 
jplove71
IBEW 292 MPLS, MN
Premium
join:2001-03-16
Twin Cities
| New Comcast user I'm a new Comcast subscriber and if I ever receive one of these letters, I'm dropping them like a hot potato and going with another high speed internet provider.
Comcast needs to stop f***ing around and make public what that 'glass ceiling' is.
--
Browsing with Mozilla Firebird 0.6.1 | |
|
 | |
| | joebear29
join:2003-07-20
Alabaster, AL
edited
| Re: New Comcast user said by ronpin  :
said by jplove71 :
if I ever receive one of these letters, I'm dropping them like a hot potato and going with another high speed internet provider.
They're hoping you do!
I was thinking pretty much the same thing:
"What? That All-You-Can-Eat Buffet warned me about eating more than 12 plates of food in a sitting?! I'll show them, and never come back. They're never getting another $3.95 from me!"
[text was edited by author 2003-10-13 11:02:06] | |
|
| | | |
| | | 
shstrang
join:2003-01-10
West Monroe, LA
| quote:
What? That All-You-Can-Eat Buffet warned me about eating more than 12 plates of food in a sitting?! I'll show them, and never come back. They're never getting another $3.95 from me!
How do you know he's abusing his "all you can eat" internet service capacity? He may end up using less bandwidth than you ever would.
While no reasonable person expects to be able to go to an "All you can eat" buffet and be able to load up more than once or twice using data services aren't always as cut and dried.
If one wants to listen to live internet radio, surf websites with high graphic content (no I don't mean porn. Believe it or not there are other high graphics content sites on the net.) and download some new programs suggested by cnet, how will one know if they're over their "all you can eat" limit? If Comcast wants to enforce maximum allowed usage in GB chunks they need to make some kind of outline of that policy available to it's customers.
Now it appears that Comcast uses some arbitrary usuage amount to determine whether you're over the alloted amount.
Whether they actually do this or not matters not. Perception is reality. | |
|
| | | | joebear29
join:2003-07-20
Alabaster, AL
| Re: New Comcast user said by shstrang :
How do you know he's abusing his "all you can eat" internet service capacity? He may end up using less bandwidth than you ever would.
While no reasonable person expects to be able to go to an "All you can eat" buffet and be able to load up more than once or twice using data services aren't always as cut and dried.
You miss the point of my post. I wasn't arguing the ethics of either side, merely pointing out that leaving wouldn't bug Comcast too much, or else they would not have sent the letter in the first place. | |
|
| | | | |
jplove71
IBEW 292 MPLS, MN
Premium
join:2001-03-16
Twin Cities
| Re: New Comcast user said by joebear29 :
I wasn't arguing the ethics of either side, merely pointing out that leaving wouldn't bug Comcast too much, or else they would not have sent the letter in the first place.
I think it would matter when I'm also using Comcast for my phone and TV service as well.
Me - "Hello? Comcast? Yea, um, I want to cancel all of my services that I have with you."
Them - "Why do you want to do that?"
Me - "I received one of your 'high usage' letters and since there is no set limit in the TOS or AUP, I feel that you really don't want my business so I'm going to take it elsewhere."
Them - "Your account shows that you have phone, TV, and internet with us. Are you sure there's nothing we can do to keep you from leaving?"
Me - "There is one thing."
Them - "And what is that?"
Me - "Add this so-called 'download limit' to the TOS and/or AUP so that subscribers to your internet service know what it is."
Them - "I'm sorry, but we aren't going to do that."
Me - "Then disconnect all of my services immediately"
--
Browsing with Mozilla Firebird 0.6.1 | |
|
| | | | | | joebear29
join:2003-07-20
Alabaster, AL
| Re: New Comcast user said by jplove71 :
I think it would matter when I'm also using Comcast for my phone and TV service as well.
Well, it would depend on how much Comcast made off your other services versus how much they lost to excess bandwidth charges. Since I don't know the answer to either, I can't say for sure if they would regret losing you or not.
