KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
 ·AT&T Yahoo
·AT&T DSL Service
 ·Cox HSI
·AT&T Southwest
| I still don't agree that knowledge = Greater use
This argument of "If we declare the Cap, then average users will increase usage to reach just below the Cap."
That's based on what--- Nothing. Personally, people use the internet the way they use it. I don't see anyone suddenly increasing usage just because they found out what their cap limit is. What I do see happening is the people who have been exceeding the limits CUTTING BACK their usage to just below the cap... but isn't that the point?
However, I think what Comcast really fears is the advertising damage--- they have to inform the public that NO, it isn't unlimited, and they are worried that the competition (DSL) may advertise their true, no capped limits....
--
"Regulatory capitalism is when companies invest in lawyers, lobbyists, and politicians, instead of plant, people, and customer service." - former FCC Chairman William Kennard (A real FCC Chairman, unlike the current Corporate Spokesperson in the job!) |
|
Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
·Colbanet
| Bullshit
"Of course Comcast can't offer precise numbers because it varies by region"
Then make it NOT vary by region. Large Canadian ISPs (Bell Canada, Videotron, etc) and small Canadian ISPs alike have no problems giving exact and specific caps, overage charges, and limitations on overage charges. |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
|  What is better for MOST customers - hidden or published caps
Of course Comcast can't offer precise numbers because it varies by region, and won't offer that information for fear heavy users would consume just enough bandwidth to avoid setting off alarms. Although if Comcast were to impose a flat 350GB monthly cap, you'd probably see interest in this topic die off almost immediately. So should Comcast care more about maintaining a good experience for the vast majority of their users or some industry pundits that only care about the mileage they can get by harping on hidden caps. I think we know Comcast's answer. And most users would agree that hidden caps are better than some PR-driven decision to set hard caps that would be much lower than the hidden and variable ones.
--
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page |
|
DMS1
join:2005-04-06
Carrollton, TX
| reply to KrK
Re: I still don't agree that knowledge = Greater use
said by KrK  :Personally, people use the internet the way they use it. I don't see anyone suddenly increasing usage just because they found out what their cap limit is. What I do see happening is the people who have been exceeding the limits CUTTING BACK their usage to just below the cap... but isn't that the point? I disagree. The vast majority of users probably never exceed a tenth of what the current soft cap is. However, it the small band of heavy downloaders that have the potential to affect the performance of individual nodes because their usage can be many times the average. These are exactly the people who would take great pride in running to within a few megabytes of the limit. If these people found out that the limit was 400GB per month when they were only currently doing 350GB, they would up their usage. This is why any published cap is going to be way lower than the current soft caps. |
|
DMS1
join:2005-04-06
Carrollton, TX
| reply to Guspaz
Re: Bullshit
said by Guspaz :"Of course Comcast can't offer precise numbers because it varies by region" Then make it NOT vary by region. Large Canadian ISPs (Bell Canada, Videotron, etc) and small Canadian ISPs alike have no problems giving exact and specific caps, overage charges, and limitations on overage charges. The issue is that the caps are set to prevent performance degradation. This means that the caps on some nodes will be way lower than on others. Do you really want a single uniform cap that by definition would have to equate to the lowest current soft cap? |
|
KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK | reply to DMS1
Re: I still don't agree that knowledge = Greater use
Uh, those are the people who are exceeding the caps now. |
|
wispagod
join:2001-06-28
House Springs, MO | reply to KrK
Well, it seems like fals advertising to me if they say unlimited usage, then try to enforce a cap, or complain when you use it to much, that's not right either |
|
kaila
join:2000-10-11
Lincolnshire, IL
clubs: 
| It's been said before......
and I don't know why that rep would say it. Caps vary be market. The network quality of Comcast's HSI markets range from overprovisioned, underprovisioned, and everything in between. They absolutely depend on the cap flexibility to manage things.
As it stands, the best piece of information subscribers could have is whether they are in an 'underprovisioned', or 'actively managed' market. |
|
Rick
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-06
Waterbury, CT
clubs:
1 edit | Please..give me a BREAK
BBR let off on this topic? NEVER!
"Although, if Comcast were to impose a clear monthly cap (say above 400GB), you'd probably see interest in this topic die off almost immediately."
It is ALREADY common knowledge to just about anyone and everyone who frequents the comcast forum that the magic number is ABOUT 300 Gigs.
But yet..this topic gets more BBR airplay than the sleeping tech did.
Think about it. 300 gigs. This company isn't "capping" people.
They're trying to save their damn network for christs sake from those who would take it down for others!
Frankly, it's time we all moved along from this topic.
I'm sure the VAST majority of comcast customers support their policing this service to that extent..to keep it working properly for the rest of us.
If someone wants to dl that much data..great.
They should then be prepared to pay for a business solution..or split their usage among multiple ISP's. or something.
Comcast.nor any ISP..doesn't owe someone that much for 43 bucks a month. |
|
NGOwner
join:2000-11-21
Leawood, KS
| reply to TKJunkMail
Re: What is better for MOST customers - hidden or published caps
Of course Comcast can't offer precise numbers because it varies by region, and won't offer that information for fear heavy users would consume just enough bandwidth to avoid setting off alarms. Although if Comcast were to impose a flat 350GB monthly cap, you'd probably see interest in this topic die off almost immediately. Wrong.
My interest in this topic is already dead.
A Dead Horse ... meet Beating.
Don ... meet Quixote.
At Windmills ... meet Tilting.
Much Ado About .. meet Nothing.
Dog Won't ... meet Hunt.
