dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
2023
share rss forum feed


09129800

join:2012-06-27
New York, NY

1 edit

What's the BANDWIDTH CAP like?

I'd rather have uncapped 5 Mbps than some piece of shit capped 300 Mbps connection. If Comcap applies their 300 GB bandwidth cap and overage charging scam to this tier then it will be a clear example of a polished turd.

At 300 Mbps speeds you can transfer over 95 terabytes of data in one month. So a 300 GB bandwidth cap on such a speed tier would be beyond ridiculous.

Can you imagine if you actually used this new speed tier to its full potential and Comcap applied their "$10 per 50 GB" bandwidth overage scam to you?

You'd be looking at almost $20,000 in overage fees in just one month. And if you maxed the upload speed as well you'd have a bill for over $25,000.

SCAM!


ArrayList
netbus developer
Premium
join:2005-03-19
Brighton, MA
Reviews:
·RCN CABLE
·Comcast
5% of the max usage is about 5 terabytes. That is well within reasonable use for that tier. There are still some that think usage does not increase with increased speed. But then again, those people also still have a davenport in the den and console tele.


JasonOD

@comcast.net
reply to 09129800
Look, do you want these higher speeds or not? When the time comes figure out your planned usage with your budget allowance for bandwidth. If Comcast's rates exceed your budget, look elsewhere or plan to reduce your usage.

JTR

join:2012-05-19
Carbondale, IL
Reviews:
·Mediacom

1 edit
reply to 09129800
said by 09129800:

I'd rather have uncapped 5 Mbps than some piece of shit capped 300 Mbps connection. If Comcap applies their 300 GB bandwidth cap and overage charging scam to this tier then it will be a clear example of a polished turd.

At 300 Mbps speeds you can transfer over 95 terabytes of data in one month. So a 300 GB bandwidth cap on such a speed tier would be beyond ridiculous.

Can you imagine if you actually used this new speed tier to its full potential and Comcap applied their "$10 per 50 GB" bandwidth overage scam to you?

You'd be looking at almost $20,000 in overage fees in just one month. And if you maxed the upload speed as well you'd have a bill for over $25,000.

SCAM!

Your irrational posts are beginning to bother me.

Speed != bandwidth. Just because you have a fast speed, doesn't mean you get a lot of bandwidth. I rent a server with a gigabit line, but I have a 1TB cap. Okay, bandwidth prices for me are dirt-cheap compared to a residential ISP ($9/TB, $59/10TB, and these are high compared to the prices from some providers), but I'm making a point here. "Unlimited" doesn't exist. I could run my line full throttle at 1Gbps 24/7, but then I'd have some pretty serious bandwidth charges to pay.

Remind me again, what legal use of a residential line uses 95TB per month? Remember, business lines for Comcast do exist, and have zero caps.

Now, I do agree that 300GB is a little ridiculous for this speed. However, have we confirmed that Comcast will have a 300GB cap for this speed, or is this just speculation based on their in-development caps? It's still not a scam.

ISPs aren't outfitted with the infrastructure to handle everyone going full throttle 24/7, they'd collapse under the load. Yes, 300GB is ridiculous. Unlimited is ridiculous in another way, because it's only offered because of a bet that everyone won't be going full throttle 24/7.

So, don't call this a scam. Comcast will mention the 300GB cap somewhere, you'll have to sign a document stating you agree to it. A scam would be where they don't mention the cap anywhere, but still enforce it.

If your bandwidth needs are so huge that 300GB won't do it for you, then you're in the minority of users, and should invest in a business connection. Otherwise, quit whining, or buy more bandwidth as you use it.


tshirt
Premium
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Comcast
reply to 09129800
said by 09129800:

At 300 Mbps speeds you can transfer over 95 terabytes of data in one month. So a 300 GB bandwidth cap on such a speed tier would be beyond ridiculous.

We get it, you hate everyone and their inferior internet.
But have you ever NEEDED to download 95 TeraBytes in a month from your residential account?
Do you even have 95 TeraBytes of storage at home?
When you go out to a resturant do you ALWAYS consume ALL the condiments available on the table? (salt, pepper, sugar, tabaisco, ketchup, chili sauce, soy sauce, etc) after all you paid for them, you are ENTITLED to use them all.

