| reply to makaze6
Re: Comcast Account Suspended for going over "limi Sorry about the delay. I think I hit topic reply instead of reply. I called the Comcast Abuse department (856-317-7272), the number I was instructed to call by tech support. Apparently, you cannot talk to anyway, it just asks to leave a message.
To clear up a question or two, I have not uncapped my modem. This was due to, to my best knowledge, downloading too much since I did received a letter in mid August.
However, this leads me to ask just how low their limit must be. Since I was cut off on the 12th of this month, I do not believe that I have downloaded more than 30 gb max (the new 200 gb hd doesn't arrive until this week).
Well, still waiting for their call back, so hopefully we'll see what is going on with their policy. |
|
| "Since I was cut off on the 12th of this month, I do not believe that I have downloaded more than 30 gb max"
They probably aren't taking this month into account. It takes awhile to process and 12 days into september is probably about right. People seem to be recieving the letters about 15-20 days into the month after the one they transfered "too much" in, minus the days it takes snail mail to reach people they probably send them out about the 12th. You didn't have to wait for the mail it was an instant disconnect. 
I can understand why they're doing this especially on overloaded nodes. People compare Cable to DSL all the time but they are completely different. DSL you are connected to a CO and so is everyone in the area while Cable you have all these nodes that carry a mere 400 customers so it costs cable companies a ton more resources to up keep all these nodes and all these neiborhoods, DSL just has to up keep 1 central office. If the CO has a problem they don't have to send people out to find it, they already know where it is and people are already there. |
|
tracyjo
join:2003-09-15
Bala Cynwyd, PA | reply to Bob0000
Looking for anyone dealing with this issue in the delaware valley-- who would like to talk about it.
I work for NBC10
please contact me
tracy.davidson@nbc.com |
|
| reply to Bob0000
You should have stopped when you got the 1st letter and you would not have been cut off If you held off for a bit. There is a limit for a reason thats why there are different deals with different speed rates, obviously the more you pay the faster and more you will be downloading. You get what you pay for! so do not expect to DL 100 GIGS when your only paying what $50. I would not.
I do not like the Caps myself hence I DL allot as well but you should be able to guess how much you have Download over a month or too. |
|
| said by dewman99:
...There is a limit for a reason
But what's the limit  |
|
|
|
| reply to dewman99
I had cut back from my "normal" after receiving the first letter. More from circumstance than choice, but the amount I downloaded had decreased. I don't want to be cut off again for trying to reduce my unknown downloading amount by half so I don't go over the unknown limit.
Regardless, I'll try to call the abuse deparment back. Perhaps, if I could get a letter or email from a sales person about the "unlimited" internet
[text was edited by author 2003-09-16 10:55:52] |
|
| reply to dewman99
said by dewman99:
You should have stopped when you got the 1st letter and you would not have been cut off If you held off for a bit.
Based on the August thread, »Comcast Bandwidth Exceeded Notice!!! , it appears that users started to receive excessive bandwidth notification letters for July in mid-August. There is a very real possibility that the user could have been over the undisclosed limit for August prior to the receipt of the letter regarding July.
quote:
There is a limit for a reason thats why there are different deals with different speed rates, obviously the more you pay the faster and more you will be downloading. You get what you pay for! so do not expect to DL 100 GIGS when your only paying what $50. I would not.
Since the actual download limits are not public, there is no manner to verify that the download limit for a $95/month Pro user (3500/384) is any different than that for a $40 - $60 / month Comcast High Speed Internet user (1800/256-300). As shown here: »Comcast Bandwidth Exceeded Notice!!! , Pro users are not immune from this. It is not so obvious that one gets more if they pay more when it comes to monthly download limits. quote:
I do not like the Caps myself hence I DL allot as well but you should be able to guess how much you have Download over a month or too.
Guessing, as well as measuring, is somewhat meaningless if you do not know what the acceptable threshold is.
[text was edited by author 2003-09-16 11:31:14] |
|
| "Pro users are not immune from this. It is not so obvious that one gets more if they pay more when it comes to monthly download limits."
We can't be certain of course. I do find it somewhat interesting that no people on the gold tier have posted in this thread reporting that they received a letter however. You'd think that at least one them would have qualified as a bandwidth hog.
Maybe this is all just a plot by Comcast to make the heavy users upgrade to Pro? ^_~ |
|
| Beh never mind - didn't read the link...lol.... |
|
 JTRockvilleData HoPremium,MVM
join:2002-01-28
Rockville, MD
 ·Verizon FiOS
| reply to dewman99
said by dewman99:
You get what you pay for! so do not expect to DL 100 GIGS when your only paying what $50.
