  ztmikeMark for moderationPremium
join:2001-08-02
Michigan City, IN
1 edit | Jump ship Looks like I might be jumping the titanic ship.
I don't like the idea that I have to wait to send something that IM PAYING FOR to use.
Edit: And the caps..well they just put a bad taste in my mouth that makes me want to vomit. Espically when Comcast wants Docsis 3 speeds.
--
www.youtube.com/watch?v=mdYueIC1pjM | |
|
 |  telcolackey5The Truth? You can't handle the truth
join:2007-04-06
Death Valley, CA | Re: Jump ship Or you could be realistic and read the following:
»Editorial: Caps are welcome
--
"Believe only half of what you see and nothing that you hear." - Dinah Craik | |
|
| |  NOCManMacChatterPremium
join:2004-09-30
Colorado Springs, CO | Re: Jump ship He is being realistic. Caps are nuclear option and will destroy how the internet works in America.
Caps are unnecessary and just an excuse to gouge customers for more money. Network congestion can be dealt with through already existing technology on their equipment and works fine and for their own digital phone service they already use it.
If one company gets away with it all will follow like dominoes. Look at the 5g caps on 3g connections in the US. | |
|
| | | kaila
join:2000-10-11
Lincolnshire, IL | Re: Jump ship As I understand it, this isn't about caps (and yes they're implementing those too), it's about adding latency to users who are supposedly 'using too much' during peak times.
A very stupid thing to do IMHO. For example, imagine some poor Vonage user attempting to dial 911 while under this. I say 'attempt' because even adding an additional 100ms (on top of the usual routing latency) will make many calls impossible.
I'm sure Comcast is planning to add 500ms+ delays to make the experience unpleasant enough for most users to walk away. .....hmmmm maybe this is a kind of behavior modification technique they're trying out. | |
|
| | | | Reviews:
 ·Verizon FiOS
| Re: Jump ship said by kaila:As I understand it, this isn't about caps (and yes they're implementing those too), it's about adding latency to users who are supposedly 'using too much' during peak times.... your interpretation appears to be correct based on the notices comcast is sending to the affected customers:
The new network management technique will result in delayed response times for Internet traffic only for those customers who are using more than their fair share of available internet resources at the time. The network management technique manages those customers’ internet traffic until their usage falls below established bandwidth usage thresholds or until network congestion ends.
bold is mine; what this appears to say is that when your node gets congested, if you are actually using the bandwidth YOU ARE PAYING FOR (eg, downloading a large file at your full 8Mbps rate), you will be throttled to some lower rate (6Mbps? 4? 2? 1? 768K? 56K?).
somebody says it below and they appear to be correct: if there are 2000 people on the node and the node gets congested, your allowance becomes node capacity/2000 and if you go over that you get throttled.
Sounds like people that actually use the bandwidth they are paying for are going to be punished because comcast doesn't want to add capacity. | |
|
| | | | |  halfbandPremium
join:2002-06-01
Huntsville, AL
 ·Comcast
4 edits | Re: Jump ship said by nasadude  Sounds like people that actually use the bandwidth they are paying for are going to be punished because comcast doesn't want to add capacity.
The idea itself is not evil, it is simply to manage network congestion. It is all in how it is implemented. | |
|
| | | | | | Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| Re: Jump ship said by halfband:.. If they use this to completely avoid upgrades required to support the explosion of video content and allow the network to become constantly congested then your right, we would not be getting what we thought we were paying for... I can see this as an emergency, limited time "fix" for them oversubscribing nodes, but it appears they would like to make this standard operating procedure.
doing this allows them to either NOT do upgrades, delay upgrades or only upgrade very slowly.
whichever they choose, they are deciding that rather than maintain a consistent customer experience by increasing capacity, they will degrade the service for a subset of customers so they can make more money.
as long as there is little or no competition, they will get away with it and some customers will suffer, not even necessarily the "bandwidth hogs". | |
|
| | | | | | | halfbandPremium
join:2002-06-01
Huntsville, AL Reviews:
·Comcast
| Re: Jump ship We will know soon. If they aggressively roll out D3, split nodes etc then this is just a band aid to the explosion of demand caused by video and p2p. If this is used to reduce the need for upgrades, well your option will be to pray to the FIOS Gods for mercy.