Wilsdom

join:2009-08-06
Do you go to the restaurant and eat nothing, because that benefits the shareholders most? There is a middle ground, I'd say 1/3 or 30TB would be fair, though for a shitty company like Comcast you can't expect more than 10TB. Anything in the GBs is joke, and as the OP said, a SCAM.


tshirt
Premium
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Comcast
then choose not to buy there until they do.
This resturant (comcast) offers a generous plate, but is not all-you-can eat. what is included is clearly listed and priced on the menu.

Whine to them not to us who wish to discuss a realistic scenrio which will be in the GB range.

JTR

join:2012-05-19
Carbondale, IL
Reviews:
·Mediacom
reply to Wilsdom
said by Wilsdom:

Do you go to the restaurant and eat nothing, because that benefits the shareholders most? There is a middle ground, I'd say 1/3 or 30TB would be fair, though for a shitty company like Comcast you can't expect more than 10TB. Anything in the GBs is joke, and as the OP said, a SCAM.

100mbps 24/7 is fair? Is this a joke?

Os

join:2011-01-26
US
reply to JTR
When Comcast puts it right under their speed tiers, as they do in Canada, then you have a point.

But they and every other capping ISP does their best to try and hide it away in the TOS/AUP and doesn't really disclose it.

JTR

join:2012-05-19
Carbondale, IL
Reviews:
·Mediacom
said by Os:

When Comcast puts it right under their speed tiers, as they do in Canada, then you have a point.

But they and every other capping ISP does their best to try and hide it away in the TOS/AUP and doesn't really disclose it.

It's your duty to read the TOS/AUP, like it or not. I do agree that not putting it out in the open is a shitty move, but it's still not an excuse.

(by the way, my ISP, Mediacom, clearly lists bandwidth caps on the order page under each plan - »mediacomcable.com/site/internet.html - they also list it again in a larger table lower on the page, and include detailed fine print on caps on the bottom of the page)


09129800

join:2012-06-27
New York, NY
reply to JTR
When it's $120 a month it damn sure is.

These American corporations have got you brainwashed good. It's still laughable that people continue to think bandwidth is some kind of finite resource like gasoline.

UNCAPPED, symmetrical 100 Mbps for under $50 USD a month is very common in Europe and Asia. Symmetrical 1 Gbps for $100 or less is also starting to pick up.

I'm not buying it, and Google is pulling the veil off of everyone's eyes with their fiber rollout too. Americans are finally starting to wake up to the fact that they are getting scammed when it comes to their Internet connectivity thanks to Google rolling out a proper service in their own backyard.


tshirt
Premium
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Comcast
reply to Os
I agree it shouldn't be hidden. But cable (and telephony and MOST other services) plans are far to complex to fit on a single page flyer, or in a few bullet points on 1 webpage.
ALL consumer have a responsiblity to read, and understand the terms or ask questions about EXACTLY what they are buying. In the case of ComCast residential accounts it is month to month with a 30 day money back guaruntee, thats about as good a free trial is you'll find anywhere.
It also current has no cap, and I'm sure that ComCast will attempt to clearly and loudly disclose what the new cap is, once that is determined.


88615298
Premium
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness
reply to 09129800
said by 09129800:

I'd rather have uncapped 5 Mbps than some piece of shit capped 300 Mbps connection. If Comcap applies their 300 GB bandwidth cap and overage charging scam to this tier then it will be a clear example of a polished turd.

At 300 Mbps speeds you can transfer over 95 terabytes of data in one month. So a 300 GB bandwidth cap on such a speed tier would be beyond ridiculous.

Can you imagine if you actually used this new speed tier to its full potential and Comcap applied their "$10 per 50 GB" bandwidth overage scam to you?

You'd be looking at almost $20,000 in overage fees in just one month. And if you maxed the upload speed as well you'd have a bill for over $25,000.

SCAM!

No one is going to transfer 95 TB a month. Every movie that has been released on blu-ray combined doesn't equal 95 TB.


88615298
Premium
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness
reply to 09129800
said by 09129800:

When it's $120 a month it damn sure is.

These American corporations have got you brainwashed good. It's still laughable that people continue to think bandwidth is some kind of finite resource like gasoline.

UNCAPPED, symmetrical 100 Mbps for under $50 USD a month is very common in Europe and Asia. Symmetrical 1 Gbps for $100 or less is also starting to pick up.

I'm not buying it, and Google is pulling the veil off of everyone's eyes with their fiber rollout too. Americans are finally starting to wake up to the fact that they are getting scammed when it comes to their Internet connectivity thanks to Google rolling out a proper service in their own backyard.

Then move to Europe or Asia.

