gatorkram
Spelling and Grammer impared
Premium
join:2002-07-22
Winterville, NC
clubs:
 ·Embarq
 ·linode
|  Sigh...
Why don't companies just put text in their TOS/AUP that states they don't have to do ANYTHING at all to keep you happy, and in fact they hate you.
--
Give me bandwidth or give me death!
»/testhistory/661871/4f240 |
|
swiffatek
join:2003-12-20 | subject goes here
They probably should have stated some type of hard cap, because as it is my ability to use their network is already limited. It's limited by the tier of service that i pay for. |
|
firewire9999
join:2004-07-11
Livonia, MI
| What are they thinking?
"Comcast manages its network with one goal: to deliver the best possible broadband Internet experience to all of its customers. High-speed bandwidth and network resources are not unlimited."
That quote from the article sounds they have the Public Relations and/or Lawyers writing the TOS now?
LOL |
|
telcolackey
The Truth? You can't handle the truth
join:2007-04-06
Death Valley, CA
| reply to gatorkram
Re: Sigh...
Not sure it is possible to make everyone happy. Top 1% is not happy that bandwidth is not 100mb, unlimited and free. Bottom 20% don't care about unlimited BW and want it cheaper. Middle of the road think the bandwidth is fine, but are not happy that they are subsidizing the top 1%'s DVD download library.
Can't please them all.
--
"Believe only half of what you see and nothing that you hear." - Dinah Craik |
|
hopeflicker
Capitalism breeds greed
Premium
join:2003-04-03
Long Beach, CA
| reply to swiffatek
Re: subject goes here
The company uses reasonable network management practices that are consistent with industry standards
What a load of dog crap!!
Throttling is not STANDARD
--
Man created God in his image : intolerant, sexist, homophobic and violent. |
|
jgkolt
Premium
join:2004-02-21
Lakewood, OH
clubs:
| time warner
i would like to see time warnewr they are managing their network to provide optimum speeds to everyone as i barely get 10-5% of what is advertised speeds. as long as att doesn't go nation wide with the filter program I will be glad i switched. I say this seeing as the cable industry seems to copy each other.
--
3 free for you/3 free for me: Free Stock Trades : PM Me |
|
koitsu
Premium
join:2002-07-16
Mountain View, CA
| reply to gatorkram
Re: Sigh...
said by gatorkram  :Why don't companies just put text in their TOS/AUP that states they don't have to do ANYTHING at all to keep you happy, and in fact they hate you. Which is funny, because it didn't used to be that way with providers 15 years ago. The utterly bizarre "anti-customer" corporate attitude is something fairly new (and I'm still baffled by the fact that it grows rather than diminishes). |
|
cornelius785
join:2006-10-26
Worcester, MA
| seem reasonable but...
the question still remains if essentially forging/altering packets is reasonable and should be allowed. in my opinion altering how someone experiences the internet should not be done (messing with packets, dns redirection, and similar, but not bandwidth allocation). i think they should just decrease bandwidth allocated to a user as the network load increases, starting with those that use the most.
i'd be curious to see how much bittorrent traffic actually effects comcast's network. does it really slow down sections of thier network? which could be solved by upgrading maybe? since comcast is not a tier 1 ISP, is the bandwidth caused by bittorrent costing them a lot of money? |
|
koitsu
Premium
join:2002-07-16
Mountain View, CA
| reply to hopeflicker
Re: subject goes here
said by hopeflicker :The company uses reasonable network management practices that are consistent with industry standardsWhat a load of dog crap!! Throttling is not STANDARD Clarification: injecting falsified/unsolicited TCP packets into a stream (sent bidirectionally nonetheless) is definitely NOT a standard.
Throttling (traffic shaping via QoS, rate-limiting, or even via packet loss) is a general standard. |
|
gatorkram
Spelling and Grammer impared
Premium
join:2002-07-22
Winterville, NC
clubs:
·Embarq
·linode
| reply to koitsu
Re: Sigh...
I remember when all we had was dial up, and being that dial up, for the most part, didn't limit you to one provider, how nice and accommodating the local guys were, compared to the big boys..
I used to hang out at my ISP sometimes, just to talk with them, and watch all the modem lights blink..
