Sturm
@alconlabs.com
1 edit | reply to funchords
Re: Comcast Bandwidth Abuse/Limits - Discuss here only
Most things video related available today are large. Development of these technologies is focused on good resolution first and a low quality, restrictions full ISP's a la Comcast are of secondary concern to the content providers. It is expected that customers would have good quality broadband, not the sub par "Comcastic experience".
When a content provider offers ~ 5000 near DVD quality wmv or avi movies, they are customer focused. Our favourite ISP could learn a thing or two about that stance.
Other cable providers that are customer oriented (as Entouch is) have expressly stated in letters sent to their customers that they do NOT cap transfers. I wonder how they can support their customers properly and Comcast can't.
If there is interest, I will get a copy of that letter and post it. |
|
funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Washington, DC | Hopefully you don't think I'm a Comcast shill. I was just asking whether or not the size of these movies would be large enough to push people over the limit. I definitely share your point of view. |
|
JSRoman
Premium
join:2005-03-10
Callahan, FL
3 edits | reply to Sturm
Entouch has less than 12000 subs if even that many and only provides services in planned communities.
Not really a fair comparison is it? |
|
espaeth
Digital Plumber
Premium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
 ·voip.ms
·Vitelity VOIP
·Callcentric
·VoiceStick
·ViaTalk
 ·Comcast
 ·Embarq
| reply to ztmike
said by ztmike  :Well, it looks like people on cable are going to be screwed.. At $5.99/pop how many movies are people really going to be grabbing? |
|
Sturm
@alconlabs.com
2 edits | reply to funchords
said by funchords :Hopefully you don't think I'm a Comcast shill. I was just asking whether or not the size of these movies would be large enough to push people over the limit. I definitely share your point of view. Apologies if I gave that impression, no, I do not think you are a shill. I believe actually what will happen is that the provider's stance will change as more and more people start to either come close to the limit as go over it. More will be booted off, but eventually the customer backlash will correct the situation.
The size will be probably in the 1-1.5 GB, but as the demand/usage ramps up and more choices become available, I am sure more and more people will get hit by the "policy".
Mod Note:
Apologies if I gave that impression, no, I do not think you are a shill. Good. Now, going forward, please keep such negative comments (moderated out of your post above) out of the discussion. ~sorto' |
|
Sturm
@alconlabs.com
1 edit | reply to JSRoman
said by JSRoman :Entouch has less than 12000 subs if even that many and only provides services in planned communities. Not really a fair comparison is it? It is a fair comparison. A large provider should be able to leverage economies of scale to provide service on the same level as a smaller provider. Does the "policy" apply only in not "planned cummunities" ?
Please answer the original question if you have a better answer, hopefully backed up with facts.
Thanks. |
|
JSRoman
Premium
join:2005-03-10
Callahan, FL
1 edit | said by Sturm :said by JSRoman :Entouch has less than 12000 subs if even that many and only provides services in planned communities. Not really a fair comparison is it? It is a fair comparison. A large provider should be able to leverage economies of scale to provide service on the same level as a smaller provider. Does the "policy" apply only in not "planned cummunities" ? Please answer the original question if you have a better answer, hopefully backed up with facts. Thanks. You are making the assumption that most people have problems with Comcast when the fact is that must people have no problems whatsoever. You are the exception not the rule.
--
»www.seabee.navy.mil |
|
anony101
@comcast.net
1 edit |
"You are making the assumption that most people have problems with Comcast when the fact is that must people have no problems whatsoever. You are the exception not the rule."Do some research in internet video streaming trends and you'll realize that it's growing very fast. So fast that in 1 or 2 years from now Grandma's across the country may start getting warning letters for bandwidth abuse unless Comcast and other cable ISP find a solution. |
|
MrJames
join:2003-05-19
Jacksonville, FL
·Comcast
| reply to funchords
said by funchords :Hopefully you don't think I'm a Comcast shill. I was just asking whether or not the size of these movies would be large enough to push people over the limit. I definitely share your point of view. The Xbox service launched some time ago. HD rentals are 5-7GB that I have seen. The new PS3 service is about 1-2GB for SD and I believe one of the HD rentals was around 8GB. You can also stream previews for every movie on both services. I'd be much more concerned if I was a Time Warner customer with a 40GB cap. |
|
Cabal
Premium
join:2007-01-21
Boston, MA
1 edit | reply to anony101
said by anony101 :
Do some research in internet video streaming trends and you'll realize that it's growing very fast. So fast that in 1 or 2 years from now Grandma's across the country may start getting warning letters for bandwidth abuse unless Comcast and other cable ISP find a solution.
Grandma downloading videos will not put her in the top 0.01% that Comcast targets for abuse. If she's at the bottom of the bandwidth users now, she'll still be at the bottom of the list when everyone is streaming shows.
--
Interested in open source engine management for your Subaru? |
|
Sturm
@alconlabs.com
1 edit | said by Cabal :said by anony101 :
Do some research in internet video streaming trends and you'll realize that it's growing very fast. So fast that in 1 or 2 years from now Grandma's across the country may start getting warning letters for bandwidth abuse unless Comcast and other cable ISP find a solution.
