dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
5
share rss forum feed

AVonGauss
Premium
join:2007-11-01
Boynton Beach, FL

1 edit
reply to sturmvogel

Re: The real reason for the cap ~by IPPlanMan~

said by sturmvogel:

Post deleted.


Considering that there are some 90+ pages on this thread and you are no stranger to posting in this thread, I'm not sure that is a fair evaluation. It seems to me the intent is to keep this discussion in one place and not to intermingle it with other discussions such as connectivity questions or issues.

Personally, I think Sofa King summarized this thread a couple of pages back the best - especially the last paragraph.


IPPlanMan
Holy Cable Modem Batman

join:2000-09-20
Washington, DC
kudos:1

1 edit

Do you agree or disagree with my post?


AVonGauss
Premium
join:2007-11-01
Boynton Beach, FL

1 recommendation

Simple answer...

No

Longer answer...

That does not mean...

I am in favor of having a cap, or,
That I wouldn't like to see it removed, or,
That I don't agree that caps can have adverse impacts on other industries and that is something to be concerned about, or,
That I am a Comcast fanboi and think they can or do no wrong

The issue is more complicated than your post is trying to make it out to be. As far as caps and overages, out of the national carriers that have announced or implemented, I do have to concede that Comcast is the more reasonable of them and find it a bit odd that they are the one you like to focus on. I assume they are your provider and that is why.



IPPlanMan
Holy Cable Modem Batman

join:2000-09-20
Washington, DC
kudos:1

2 edits

So you agree with Comcast's position that 250GB is excessive use for residential use even though no such policy exists for the business tiers, not to mention the fact that the cap remains EXACTLY the same as before for Docsis 3.0?

Please explain.


AVonGauss
Premium
join:2007-11-01
Boynton Beach, FL

Strangely, I don't believe that is what I said. I also believe we discussed the business tiers several (several) pages back.


jsgiv

join:2009-03-01
Woodstock, GA

3 recommendations

reply to IPPlanMan

said by IPPlanMan:

So you agree with Comcast's position that 250GB is excessive use for residential use even though no such policy exists for the business tiers?

Please explain.
Eh - That's NOT the answer he stated - quite the contrary. And also, what you've stated above is not the question you asked him to respond to.

But I give you props for re-wording everything to make an argument out of it - you should try your skills in the news/media ...


IPPlanMan
Holy Cable Modem Batman

join:2000-09-20
Washington, DC
kudos:1

1 edit
reply to AVonGauss

Comcast doesn't want alternative video sources gaining a foothold in the residential market. Hence, they have implemented a cap under the guise of excessive use. They are not applying this policy to the business tiers because these activities are not a threat in this space. Furthermore, the fact that the cap doesn't increase under Docsis 3.0 means that it's all about protecting Comcast's ondemand and premium channels. I find it very suspicious that excessive use under Docsis 3.0 is exactly the same.
--
"We're going to start at one end of (Fallujah), and we're not going to stop until we get to the other. If there's anybody left when that happens, we're going to turn around and we're going to go back and finish it."
Lt. Col. Pete Newell: 1st Inf. US Army


jsgiv

join:2009-03-01
Woodstock, GA
reply to IPPlanMan

To clarify - (since you've forgotten your own post):

said by IPPlanMan:

Well how about that...

No reports of the network grinding to a halt either...

A scam indeed....

How likely is a business to use iTunes/Apple TV, Netflix streaming, Vudu...

The answer is that they aren't.

So here's the real reason for the cap:
They are used in the residential market. The real reason for the 250GB cap is to prevent these aforementioned services from posing a real threat to Comcast's Premium channels and onDemand, a revenue stream that comes in on top of people's cable bills, not to mention CDV which doesn't count against the cap either.
To which the question posed was "Do you agree?" - I guess - to your stated opinion?

Which some how, after AVonGauss responded quite explicitly to the negative, with additional detail with regards to his opinion of the cap, turned into:

said by IPPlanMan:

So you agree with Comcast's position that 250GB is excessive use for residential use even though no such policy exists for the business tiers, not to mention the fact that the cap remains EXACTLY the same as before?

Please explain.
And for the record - no I don't agree with your post/opinion either - but for differing reasons than others. Primarily - you make the assumption that all/majority of users of Comcast HSI use the service for "competing" products as compared to Comcast's OnDemand, etc.

I don't use my service for supplanting TV/Video service - nor do I have other Comcast Services at the moment (i.e. Comcast Cable / VOIP). I use it for *internet* access - if I want to watch TV / Videos - that's what my DirecTV / DVD / DVR are for..

Obviously others do use it for these purposes (to the tune of 715 GB in a single month) - and then question why they're being flagged as an "excessive" user.
Expand your moderator at work


C_Chipperson
Monster Rain
Premium
join:2009-01-17
00000
kudos:3

1 edit

1 recommendation

reply to IPPlanMan

Re: The real reason for the cap ~by IPPlanMan~

We regularly watch movies/tv shows through Netflix streaming on our Xbox 360. I've never broken 40GB/month. Comcast seems to be more than happy to deliver the service to us!

On the other hand, If I was unemployed and had nothing to do but watch streaming video 24/7 then I would be upset about the cap.

