| reply to qworster
Re: Yeah-on speedtests you do! said by qworster:I get speed tests that show I'm getting 10 mB downloads, yet half the time, web pages load slowly. And how is slow loading web pages Comcast's problem? Web pages load slowly because the web servers are set to limit how fast they provide pages so that they can serve thousands of customers concurrently. Send your complaints to the content providers where they belong.
--
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page |
|
| reply to Rick
Re: Comcasts position on this sounds pretty clear to me said by Rick:And so, they say it this way. So . . . IF they ARE doing traffic shaping and saying they aren't, then you have no problem being lied to?  |
|
|
|
| reply to Rick
said by Rick:And, these speeds would cost us thousands per month if we had to buy these pipes ourselves. Yes, Rick, you are 100% correct on this. But please do realize that, at least in the context of this post, you are only correct in a world where Comcast is the only choice. Of course there are other situations...
However... if you live in an area in the US where you can get ILEC DSL (and Covad still before they get bought out - if they do) you have that kind of connectivity without thousand-dollar pipes; if you live in Japan, South Korea, if you can get Verizon's FTTH... there's no need for thousand-dollar pipes.
Point being, if an ISP sells 6/384 or 20/20 or 50/50 or 100/100 or whatever, that's what's being sold. If a person wants to use it, they use it. That's why they buy it. You either understand that or you don't. If you choose to not use the full capacity of that connection, you're simply not using the full capacity of your connection. You're not subsidizing anyone. An individual should be more than welcome to use the full capacity of the service they have purchased. Yet, however, statistically speaking, 95% of the subscribers choose not to, and that is perfectly fine. The price gets adjusted down, and the bandwidth gets oversold. You're not subsidizing anyone. The primary obligation of the ISP is to deliver that which they advertise. That's not 20/20 .20% of the time. It's 20/20. If the ISP sees that 95% of the subscribers don't use the full capacity, they can go ahead and "overbook", or whatever. If that ratio changes, it's entirely logical that they have an obligation to upgrade to support the new ratio.
There are plenty of situations where you don't need to purchase a thousand-dollar internet connection in order to simply be able to not worry about bandwidth, where you can download and upload terabytes of information and not get cut off -- at residential prices, no less. You buy it, you get to use it. Then again, in those places where this is not the case, you would need to purchase a thousand-dollar internet connection. Many places in Europe, and Eastern Europe, for instance, bill by the byte or megabyte or whatever... so you're only limited by how much money you have (which is the same thing as a thousand-dollar pipe w/o the SLA).
If Comcast is your only choice, then you're stuck with purchasing a thousand-dollar internet connection -- yes, that is 100% true. |
|
 gaforcesUnited We Stand, Divided We Fall
join:2002-04-07
Santa Cruz, CA | reply to Rick
Doublespeak >> »en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublespeak. |
|
| reply to Rick
Your position is cool and all, but it would be nice if these restrictions were noted in their Terms Of Service agreement and were the subject of an online FAQ. It would also be nice if they let their floor agents (sorry, I mean Customer Account Executives) on the phone know that this is going on.
You know what happens when they call and complain? The tech support agents don't know anything about this and end up trying to troubleshoot the problem for a hour before eventually blaming the problem on your computer/router/stupidity. |
|
mworks
join:2006-06-13
Faison, NC
1 edit | reply to Rick
I think a good solution to p2p traffic is for them to throttle based on daily usage patterns not monthly.
So if the connection for a neighborhood is at 100% and of that 100% , 30% is p2p then throttle those connections. If the local traffic drops to 90% usage then give those p2p users back there speed.
I don't think adjusting a persons connection speed on how much they download for a month is the correct way to do it. Instead it needs to be based on how that connection is affecting the area at the time.
I would gladly accept a isp that put qos on connections, something in order like. voip, gaming , web sites, email, p2p
high priority stuff first then the others.
Of course if they could provide 100% of what they sell, this wouldn't even be necessary. |
|
| reply to Rick
said by Rick:As for me, i'll just continue to think that up to 300gigs a month at speeds up to 20 to 30Mb for 42.95 month is one helluva good deal. So the invisible cap is now 300gigs a month? I'd heard of folks getting in trouble for 200gigs. Glad to hear they raised it  |
|
 dvd536as Mr. Pink as they comePremium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:4 | reply to Rick
said by Rick:They're saying they are NOT blocking access to it...NOR are they limiting access to it. As a regular course of business however, they do protect their network from ABUSERS. As well they should. Uhmmmm. Well i guess ANYONE that might download a 10mb ebook on BT would be seen as an abuser by sandvine. sandvine doesn't care whether you're a 3GB/month or 500GB/month user. its an equal opportunity RSTer.
--
You can never be too rich, too thin or have too much Bandwidth |
|
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
said by fAcEtIOUs:For me, I hope they are throttling Bittorrent, because the last thing I want is a couple teenagers flooding my local node non-stop with P2P traffic. That affects my enjoyment of the internet. you sir are an idoit. seems to me your enjoyment of the internet is surfing, where as you wont be using damn near any bandwith, dumb bandwagon hopping slizzut! |
|
| reply to Rick
said by Rick:Comcast is saying they are not blocking NOR limiting your use of the service. I suspect that those who ARE having this problem are the ones who being flagged for overall and excessive usage while people like you and I aren't affected at all. Normally i wouldn't even respond to you rick, but in one breath you contradicted yourself.
Not blocking NOR limiting, but flagging people.....