But it seems to me to be pretty stupid to send out the letter if you didn't want the customer to either cut usage or leave, so I assume that is the intent of the letters. | |
|
| | | | | | | 
J D McDorce
Premium
join:2001-12-29
Westland, MI | Re: New Comcast user It would be extremely interesting to see Comcast try to quantify excess bandwidth charges for an individual user.
In my specific case, Comcast was much more concerned about losing my CATV business than they were losing my HSI business. | |
|
| | | | | | | | joebear29
join:2003-07-20
Alabaster, AL
| Re: New Comcast user said by J D McDorce :
It would be extremely interesting to see Comcast try to quantify excess bandwidth charges for an individual user.
In my specific case, Comcast was much more concerned about losing my CATV business than they were losing my HSI business.
That I agree with. It could be they simply ignore the CATV/phone side of the equation when deciding who's profitable, at which point you could properly punish them by leaving. | |
|
| | | | | | | | |
jplove71
IBEW 292 MPLS, MN
Premium
join:2001-03-16
Twin Cities
| Re: New Comcast user said by joebear29 :
That I agree with. It could be they simply ignore the CATV/phone side of the equation when deciding who's profitable, at which point you could properly punish them by leaving.
Which is exactly my point that I mentioned earlier. Punish me for 'excessive' bandwidth usage when there is no pre-determined cap defined in the TOS/AUP and I'll go give a different company my money.
--
Browsing with Mozilla Firebird 0.6.1 | |
|
| | | | | | | | | 
Rambo76098
join:2003-02-21
Pataskala, OH
| Re: New Comcast user comcast: you have exceeded the amount of bandwidth allowed in our tos even though we have no set number and just send this letter at will. someone at comcast needs to get their act together... keep this up and real users will start dropping like rocks. I've heard that optium online has been doing this as well. (this is why to get dsl if available at a fixed speed with no usage limits(or implied usage limits for that matter) | |
|
| | | 
HotRodFoto
Premium
join:2003-04-19
Denver, CO
| Comcast outta knock the crap off. It sounds to me like one side is sayin yes u can go faster and the other side is sayin caps! Double standard. It will happen to where they do get a lawsuit sooner or later, as they will issue a letter to someone who runs a business and bam! Lost income and all that. Unlimited means UNLIMITED.....it means being able to surf when u want to with your connection and never worrying about it. Downloading how much u want when u want (legally that is...not illegal stuff) and never worrying about a cap. They are false advertising plain and simple.
Unlimited
\Un*lim"it*ed\, a. 1. Not limited; having no bounds; boundless; as, an unlimited expanse of ocean.
2. Undefined; indefinite; not bounded by proper exceptions; as, unlimited terms. ``Nothing doth more prevail than unlimited generalities.'' --Hooker.
3. Unconfined; not restrained; unrestricted. | |
|
| | | | joebear29
join:2003-07-20
Alabaster, AL
| Re: New Comcast user said by HotRodFoto :
Comcast outta knock the crap off. It sounds to me like one side is sayin yes u can go faster and the other side is sayin caps! Double standard. It will happen to where they do get a lawsuit sooner or later, as they will issue a letter to someone who runs a business and bam! Lost income and all that. Unlimited means UNLIMITED.....it means being able to surf when u want to with your connection and never worrying about it. Downloading how much u want when u want (legally that is...not illegal stuff) and never worrying about a cap. They are false advertising plain and simple.
Unlimited
\Un*lim"it*ed\, a. 1. Not limited; having no bounds; boundless; as, an unlimited expanse of ocean.
2. Undefined; indefinite; not bounded by proper exceptions; as, unlimited terms. ``Nothing doth more prevail than unlimited generalities.'' --Hooker.
