they're not looking at cable TV as a sacred cow the way Comcast does

Oh yes they very much are wanting to make money on TV.

(Incidentally, FIOS isn't available everywhere.

Incidentally neither is Comcast.

Finally, the cord cutting trend is just getting started. Many people still pay for cable TV without realizing that they could save money by using Internet video sources instead. As time goes on, without any interference from the cable companies, cord cutting will increase more and more. This will hurt cable company revenues. Cable companies may be many things, but they aren't stupid. They see this trend (even if they refuse to publicly acknowledge it) and want to squash it before it starts. Therefore, they are capping service and allowing peering connections to flood so that Netflix and other video providers won't be as attractive as the cable companies' own video offerings.

Assuming your correct can you blame them? Cable companies should just lose revenue to be nice to you? Cable companies are assholes because they don't want you to have internet only and not TV? How dare they want o make money. I mean this is America our country wasn't founded on the concept that business should try to make profit. Businesses should exist to provide people with free shit. Making a profit is communist.