[NG]Owner
--
It is impossible to create an idiot-proof product. Humanity is simply too adept at churning out better idiots. |
|
hopeflicker
Capitalism breeds greed
Premium
join:2003-04-03
Long Beach, CA
| reply to Rick
Re: Please..give me a BREAK
said by Rick :BBR let off on this topic? NEVER! "Although, if Comcast were to impose a clear monthly cap (say above 400GB), you'd probably see interest in this topic die off almost immediately." It is ALREADY common knowledge to just about anyone and everyone who frequents the comcast forum that the magic number is ABOUT 300 Gigs. But yet..this topic gets more BBR airplay than the sleeping tech did. Think about it. 300 gigs. This company isn't "capping" people. They're trying to save their damn network for christs sake from those who would take it down for others! Frankly, it's time we all moved along from this topic. I'm sure the VAST majority of comcast customers support their policing this service to that extent..to keep it working properly for the rest of us. If someone wants to dl that much data..great. They should then be prepared to pay for a business solution..or split their usage among multiple ISP's. or something. Comcast.nor any ISP..doesn't owe someone that much for 43 bucks a month. Aren't business users usually on the same node as residential? When i worked for Charter, we hooked them up right along side of residential customers.
How can they manage their bandwidth if they do this? oh, that's right, they dont. They just over sell like all over cable outfits.
--
People pray to God because they're told to. |
|
rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO
| reply to DMS1
Re: Bullshit
said by DMS1 :The issue is that the caps are set to prevent performance degradation. If this is truly the reason, why set caps at all? Cable modems are very configurable and they already know how much you use. Why not discriminate against "heavy" users and reduce their speed when the network is saturated? As the peak usage passes, return them to normal speed. This certainly fits the "up to 5Mbps or up to 10Mbps" fuzzy definition of consumer broadband, doesn't it?
IMO -- I don't think performance is the only underlying reason. Don't they have to worry about total usage through their Internet backbone connection? I would guess the gigabits of bandwidth they need in a large market would make it hard to justify a fixed-speed, unlimited usage relationship with a backbone provider. Don't they pay a flat "infrastructure" fee for multiple, big pipes and a usage fee based on total bytes? If true, the more customers use, the less profit they make. |
|
KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
·AT&T Yahoo
·AT&T DSL Service
·Cox HSI
·AT&T Southwest
| reply to wispagod
Re: I still don't agree that knowledge = Greater use
I'd tend to agree. These days they have shied away from using the word "Unlimited" to avoid the legal consequences but have done nothing to disperse the public misconception that it is unlimited, and since they don't tell you it's capped, in fact, they deny it if asked, people DO assume it's unlimited.
Thus the bad press every time a heavy user gets stomped on.
--
"Regulatory capitalism is when companies invest in lawyers, lobbyists, and politicians, instead of plant, people, and customer service." - former FCC Chairman William Kennard (A real FCC Chairman, unlike the current Corporate Spokesperson in the job!) |
|
BarneyBadAss
Badasses Fight For Freedom
Premium
join:2004-05-07
00001 | reply to Rick
Re: Please..give me a BREAK
perhaps the new thread should be that Comcast should pay folks to use the service! 
--
---Barney |
|
Noah Vail
Premium
join:2004-12-10
Lorton, VA
·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to Rick
It's so much FUN though.
Who doesn't enjoy dragging a mediocre company through the mud every now and then, over a stupid business decision?
This is recreation. Relax and enjoy.
NV
--
The More Alike 2 Religions are, the Stronger the Hate between them. |
|
rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO | reply to hopeflicker
Re: Please..give me a BREAK
I have no idea if this is true but they could ensure the business users consume bandwidth on dedicated channels. Although they share the same node, they would have dedicated bandwidth that is unaffected by consumer saturation. |
|
dadkins
Can you do Blu?
Premium,MVM
join:2003-09-26
Hercules, CA
·Comcast
| reply to KrK
Re: I still don't agree that knowledge = Greater use
It will happen like this...
xxxGB cap, "ONOES!!!1 I'm not getting all of what I'm paying for, must download for the sake of downloading because I am paying for it!"
Usage spikes! Your Comcast line chokes because all your neighbors take the above attitude and open it up!
You and I may not do this, but you know damn well some people will do it!
Screw that noise! 
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera |
|
Corona
It's cool, I'm takin it back
Premium
join:2000-03-14
Aubrey, TX
| reply to Rick
Re: Please..give me a BREAK
said by Rick :...Frankly, it's time we all moved along from this topic... Let's get this straight, Rick is telling people we should move off a topic? Can anyone else smell the irony here? |
|
dadkins
Can you do Blu?
Premium,MVM
join:2003-09-26
Hercules, CA
·Comcast
| reply to Guspaz
Re: Bullshit
said by Guspaz :"Of course Comcast can't offer precise numbers because it varies by region" Then make it NOT vary by region. Large Canadian ISPs (Bell Canada, Videotron, etc) and small Canadian ISPs alike have no problems giving exact and specific caps, overage charges, and limitations on overage charges. Ok, your way... 50GB max for ALL Comcast HSI customers, period!
Fuck that!
You know Comcast(or any business) will lowball everyone in that scenario. No thanks! 
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera |
|
Rob
In Deo speramus, God Bless the USA
Premium
join:2001-08-25
Kendall, FL
·Comcast
| reply to wispagod
Re: I still don't agree that knowledge = Greater use
said by wispagod :Well, it seems like fals advertising to me if they say unlimited usage, then try to enforce a cap, or complain when you use it to much, that's not right either Comcast isn't advertising their service as unlimited, therefore, they aren't guilty of false advertising. |
|
