Cheese
Premium
join:2003-10-26
Naples, FL
clubs:
| reply to LurkerLito
Re: How about that 250GB Cap, eh?
said by LurkerLito  :said by Cheese :Which is absolutely stupid, if TW is the one offering the content, it should not count against their caps, I could understand if the content is not being stream from them... If this doesn't count against their cap then the service would be favoring it's content over other companies like Hulu etc. Which would make them a target for Net Neutrality advocates for anti-competitive/monopoly behavior. The cap should NOT exist in the first place. Of course it would favor their content, their pipes/their content, while HULU would work, it would just count against the caps.
And yes, there should be no caps, I agree. |
|
IPPlanMan
Holy Cable Modem Batman
join:2000-09-20
Washington, DC | The fact that we're even discussing the cap means that it's way too low... or shouldn't even exist at all... |
|
Pizz
Hi
join:2000-10-27
Astoria, NY | or time warner's low cap of 5gb! |
|
IPPlanMan
Holy Cable Modem Batman
join:2000-09-20
Washington, DC
1 edit | That's probably 3 Netflix/Apple TV HD movies... |
|
espaeth
Digital Plumber
Premium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
 ·voip.ms
·Vitelity VOIP
·Callcentric
·VoiceStick
·ViaTalk
 ·Comcast
 ·Embarq
| reply to Pizz
said by Pizz :or time warner's low cap of 5gb! ... on the cheapest plan they offered. The caps went to 100GB on the $75 plan. |
|
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | reply to IPPlanMan
It's barely 1 DVD ISO. |
|
Pizz
Hi
join:2000-10-27
Astoria, NY
·Verizon Online DSL
·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to espaeth
Re: How about that 250GB Cap, eh?
There's clearly a huge difference in those type of caps. I guess this is clearly a great pricing point, because the last mile networks of cable co's can only support 5, 15, 25, 100, 250gb caps.
--
The more you talk, the less you listen. |
|
espaeth
Digital Plumber
Premium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
·voip.ms
·Vitelity VOIP
·Callcentric
·VoiceStick
·ViaTalk
·Comcast
·Embarq
| said by Pizz :There's clearly a huge difference in those type of caps. I guess this is clearly a great pricing point, because the last mile networks of cable co's can only support 5, 15, 25, 100, 250gb caps. If you want to break it down, a 38mbps DOCSIS channel (ignoring overhead) can transfer a total of 12,312GB/mo, or a total of 17.1GB/hour. Depending on MSO, local usage, and other such factors each downstream channel has 100-1000 modems attached.
It really doesn't matter what your position is on caps, the reality is usage is constrained by capacity which is not necessarily easily augmented. If this were a network built out on cheap commodity Ethernet, it would be a different story. |
|
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | reply to en102
said by en102 :It's barely 1 DVD ISO. even blu-ray maxes out at 50 GB. |
|
sonicmerlin
join:2009-05-24
Cleveland, OH
| reply to espaeth
It is very easily augmented by investing money into the network. Money that both TWC and Comcast have gobs of and make more of every year.
Money that was given to them to the tune of $300 billion over the last 10 years, and that they pocketed. |
|
funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Washington, DC
·Verizon Online DSL
·Skype
| reply to espaeth
[BQUOTE=espaethIf you want to break it down, a 38mbps DOCSIS channel (ignoring overhead) can transfer a total of 12,312GB/mo, [/BQUOTE... about 50 x 250 GB. Interesting.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- District of Columbia -- KJ7RL |
|
espaeth
Digital Plumber
Premium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
·voip.ms
·Vitelity VOIP
·Callcentric
·VoiceStick
·ViaTalk
·Comcast
·Embarq
| reply to sonicmerlin
said by sonicmerlin :It is very easily augmented by investing money into the network. Money that both TWC and Comcast have gobs of and make more of every year. That's how percentage-based profits generally work. If you increase your revenue, your dollars of profit also go up.
Comcast's direct costs of network operations were $523 million last year, but as their 10K filing states:
High-speed Internet expenses and phone expenses include certain direct costs identified by us for providing these services. Other related costs associated with providing these services are generally shared among all our cable services and are not allocated to these captions. The decrease in high-speed Internet expenses in 2008 was primarily driven by lower support service costs that were the result of our entering into new contracts with lower cost providers and renegotiating existing contracts. High-speed Internet expenses increased in 2007 primarily due to growth in the number of customers receiving these services and the addition of our newly acquired cable systems. So outside of direct hardware costs for services that are 100% dedicated to HSI service only, you have no way to really determine what their total expenditure was to provide the service.
said by sonicmerlin :Money that was given to them to the tune of $300 billion over the last 10 years, and that they pocketed. Link please? |
|
espaeth
Digital Plumber
Premium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
·voip.ms
·Vitelity VOIP
·Callcentric
·VoiceStick
·ViaTalk
·Comcast
·Embarq
1 edit | reply to funchords
said by funchords :... about 50 x 250 GB. Interesting. Just like insurance companies, they're playing the safe bet that the majority aren't going to cash in to the limit.
Of course, it gets closer to even odds with a 4 channel DOCSIS 3.0 spread. |
|
funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Washington, DC | Yeah, I'm still trying to digest it. I won't have a snarky comeback, though. It seems sane. |
|
sonicmerlin
join:2009-05-24
Cleveland, OH
1 edit | reply to espaeth
Sure you can. Look at pg. 25, 26 of the .pdf.
Also, seeing as how Comcast is a near monopoly in many of its areas, until real competition exists it's hard to sympathize with a company that makes billions in profits that wants to cap and/or throttle, regardless of the overall % of those margins.
As for links:
»www.newnetworks.com/attbroadband.htm
and...
»www.teletruth.org/docs/SBCMergerharms.pdf |
|