3. Unconfined; not restrained; unrestricted.
Even if I accept your entire post as true and correct, I don't see how it relates to my point of how COmcast wanted him to leave or they would not have sent the letter. | |
|
| | | 
blackjeep
join:2001-07-12
Atlanta, GA
| The reasoning here, as at an all U can eat restaurant, should be that they are going to make their money up on the folks who come in, pay $3.95 to visit the bar, and then end up eating a bowl of soup and a roll. They more than make up for/outnumber the occasional overindulger(unless you're from the southeast and going to the western sizzlin' all u can eat breakfast buffet with Bubba and his 8 starving kids. | |
|
| | |
| hobbesk
join:2002-03-24
Seattle, WA
| Just use as much as you want and if you get this letter, sue their @$$ off. A few litigations like this and they will be forced to either Define a Clear Limit or Stop sending those letters.
If Comcast had anyone in power who was able to look forward they wouldn't be doing this. In order to woo people onto broadband, broadband has to be able to offer a substantial improvement in the "Online Experience". As of technology right now, the "Substantial Improvement" can ONLY come with high bandwidth, i.e. online media content.
So Comcast should be encouraging their users to experience all the online media content they can and go out and tell their friends about it. But with this cap, I feel like I'm at Disney Land waiting 3 hours in line for 3 minutes of thrill ride on some roller coaster.
The analogy of buffet is WAY OFF THE MARK, since our appetite for online content is way higher then what the buffet is allowing us to eat.
A true buffet analogy would go something like a buffet advertising all you can eat and not allowing us to eat more then a half a plate full.
That is a true analogy of what's going on right now.
But since there are no other prominent Online-Buffet that is allowing us to eat our fill, Commicast can get away with it. | |
|
| 
Transmaster
Onward Through The Fog
join:2001-06-20
Cheyenne, WY
| This forum in the past has turned me on to a band width
meter. I have lost the URL to where that was. I listen to a lot of streaming radio and It would be very interested
to see how much I clock up.
--
I love Irish Terriers, Low Brass, and the electric blue glow of an 866 mercury vapor rectifier tube at night. | |
|
| | |
| | |
| |
B
Premium,MVM
join:2000-10-28 | Invisible Data Cap? Is that anything like a tinfoil hat? Mine gets too hot in the summer, and I'm looking for alternatives...
Apologies for this guaranteed-content-free post.
-- B | |
|
|
| 
Archivis
Your Daddy
Premium
join:2001-11-26
Earth
 ·Verizon FIOS
| Re: Why can't they just go public? Why should they have to? It would be bad PR if they DID announce this. Instead, just send these to the people who they're losing money off of. Who cares how you treat them.
--
The Internet Hitman | TIHM chat | Aftershock | |
|
| | 
Sarick
It's Only Logical
Premium
join:2003-06-03
USA
 ·FrontierNet Intern..
| Re: Why can't they just go public? You don't seem to get the issue here, they aren't setting a limit.
Set a limit and then you can complain, don't set one and your cheating anyone who buys the service.
How can you tell if your over the limit if there is no limit?
Come to think about it what do you think would happen if credit cards ran this way?
Mr Credit card.
CARD Co.. : You have unlimited use of our credit card.
Customer : Really?
CARD Co.. : Yes you can use it as much as you want..
You buy tuns of stuff.
Card Co calls back.
Customer : Hello?
CARD Co.. : You've used over your cap. We are suspending your account and suing you for misuse of our service!
Customer : What yada yada, you said unlimited..
CARD Co.. : Read the TOS, and deal with it.
--
Trouble with spelling.. This browser extension changed my internet life. www.iespell.com (it's really nice!) -Sarick | |
|
| | |
Archivis
Your Daddy
Premium
join:2001-11-26
Earth
·Verizon FIOS
| Re: Why can't they just go public? Well, if you've got a problem with it, then take your money elsewhere.
We're talking about internet service. I think this place is making a big stink about nothing. How many letters have we seen that have been sent out? A few?
Send them out en masse towards our everyday high users and I'll sing a different tune.
