dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
167
« Caps
prev · 1 · 2

TechyDad
Premium Member
join:2001-07-13
USA

1 recommendation

TechyDad to Kuro

Premium Member

to Kuro

Re: Caps Are To Kill Internet Video

said by Kuro :

People are voting with their wallet that they want one thing and rather than change the model to fit that they are throwing a fit to stick with the old one.

Sadly, while people are trying to vote with their wallets, the big ISPs have a monopoly (or duopoly) on Internet access and so can enforce policies regardless of what the customers are saying they want. For example, my only choice for wired broadband service is Time Warner Cable. (No FIOS in my area.) If TWC decided that there would be a 50GB cap and $5 per GB overage fees, I could complain but my only options would be a) pay them or b) go without Internet. (Given that I'm a web developer, B isn't really an option.)

Kuro
@75.151.50.x

Kuro to 78036364

Anon

to 78036364
I'm saying for me it costs $50 for 25/5 (not sure on the upload) stand alone internet or $40 for that and basic cable bundle.

newview
Ex .. Ex .. Exactly
Premium Member
join:2001-10-01
Parsonsburg, MD

newview to 78036364

Premium Member

to 78036364
Whatever your assumptions of what the modern day family should look like doesn't negate the fact that current "caps that aren't caps" are designed to benefit Comcast and not the subscriber or their families

IowaCowboy
Lost in the Supermarket
Premium Member
join:2010-10-16
Springfield, MA

IowaCowboy to TechyDad

Premium Member

to TechyDad
You could also send them a message by buying your TV from a DIFFERENT provider. If enough of us bought our TV from Dish/DirecTV then Comcast would realize they're on the losing end. Caps are to protect their CATV revenues but you don't have to feed into their negative behavior by switching to satellite. It doesn't count against internet caps and it cuts into cable tv revenue.

v6movement
@206.51.28.x

v6movement to IPPlanMan

Anon

to IPPlanMan
said by IPPlanMan:

Trolling? Oh please... It isn't all about you. I never even came close to referring to you by name in my post. You're not mentioned! Your assumptions are just that.

What do you expect when the guy trolls so hard it isn't funny.
v6movement

v6movement to 78036364

Anon

to 78036364
said by 78036364:

Then customers call in and complain their connections are "slow" and demand refunds or government action because they aren't getting the full speed they are paying for.

It wouldn't be an issue if the network was managed properly in the first place. It's this thing called proactive maintenance as opposed to reactive.

camper
just visiting this planet
Premium Member
join:2010-03-21
Bethel, CT

camper to 78036364

Premium Member

to 78036364
said by 78036364:

4K UHDTV = 3-D TV 2.0

 
Possibly. But I'm seeing more interest in 4K UHDTV than I ever saw in 3D.

Time will tell...

v6movement
@206.51.28.x

v6movement to Seluryar

Anon

to Seluryar
said by Seluryar:

What irks me about Netflix and Comcast, isnt Netflix now paying Comcast for bandwidth? If so, Comcast could be nice enough to allow Netflix data to not count towards the cap, oh I'm sorry..threshhold

While we are at it, I have a new idea for you Comcast! Lets go back to hour-based usage like in the early days of dial-up!

They're paying for paid peering with Comcast. What you're talking about would be additional fees on top of that. That would move Comcast into triple dipping.

norm
join:2012-10-18
Pittsburgh, PA

norm to 78036364

Member

to 78036364
said by 78036364:

said by TechyDad:

Many of the cable companies make the Internet-only packages more expensive than Internet+TV. So, to save money, a cord cutter needs to sign up for cable TV and get a cable box.

How is paying $10 extra for internet only MORE expensive than paying for a $80 cable package? That kind of person deserves to lose his money.

FiOS 75/75 internet only: $94.99
FiOS 75/75 internet AND lowest TV package listed: $77.99 + tax

In case you weren't aware, there are generally multiple tiers of cable packages available.

v6movement
@206.51.28.x

v6movement to camper

Anon

to camper
said by camper:

Possibly. But I'm seeing more interest in 4K UHDTV than I ever saw in 3D.