--
Give me bandwidth or give me death!
»/testhistory/661871/4f240 |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·Comcast
| reply to firewire9999
Re: What are they thinking?
said by firewire9999 : they have the Public Relations and/or Lawyers writing the TOS now? Lawyers always wrote the TOS. Just a byproduct of our sue-happy society and the fact that there are too many law schools pumping out too many lawyers.
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page |
|
axus
join:2001-06-18
Washington, DC
·Verizon Online DSL
| reply to gatorkram
Re: Sigh...
Dialup really was the perfect competitive environment for internet access. The only limiter was your local phone company, pretty much every local zone would have an ISP or 10. Prices dropped to the minimum, and the fittest/most friendly flourished.
The thing dialup had going for it was the phone routing system, so you could dial anywhere that gives the best deal. A modern net connection goes to one place, and you need an account to even get there. Every competitor needs to bring you a separate line to your door, instead of going over one line. Its a shame that line-sharing could not be done in a way to make customers and the line-sharer happy. |
|
Dogfather
Premium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA | Now ADVERTISE it
Now instead of claiming "lightning fast downloads" in all yer advertising, put that part of the TOS in bold print in all the advertising so customers aren't mislead and know exactly what they're signing up for. |
|
Rick
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-06
Waterbury, CT
clubs:
| IMHO..
We need to move on from this issue.
Those who this is ultimately affecting are the extreme..way over the top users who feel that they have the right to everything and anything for one low price.
I..and the vast majority of Comcast customers are very satisfied with our service and expect this company to do whatever it takes to preserve exactly that and to deliver a quality experience for the majority of us..not the minority.
What regular visitors to the comcast forum at this site know is that Comcast has VERY liberal usage policies allowing for upwards of 20Mb speeds with powerboost..as well as VERY generous "caps" exceeding 200 to 300 Gigs per month of downloading.
What we have ALL seen is other isp's who..when pressed to the wall on this issue..have THEN had to state their policies to allow for perhaps only 20 to 30 gigs.
Comcast hasn't done that..but what is being risked here in continuing to press them on this issue is that they will be FORCED to do that. Obviously they don't want to..and haven't...but if this minority is allowed to continue to speak on this issue..and given this continued voice to do so by BBR in the process...then that is most likely exactly what could wind up happening.
Comcast..nor any isp for that matter..does not owe any customer these kinds of speeds and download amounts for this kind of a price on an absolutely unlimited basis 24/7.
These networks have limitations that can cause the service to totally crash for the rest of us..and it is comcasts responsibility to protect us from that which is exactly what they are doing.
This company is more than fair in what they allow the vast majority of us for this kind of price..and I believe are even going above and beyond what they even need to do in the interest of delivering us a very quality product and experience.
If the bandwidth hogs want what they want..then they should seek out other resources and isp's to get that.
Perhaps they should pay for their own unlimted 20,000k pipe that would probably cost them 10,000 or more per month.
WE..as their regular customers..do not owe that to them.
Nor do we want to subsidize their activities any longer.
If they have a problem with this..then move to another isp's territory. Or split their usage up among a second connection.
BBR should STOP promoting their interests which is, in fact..endorsing them. Publicly posting under the guise of "news" workarounds as to how they can get around this only puts yourself in the light of being something that you really shouldn't be yourselves IMHO.
Comcast..keep right on doing what you're doing.
The vast majority of us respect you for it..and appreciate it.
--
The Coyote captured the RR! Roadrunner Rick is now Comcastic! |
|
MichaelWacey
OwlSaver
Premium
join:2005-01-30
Berwyn, PA
 ·Verizon FIOS
·Comcast
| reply to TKJunkMail
Re: What are they thinking?
I am no defender of Lawyers or Comcast. However, your comment about lawsuits and lawyers does require some clarification. First, corporations file far more lawsuits than individuals. So, if sue happy refers to companies suing each other and their customers (a very strange policy but all too common), then you are correct. If you are referring to consumers suing companies, then you are following the Insurance industry line. Please do some research on both sides of this issue and you will find that there is ample evidence that it is companies that are sue happy and not consumers.