Wanna tell a guy who's got 4 radio streams capturing every single second of every single day to knock it off? Go for it.
--
The Internet Hitman | TIHM chat | Aftershock | |
|
| | | |
Sarick
It's Only Logical
Premium
join:2003-06-03
USA
·FrontierNet Intern..
| Re: Why can't they just go public? QOS.
It's the networks design flaw.
If they have a set limit all they need to do is TELL them that limit..
by them not stating a limit and keeping the caps hidden they are using a bait tactic. how so? Well they are expecting people to buy into a service under the impression that its unlimited while secretly maintaining a limit. When someone pays for the service and decides to use it as it is advertised (broadband internet) they get shafted?
It looks like a slithering snake oil salesman.
They aren't setting a real limit yet saying it's unlimited no matter how you put it its falsely promoting a service as something its not meant to be.
Cable Co's Are KNOWINGLY and WILLINGLY cheating people by selling a service they can't support. It's simple if they can't support the streams then they should state it before any money transactions are made.
Thats what people want!
Since the provider can't balance the loads then it's their fault for the poor backbone design. Isn't that what stream caps are? If they want to limit his streams then all they need to do is cut back on the connection.
--
Trouble with spelling.. This browser extension changed my internet life. www.iespell.com (it's really nice!) -Sarick | |
|
| | | | | joebear29
join:2003-07-20
Alabaster, AL
| Re: Why can't they just go public? said by Sarick :
QOS.
It's the networks design flaw.
If they have a set limit all they need to do is TELL them that limit..
Apparently there is no set limit, it varies from location to location and node to node.
quote:
by them not stating a limit and keeping the caps hidden they are using a bait tactic. how so? Well they are expecting people to buy into a service under the impression that its unlimited while secretly maintaining a limit. When someone pays for the service and decides to use it as it is advertised (broadband internet) they get shafted?
It looks like a slithering snake oil salesman.
They aren't setting a real limit yet saying it's unlimited no matter how you put it its falsely promoting a service as something its not meant to be.
You can't run a server off the service either. That is a non-publicized (yet in the TOS/AUP) limit as well, yet few are complaining about that.
And who is getting shafted? You pay your $40, download 400 gigs, get a letter. Repeat next month. Third month, they shut off your service at the end. You paid for three months unlimited, you got three months unlimited. Where were you "shafted" by being charged for something you did not get?
quote:
Cable Co's Are KNOWINGLY and WILLINGLY cheating people by selling a service they can't support. It's simple if they can't support the streams then they should state it before any money transactions are made.
Thats what people want!
Again, how is anyone being cheated? For as long as they pay for the service, they get unlimited access.
quote:
Since the provider can't balance the loads then it's their fault for the poor backbone design. Isn't that what stream caps are? If they want to limit his streams then all they need to do is cut back on the connection.
So, if they want to limit his usage to lets say 100 gigs a month, they should throttle his connection to a 323 kilobits down? i would be angrier at paying $40 bucks for 323 down than I would simply having the service cancelled and not being charged anymore. | |
|
| | | | | | |
| | | 
Athlon III
join:2000-08-27
Corvallis, OR
| said by Sarick :
Come to think about it what do you think would happen if credit cards ran this way?
American Express has no spending limit on their card but if you spend more than you normally spend, they'll probably but a lock on it.
I just think Comcast is trying to control heavy users on individual nodes. If you're part of the group (top 2%?) that's causing the slow down you might get a letter. Every node would be different. 100GB downloaders might be a problem on one node and 250GB might be a problem on another.
---
Athlon III | |
|
| | | |
Sarick
It's Only Logical
Premium
join:2003-06-03
USA | Re: Why can't they just go public? I didn't say spending limit.
I said unlimited use. 
You see why people are so confused? | |
|
| | bandw1dth
join:2003-02-07
Hoboken, NJ
| said by Archivis :
Why should they have to? It would be bad PR if they DID announce this. Instead, just send these to the people who they're losing money off of. Who cares how you treat them.
