how-to block ads
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·Comcast
| Re: Comcasts position on this sounds pretty clear to me 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.
--
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page | |
|  
Boogeyman
Drive it like you stole it
Premium
join:2002-12-17
Huntsville, AL
| Re: Comcasts position on this sounds pretty clear to me So what about the bt users that only use about 50gb, or 25, or hell, even 10 a month? Should they be punished too because there are others that use it in excess?
I barely use 20gb a mo total, so why am I having to subsidize YOUR heavy usage? (In response to RR, not TCH) | |
| | 
Rick
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-06
Waterbury, CT
clubs: 
| Re: Comcasts position on this sounds pretty clear to me said by Boogeyman  :So what about the bt users that only use about 50gb, or 25, or hell, even 10 a month? Should they be punished too because there are others that use it in excess? I barely use 20gb a mo total, so why am I having to subsidize YOUR heavy usage? (In response to RR, not TCH) 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.
--
The Coyote captured the RR! Roadrunner Rick is now Comcastic! | |
| | |
Boogeyman
Drive it like you stole it
Premium
join:2002-12-17
Huntsville, AL
1 edit | Re: Comcasts position on this sounds pretty clear to me That may very well be true, but if they ARE throttling it for the people who use it 24/7 (Which a lot of users say they are getting throttled) why cant they just come out and say "Certain users that are making excessive use of the BT protocol and saturating our nodes have had said traffic throttled for the good of the rest of the node."
I know I am not an excessive bandwidth user most of the time, and I agree that 200gb EVERY month is excessive, there are times when using that amount is reasonable. I mean hell, I pay for 6/768 and usually only use 2/256, but I dont want to be told that I cant max my connection for a few hours here and there because they want to sell everyone on my block 6/768, but we can only use half of it before it starts to affect others and they decide to cut me off. (After a reformat/new computer, I use about 200gb a mo due to updates and having to download and install all the free/shareware I use, and I usually try out a bunch of new ones to see if I like them better, and then for games distributed digitally, like all my Steam games, I just download through Steam instead of trying to find disks and then having to patch what I installed off of the disk.)
*EDIT*
First paragraph edited because it made no sense. | |
| | | |
Rick
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-06
Waterbury, CT
clubs:
| Re: Comcasts position on this sounds pretty clear to me Again, I think if you carefully read their statement..you'll see they've said ever way they can..that they are NOT impacting people like you and I.
They ARE managing their network however from abusers for OUR benefit.
Frankly, it would be just plain dumb for them to come out and say exactly what it is they are doing as it relates to THOSE people. Because all THOSE people will do is then use THAT information to work around the issue.
And so, they say it this way.
I really think you have to ask yourself..would someone at THAT level of the company be directing their entire call center staff to tell everyone something that simply isn't true?
That would be just plain dumb.
I think what this all boils down to is you..I..and every person who reasonably uses this service..and who even uses it quite heavily..has nothing to worry about.
And..people who start hitting these outrageous levels that impact us all..have plenty to worry about.
Isn't this what we want..as customers of theirs..looking for a good internet experience?
I sure do. I want them policing the service to make sure we are not impacted by abusers and those who apparently feel that everything in this world should be free.
Remember too..that many of these people have a choice.
They can also upgrade to business level connections.
Or..split their usage among providers.
Comcasts "caps"..are not restrictive for the majority of people. 300 gigs and more is a TON of data.
And, these speeds would cost us thousands per month if we had to buy these pipes ourselves.
It seriously is time for those of us who are not impacted by this..but yet who are paying the price everyday..to stand up to this very small minority and say..it's time they shaped up their acts.
And, it's time for us to support Comcast and their efforts to keep this a great service for the vast majority of us.
--
The Coyote captured the RR! Roadrunner Rick is now Comcastic! | |
| | | | | 
james
join:2001-02-26
antarctica
| Re: Comcasts position on this sounds pretty clear to me Look, if they can't afford to supply the high speeds of their competitors without overloading their network then perhaps they need to either UPGRADE THEIR NETWORK or STOP OFFERING WHAT THEY CAN'T PROVIDE. If they want to cap connections then they should advertise their cap, it's like a hard drive manufacturer who advertises 10000 rpm drives for sale but doesnt tell you how many Gigs it is because they KNOW that it's way lower than their competitors and no one would buy it. | |
| | | | |
Boogeyman
Drive it like you stole it
Premium
join:2002-12-17
Huntsville, AL
| I agree that they should be doing something, but I disagree that they are smart enough to tell the truth.
Look at how they liad about the caps at first, then they changed thier story when users started posting the letters stating they were getting capped. Should they have been capped/cut off for excessive use? Yessir. But the company SHOULD have said, yup, we cut off service to the network abusers.
And should they have to say what the limits are? Well, if its a frequently changing number depending on node saturation, then, its reasonable to not expect that number, as long as its a reasonable amount. And yes, I think capping someone at 300gb is reasonable. The MOST I have ever used, was 500gb a month according to D/U meter, and 70% of that was traffic on my home network (I keep most of my media on an older pc because it has more room for HDD's). Now if they want to make a cap of say, 50gb, or 100gb, then they should let us know because a lot of regular users might excede that while normal usage.
I just dont think that the company cares about the customer, its all about company image. If no one notices what they do wrong, they will continue doing it. But when people start noticing it and calling them on it, they do damage control instead of just being up front about it. Its like they are all for screwing the customer untill it affects thier public image. And to me, THATS what is pissing everyone off. | |
| | | | | 
TreeTopFlyer
@sbcglobal.net
| 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?  | |
| | | | |
whatcanisay
@sbcglobal.net
| 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. | |
| | | 
Morac
join:2001-08-30
Riverside, NJ
·Comcast
| 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. I call BS on this. The AP and the EFF have both shown that Comcast has been interfering with BitTorrent and even Lotus Notes traffic. I highly doubt the AP and EFF reporters were flagged for excessive use.
I've seen the problem myself and the only thing I use BT for is to download World of Warcraft patches.
Yes Comcast doesn't block downloads via BitTorrent, what they are doing is messing with the uploads and only if the other person is not a Comcast user. Since BT is designed to limit download speeds if the user doesn't upload, it in effect hampers downloads.
A good analogy is if you are talking to someone on the phone and suddenly you hear the other person on the line say "Goodbye" and hang up and they hear you say "Goodbye" and hangup when neither of you did such a thing. If one of you calls back about a minute later the same thing happens again. So technically, if you knew what was happening, you could carry on a conversation by keep calling every time you got disconnected, but since the other person said "Goodbye" you might just assume they don't want to talk anymore and not call back. This is what Comcast is doing with BitTorrent and other types of traffic; faking the "Goodbyes".
--
The Comcast Disney Avatar has been retired. | |
| | | tdumaine
join:2004-03-14
Redmond, WA
·Comcast
| 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. | |
| competence
join:2004-11-24
123456
| said by TKJunkMail :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! | |
| | three6ohchri
join:2004-04-14
Portland, OR
2 edits | Re: Comcasts position on this sounds pretty clear to me 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. | |
| | | |
|
