republican-creole
site Search:


 
   
story category
80% DOCSIS 3.0 Coverage By 2013?
Low per home costs mean technology will come on quickly...
by Karl Bode Tuesday 10-Feb-2009 tags: coverage · hardware
Industry analyst Dave Burstein has been crunching the numbers from most major cable operators, and believes that 10% of all cable customers have access to DOCSIS 3.0 technology (and faster speeds) today. According to Burstein, those numbers will jump to 50% in 2010, fueled largely by Comcast's promise that they'll have their entire footprint DOCSIS 3.0 ready by the end of 2010. Given the estimated $50-$100 per home investment cost, Burstein thinks we'll see 70-80% nationwide DOCSIS 3.0 coverage by 2012 or 2013.

Of course the big question will be just how big the coverage gap will be; carriers in uncompetitive areas doing battle with slow DSL may not see the competitive necessity to move past DOCSIS 2.0. With caps, de-prioritization systems and (if many ISPs get their way) metered billing now becoming the norm, by 2013 the discussion may be less about how fast your connection is -- and more about just how fully you're able to use it. Customers may ultimately prefer slower connections if they aren't capped, throttled, and filtered.

view: topics flat text 
Post a:

BF69
Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN

So they won't need caps then right?

Since Docsis 3.0 basically solves most of there supposed issues with congestion,

fifty nine

join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ
kudos:1

Re: So they won't need caps then right?

We have DOCSIS3 and our cable provider caps at 100GB. Over that you pay.

Of course, Prolog/Penteledata have been known to be pretty greedy and have had low caps ever since so this is no surprise.

If Embarq would get off their butts and offer me more than 5m down and 896 up I'd jump ship in a heartbeat.
me1212

join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO

Re: So they won't need caps then right?

So embarq has no caps? It may be slower, but for no caps It would be worth it were I in your shoes. you could always see if you could get some bonded DSL lines from them.

Matt
All noise, no signal.
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12

Re: So they won't need caps then right?

said by me1212:

So embarq has no caps? It may be slower, but for no caps It would be worth it were I in your shoes. you could always see if you could get some bonded DSL lines from them.
Aside from Time Warner's shenanigans, the caps that are being announced by the likes of Comcast and AT&T are perfectly acceptable for the vast, vast, majority of users. One can only hope that as time goes on, the caps will be raised to account for the inevitable increase in usage that will come by the average user. The outliers - otherwise labeled as "bandwidth hogs" - will never be catered to however.

And I'll state the very unpopular opinion again, if you're using hundreds of GB a month, the likelihood is very high that you're engaging in illegal activities.
deadzoned
Premium
join:2005-04-13
Baton Rouge, LA

Re: So they won't need caps then right?

Guilty until proven innocent huh? Sounds about right in this day and age of teh "BANDWIDTH APOCALYPSE!!!!!!!!" I sure wish they would catch these mysterious 1 percenters that we keep hearing so much about that are destroying the Internet as we know it.

Typically, a business will increase capacity to meet new demands. Not so with the major isp's though, as they have decided to limit all customers instead. All of this, and none of them have provided any specific data to back up their claims of bandwidth congestion. We must take them for their word and trust them. At the same time, ironically enough, we are seeing an explosion in competitive tv services that utilize a broadband connection. Weird huh? I'm sure there is nothing to that other than bad timing though. The cable and phone companies have always shown themselves to be trustworthy and completely concerned about their customers, so I am not worried.

Matt
All noise, no signal.
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12

Re: So they won't need caps then right?

How about Guilty by Experience?

I was a warez kiddie back in the day, probably before you were born, when HS-Link was popular because it allowed you to upload and download at the same time to save on long distance charges.

My behavior has changed as I've gotten older, but the only thing I don't do now is download music, movies, and warez illegally ... and my usage sits around 60GB a month. That's with Netflix streaming, 3 computers in the house, streaming movies outbound with Orb, XBox gaming, 100% teleworking, two iPhones on WiFi, XM Radio streaming for 8+ hours a day, and a PBX based VoIP phone.

60GB.

While I agree that caps are probably a preemptive shot at competing video services, as it stands right now, it's much ado about nothing. If you remove illegal BitTorrent and NNTP traffic, you simply don't have enough hours in the day to hit some of the proposed caps.
deadzoned
Premium
join:2005-04-13
Baton Rouge, LA

Re: So they won't need caps then right?

None of that matters. As streaming services become more and more plentiful and prevalent, consumption is naturally going to go up.

It's a major preemptive strike against competing services but in reality it's also just the excuse they were looking for to do what they have desperately wanted to do for a long time now - take total control of the pipes so they can dictate how we use them.

Sadly, they are being less than truthful, and characterizing it as a fight against bandwidth congestion. None of them have provided any hard evidence to support this so-called "Bandwidth Apocalypse" that they keep screaming about.
me1212

join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO
Yes, that may be true, but with VoIP, and gaming(online), downloadable content for games, and legal movie/tv watching sites[hulu(I don't know if everything is legal there, butI know some is)/netflix come to mind] like this: Its the middle of summer vacation. The dad hooked the PC up to the new plasma/lcd TV, and they have a netflix subcription, he and the mom go to watch an HD movie. Then the mon's friend calls(on VoIP) and they chat for an hour or so. They have 3 kids one gets on the 360 to play halo3 online, the second goes to watch hulu(the "D" doesn't matter as he will be on for a few hours) and goes to itune to get a new song or 2 while its buffering, the third gets on a web cam with a friend, or plays brawl online. and due to the fact that its summer vacation the kids will be doing this most evern day for a while.

