Lazlow
join:2006-08-07
Saint Louis, MO | Wait a minute: From the new TOS letter:
"In the updated AUP, we clarify that monthly data (or bandwidth) usage of more than 250 Gigabytes (GB) is the specific threshold that defines excessive use of our service. We have an excessive use policy because a fraction of one percent of our customers use such a disproportionate amount of bandwidth every month that they may degrade the online experience of other customers."
OK, with the new throttling technique how can anyone's "excessive" use effect other users? I have been saying all along that monthly caps do not help the congestion problem. If an individual is downloading just during off hours (say 11pm to 8am) he can easily exceed the 250mb cap (even on 5meg speeds) without causing congestion during peek hours (say 4pm to 11pm). Now without the fap (throttling) a individual could be doing downloads during high traffic times and cause a problem. If that same individual is doing the majority of his downloads only during peak usage times (without fap) he could easily cause issues and stay well below the 250 cap. So contrary to what this new TOS is saying, monthly usage caps do NOT effect the congestion on the network and should be dropped. | |
|
 | | Re: Wait a minute: The cap in my opinion is targeted toward competing video on demand services that threaten CC's revenue. The "congestion" argument has been shown to be false, since CC has been terminating heavy users regardless of congestion complaints or not. The top 1000 heaviest users will be disconnected.
--
Obama '08. Will help resolve the terrible broadband issues we have that put us so far behind other countries. | |
|
 | | | Re: Wait a minute: Sturmvogel is EXACTLY right. Comcast does NOT want to compete with free online video. It eats into their business. This is not about network management, speeds, congestion or any of that. Its simply about people who live on mininova, HDbits and other content distributors that offer FREE quality content to people willing to download it. Not only that, as we all know, the downloads are free. It does hurt Comcast's video business. | |
|
| | | | Re: Wait a minute: said by anondude924 :
Sturmvogel is EXACTLY right. Comcast does NOT want to compete with free online video. It eats into their business. This is not about network management, speeds, congestion or any of that. Its simply about people who live on mininova, HDbits and other content distributors that offer FREE quality content to people willing to download it. Not only that, as we all know, the downloads are free. It does hurt Comcast's video business.
Not only with the free, but also with the PAID. I pay for my video on demand that is totally LEGAL, FTP transmission.
--
Obama '08. Will help resolve the terrible broadband issues we have that put us so far behind other countries. | |
|
| | |  dadkinsCan you do Blu?Premium,MVM
join:2003-09-26
Hercules, CA
kudos:18 | Re: Wait a minute: You blew through how many GB in a month friend? 400? 600? More?
Legit or not is besides the point, it was the sheer volume you consumed. You got booted.
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera | |
|
| | | | Lazlow
join:2006-08-07
Saint Louis, MO | Re: Wait a minute: Dadkins
If they would admit the reason they are capping is to prevent video competition it would be one thing but they are not. Per their new TOS they are trying to claim that bandwidth "hogs" are/will be causing congestion even with the throttling. This is simply NOT true. If I am downloading during off peak hours (say 11pm to 8am) I can easily exceed the cap (with just a 5 meg connection) without causing any "peak time" congestion (even before the throttling). So how am I causing congestion by downloading more than the cap with the throttling being added in? The answer is that I am not. | |
|
| | | | | | | Re: Wait a minute: Uhh, it is exactly because Comcast doesn't want free online video eating into their video business. I am a Comcast employee who wants anonymity on this subject. Comcast is working hard to manage capacity and keep the network running at full speed. They just don't want to lose money to free online video. Can you blame them? | |
|
| | | | | | Lazlow
join:2006-08-07
Saint Louis, MO | Re: Wait a minute: TechnoScott
I have less of a problem with them doing it for that reason than I do about them not telling the truth about why they are doing it. Just tell the truth. | |
|
|
|
