daslog
join:2002-04-10
Milford, NH
| Until this gets mainstream press....
Like USA today, CNN(haha) or the NY times, their policy of invisible caps is unlikely to change. That being said, I warn everyone that I know with Comcast to keep it under 100 gigs.
Also, it would be nice for them to provide a Bandwidth meter on their website. |
|
Camelot One
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-21
Sarasota, FL
clubs:
| Whats old is new again
The topic of the download caps has already been beat to death around here, so I'll leave that alone.
But PC Magazine just now finding out about it seems normal. There was a time when PC Mags were written for the true geeks, but unfortunately they have learned that we tend to get our news online, as it's happening. So they've all been redone, now written for those who have trouble checking their email. (no kidding, see their recent "Reader Help" sections)
I hear they'll soon be publishing an article letting readers know Microsoft is releasing a new OS.
--
AMD X2 4800+ @2700Mhz/ MSI K8N Neo 4 Platinum SLI/ 4x 1024Mb Corsair XMS PC4000/ WD 74Gb Raptor/ PNY 7800GTs SLI/ Antec 550 True Control/Custom water cooler |
|
nicecaps
@cox.net | reply to daslog
Re: Until this gets mainstream press....
OK 100 gigs beats Cox with their 40 gigs down/ 10 gigs up per month cap. What a ****ing joke!  |
|
RideRed
Vista needs a popup blocker for Vista
Premium
join:2005-06-18
USA | At least you know what the cap is even if Cox rarely enforces it. |
|
inteller
Sociopaths always win.
join:2003-12-08
Tulsa, OK | reply to nicecaps
how did you discover that cap? I'm not aware of such low cox caps. |
|
RideRed
Vista needs a popup blocker for Vista
Premium
join:2005-06-18
USA
2 edits | If Verizon wireless can figure it out...
...certainly Brian "low-mileage lease BMW" Roberts can.
Just state what the caps are. Obviously Comcast isn't capable of supplying the speeds they claim for any length of time, it's the nature of cable network topology and doesn't matter to 99% of the users on the service (as I would imagine the "average" user wouldn't exceed 4GB/mo in consumption). But since capping and cable go hand in hand they should step up like Cox did and state what the caps are. If it's 100GB/mo fine. IMO that is more than generous. If it's 100GB and because it's only certain markets they have to enforce the AUP they rarely enforce it fine. If they have a cap and then charge a few pennies / MB for overages fine. But arbitrarily picking a secret number every month and not telling customers what to do other than "cut your useage by half" is beyond lame. And because of it Roberts' claims of Comcast greatness are exaggerated. NASCARS are fast too, but the motor is done in 500 miles. Same with Comcast.
--
There's only 10 types of people in this world. Those who understand binary, and those who don't. |
|
RideRed
Vista needs a popup blocker for Vista
Premium
join:2005-06-18
USA
1 edit | reply to inteller
Re: Until this gets mainstream press....
»www.cox.com/policy/limitations.asp
You aren't aware of it because it's rarely if ever enforced. |
|
Titus Pullo
I came, I saw, I slept
join:2004-06-26
 ·Embarq
| reply to Camelot One
Re: Whats old is new again
said by Camelot One  : There was a time when PC Mags were written for the true geeks, but unfortunately they have learned that we tend to get our news online, as it's happening. I hear they'll soon be publishing an article letting readers know Microsoft is releasing a new OS. That's because life outside their offices is a series of 'UNDOCUMENTED TIPS!' 
--
Who would Jesus bomb? |
|
CLEVELTECH
join:2006-12-21
02107
3 edits | reply to RideRed
Re: If Verizon wireless can figure it out...
My guess as to why Comcast does not want to post what the limits are is because it's simple lying. If Cox Communications can post the limits on their website (depending on the area where their service is located), so can Comcast. They would rather lie to people and tell them that there are no cap limits to keep bringing in customers and keep the profits high rather than risk alienating them. This is not a problem that is going away anytime soon and with the continuing aquisitions that Comcast keeps buying up, more and more people are going to be getting the "call" and being threatened to "limit their usage" and left wondering what or how much do they have to cut back.
The day will come when CEO Brian Roberts is facing angry former Comcast subscribers and a federal judge in court and that one-sided TOS is thrown right out the window. That fuzzy policy might be legal, but very much in the gray-area and in this country we have laws protecting consumers from greedy corporations that try to change the rules as they go along.