JTR

join:2012-05-19
Carbondale, IL
Reviews:
·Mediacom

1 recommendation

reply to 09129800
said by 09129800:

When it's $120 a month it damn sure is.

These American corporations have got you brainwashed good. It's still laughable that people continue to think bandwidth is some kind of finite resource like gasoline.

UNCAPPED, symmetrical 100 Mbps for under $50 USD a month is very common in Europe and Asia. Symmetrical 1 Gbps for $100 or less is also starting to pick up.

I'm not buying it, and Google is pulling the veil off of everyone's eyes with their fiber rollout too. Americans are finally starting to wake up to the fact that they are getting scammed when it comes to their Internet connectivity thanks to Google rolling out a proper service in their own backyard.

I think you need some more experience before comparing the US's network to foreign countries. Want to know why those countries have gigabit/100mbps for ridiculously low prices? It's because the ISP is essentially a country-wide LAN. Connections to the outside internet are horribly slow. I've seen countless posts by people from those countries (Korea, Japan, etc) with "gigabit" lines, who have said the same thing - foreign connections are a tiny fraction of their advertised speed. This is an even bigger issue because most of the world's server are located in the United States and the EU.

Ah yeah, and there's the whole deal with those cheap fiber speeds being only available in the big cities (good luck if you're in a rural area!), and of course the fact that those countries have a small land mass and government-subsidised infrastructure buildout.

Calling me brainwashed? This just shows the depth of your ignorance.

Google's pulling the veil off of everyone's eyes? Ah yes, it's totally not a PR move and a money-looser, which is only sustainable by selling all their subscriber data. What they're doing is possibly illegal. Selling a service below market cost is unsustainable and anti-competitive behavior.

Wilsdom

join:2009-08-06
reply to JTR
Don't see why it wouldn't be, unless hard numbers on what Comcast pays to its suppliers for that kind of bandwidth makes it unaffordable for $120. "It sounds like a lot" is no argument, 1KB/s sounded like a lot at one point too. Rationing for no reason like an anorexic is sick, as is Stockholm Syndrome acceptance of price gouging.


aaronwt
Premium
join:2004-11-07
Woodbridge, VA
reply to 88615298
said by 88615298:

said by 09129800:

I'd rather have uncapped 5 Mbps than some piece of shit capped 300 Mbps connection. If Comcap applies their 300 GB bandwidth cap and overage charging scam to this tier then it will be a clear example of a polished turd.

At 300 Mbps speeds you can transfer over 95 terabytes of data in one month. So a 300 GB bandwidth cap on such a speed tier would be beyond ridiculous.

Can you imagine if you actually used this new speed tier to its full potential and Comcap applied their "$10 per 50 GB" bandwidth overage scam to you?

You'd be looking at almost $20,000 in overage fees in just one month. And if you maxed the upload speed as well you'd have a bill for over $25,000.

SCAM!

No one is going to transfer 95 TB a month. Every movie that has been released on blu-ray combined doesn't equal 95 TB.

it should be past 95 TB for the thousands of BD releases. The average BD size is over 31 GB.

Wilsdom

join:2009-08-06
reply to JTR
Ha, can't ever accuse Comcast of being anti-competitive, because they don't compete. They sit on their fat monopoly just steal

JTR

join:2012-05-19
Carbondale, IL
Reviews:
·Mediacom

1 recommendation

said by Wilsdom:

Ha, can't ever accuse Comcast of being anti-competitive, because they don't compete. They sit on their fat monopoly just steal

Comcast is competing with FiOS. Want to talk about non-competing behavior? Try looking at Frontier.


88615298
Premium
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness
reply to aaronwt
said by aaronwt:

said by 88615298:

said by 09129800:

I'd rather have uncapped 5 Mbps than some piece of shit capped 300 Mbps connection. If Comcap applies their 300 GB bandwidth cap and overage charging scam to this tier then it will be a clear example of a polished turd.

At 300 Mbps speeds you can transfer over 95 terabytes of data in one month. So a 300 GB bandwidth cap on such a speed tier would be beyond ridiculous.

Can you imagine if you actually used this new speed tier to its full potential and Comcap applied their "$10 per 50 GB" bandwidth overage scam to you?

You'd be looking at almost $20,000 in overage fees in just one month. And if you maxed the upload speed as well you'd have a bill for over $25,000.

SCAM!

No one is going to transfer 95 TB a month. Every movie that has been released on blu-ray combined doesn't equal 95 TB.

it should be past 95 TB for the thousands of BD releases. The average BD size is over 31 GB.

