Comcast Brings 50Mbps To DC > Competition

reply to iansltx

Re: Competition

While that is undoubtedly true for DSLReports users, most people don't care. Around 1Mbps or 2Mbps, they are completely happy with their upload speed and I would wager a guess to say they are oblivious to it.

If video conferencing or some other upstream dependent application emerges, then FiOS will have the upper hand, but for now, people want inexpensive and companies want to improve their bottom line. Comcast is in a better position to do that.

FWIW, I am a HUGE Verizon fan and I think they made the right decision to go all-fiber now. I just think in the current economic situation, Comcast is better positioned to reap the rewards of lower consumer spending.

Most user don't have a choice
I think they do care but their choice are limited
Why would I go with comcast at 42.95 for 6/1 when I can get 20/20 for 69.99

In my area comcast only offer 6/1 and 8/2
You probably want to laugh too

att formerly sbc is even worse then comcast thought their cheaper you get slower speed, 3.0/512k then 1.5/384k recently
due to stricter speed caps because the technician are playing guessing game called setting speed base on distance. DSL is obsolete, slow and a waste of investment

comcast have no problems kicking a few user off their network because we use more bandwidth
i would have to limit my computer use with comcast or face disconnect. what kind of attitude is that?
as for comcast user, you may as well go to the library frequently to conseve bandwidth for comcast subscriber
It is obvious that comcast network are limited in bandwidth usage, especially the upload. their network capacity is so small that they can't offer similar speed to fios
hence the same limit with 50/10 tier for 99.95 a month
its a scam to make more profits for the investor or insider
not very exciting... its like a faster car but you're only given 10 gallons of gas to drive per month so you can't go any further then those with slower car.

reply to Matt
If it were true that people are happy with their slow upload speeds, then DSL companies wouldn't be hemorrhaging customers to cable. If that were true Verizon wouldn't have bothered spending $23 billion on fiber rollout. DSL can achieve decent download rates, but upload-wise it fails miserably.

reply to jadebangle
Yes, AT&T is abysmal...now combine them with TWC as the two incumbent providers and things can't get much worse (welcome to hell...Dallas, TX metro area and many points to the east).

reply to sonicmerlin

reply to Matt
Comcast won't have the last laugh. Verizon will. It's just that the last laugh may be awhile in coming.

reply to Matt
One word: cloud. Actually two words: cloud computing. When yu get more people wanting to "live in the cloud" upload speed differences will be noticeable. It's all about what applications you want to run over the pipe. Right now there are apps that like more bandwidth than is available over even a DOCSIS 3 cable connection...

reply to sonicmerlin
I don't think that's the issue so much as being "too far out" for decnt DSL speeds, yet paying prices close to those provided by a cable bundle. DSL is actually on the uptick. It's landlines that telcos are losing, and fast. This is because a $33 (or $40) cable VoIP line is cheaper than a $45 + $15 in taxes landline from the telephone company. Since lots of people have cable anyway, triple play bundles from the cable company are attractive to consumers. No dish, one bill.

Verizon, with FiOS, provides superior service on that triple play. Thus they get custoemrs.

reply to vinnie97
Shoot, Dallas is one of THE BEST cities for bandwidth. Smeone should be offering FTTH up your way...

...oh wait, FiOS doesn't like to go into AT&T areas

reply to iansltx

Cloud computing is only years away because there isn't the bandwidth to do it. Take Animoto for example; it's an online video slideshow maker that's quite awesome. But high-quality photos take several minutes to upload on a 512k or even 2M up cable connection. On a 20M connection the photo uploads take seconds and everyone's happy.

On the business side of things, I could give you examples of awesome systems that are bandwidth-hungry, if you're interested Just finished talking with a guy here in town that's going to try bringing serious bandwidth into town for this purpose. He and I actually want to do many of the same things, and fat pipes are required for his IT solutions.

On the cloud side, my primary computer just shut off last night. Have to drive about 60 miles to the Apple store to see what's wrong with it. Fortunately I have much of my stuff on GMail, however my Adobe CS4 install is sitting on that computer. I'm at a local coffee shop to download Photoshop CS4 trial to get the work done I need to. It's a cable connection but bandwidht is much better than at home 9WISP). However on uploads things still take a bit.

If I had this connection, but symmetric, I'd be happy (15/15). 10 Mbps up? Not so much.

Cloud Computing is years away because the platforms are very immature.

Used any of 'em? They're quite solid if you ask me, and will get even better as more bandwidth is available. Seriously, bandwidth is the big limiting factor here. Chick-and-egg problem.

reply to iansltx
Don't look now but those same $15 in taxes are on the cable VOIP line. However, you are right that cable typically prices the base voice product cheaper and includes more features.

It amazes me how much AT&T still charges for a basic voice line with no features. It's also amazing how much they charge for features that cost them absolutely nothing to implement. It's all built into the switch and even though they've recovered those switch costs years ago, they still price them like a theme park soda.

reply to Matt
I'm talking about cloud computing as a general sort of thing, not about a specific brand. Can be open source (and should be IMO) for all I care.

By cloud computing I mean having your applications, data and even computing power hosted elsewhere in a scalable fashion. That's about it.

reply to vinnie97

reply to iansltx
Nice idea, however, many of us like to have our applications and media right beside them. Just like records, CD, DVD, BluRay, Install disks..... I don't trust that a company will always be around to get to those applications, or that the delivery pipe will be there. I want some media to own. Maybe I'll do the cloud thing too, but if I buy a product, I want something tangible. I purchased one of those High bit rate, HD DVD for T2 several years ago... I can not play it back any longer... The "authentication server" no longer responds... Now imagine that with an old version of word or some game. The company goes under and you're S.O.L. The company may just decide to not support that app. It may be your life blood to use THAT version. It takes power away from the consumer and puts it elsewhere. Also, I'm not sure how much of my DATA I'd want being hosted "IN THE CLOUD"
Good side of Cloud computing is that those centralized upgrades will take no time.... I'm sure there's more to it but I'm rather too lazy to dig further.