Your last sentence is the major problem with business's today. | |
|
| | |
Archivis
Your Daddy
Premium
join:2001-11-26
Earth
·Verizon FIOS
| Re: Why can't they just go public? If I was in business and someone was abusing my unlimited (a man eating 14 plates at a buffet) business, I'd cut them loose as well.
I'll even refund the money for their last visit/month. You're just not allowed to be my customer anymore.
--
The Internet Hitman | TIHM chat | Aftershock | |
|
| | | | |
| | | | |
Archivis
Your Daddy
Premium
join:2001-11-26
Earth
·Verizon FIOS
| Re: Why can't they just go public? You're right JT, but what would be the business's alternative?
They set the price, based upon what the average consumer will consume. If I were running the business, I wouldn't be kicking people out for eating 3, 4 or 5 plates.
But I don't know a single person who could eat 10+ plates (full) of food. The only means a person could go to do that would be if they stayed in the restaurant for hours at a time, digesting their food and eating when they could.
That would be abuse. I would kick them out, even though I advertised an unlimited buffet sitting.
How does this translate over to this situation? Well, there's some people who eat up a lot of bandwidth, even an excessive amount. Then there's a guy who keeps his bandwidth full throttle every second of the month. That's excessive. That's a man who stays in the buffet all day for breakfast lunch and dinner.
If these ISP's were sending out these letters en masse to "high downloaders" then I would be singing a COMPLETELY different tune. That's like kicking a guy out because he has a high capacity for food and can eat it all in one sitting (I know a pastor who weighs around 140 and consumes 4-5 plates at a chinese restaurant). That would be absurd, and clearly a misuse of the unlimited term.
I think the common sense rule comes into place here. I don't think it could be something that could be easily defined. And if it were, as a courtesy, I would refund the user for their last month's of service (or their fee for the buffet) and request that the customer never comes back.
As a business owner, I wouldn't see anything wrong with that.
--
The Internet Hitman | TIHM chat | Aftershock | |
|
| | | | | | |
|
Rambo76098
join:2003-02-21
Pataskala, OH
| said by Sarick :
Worse off why won't the cable companies just set it straight?
Because that might be well..... logical! | |
|
|
Sarick
It's Only Logical
Premium
join:2003-06-03
USA
·FrontierNet Intern..
| It all comes down to false advertisement.
Don't call it unlimited if its limited it doesn't matter how much they use if you told them it was "all you can eat."
If I'm still hungry after 16 plates thats not your busyness even if your losing money, when you put up that advertisement without the small print and I payed for that service it becomes my busyness how much I eat. It becomes your problem if you lose money.
Try this on for size.
You make an investment in gold with a gold broker and golds value starts dropping dramatical. You can't tell the companies you invested gold in at a higher price. "Hay the gold was a higher price when I invested in it. I've changed my mind. I would like you to give me a full refund I'm losing money because I made a bad investment."
You know what they would say, tough luck.
Unlike buying a service that is advertised as unlimited.
Being the busyness and selling the serviced as advertised is a commitment busyness risk. By offering that service as unlimited and not complying to your investment your ethics are warped. Just because your losing profits on a contract doesn't give you the right to pull out at any time unless your contract has opt out terms specifically imposed in the introduction of the contract. Wildly broad based exceptions are hard to comply with in a court of law to to their broad nature.
--
Trouble with spelling.. This browser extension changed my internet life. »www.iespell.com (it's really nice!) -Sarick | |
|
| |
Archivis
Your Daddy
Premium
join:2001-11-26
Earth
·Verizon FIOS
| Re: Why can't they just go public? Well I suppose we can agree to disagree on that one.
You run your fake biz your way and i'll run my fake biz my way
And if I catch your fat ass eating more plates of food in my restaurant then you can count on your fingers, you can have your $6.95 and you can waddle out the door.