--
Registered Bandwidth Offender #40812 | |
|
| | | | | | | |  funchordsHelloPremium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA
kudos:5 | Re: Jump ship said by halfband:demand caused by video and p2p. If this is used to reduce the need for upgrades, well your option will be to pray to the FIOS Gods for mercy. P2P is and probably will be decreasing as studios figure out how to get the content out there and still make money on it.
Sure, there will always be those who can't or won't pay or watch commercials or mess with their boxed-in video formats -- but most people just want to watch the show they want to watch or hear the song they want to hear. The more ways studios allow that, the lesser the demand on P2P services.
It will also level-off higher than that because P2P really is an excellent and legitimate delivery method all by itself. But copyright rebellion is the larger driver right now.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
HTTP is the new Bandwidth Hog...
| |
|
| | | | | |  DownTheShoreTag, you're itPremium
join:2003-12-02
Beautiful NJ
kudos:11 | said by halfband:]You are paying for a shared connection. Damn. Two steps forward, one step back. It's just like way back in the party line days on the telephone system. 
--
Life is simply one damned thing after another. | |
|
| | | |  espaethDigital PlumberPremium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
kudos:2
 ·Clear Wireless
| said by kaila:A very stupid thing to do IMHO. For example, imagine some poor Vonage user attempting to dial 911 while under this. I say 'attempt' because even adding an additional 100ms (on top of the usual routing latency) will make many calls impossible. Latency isn't the killer for VoIP or voice in general. We do VoIP from Minneapolis to India, and I assure you we're not making it to Gurgaon in under 100ms. Also remember we used to bounce international calls off communication satellites, and that's 400ms up, 400ms down resulting in nearly a full second of latency on the call.
Of course, the simple solution would be to either use your cell phone to dial 911, or turn off your P2P client while you are making the call. | |
|
| | | | | kaila
join:2000-10-11
Lincolnshire, IL | Re: Jump ship Hey me too! We had some contractors who worked for Accenture in Gurgaon. Yes, I suppose you can get away with what you can call a conversation with a second of delay provided you have zero jitter. In my experience though, 250ms latencies is appropriate for remote offices, with sub 150ms latencies a must to provide high quality calls that wouldn't be fatiguing for high volume/call center users.
Not many of those using Comcast, I know, but who knows how much purposeful delay Comcast has in mind. | |
|
| | | Reviews:
·Comcast
| said by NOCMan:He is being realistic. Caps are nuclear option and will destroy how the internet works in America. Caps are unnecessary and just an excuse to gouge customers for more money. Network congestion can be dealt with through already existing technology on their equipment and works fine and for their own digital phone service they already use it. If one company gets away with it all will follow like dominoes. Look at the 5g caps on 3g connections in the US. You my friend have good common sense skills , this is being missed by 1/2 the country and very many here on this site.
I can't add anything to your comment you pretty much said it all.
--
"It's always funny until someone gets hurt......and then it's absolutely friggin' hysterical!" | |
|
| | | |  jester121Premium
join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL | Re: Jump ship Not sure about common sense, but posters here certainly have a gift for hyperbole. People vomiting over caps and using phrases like "nuclear option" makes for very entertaining reading. | |
|
| | | espaethDigital PlumberPremium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Clear Wireless
| said by NOCMan:He is being realistic. Caps are nuclear option and will destroy how the internet works in America. It works for the other side of the Internet world -- the content providers. They pay for every bit they push.
said by NOCMan:Caps are unnecessary and just an excuse to gouge customers for more money. Network congestion can be dealt with through already existing technology on their equipment and works fine and for their own digital phone service they already use it. The ironic thing is, you're talking about QoS in a news item describing how they're deploying QoS. Are you thinking of some mythical type of network management that magically adds capacity instead of slowing something down? | |
|
| | | |  Combat ChuckToo Many CannibalsPremium
join:2001-11-29
Erie, PA | Re: Jump ship said by espaeth:The ironic thing is, you're talking about QoS in a news item describing how they're deploying QoS. I'm glad I'm not the only one that noticed that. What I don't understand is why they don't just throttle when/as necessary instead of adding artificial latency so that software can deal gracefully with the reduced bandwidth; there's not much you can do about latency.