3000 Blu-ray movies( if there are that many )assuming your 31 GB average size is correct is 91 TB.


aaronwt
Premium
join:2004-11-07
Woodbridge, VA
said by 88615298:

3000 Blu-ray movies( if there are that many )assuming your 31 GB average size is correct is 91 TB.

May titles have multiple discs. I have some titles that have five or six Blu-ray Discs. And the james Bond BD set I'm getting soon has over twenty discs.
Although I have no idea what the actual count is for titles released on BD.
And my 31GB size came from my average disc size for what I have at home. Although I have over 110TB available on my home network, but not all of it is in use.


88615298
Premium
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness
said by aaronwt:

said by 88615298:

3000 Blu-ray movies( if there are that many )assuming your 31 GB average size is correct is 91 TB.

May titles have multiple discs. I have some titles that have five or six Blu-ray Discs. And the james Bond BD set I'm getting soon has over twenty discs.

Because there are over 20 James Bond movies. It's not like ONE movie is on 20 discs.


aaronwt
Premium
join:2004-11-07
Woodbridge, VA
said by 88615298:

said by aaronwt:

said by 88615298:

3000 Blu-ray movies( if there are that many )assuming your 31 GB average size is correct is 91 TB.

May titles have multiple discs. I have some titles that have five or six Blu-ray Discs. And the james Bond BD set I'm getting soon has over twenty discs.

Because there are over 20 James Bond movies. It's not like ONE movie is on 20 discs.

But also many titles are TV shows, that span multiple discs. Or even with just a movie title, there can be two or three or more discs with the extra discs having supplemental content.

Anyway according to wikipedia, as of June 2011, there were 3500 BD titles that had been released in the US.


tshirt
Premium
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Comcast
reply to Wilsdom
said by Wilsdom:

...unless hard numbers on what Comcast pays to its suppliers for that kind of bandwidth makes it unaffordable for $120.

Knowing what ComCast pays is irrelevent to how affordable it is or not.
Either you have $120 to spend for what you recieve or you do not.

Os

join:2011-01-26
US
Reviews:
·Comcast
reply to 88615298
And as things become more bandwidth-intensive, as they are, video streaming will be of higher resolutions, etc., and as always, files grow in size.

It's one thing to argue that 95TB of usage is ridiculous. It is. But it's another to act like 300GB is ridiculous. That is less than 1% of that.


88615298
Premium
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness
reply to aaronwt
said by aaronwt:

But also many titles are TV shows, that span multiple discs. Or even with just a movie title, there can be two or three or more discs with the extra discs having supplemental content.

Anyway according to wikipedia, as of June 2011, there were 3500 BD titles that had been released in the US.

A) I'm talking movies only not TV shows.

B) It's doesn't matter since no one is going to upload 3000 Blu-ray discs to the cloud every month.


88615298
Premium
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness
reply to Os
No said anything about 300 GB. We are discussing how ridiculous it is to assume one would use 95 TB in a month as RainbowDash thinks you would.

By the way having 6 Netflix streams going 24/7 would use at most 9 TB a month.


tshirt
Premium
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Comcast
reply to aaronwt
Are you going to redownload ALL 3000 blurays EVERY month?
assuming 2 hours per movie means you'll be running 8.3 movies at once 24/7, hardly residental useage.
As you have noticed BD is a highly efficient distrubution method for things you frequently access. Perhaps that method has a few more years left.


09129800

join:2012-06-27
New York, NY
reply to 88615298
What a very unpatriotic stance to take.

"This guy wants to improve our country? NOT IN MY 'MERRICA!! YOU CAN ACCEPT OUR SHITTY INFRASTRUCTURE OR GIIIIT OUT! WE DON'T NEED NONE OF THAT THERE FANCY FOREIGN INTERNETS"


09129800

join:2012-06-27
New York, NY
reply to JTR
said by JTR:

I think you need some more experience before comparing the US's network to foreign countries. Want to know why those countries have gigabit/100mbps for ridiculously low prices? It's because the ISP is essentially a country-wide LAN. Connections to the outside internet are horribly slow. I've seen countless posts by people from those countries (Korea, Japan, etc) with "gigabit" lines, who have said the same thing - foreign connections are a tiny fraction of their advertised speed. This is an even bigger issue because most of the world's server are located in the United States and the EU.

Then why is it that South Korean and Swedish seeders are always able to max out my 150 Mbps download if their connections outside of their countries are so awful?

You are so full of shit it's not even funny.