People like Brian Roberts need to come back to earth from whatever planet he's on and realize that even though he might be rich and in a cushy job, the average consumer is much more intelligent than him and the crap he's feeding is going to eventually come back to bite him in the face.
The NYTIMES hasn't reported it YET, but they will soon enough.
My bud just updated his blog and like me, he's had to defend himself from accusations and attacks by those that refuse to accept that there is a problem and defend Comcast.
»comcastissue.blogspot.com/index.html |
|
phattieg
join:2001-04-29
Winter Park, FL
 ·Verizon Wireless B..
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
| reply to daslog
Re: Until this gets mainstream press....
said by daslog :Like USA today, CNN(haha) or the NY times, their policy of invisible caps is unlikely to change. That being said, I warn everyone that I know with Comcast to keep it under 100 gigs. Also, it would be nice for them to provide a Bandwidth meter on their website. Yeah, a bandwidth meter would be nice, but the caps are "floating" caps, and all depend on your area, and the over all usage patterns for the specific node you're on. I download a ton, and have yet to receive a letter, or warning. I am glad they don't have "specific" caps, because then I would be restricted to a specific limit, and thats not cool. I'm sorry if you'd like it that way because you got kicked off for using it too much, but thats your problem. If there were specific caps, nobody would be happy. At least without caps you can keep going until you're warned... If the restriction bothers you, it's THEIR network, go somewhere else if you need more. I can't understand why you EXPECT a company who is known for shutting people off for "using it too much" has to keep being brought into the spotlight. Repetitive news clips about issues that aren't going to change is the reason I read more news from DIGG. We are getting to the point with this topic where we're "beating a dead horse". They aren't going to change their acceptable use policy for less than 2% of their customer base. This is the nations largest broadband ISP we're talking about here. Why would they change if it's not killing business? If it really mattered, people would jump ship left and right. 
--
SIPPhone/Gizmo # 17476200648 / PIMPNET Chatline / Ran by Asterisk & Slackware 10.1. |
|
phattieg
join:2001-04-29
Winter Park, FL
·Verizon Wireless B..
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
| reply to Camelot One
Re: Whats old is new again
said by Camelot One :There was a time when PC Mags were written for the true geeks, but unfortunately they have learned that we tend to get our news online, as it's happening. So they've all been redone, now written for those who have trouble checking their email. (no kidding, see their recent "Reader Help" sections) I was going to say "PC Magazine sucks anyway" in my post above, but decided not to because someone might get mad. It's good to know I am not alone.
--
SIPPhone/Gizmo # 17476200648 / PIMPNET Chatline / Ran by Asterisk & Slackware 10.1. |
|
Loker
Premium
join:2004-07-11
Fargo, ND
clubs: | News?
Why is it news every time someone writes an article about getting disconnected for network abuse? |
|
RideRed
Vista needs a popup blocker for Vista
Premium
join:2005-06-18
USA
| reply to CLEVELTECH
Re: If Verizon wireless can figure it out...
I don't think there is anything illegal about their AUP. It's just bad practice to in these rare circumstances to expect the customers to curb their usage without telling them how much to curb their usage.
And as Comcast ramps up speeds in their attempts to keep up with telco deployments this will just happen more and more.
Hell, stating caps doesn't seem to have hurt Cox's reputation and the telcos at least in Orange County aren't using the caps in their advertising against them.
It would be very simply for Comcast to do what Cox did...state a cap and then selectively enforce it. But at least them when it came time for enforcement the sub would have a number (eg 40, 60, 100GB) to shoot for.
--
There's only 10 types of people in this world. Those who understand binary, and those who don't. |
|
CLEVELTECH
join:2006-12-21
02107
1 edit | I agree with you about stating the caps. That's all I (and many other former subscribers) want.
This isn't as isolated as you think. I've talked to hundreds of others that have contacted me with the same story.
I never said that their AUP is illegal, but it certainly falls into a gray area and if you read it unless you are a lawyer, the average person will NOT understand it. It's very vague. It was written that way purposely to shield Comcast from liability.
THAT'S THE PROBLEM. |
|
axus
join:2001-06-18
Washington, DC
·Verizon Online DSL
| reply to RideRed
Caps need to be published for competitive reasons
Yeah, if everyone published their caps then it can be used as a point of competition in advertising. The way it is now, companies don't like to discuss it, because all of them would like to not compete on this. When they do, caps necessarily match the highest competitor.