I would think that, Ironically, the software that uses the most bandwidth (file downloads of various types) is probably the least affected by latency.
--
"Wisdom and Knowledge shall be the stability of thy times" | |
|
| | | Ulmo
join:2005-09-22
San Jose, CA Reviews:
 ·SONIC.NET
| said by NOCMan:Caps are nuclear option Hardly.
Nuclear option is cutting the backbones and taking down many of the ISP hotels. | |
|
| | | |
| | ztmikeMark for moderationPremium
join:2001-08-02
Michigan City, IN
1 edit | Yea..I saw that last night..more than anything it made me
I'm glad Justin thinks that its a good idea..but what about the ever new programs/games coming out that take advantage of a fast internet pipe? "I" believe the internet will become the main distribution method instead of a cable tv line, in the future.
What these cable company's are doing is not allowing that and wanting the customer to have to be STUCK with them for ALL their services. If somebody can't see that, their blind.
If Verizon FiOS keeps up the big 2-way speeds of their internet tiers and UNCAPPED access, they will literally own the rest, if you think that's bullshit, read some of the FiOS reviews right here on DSLR.
--
www.youtube.com/watch?v=mdYueIC1pjM | |
|
| | | telcolackey5The Truth? You can't handle the truth
join:2007-04-06
Death Valley, CA
1 edit | Re: Jump ship The reality is, as you increase speeds to these new levels it is not as simple as "upgrade the network". We have reached the tipping point of an all you can eat service. With "all you can eat" there are people that consume vast quantities impacting the cost and experience of others using the service. This goes for all technologies (Cable, DSL, FTTH, etc).
The only reason you may (temporarily) see some other ISPs use this as a selling feature, it is either because they offer slow speed or they MUST gain market share (bait, then switch)
Speeds have increased more in the past few years than in the history of broadband. Sorry to say this, but if you really do the economics around it, the path is inevitable.
"All you can eat/flat rate" + "slow network speeds" = workable
"All you can eat/flate rate" + "very fast broadband speeds" = not a sustainable business model.
--
"Believe only half of what you see and nothing that you hear." - Dinah Craik | |
|
| | | |  danclan
join:2005-11-01
Midlothian, VA
1 edit | Re: Jump ship said by telcolackey5:"All you can eat/flat rate" + "slow network speeds" = workable "All you can eat/flate rate" + "very fast broadband speeds" = not a sustainable business model. I disagree on so many levels here. The market will dictate what you as ISP need to provide in order to deliver the content the customer is now craving and demanding. You will charge accordingly to accommodate the market to provide the speeds that your customers are willing to pay for. If joe wants unlimited then charge him more. Its that simple. You can then build out and accommodate your customers needs and demands and willingness to pay for.
If you don't or won't deliver then your customers will leave the instant an alternative arrives.
Verizon does charge more and they have no cap and have stated so far that they have no need to place one.
There is no "tipping" point here. Only an unwillingness of incumbents to change the way they think of their capital investments in their networks. | |
|
| | | | | CorydonCultivant son jardinPremium
join:2008-02-18
Denver, CO | Re: Jump ship said by danclan:Verizon does charge more and they have no cap and have stated so far that they have no need to place one. There is no "tipping" point here. Only an unwillingness of incumbents to change the way they think of their capital investments in their networks. We already see routine crying about Comcast and other cable TV providers constantly raising their rates.
I think this is a way for them to hold the line on increases in what they charge for their HSI service while still providing service that's at least as good as it is now to most customers.
Frankly, there are an awful lot of people around here who want faster speeds, lower latency, no caps on a pipe they can fill 24/7 (with "free" [i.e. copyright violating] content) and lower prices. They are going to whine and cry until they get everything they want at no cost to them. So let 'em whine.