I could get by with 250g a month with CC, but the throtling is what I cannot stand, if it makes VoIP unuseable, what if I have to call 911? They won't be able to understand me! then I die! Thats why I would rather have a slow speed with at least 250g per month and no throtle than one with a throtle. I would rather have unlimited incase I NEEDED it, butI could do just fine with 250-300 a month. I am most likly in the "vast vast" part you talked about. I too hope that as time goes on the caps will increase to accomadate the increased need(and by then it WILL be NEED). and for thoes who NEED no caps I heop they can afford T1.

fifty nine

join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ
kudos:1

1 edit

Re: So they won't need caps then right?

said by me1212:

and legal movie/tv watching sites[hulu(I don't know if everything is legal there, butI know some is)/netflix come to mind]
Hulu is a partnership between NBC Universal and Fox along with content supplied from other copyright holders so the content there is 100% legal.

BF69
Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
said by Matt:

Aside from Time Warner's shenanigans, the caps that are being announced by the likes of Comcast and AT&T are perfectly acceptable for the vast, vast, majority of users.
I don't care if they had a 1 TB monthly cap. If Docsis is supposed to prevent congestion and that's the reason they claim for the cap then there shouldn't be any caps after Docsis 3.0 is rolled out. PERIOD.

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
Reviews:
·AT&T DSL Service
said by Matt:

the caps that are being announced by the likes of Comcast and AT&T are perfectly acceptable for the vast, vast, majority of users.
I'm afraid I'm going to have to strongly disagree. at&t's caps will vary by speed plan; if you're trying to save money by buying an economical plan (VS Max 18+ or whatever) the caps are pretty restrictive. With streaming coming on strong I think many people--- ESPECIALLY families--- will hit at&t caps easily--- WITHOUT being "illegal P2P'ers"...
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini

Matt
All noise, no signal.
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12

Re: So they won't need caps then right?

said by KrK:

said by Matt:

the caps that are being announced by the likes of Comcast and AT&T are perfectly acceptable for the vast, vast, majority of users.
I'm afraid I'm going to have to strongly disagree. at&t's caps will vary by speed plan; if you're trying to save money by buying an economical plan (VS Max 18+ or whatever) the caps are pretty restrictive. With streaming coming on strong I think many people--- ESPECIALLY families--- will hit at&t caps easily--- WITHOUT being "illegal P2P'ers"...
What are the caps per tier?
vinnie97
Premium
join:2003-12-05
US
kudos:1

Re: So they won't need caps then right?

damn low, as low as 20GB. TWC/AT&T territories are truly in broadband hell.

Matt
All noise, no signal.
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12

Re: So they won't need caps then right?

said by vinnie97:

damn low, as low as 20GB. TWC/AT&T territories are truly in broadband hell.
You ever tried to download more than 20GB a month on a 768Kbps connection? My friend has a 768Kbps cable connection and Netflix streaming is so blurry on his SD TV he can't even watch it.

fifty nine

join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ
kudos:1

1 edit
said by Matt:

Aside from Time Warner's shenanigans, the caps that are being announced by the likes of Comcast and AT&T are perfectly acceptable for the vast, vast, majority of users. One can only hope that as time goes on, the caps will be raised to account for the inevitable increase in usage that will come by the average user. The outliers - otherwise labeled as "bandwidth hogs" - will never be catered to however.

And I'll state the very unpopular opinion again, if you're using hundreds of GB a month, the likelihood is very high that you're engaging in illegal activities.
The caps on my ISP are 60GB for 10meg DOCSIS1 and 100GB for 30 meg DOCSIS3. Commercial accounts are 150 gig (75 down, 75 up).

As for engaging in illegal activities, I strongly disagree.

Most of my bandwidth usage is because I work from home sometimes, send high res TIFF photos for printing and archival (I'm an amateur photographer), watch hulu, watch streaming on news sites (Fox News, CNN), watch netflix HD and download TiVocasts from my TiVo.

All 100% legal.

I don't torrent anything at all, not even a Linux ISO. In fact since I work in the industry it would be a major embarrassment if I was caught illegally downloading or uploading any copyrighted movies or TV shows.

Matt
All noise, no signal.
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12

Re: So they won't need caps then right?

I also do Hulu and other streams via PlayOn. So what is your monthly usage? It sounds to me like you're right in line with mine. Unless you're paying for overages every month above and beyond the 100GB maximum you're allowed on the highest tier, you're no where near the the usage of the group I am referring to.

fifty nine

join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ
kudos:1

1 edit

Re: So they won't need caps then right?

I'm averaging about 80-85 gig per month, and that's only because I watch my usage and download/upload my big files at the office. If I used netflix HD more I would probably be over the cap.