--
The Internet Hitman | TIHM chat | Aftershock | |
|
|
Sarick
It's Only Logical
Premium
join:2003-06-03
USA
·FrontierNet Intern..
| Busyness is a risk, false advertisement and taking unethical approaches toward busyness will only do one thing.
Insure your busyness gets sued and the investment risk becomes an investment failure.
--
Trouble with spelling.. This browser extension changed my internet life. »www.iespell.com (it's really nice!) -Sarick | |
|
| sago
join:2001-12-19
edited
| Here's the thing... how many people are using cable internet because they have no other option? What's driving people in the door of the restaurant is that it's the only place in town that has any food! In a situation like this, doesn't it make some kind of sense to have some kind of control over one person hogging all the food and leaving the rest of the population hungry? So you have people that eat a lot, and some that eat less. But in any case, you still have some people that haven't come down to grab a bite yet. Why give away all of your food one particular individual? Other people need to eat too!
P.S. - by the way, where did this unlimited means unlimited data transfer theory come from? The ads say "there's no need to dial up, you're always connected" or something along those lines. I don't see anywhere that it says "unlimited data transfer". Unlimited can mean lots of things. Lots of things can be unlimited. In this case, unlimited means that you can stay connected 24/7/365 with no need to dial up. Nowhere does it say "unlimited data transfer". Nowhere.
It's the difference between having a back-up generator with a fuel delivery contract to keep the freezers and refrigerators running at the restaurant during a power outage when all the other food in town is spoiled, and someone coming in demanding all of the fresh food available for miles around because it's "all you can eat".
[text was edited by author 2003-10-14 18:44:59] | |
|
| | |
| |
| sago
join:2001-12-19
| show me a place where is says "unlimited data transfer".
access is access -- it's a key. Cable modem is on all the time, the "door to the internet" is open 24/7.
I've never seen them say "unlimited data transfer", have you?
It's a pointless argument, I think. It's not what I thought you said, it's what you meant to say that's important. The TOS is the legal document. Even if there are no bandwidth "limits", per se, there are still limitations on how much impact you can place on the network resources as an individual subscriber. For instance, you can't uncap your modem, the modem has a cap, why don't we argue that it's false advertising to say unlimited and then put a cap on your modem at 3mbps? Same argument, really... | |
|
| |
Sarick
It's Only Logical
Premium
join:2003-06-03
USA
·FrontierNet Intern..
| Re: Why can't they just go public? When someone says unlimited use the common conception is use as much as you want.
To treat it as otherwise is is misleading. Why because the general public if that was told they had an unlimited of anything would think. the last time I checked unlimited meant.
NO limits..
when it comes to internet and I see unlimited it dent state what's unlimited it just says unlimited. Then you use a service that has "transactions and or is based on a timescale" any representation that the service is unlimited without clearly stating what the unlimited refers to and how the term is used is in fact misleading.
You wanted links where comcast promoted unlimited I gave you a few, one of them was from comcast.
Now your getting down to the gritty point of whats unlimited and whats not. It's clearly been proven that comcast used the term at one point and in some instances comcast is still using it.
The reasoning is obvious they know the average consumer would see that term and think WOW unlimited. My DSL is also unlimited but the cables transfer rates are much faster. I'm going to get this faster unlimited broadband.
You can't possibly deny me of this evidence.
If this wasn't a selling point then they wouldn't have put it up as one. Their intention wasn't that unlimited connection meant always on. It was used as a selling point to outsell DSL subcribers that had real unlimited connections. Based on a few of the samples I've shown the always on is included as another selling point. Comcast wouldn't put the same feature twice now would they?
They where separate selling points, if they clearly didn't want the consumer to assume unlimited meant always on then they wouldn't have stated always on in another section.
--
Trouble with spelling.. This browser extension changed my internet life. »www.iespell.com (it's really nice!) -Sarick | |
|
| | |
| |
The Glass Ceiling
·
Why can't they just go public?
Re: Why can't they just go public?
·
·
·