The only thing that troubles me about Comcast's new network management techniques is that the cap isn't set in stone. I personally believe that they should be absolutely clear about what constitutes abuse of the network. If the limit is going to be close to 250 GB as has been mentioned elsewhere on this site, that strikes me as a limit that's more than fair in today's environment.
--
My opinions are my own. No-one else would want them! | |
|
| | | | | | Reviews:
·Comcast
| Re: Jump ship While it may be fair for today , will it be fair tomorrow as well ?
What happens when youtube goes hi def ? how about amazon unbox ? if it goes hi def ? Will they change the bandwidth rules to go with tech ? Or will they just start wacking away at our pockets and hit us overages to control their stake in the content market ?
--
"It's always funny until someone gets hurt......and then it's absolutely friggin' hysterical!" | |
|
| | | | | | |  KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
·AT&T DSL Service
| Re: Jump ship said by BosstonesOwn:Will they change the bandwidth rules to go with tech ? Or will they just start wacking away at our pockets and hit us overages to control their stake in the content market ? I'll give you two guesses. Pick one:
1) Yes, and Yes....
2) Definitely and you bet.
--
"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!) | |
|
| | | | | | | | I just rented and downloaded a 1.5 GB ITunes movie, I guess I and everyone else is a pirate! STFU wannabe pirate!!!! | |
|
| | | | | | DSL remains an all you can eat option in most markets. It didn't start out that way but when cable came along, they changed their attitudes and reversed course. Now with cable doing this, DSL might see a large increase in customers. I know if I ever had this done on my ISP and enforced, I'd go elsewhere. It would be the principle versus the fact I probably wouldn't break the cap. Consider this point. Someone is breaking into houses in your area and stealing things. Crime is getting worse by the day. No one is able to stop the trend and you fear you might be next. Do you wait around for it to happen, seeing most of your neighbors have been victims, or decide it's time to move? I think most would pick the course of moving, if the area one resides has gotten bad. Consider this analogy the same for cable. It's just a matter of time before they screw everyone some way or another. It's best to pick up your chips and go somewhere else. It sets the example that until said problems are fixed, you no longer want to be in that part of town. | |
|
| | | | |  ptrowskiGot Helix?Premium
join:2005-03-14
Putnam, CT
kudos:4
 ·VOIPo
| Re: Jump ship One of the uber Comcast fans here loves to harass people about my slow DSL speeds. (5mb down/656 up)
But I am not throttled, I am not being blocked by Sandvine, and I don't have any caps.
My connection may be slower, but I am free to use it as I wish.
--
"A religious war is like children fighting over who has the strongest imaginary friend."
Have you been touched by his noodly appendage? »www.venganza.org | |
|
| | | | | |  caffeinatorComing soon to a cup near you..Premium
join:2005-01-16
WA, USA
kudos:3
·CenturyLink
| Re: Jump ship Amen.
I have $48/mo. ADSL thats currently trained at 7168/800 and I've used at least 3Gb's this month alone. No calls, no letters. Never.
A lot? Not when you have 3 computers on 24/7. (And no, I don't use P2P)
Plus, my local ISP actually knows me by name and has since V.90 came out. 
-CaFF | |
|
| | | | funchordsHelloPremium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA
kudos:5 | said by telcolackey5:Speeds have increased more in the past few years than in the history of broadband. I don't think that's true. It's followed a very Moore's Law behavior.
said by telcolackey5:Sorry to say this, but if you really do the economics around it, the path is inevitable. "All you can eat/flat rate" + "slow network speeds" = workable "All you can eat/flat rate" + "very fast broadband speeds" = not a sustainable business model. Why? What has really changed?
The problem is with Cable.
"All you can eat OF A DOCSIS 1.1 BANDWIDTH POOL/flat rate" + "slow network speeds" = workable
"All you can eat OF A DOCSIS 1.1 BANDWIDTH POOL/flat rate" + "very fast broadband speeds" = not a sustainable business model
And yet, look what happened this week -- Comcast announced it is increasing its 6 Mbps/384 Kbps plan to 6 Mbps/1 Mbps and it's 8 Mbps/768 Kbps plan to 8 Mbps/2 Mbps -- most likely in FIOS areas first.