If comcast was flagging people as such, there goes their privacy talking point. |
|
| reply to Claybraker
said by Claybraker:said by Rick:As for me, i'll just continue to think that up to 300gigs a month at speeds up to 20 to 30Mb for 42.95 month is one helluva good deal. So the invisible cap is now 300gigs a month? I'd heard of folks getting in trouble for 200gigs. Glad to hear they raised it But who really uses that much really? 200/300GB a month just sounds obscene to me. |
|
pgm_01
join:2003-06-16
Preston, CT | reply to Rick
Sorry, but no. It is implemented here already and it effects everyone. I use bittorrent maybe a few times a month and it usually about 1 CD worth of data at a time since I use it to download Kubuntu when it updates and different bootable Linux discs. I do watch TV using Joost and stream CD quality uncompressed music from time to time, but there is no way that I am a bandwidth abuser. I would not mind if the system flagged abusers and booted them off but what is happening is that all BT traffic is being affected regardless of how much bandwidth that user consumes. |
|
| reply to Rick
and BTW. who is to say that comcast isint getting kickbacks or FREE SANDVINE equipment from the RIAA or MPAA to kill bittorrent traffic? since in their eyes bittorrent "has no legal use" and we're all "communist copyright infringers" (just like how alot of big multimillion dollar corporations hate linux (yet they use it in their own networks)) - just my two cents since this looks and smells a whole lot like crap. i'm happy with my ADSL line |
|
2 edits | reply to competence
said by competence: you sir are an idoit. seems to me your enjoyment of the internet is surfing, where as you wont be using damn near any bandwith, dumb bandwagon hopping slizzut!
Hahaha, does anyone else see the irony in this guys statement? Check his name, his spelling, and the word he misspelled. Spell check would have saved you about 20 credibility points there buddy.
Anyway... If Comcast's actions are helping the MAJORITY of it's users than I say hooray. I'm tired of the minority ruling the majority. It happens everywhere else in the world, how about a little change finally. |
|
DoubleKDoublek
join:2003-03-04
Beloit, WI Reviews:
 ·Charter
| reply to Rick
There are quite a few holes in your logic Comcast Rick.
First when they designed their business model everyone subsidizing everyone else was the goal. You seen it with tv and hence why stations like mtv even exist. Sure they are popular among subscribers today but 20 years ago it was crammed down our throats in a package. They are simply trying to carry over their antiquated business model much like the riaa and mpaa attempt to do today.
Secondly, how can you sit there and say that the only way to use up that much bandwidth is by pirating? Possibly in your limited world of computing. In my own and many others that I know we chew up a fair amount ourselves when it comes to gaming. Watching youtube for the latest greatest cheats and their consequences. Have you ever played Americas Army? Did you know that their is an anticheat consortium if you will where just about anyone can peruse a game servers screenshots looking for cheaters? Trust me, if you are dedicated this can chew up alot of bandwidth. It is very enjoyable getting shitties banned 
Lastly, how do I even begin to explain how much bandwidth my three websites chew up if you cannot comprehend my first two examples? My websites are strictly non-commercial. Gaming Websites and a family photo site. I know I should have to purchase a commercial account for my extravagant hobbies right? I would be more than willing to pay more if I could get anything at home faster on the upload side.
Rick, if anything else I hope this helps awaken your mind to other possibilities besides pirating. |
|
gpp6
join:2001-12-15
Elmhurst, IL | reply to Rick
Where do you come up with this stuff, Rick - the Al Gore School of Debate? You say in your post "Folks..i've never had a problem with my comcast connection.", yet you can barely contain your anger at people who use their connections differently than you. How can you say "their use hurts the rest of us" and "i've never had a problem with my comcast connection" in the same breath? Earth to Al...
These people "know no limits" because Comcast won't say what they are. A few years ago, I visited my parents at their retirement community in Arizona. I hated to go at time, because one of the sites I belong to was torrenting all of the Grateful Dead shows from 1970, and their acoustic stuff from spring of that year was some of their best work ever. When I got out there, I found they had cable internet, so I was able to dl a ton of stuff and upload more than that by a factor of three. Wrote it all to dvd and took it home with me. I was jealous. What would be the limit in a community like that, with nothing but geezers for miles around (sorry 'bout that dad...) puttering around in their golf carts and occasionally checking their AOL mail for pictures of the grandkids? Would it be the same as the limit in a community where they have people like you, who 'use it heavily'? No one knows. And you won't find out until you give them your money.
I don't just dl music. I have a u60 here running Solaris 10 8/07 to run my web/mail/ftp servers. I've also been checking out Sun's new (free) compiler which they've been making progress on and one day might even be able to cleanly compile and run the boost libraries. That was a lot of bits to download from Sun. I have Fedora 7 on my wife's computer. Got that from BitTorrent, and unlike most people, I upped as much as I downloaded. Nobody made a profit from any of those downloads.
I don't have a problem with caps. I just want to know what they are so I can make an informed decision. I'm able to live within the parameters of my DSL connection, which I keep pegged about 60% of the time.
Comcast is out to get customers. And in their rush to do so, they seem to be willing to prevaricate. To misdirect, to play up the benefits and remain silent about the rest. And that is a fundamentally dishonest way to do business.
Where is the line between "use it heavily" and ABUSE? It all depends on where you live and who your neighbors are. Give up your corporate toady ways and smell the coffee, man. You could be the next ABUSER. |
|
| reply to Rick
said by Rick:And, I will note..not a single dime more has been charged for all this. So . . . once Comcash gets rid of all the torrent users, they will be dropping prices on internet access? |
|