The price of CHSI is $58. Sure, promos and discounts can be had, but some folks pay the full price.
Comcast is responsible for setting the expectations. IMO they haven't done a very good job. |
|
JTRockvilleData HoPremium,MVM
join:2002-01-28
Rockville, MD Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| reply to fiatlux
said by fiatlux:
Maybe this is all just a plot by Comcast to make the heavy users upgrade to Pro? ^_~
Except pros reported receiving "the letter" too.
Although.... your theory would allow Comcast to look good in the press.
We gave a speed increase WITHOUT a price increase.
Huh? Limits? They were always there, we just didn't enforce them! |
|
| "Except pros reported receiving "the letter" too."
I know, my bad, didn't click through... *^_^*
Have any gold users been turned off though? |
|
JTRockvilleData HoPremium,MVM
join:2002-01-28
Rockville, MD | As far as I know, "gold" isn't widely available. I don't recall ever seeing a "gold" subscriber in the Comcast Forum, so I don't think lack of a reported "excessive use" incident is really indicative of anything. |
|
| Sorry, I meant "Pro" instead of "gold" in that last post.
Not enough coffee this morning apparently.... ^_^;; |
|
| reply to fiatlux
said by fiatlux:
Maybe this is all just a plot by Comcast to make the heavy users upgrade to Pro? ^_~
Based on this post: »Comcast Account Suspended for going over "limit" , it looks like Comcast is trying to push heavy users past Pro into Workplace or one of the other CCIS offerings. $195 per month is $100 over the Pro rate. |
|
JTRockvilleData HoPremium,MVM
join:2002-01-28
Rockville, MD | Is there an indication that Comcast workplace has no "excessive bandwidth" restrictions? |
|
| JTRockville,
Well, since it was suggested to upgrade to the Comcast workplace in the Excessive Bandwidth Usage letter, it looks like there isn't one. I also asked the person from the abuse department, and he said that it was an option. |
|
JTRockvilleData HoPremium,MVM
join:2002-01-28
Rockville, MD | It doesn't "look" like there's a restriction on the silver service either though. Until you get "the letter". |
|
| reply to JTRockville
said by JTRockville:
Is there an indication that Comcast workplace has no "excessive bandwidth" restrictions?
The AUP provisions are strikingly similar to CHSI (CHSI shown first): said by »www.comcast.net/terms/use.jsp :
Network, Bandwidth, Data Storage and Other Limitations
You must comply with all current bandwidth, data storage, and other limitations on the Service established by Comcast and its suppliers. In addition, you may only access and use the Service with a dynamic Internet Protocol ("IP") address that adheres to the dynamic host configuration protocol ("DHCP"). You may not access or use the Service with a static IP address or using any protocol other than DHCP unless you are subject to a Service plan that expressly permits otherwise.
You must ensure that your activity (including, but not limited to, use made by you or others of any Personal Web Features) does not improperly restrict, inhibit, or degrade any other user's use of the Service, nor represent (in the sole judgment of Comcast) an unusually large burden on the network. In addition, you must ensure that your activities do not improperly restrict, inhibit, disrupt, degrade or impede Comcast's ability to deliver the Service and monitor the Service, backbone, network nodes, and/or other network Services.
said by »work.comcast.net/legal/aup.asp :
Network, Bandwidth, Data Storage and Other Limitations
You must comply with all current bandwidth, data storage, and other limitations on the Service established by Comcast and its suppliers.
You must ensure that your activity (including, but not limited to, use made by you or others of Web Site Hosting) does not improperly restrict, inhibit, or degrade any other user's use of the Service, nor represent (in the sole judgment of Comcast) an unusually large burden on the network. In addition, you must ensure that your activities do not improperly restrict, inhibit, disrupt, degrade or impede Comcast's ability to deliver the Service and monitor the Service, backbone, network nodes, and/or other network Services.
|
|
| reply to fiatlux
said by fiatlux:
"Pro users are not immune from this. It is not so obvious that one gets more if they pay more when it comes to monthly download limits."
We can't be certain of course. I do find it somewhat interesting that no people on the gold tier have posted in this thread reporting that they received a letter however. You'd think that at least one them would have qualified as a bandwidth hog.
Maybe this is all just a plot by Comcast to make the heavy users upgrade to Pro? ^_~
are you referring to pro or commerical i have pro and i got a letter and i've seen many others on this form with pro |
|