That's a stupid idea -- they're already bandwidth constrained, so why are they doing that?
We're seeing this for exactly one reason: TelCo competition. FIOS is not crying "not a sustainable business model." DSL's much larger and more flexible bandwidth pool is aggregated for thousands of customers (as opposed to a few hundred with a shared pool that has hardly increased in 5+ years at most Cable MSOs).
Don't get me wrong -- I'm looking forward to DOCSIS 3, but it still does nothing for the upload side currently.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
HTTP is the new Bandwidth Hog...
| |
|
| | | | |  dvd536as Mr. Pink as they comePremium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:4 | Re: Jump ship 2mbps upload will probably *ONLY* be in fios areas. | |
|
| | | | | | espaethDigital PlumberPremium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Clear Wireless
| Re: Jump ship said by dvd536:2mbps upload will probably *ONLY* be in fios areas. It will be in all areas with DOCSIS 3.0 CMTS hardware for users that have DOCSIS 2.0 capable modems.
In other words, the overwhelming majority of their network. | |
|
| | | | | espaethDigital PlumberPremium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Clear Wireless
| said by funchords:And yet, look what happened this week -- Comcast announced it is increasing its 6 Mbps/384 Kbps plan to 6 Mbps/1 Mbps and it's 8 Mbps/768 Kbps plan to 8 Mbps/2 Mbps -- most likely in FIOS areas first. That's a stupid idea -- they're already bandwidth constrained, so why are they doing that? When they upgrade the CMTS to 3.0 cards they can implement DOCSIS 2.0 upstream channels for free. DOCSIS 1.1 = 9mbps up DOCSIS 2.0 = 27mbps up (3x increase)
384 x 3 = 1152
768 x 3 = 2304
For the folks uploading photos to photobucket or flickr, uploading videos to youtube, or uploading other fixed content (ie, non-P2P/non-streaming) this gets them off the upstream channel 3 times faster. | |
|
| | | |
| cacoPremium
join:2005-03-10
Whittier, AK
1 edit | said by ztmike:Looks like I might be jumping the titanic ship. I don't like the idea that I have to wait to send something that IM PAYING FOR to use. Edit: And the caps..well they just put a bad taste in my mouth that makes me want to vomit. Espically when Comcast wants Docsis 3 speeds. Did you miss "only for those customers who are using more than their fair share of available Internet resources at the time. The network management technique manages those customers' Internet traffic until their usage falls below established bandwidth usage thresholds or until network congestion ends." ? | |
|
| |
See 27 replies to this post |
| | Beginning of The End The internet I knew and used prior to 2007/2008 is approaching a rapid death. | |
|
| telcolackey5The Truth? You can't handle the truth
join:2007-04-06
Death Valley, CA | Re: Beginning of The End I think the sky is falling too  | |
|
| dvd536as Mr. Pink as they comePremium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:4 | said by karpodiem:The internet I knew and used prior to 2007/2008 is approaching a rapid death. YEP! its just all a big cash grab now!
--
When I gez aju zavateh na nalechoo more new yonooz tonigh molinigh - Ken Lee | |
|
| | lies and BS hey guess what, I'm a comcast user and I have NEVER experienced my BT traffic or anything else being squeezed or manhandled. | |
|
| | |  Re: lies and BS
Am trying a friends rogers super expensive connection and it is super slow in comparison! | |
|
| | No one owns the internet One day, those who don't already know it will realise that no one owns the internet and that trying to will only lead to ones demise. | |
|
 FLengineerCCNA, CEH, MCSAPremium
join:2007-06-26
Leesburg, FL
·T-Mobile US
·Bright House
1 edit | Verizon FiOS Lets get one thing out in the open about Verizon FiOS and no caps.
Verizon FiOS has no where near the number of subscribers that Comcast and TWC have. They don't have a congestion problem... YET. They will and they will cap or increase prices. Verizon is no different from Comcast except that they haven't reached the point of congestion yet. Remember Comcast advertizing "Faster than DSL" they got the subscribers now they have a congested network. Now Verizon is claiming "Faster than Cable" They will get the subscribers and they will get the congested network and caps will be the first thing we hear about it.