Here are the things I can think of that can be competed on:
price
average uptime (95% is probably fine for homes)
downstream bandwidth
upstream bandwidth
download cap
upload cap
average latency
customer service |
|
dadkins
Can you do Blu?
Premium,MVM
join:2003-09-26
Hercules, CA
 ·Comcast
| Ok people, one last time...
Comcast is huge.
Comcast has a shitload of markets.
My market can likely handle 300+GB per month per sub.
Your market may be able to handle 500+GB per month per sub.
Someone else's market may onle be able to handle 200GB per sub.
So, do you, possibly being in a market that can handle 500GB per sub, REALLY want Comcast to set a fair(for *ALL SUBS*) cap at say - 150GB per month?
So much for your ability to download 500GB, huh?
Screw *MY* 300GB per munth, but that's ok, right?
We *ALL* now get to have a lowballed cap, regardless of what our markets can actually handle.
Oh yeah, that make a whole lot of sense! NOT!
Look, here is what a SMART Comcast Residential HSI customer would do...
Set your own damn limits!
If, by only by reading of these cutoff threads, you can assertain that the "AVERAGE" is 200-300GB per month...
DUH!!!
Don't allow yourself to surpass 300GB per month!
*IF* you still get "The Call", why not just do as asked and CUT BACK and get on with your life?
No, y'all want to have a stated cap.
Never have any of you thought that Comcast(in their INFINITE wisdom) might set it WAY lower than what you previously were able to download.
Here is something that y'all are missing too -
What if... *I* wanted to download 300GB one month?
Now, with that lowballed STATED CAP, I'm boned?
Not only did you all screw yourselves, ya screwd everyone else!
Main thing I'm concerned about, ya just screwqed *ME*!
Do you know what "Fuck all That!" means?
If y'all get your way, we may end up another Rogers!
_____________________________________________________________
So, lets look at this one last time:
Inviso-cap @ 200-300(average).
Or
Stated cap @ 100-150(to be fair to everyone).
Even my neighbor's 3 year old could figure this one out...
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera |
|
CLEVELTECH
join:2006-12-21
02107
1 edit | OK Daddy, I accept that.
Now Comcast NEEDS to state it . I don't care how huge they are. They should give an estimate the way Cox Communications does. |
|
dadkins
Can you do Blu?
Premium,MVM
join:2003-09-26
Hercules, CA
·Comcast
| said by CLEVELTECH :OK Daddy, I accept that. Now Comcast NEEDS to state it . I don't care how huge they are. They should give an estimate the way Cox Communications does. ...and you don't care that you were once able to download 200GB, but with a 100GB cap, that's it and you're terminated?
Please explain, how is that better?
I have a question for you Joe, who is your ISP? Right now?
Are you even a Comcast customer?
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera |
|
albie81
Premium
join:2005-01-04
Mount Laurel, NJ
| Just say what it is in the ToS.....
I don't care that they have a cap. I care that they have a cap and try to pretend like they don't, until you do something to reach some magical number and they start sending hatemail.
watch what's gonna happen with more availability of online digital media. LEGAL digital media.
say, a person in a given billing cycle, purchases, completely legally, a certain number of say... Hi-Def movies. (regardless of whether or you can NOW... it's coming.) Those are LARGE LARGE files. You download 10 or 15 in a month, you are in deep with comcast. All because you are using your broadband connection how you choose, in a perfectly legal manner?
They need to state SOMETHING in the ToS, instead of making people think they have unlimited service to use as they choose, albeit within the confines of what's legal.. (i.e. don't piss off the xxAA's) and then suddenly getting shut off because comcast decides you've used your allotment of bandwidth.
--
AMD Athlon 64 3000+ @ 2.4Ghz ~ DFI LanParty 250gb nF3 ~ 1gb (2x512mb) Corsair PC3200 ~ MSI Radeon 9600Pro ~ 160gb WD Caviar SATA 150 ~ Creative SB Audigy2 ZS Platinum ~ Cooler Master Centurion ATX ~ Sony 18.1" LCD ~ Cubase SX ~ Cakewalk SONAR |
|
Nintendo
join:2007-03-17
2 edits | reply to RideRed
Re: Until this gets mainstream press....
Yes, i have Cox and regularly download in excess of 200 + gigs
(usually linux iso's on Bit torrent )
I should also mention i have done this for about 5 years now |
|