Time will tell...

There will be a lot more interest in 4K over 3D. 4K sets will be down to inexpensive pricing by the end of next year.
Papageno
join:2011-01-26
Portland, OR

Papageno to 78036364

Member

to 78036364
And then the company could honestly say it had to raise prices to further build out the network. Well, "honestly" would apply if Comcast had any real, viable competition most places--in my neighborhood my only viable choice is Comcast, because DSL from CenturyLink tops out at 3 Mbps D/L. It'll be interesting to see what happens to any talk of caps, er THRESHOLDS when/if Google decides to build FttH in Portland. I'll bet Comcast becomes MUCH more responsive to its customers then.

v6movement
@206.51.28.x

v6movement to silbaco

Anon

to silbaco
said by silbaco:

If cable companies wanted to prevent cord cutters they could simply refuse to offer internet-only packages.

LOL. Lets see how much shit cable companies would be in if they tried that. That would definitely get them into hot water and have government involvement. I would very much welcome that if it ever came to that.
v6movement

v6movement to IowaCowboy

Anon

to IowaCowboy
said by IowaCowboy:

You could also send them a message by buying your TV from a DIFFERENT provider. If enough of us bought our TV from Dish/DirecTV then Comcast would realize they're on the losing end. Caps are to protect their CATV revenues but you don't have to feed into their negative behavior by switching to satellite. It doesn't count against internet caps and it cuts into cable tv revenue.

Except that doesn't fix the original issue of caps, but that would make too much sense to actually understand that.
v6movement

v6movement to Papageno

Anon

to Papageno
said by Papageno:

And then the company could honestly say it had to raise prices to further build out the network. Well, "honestly" would apply if Comcast had any real, viable competition most places--in my neighborhood my only viable choice is Comcast, because DSL from CenturyLink tops out at 3 Mbps D/L. It'll be interesting to see what happens to any talk of caps, er THRESHOLDS when/if Google decides to build FttH in Portland. I'll bet Comcast becomes MUCH more responsive to its customers then.

Bullshit. They already make enough to cover the network upgrades. Are you that naive?
silbaco
Premium Member
join:2009-08-03
USA

silbaco to v6movement

Premium Member

to v6movement
No, they really wouldn't. Some ISPs have done this in the past with absolutely no repercussions. It is no different than telephone companies requiring you take their phone service if you want DSL. Completely legal.
silbaco

silbaco to Seluryar

Premium Member

to Seluryar
I am sure Netflix would love that. Completely break net neutrality beyond repair and crush what little competition Netflix has.

jmn1207
Premium Member
join:2000-07-19
Sterling, VA

jmn1207 to newview

Premium Member

to newview
said by newview:

Whatever your assumptions of what the modern day family should look like doesn't negate the fact that current "caps that aren't caps" are designed to benefit Comcast and not the subscriber or their families

I wouldn't say it is designed to benefit Comcast, either. Maybe it benefits the short-sighted, greedy investors, but probably not Comcast or their future.

newview
Ex .. Ex .. Exactly
Premium Member
join:2001-10-01
Parsonsburg, MD

1 recommendation

newview

Premium Member

said by jmn1207:

said by newview:

Whatever your assumptions of what the modern day family should look like doesn't negate the fact that current "caps that aren't caps" are designed to benefit Comcast and not the subscriber or their families

I wouldn't say it is designed to benefit Comcast, either. Maybe it benefits the short-sighted, greedy investors, but probably not Comcast or their future.

Please enlighten as to how the short-term goal of $10 per 50gb overage nationwide on a on-the-low-side "soft-cap" and the long-term goal of making it just that much more difficult for a family to view Neflix as their primary TV entertainment does NOT benefit Comcast.