So the ONLY reason Verizon FiOS is not capped is because they don't have the subscribers to warrant caps yet, They will. | |
|
|
See 36 replies to this post |
|
| | New my a$$ I live in the south florida area and have been experiencing delays on sites like pandora.com and last.fm for the past few weeks and I'm not a heavy user. If they keep messing with people's service they'll start losing customers like bellsouth did for not keeping up with customer needs. | |
|
| | Cap given I only have a 60gb cap on mine a 250gb cap would a a Godsend. How much are up downloading if you are burn thought that. Do you really have that much time on your hands | |
|
| | great so if iam compared to all the old ladies in the neighborhood, checking my email daily will cap my downloads because i am a bandwidth hog..
--
»www.thereligionofpeace.com/ | |
|
systems2000What? You Say It's Fixed. Hah
join:2001-11-29
Cyberspace | Chambersburg, PA I live in Chambersburg, PA and dumped Comcast back when they increased the price of their services twice within a Year. I already had lousy service.
Chambersburg is the County Seat for Franklin County and pretty much at the end of Comcast's Cumberland Valley leg, serving a town of under 18,000 people. There are about five end-points from Chambersburg. Fayetteville, Fort Loudon, Greencastle, Mercersburg, and Waynesboro.
It is a very rural County with a large population of DirecTV and Dish subscribers. There is also a very large number of Satellite Broadband subscribers within the County.
Chambersburg is also served by several dial-up providers, at least one local wireless broadband provider, and Embarq with at least 10MB xDSL service.
--
Personal Theme Song:
RUSH - Mystic Rythms from Power Windows.
Rush Radio Website | |
|
| | Or... Comcast hopes to piss off their customer base, open the door to lots of lawsuits, and alienate any loyal people who still cared for the service. But hell, what do I know? I'm thinking way too rationale here. After all, packet shaping and interrupting traffic turns Comcast from a dump pipe to the police. Now Comcast is liable when customers do something illegal. A customer can argue they thought Comcast's new monitoring system would prevent them from downloading anything illegal or would better protect their kids. Now if the customer faces lawsuits, they can use Comcast as a shield of liability. | |
|
|
See 16 replies to this post |
|
drugrep--
join:2000-08-10
Woodridge, IL | Why go backwards? Going from unlimited to a capped system is going backwards. All the cell phone companies now are offering unlimited plans.
Comcast is my best internet option where I'm at, but I will drop it for SBC if they go to capped system.
--
If the firmware wasn't broke, there wouldn't be an update for it! | |
|
| ztmikeMark for moderationPremium
join:2001-08-02
Michigan City, IN | Re: Why go backwards? said by drugrep:Going from unlimited to a capped system is going backwards. All the cell phone companies now are offering unlimited plans. Comcast is my best internet option where I'm at, but I will drop it for SBC if they go to capped system. They never been unlimited..just that some places (I'm guessing don't have alot of people on the system at once) but now it will be enforced. Right now it just goes by node/headend traffic, you cause problems for other users or they noticed alot of traffic for one customer..they'll cut you off.
I have 2 other options for highspeed internet 1.) Atat dsl 2.) Csinet.net
--
www.youtube.com/watch?v=mdYueIC1pjM | |
|
|  bencPremium
join:2007-06-17
Glen Carbon, IL
·Charter
| said by drugrep:Going from unlimited to a capped system is going backwards. All the cell phone companies now are offering unlimited plans. Comcast is my best internet option where I'm at, but I will drop it for SBC if they go to capped system. I agree. When I was little, I remember that my parents had to pay extra for long distance calls. This was the case even when the call was domestic, when my father sometimes called his mother in CA (we were, and I still am in IL). My mother didn't even call her relatives in other countries.
Nowadays, I have the unlimited domestic long distance on my home phone. And boy am I thankful, as I live nearly three hours away from my parents.
If it weren't for that long distance option, I don't want to think how much money I would be paying to AT&T each month.
I can even call my uncle in New Zealand, and not cringe when I get the bill (though international calls are of course still per-minute).