EDIT - THIS POST IS IN RESPONDS TO IPPLANMAN'S CLAIM THAT COMCAST HAS PUT IN A CAP TO DISCOURAGE 3RD PARTY VIDEO STREAMING



sturmvogel
Obama '08

join:2008-02-07
Houston, TX

1 edit

said by C_Chipperson:

We regularly watch movies/tv shows through Netflix streaming on our Xbox 360. I've never broken 40GB/month. Comcast seems to be more than happy to deliver the service to us!

On the other hand, If I was unemployed and had nothing to do but watch streaming video 24/7 then I would be upset about the cap.
You do not have to be watching 24/7 to run afoul of the 250 GB cap, actually using the connection only less than 3 hrs/day would be enough. However, your negative connotation that only unemployed watching 24/7 would run afoul of the cap is noted.
--
Obama '08. Will help resolve the terrible broadband issues we have that put us so far behind other countries.


IPPlanMan
Holy Cable Modem Batman

join:2000-09-20
Washington, DC
kudos:1

3 edits

I agree with Sturm. You do not need to be unemployed to run afoul of your cap... Maybe you have multiple housemates... Maybe they like using the internet too. Keeping track of their usage with all the different meters on the computers is burdensome... but hey, I can understand why Comcast likes it that way... They don't want us actually using the internet anyway.
--
"We're going to start at one end of (Fallujah), and we're not going to stop until we get to the other. If there's anybody left when that happens, we're going to turn around and we're going to go back and finish it."
Lt. Col. Pete Newell: 1st Inf. US Army



IPPlanMan
Holy Cable Modem Batman

join:2000-09-20
Washington, DC
kudos:1

1 edit
reply to jsgiv

said by jsgiv:

I don't use my service for supplanting TV/Video service - nor do I have other Comcast Services at the moment (i.e. Comcast Cable / VOIP). I use it for *internet* access - if I want to watch TV / Videos - that's what my DirecTV / DVD / DVR are for..
That's fine. You can do that. And if someone uses more than 250GB, are you really going to notice that they do? My whole point is that this an arbitrary amount, which coincidentally is exactly an order of Magnitude greater than their 250MB quota for emails. they have a traffic management system and they still need a cap? Doesn't make sense.

You aren't a Comcast TV Customer, but the principle is the same. Direct TV is happy that you're using their service instead of Comcast's Internet to watch shows. Comcast wishes that you used their TV service for TV and internet for internet. That's exactly what they want. They don't want to lose their TV business to people who only want to pay for the internet service... under the guise that 250GB is "excessive use"... and this is in spite of the fact that there is no similar cap for the business tiers, nor does the cap increase under Docsis 3.0 for the residential tiers... and it's the residential tiers that are directly engaged in using these other services like iTunes/AppleTV/Vudu/Netflix, etc.... Probably Slingbox as well.

Comcast apparently isn't concerned with Business users using these services, which is why there's no "excessive use" cap stated.

People don't get to their cap by checking their email. People get to the cap by doing audio/video, etc.
--
"We're going to start at one end of (Fallujah), and we're not going to stop until we get to the other. If there's anybody left when that happens, we're going to turn around and we're going to go back and finish it."
Lt. Col. Pete Newell: 1st Inf. US Army


C_Chipperson
Monster Rain
Premium
join:2009-01-17
00000
kudos:3

1 recommendation

reply to sturmvogel

said by sturmvogel:

said by C_Chipperson:

We regularly watch movies/tv shows through Netflix streaming on our Xbox 360. I've never broken 40GB/month. Comcast seems to be more than happy to deliver the service to us!

On the other hand, If I was unemployed and had nothing to do but watch streaming video 24/7 then I would be upset about the cap.
You do not have to be watching 24/7 to run afoul of the 250 GB cap, actually using the connection only less than 3 hrs/day would be enough. However, your negative connotation that only unemployed watching 24/7 would run afoul of the cap is noted.
I was replying to IPPlanMan's theory that Comcast implemented the cap to curb 3rd party video streaming. Your irrelevent retort is noted.


funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA
kudos:6
reply to C_Chipperson

said by C_Chipperson:

On the other hand, If I was unemployed and had nothing to do but watch streaming video 24/7 then I would be upset about the cap.
Or, if you had a house full of kids or your own content you wished to distribute or... (insert other things supporting my view that the Internet needs to be different things for different people).
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- District of Columbia -- KJ7RL
Evil does seek to maintain power by suppressing the truth, or by misleading the innocent. --Spock and McCoy stardate 5029.5


C_Chipperson
Monster Rain
Premium
join:2009-01-17
00000
kudos:3

3 edits

1 recommendation

said by funchords:

said by C_Chipperson:

On the other hand, If I was unemployed and had nothing to do but watch streaming video 24/7 then I would be upset about the cap.
Or, if you had a house full of kids or your own content you wished to distribute or... (insert other things supporting my view that the Internet needs to be different things for different people).
True, 7 kids plus a spouse each using 28 GB/month would be annoying

However, I was ONLY responding to IPPlanMan's claim that Comcast is capping usage to discourage 3rd party video streaming.

Edit - Happy 4th everybody!!
Expand your moderator at work