Grandma downloading videos will not put her in the top 0.01% that Comcast targets for abuse. If she's at the bottom of the bandwidth users now, she'll still be at the bottom of the list when everyone is streaming shows. Incorrect. If the rolling cap model remains, by then most of the "abusers" will be gone due to the process of elimination to other services and then Grandma will be suddenly a top "abuser" since percentage wise she will be near the top. |
|
anony101
@comcast.net
| reply to Cabal
"Grandma downloading videos will not put her in the top 0.01% that Comcast targets for abuse. If she's at the bottom of the bandwidth users now, she'll still be at the bottom of the list when everyone is streaming shows."
Let’s put it differently. As of now how many simultaneous 8GB HD movies can be viewed online on the Comcast network nationwide? In 2 years take that number and multiply by 50. When the Comcast network is brought down to a crawl what will Comcast do?
The reality is that the internet backbone as is is not ready for that amount of data transfer. The other reality is that to get ready will cost a tremendous amount of money which does not justify the current pricing model. So again, what are Comcast’s plans for the near future? |
|
espaeth
Digital Plumber
Premium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
·voip.ms
·Vitelity VOIP
·Callcentric
·VoiceStick
·ViaTalk
·Comcast
·Embarq
| reply to Sturm
said by Sturm :
If the rolling cap model remains, by then most of the "abusers" will be gone due to the process of elimination to other services and then Grandma will be suddenly a top "abuser" since percentage wise she will be near the top. You're forgetting that Comcast is still signing up new subscribers all the time. Even if Comcast only grows their subscriber base by 0.5% each year, they're still net positive on subs compared to those they dropped for abuse.
Cabal was right, if grandma was an ultra-light user before, at worst she's going to move up to the middle of the pack. |
|
Sturm
@comcast.net | A lot of people are also LEAVING Comcast due to poor reliability and support and FiOS penetration of the market. I am not sure that they are growing their customer base. |
|
funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Washington, DC
·Verizon Online DSL
·Skype
| That's kinda too bad, because Cable is especially well suited for an download-centric application like this Xbox one.
I never really did understand the download caps. The only bandwidth it affects is the cheapest kind to get. It's the upload side that really hurts Cable ISPs. |
|
Sturm
@comcast.net
| said by funchords :That's kinda too bad, because Cable is especially well suited for an download-centric application like this Xbox one. I never really did understand the download caps. The only bandwidth it affects is the cheapest kind to get. It's the upload side that really hurts Cable ISPs. You are right, but after a limit their network topology gets saturated node wise and they also do not like the conflict of interest with the video content that one can purchase elsewhere instead of them (in their mind, since really they cannot match the price and variety of the third party providers). |
|
NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| reply to Sturm
said by Sturm :
Incorrect. If the rolling cap model remains, by then most of the "abusers" will be gone due to the process of elimination to other services and then Grandma will be suddenly a top "abuser" since percentage wise she will be near the top.
Logical fallacy: Reductio ad absurdum, or something like it. Assumes Comcast will keep cutting customers until none are left. Only until the stress on the bandwidth is relieved.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum |
|
goody 101
@comcast.net
| reply to Sturm
said by Sturm :said by funchords :That's kinda too bad, because Cable is especially well suited for an download-centric application like this Xbox one. I never really did understand the download caps. The only bandwidth it affects is the cheapest kind to get. It's the upload side that really hurts Cable ISPs. You are right, but after a limit their network topology gets saturated node wise and they also do not like the conflict of interest with the video content that one can purchase elsewhere instead of them (in their mind, since really they cannot match the price and variety of the third party providers). That's presumptuous on your part. You really don't know much about their network systems or what they are thinking in regards to video content. Your arguments are completely warped by your own personal experience, not reality. |
|
anony101
@comcast.net
| reply to sortofageek
»Amazon Unveils Beta Video On Demand
Yet another video service and not just from anyone. We're talking Amazon here. All these companies: AOL, Amazon, Microsoft, Yahoo, Hulu and so on either already offer HD or are about to offer it by the end of the year.
The question still stands: How will Comcast handle an increase from the current 0.01% to 50% or even 70%?
AOL used to think that all people would ever need is dialup. Look at them now. Some people never learn from the past experience of others. |
|
Sturm
@comcast.net
| reply to NormanS
said by NormanS :said by Sturm :
Incorrect. If the rolling cap model remains, by then most of the "abusers" will be gone due to the process of elimination to other services and then Grandma will be suddenly a top "abuser" since percentage wise she will be near the top.
Logical fallacy: Reductio ad absurdum, or something like it. Assumes Comcast will keep cutting customers until none are left. Only until the stress on the bandwidth is relieved. Assumes CC will keep cutting customers to keep the network load at current low levels since they are not planning to invest in infrastructure to meet demand or, in rare cases they do, the same cap/calls remain. Then, if Grandma does the same level download as I did, she will get a call. |
|