Yes, law schools do produce far too many lawyers. The result however is not as bad as one might expect. I do not have current statistics, but I believe that close to 50% of law school graduates are practicing law after five years. So, it is the law students (and their parents in many cases) who pay the price for too many lawyers.
Take Care |
|
major marco
Res Firma Mitescere Nescit
Premium
join:2003-02-13
Stepford, CA
clubs:
| reply to TKJunkMail
said by TKJunkMail :Lawyers always wrote the TOS. Just a byproduct of our sue-happy society and the fact that there are too many law schools pumping out too many lawyers. Just as there are too many B schools "pumping" out too many MBAs and generating too many marketing morons and white collar CEO criminals. |
|
pokesph
It Is Almost Fast
Premium
join:2001-06-25
Sacramento, CA
clubs:
·Comcast
| reply to Rick
Re: IMHO..
said by Rick :We need to move on from this issue. Those who this is ultimately affecting are the extreme..way over the top users who feel that they have the right to everything and anything for one low price. I..and the vast majority of Comcast customers are very satisfied with our service and expect this company to do whatever it takes to preserve exactly that and to deliver a quality experience for the majority of us..not the minority. What regular visitors to the comcast forum at this site know is that Comcast has VERY liberal usage policies allowing for upwards of 20Mb speeds with powerboost..as well as VERY generous "caps" exceeding 200 to 300 Gigs per month of downloading. What we have ALL seen is other isp's who..when pressed to the wall on this issue..have THEN had to state their policies to allow for perhaps only 20 to 30 gigs. Comcast hasn't done that..but what is being risked here in continuing to press them on this issue is that they will be FORCED to do that. Obviously they don't want to..and haven't...but if this minority is allowed to continue to speak on this issue..and given this continued voice to do so by BBR in the process...then that is most likely exactly what could wind up happening. Comcast..nor any isp for that matter..does not owe any customer these kinds of speeds and download amounts for this kind of a price on an absolutely unlimited basis 24/7. These networks have limitations that can cause the service to totally crash for the rest of us..and it is comcasts responsibility to protect us from that which is exactly what they are doing. This company is more than fair in what they allow the vast majority of us for this kind of price..and I believe are even going above and beyond what they even need to do in the interest of delivering us a very quality product and experience. If the bandwidth hogs want what they want..then they should seek out other resources and isp's to get that. Perhaps they should pay for their own unlimted 20,000k pipe that would probably cost them 10,000 or more per month. WE..as their regular customers..do not owe that to them. Nor do we want to subsidize their activities any longer. If they have a problem with this..then move to another isp's territory. Or split their usage up among a second connection. BBR should STOP promoting their interests which is, in fact..endorsing them. Publicly posting under the guise of "news" workarounds as to how they can get around this only puts yourself in the light of being something that you really shouldn't be yourselves IMHO. Comcast..keep right on doing what you're doing. The vast majority of us respect you for it..and appreciate it. OR Comcast could build out it's inferstructure to handle oh, lets say 80% of the speeds/bandwidth it offers to it's customers. |
|
moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD | reply to Rick
You don't have respond to these threads nor read them.
I think these articles are reasonable since Comcast did deny it was doing anything. Now, why did they deny it if they don't think it is wrong? |
|
gatorkram
Spelling and Grammer impared
Premium
join:2002-07-22
Winterville, NC
clubs:
·Embarq
·linode
| reply to axus
Re: Sigh...
I so wish life could be that simple in the internet provider space..
Of course some will say, if the providers know they have to line share, they will have no incentive to upgrade their lines in the first place..
It seems to me, they already have little to no incentive to do that, and pretty much only roll out better services when they absolutely must.
Sad isn't it?
--
Give me bandwidth or give me death!
»/testhistory/661871/4f240 |
|
gateguy
Premium
join:2001-02-12
Reisterstown, MD
·Verizon FIOS
·Comcast
| reply to Rick
Re: IMHO..
Here here, well said and all that sort of crap.
Comcast should get rid of the bandwidth hogs BUT they should also stop oversubscribing their service too.
Can't always blame it on the hogs when everyone gets on the internet during the super bowl halftime and cant get more than 50Kbps...
Cuts both ways.
--
Without data, it is just an opinion |
|