This cap smacks of a "stage 2" implementation of a Comcast war on Netflix, stage 1 being the throttling battle in which Netflix caved and paid Comcast's extortion fee, which in the long run will work to raise Neflix's prices to their subscribers, and now this "cap that's not a cap" to make Netflix less attractive because watching "too much" will raise your Comcast bill.

The consumer is fucked either way.
Papageno
join:2011-01-26
Portland, OR

Papageno to v6movement

Member

to v6movement
said by v6movement :

Bullshit. They already make enough to cover the network upgrades. Are you that naive?

No, not that naïve, which you would have realized if you'd read past the first sentence of my post. You know, where I wrote that "honestly" doesn't apply to Comcast in the vast majority of its markets because it has no viable competition whatsoever? In other words, I'm violently agreeing with you and arguing against the thrust of Mr Guy's posts ("Poor Comcast, everyone's being so mean picking on it all the time.").
tdumaine
Premium Member
join:2004-03-14
Seattle, WA

tdumaine to TechyDad

Premium Member

to TechyDad
What makes it even worse is the corrupt politics that allow it. Read as: Comcast lines the gooberments pockets so it wont matter what we say

jmn1207
Premium Member
join:2000-07-19
Sterling, VA

jmn1207 to newview

Premium Member

to newview
My line of thought is that the consumers have already lost this battle. Our only option is to let the big fish eat up the pond and then starve to death to become food for smaller things.

The way things are heading, it's all going to be the government's anyway. Then by proxy or war, China's.

TechyDad
Premium Member
join:2001-07-13
USA

TechyDad to silbaco

Premium Member

to silbaco
Comcast is the only wired broadband Internet provider in many areas. If you want wired broadband Internet, your choice is 1) The Comcast Monopoly or 2) Nothing. If Comcast were to force people to use their TV service to get their Internet service, that would be using a monopoly power to kill off competition in another area. Not only would Netflix, Amazon, etc oppose this, but DirectTV and DISH would as well. I don't think they'd get away with having no Internet only plan.

However, they *could* have an Internet only plan that just so happens to cost more than Internet and TV bundled. Then the customers would be "saving money" by choosing Comcast TV, but would be free to pay more for just Internet if they wanted to.

IowaCowboy
Lost in the Supermarket
Premium Member
join:2010-10-16
Springfield, MA

IowaCowboy

Premium Member

There is technically competition to Comcast internet by satellite internet providers (HughesNet and Exede) but Comcast is the preferred option.

IPPlanMan
Holy Cable Modem Batman
join:2000-09-20
Washington, DC

IPPlanMan to v6movement

Member

to v6movement
Nothing less...

TechyDad
Premium Member
join:2001-07-13
USA

TechyDad to IowaCowboy

Premium Member

to IowaCowboy
True, but satellite Internet tends to be much more expensive. If you wanted to, you could also include mobile Internet providers like Verizon Wireless. (Also much more expensive. Just try pricing 300GB over 4G.)

v6movement
@206.51.28.x

v6movement to Papageno

Anon

to Papageno
said by Papageno:

No, not that naïve, which you would have realized if you'd read past the first sentence of my post. You know, where I wrote that "honestly" doesn't apply to Comcast in the vast majority of its markets because it has no viable competition whatsoever? In other words, I'm violently agreeing with you and arguing against the thrust of Mr Guy's posts ("Poor Comcast, everyone's being so mean picking on it all the time.").

I did, I just misinterpreted what you were saying. Sorry.

NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
TP-Link TD-8616
Asus RT-AC66U B1
Netgear FR114P

1 recommendation

NormanS to 78036364

MVM

to 78036364
said by 78036364:

can you get a cable TV package for $5-$20 a month? No? Then internet only is cheaper than bundle.

Comcast Internet only, non-promotional, would run about $1.98 more per month than Internet bundled with the cheapest TV tier. So Internet only is not cheaper than the bundle.
« Caps
prev · 1 · 2