Going to caps would bring me back to the horrible days when dial-up access was charged by the hour.
I just hope Charter doesn't do this soon if ever, at least on their Business plans. Though I plan to move very soon, my current choices are Charter Residential and Charter Business (so basically no choice). | |
|
kaila
join:2000-10-11
Lincolnshire, IL | Just what does 'using more than their share'..... mean exactly?!? It sounds just as shady as the invisible caps (yes I understand they're moving away from this). And with the mention of 'network congestion' does this mean 'using more than their share' will be a widely variable term depending upon how well things are provisioned locally?
VoIP, for starters, is going to be impossible under these conditions. | |
|
|
See 6 replies to this post |
|
 knightmbEverybody Lies
join:2003-12-01
Franklin, TN | Fixed part of the summary quote:
Comcast's existing system uses forged TCP packets to disrupt BitTorrent communication for all users, 24/7, regardless of consumption.
I think that should be all *residential* customers, because as far as I know, the Business customers are still getting the "all you can eat" with must fewer restrictions.
--
Fight NebuAD and the like:
Click Here to pollute their data | |
|
| bencPremium
join:2007-06-17
Glen Carbon, IL Reviews:
·Charter
| Re: Fixed part of the summary said by knightmb: quote:
Comcast's existing system uses forged TCP packets to disrupt BitTorrent communication for all users, 24/7, regardless of consumption.
I think that should be all *residential* customers, because as far as I know, the Business customers are still getting the "all you can eat" with must fewer restrictions. I would certainly hope so. That is, if I'm ever unfortunate enough to end up living where the choices are Comcast Residential or Comcast Business (or no choice).
Of course, they'd probably take advantage of the situation. | |
|
 MattAll noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 |  No problem
1) The caps are REASONABLE. 5GB (TW) is not, 250GB is.
2) Fair overage charges. $1/GB is not fair but makes for an easy number to digest. $.50/GB is closer to a nice profit margin yet still fair to consumers.
3) The caps are reviewed and increased each year. If they are using the excuse that it will allow them to expand and improve infrastructure, let's see some of that in the form of a higher cap yearly. They can just tack it on to their yearly price increases. They've been good about speed increases, so I think this is realistic.
4) Offer some sort of unlimited option ... even if it's business class.
While I think this is a massive move backwards and nothing more than an attempt to appease stockholders and nip IPTV and IP VoD in the bud, if implemented fairly it will impact a minimal numbers of users.
I do not agree in any way shape or form with ISP level caching. We've been down that road with the early MSO proxies ... we all remember what a disaster that was. | |
|
| | but what about? i understand their point of view but what about appletv netflix etc... streamers
they tell ya on stream this and that video music etc... but then there comes hd movie streaming helo limits going fast | |
|
| | throttling oay attention to the talk going on in the teksavvy forum on throttling in Canada. The biggest telco is being called up to justify the throttling | |
|
| |  noooooooooooooo
| |
|
| | speeds i am thinking that the deployment of the DOCSIS3 is probably in the Verizon 20/20 areas in a lame attempt to get a piece of the pie. i know who i would pick in that situation and it sure isnt Comcrap. | |
|
 CheesePremium
join:2003-10-26
Naples, FL
kudos:1 | So.... With this way starting to be implemented, will this lower prices for people who use less? I seriously doubt it, as the greed will not allow for it, but one can hope right? | |
|
|  tshirtPremium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:3
·Comcast
| Re: So.... said by Cheese:With this way starting to be implemented, will this lower prices for people who use less? I seriously doubt it, as the greed will not allow for it, but one can hope right? No this is probably to avoid an across the board INCREASE, to further subsidize the high end abusers (that 0.1 or 0.01% group, depending on which press release you read ) | |
|
| | Torrent I have slowskis 10mb service. The past few weeks I have had bitorrent downloading (using about 15% of my bandwidth) while playing Warcraft and latency gets bad sometimes. I shut down bittorent and restart the game and everything runs smooth again. Also happens while viewing the web/youtube. Lag lag lag.
they must be testing it in other places but of course, they won't tell you | |
|
|
|