Mind you, my work often involves uploading large log files (hundreds of megs most time) to tech support.

I did a workaround by using an X session on my work desktop PC but it's a PITA. It would be a whole lot easier if I didn't have caps to worry about.
me1212

join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO

Re: So they won't need caps then right?

Caps could hurt with VoIP,if you hit your cap(and its not a soft one) you could really die, if all you can aford its voip, and no cell. 250-300g you be more than enough for me, and I would fell safer with a cap that high cause I use VoIP. I would have all I need for legal sites like hule and veoh(I think they have some not legal suff, but I know they also have legal stuff, ie nick[the tv station] uploads stuff there) legal youtube stuff(chad vader) brawl and PBR on the wii, and have enough left over to safly use the phone.

Matt
All noise, no signal.
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12

Re: So they won't need caps then right?

said by me1212:

Caps could hurt with VoIP,if you hit your cap(and its not a soft one) you could really die
They don't cut you off when you reach your cap, you pay an overage charge next month. Think of how your cell phone works ... same principle.

BTW, VoIP traffic is miniscule in the grand scheme of things. You use about .5 megabytes a minute on VoIP, so you'd have to talk for 500,000 minutes to burn through Comcast's 250GB cap -- in other words, it's not possible unless you have discovered a way to defy the laws of space and time.

pspcrazy
Anime Freak

join:2008-02-06
San Diego, CA

Re: So they won't need caps then right?

Matt why are you going so far as to stand behind caps? What does it matter to you if everyone is against caps. I know you don't like the idea as well, so why try to defend the cableco's position on it? Just leave it and let them take the blame for their greed.
me1212

join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO

1 edit
"it's not possible unless you have discovered a way to defy the laws of space and time." Okay, first if I did that I would have so much cash, that I would have 3 coms each with a 1gb conection and unlimited UL/DL, and they would be able to handle it with ease. second I did not know that it was a soft cap(not a lock out cap as with some(WB/hughesnet come to mind[I had WB] its their throttle I don't like.

Thank you very much for clearing that up. But I still think that a ISP should HAVE to say on their site and comercials they have a cap and actuly say it with word on TVCs, not in the fine print, but I'm just happy I have high speed, fixed wireless, that can handle VOIPo out here where I live, I used to think all I had was WB/hughes.

Also can some1 answer my question, does embarq have a cap or not? I ask cause, to the left of my house the high speed is my WISP or comcast to the right its my WISP or embarq, and when I move out it won't be more(I want to stay close in case...) then 8 or so miles from my parents house and my grand parents live to the comcast side(and have CC), so I want to know which direction to go.

fifty nine

join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ
kudos:1

Re: So they won't need caps then right?

Embarq has no caps.
me1212

join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO

Re: So they won't need caps then right?

Thank you!

fifty nine

join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ
kudos:1
said by Matt:

They don't cut you off when you reach your cap, you pay an overage charge next month. Think of how your cell phone works ... same principle.
I could have sworn that some providers will slow your internet access to a crawl once you hit your cap.

But yes, you are right that some will charge overages. Penteledata charges $1/gig over my cap. I guess if I really wanted I could go over anyway and pay the overage, but they also say that they can disconnect your service if you routinely go over the cap. I've heard of some people calling and asking about it only to be told "don't abuse the network." That's the scary part.

I agree that VoIP won't significantly add to your bandwidth usage, but some ISPs (Comcast comes to mind) will degrade your VoIP experience if you are targeted for network de-congestion and are penalized. While separate from the caps, this pretty much makes using VoIP tricky at the least.

en102
Canadian, eh?

join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
Right...
As much as that may be true. There are a few reasons that caps will be implemented:

1. Profit - This is a way to make more money off your package w/o increasing the monthly price at the sticker level.

2. Control - This can/will keep traffic in check for the average user, as unlimited is now 'gone'. Methods such as this can also keep costs in check by adjusting overage charges as needed (there is no contract on cable).

3. Easy method to get less profitable customers off the base tiers and have them spend money. Eg. On a 3Mbps connection, I can still use +1TB/month if needed. Putting a paltry 40GB cap on a 3Mbps connection will have most customers jumping to higher connections just to avoid overage charges.
--
Canada = Hollywood North

hopeflicker
Capitalism breeds greed
Premium
join:2003-04-03
Long Beach, CA
kudos:1

Why??

Why do they need DOCSIS 3 when they already have an "advanced fiber network"?

fifty nine

join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ
kudos:1

Re: Why??

Are you really that dense?

That's like saying why would Verizon need G.984 when they have FTTH.
TheKnossos

join:2003-05-14
Argyle, TX

Re: Why??

It's ok, the concept of sarcasm can be a difficult one...
Rob2647

join:2008-08-12
Rochester, MI

I don't

understand the need for DOCSIS 3 when carriers are not offering full DOCSIS 2 speeds. When we were with Comcast we were still on DOCSIS 1.1 But that was before U-verse really expanded in my area.

jadebangle
Premium
join:2007-05-22
00000
Reviews:
·SureWest Internet
·AT&T Yahoo
·Comcast

Re: I don't

said by Rob2647:

understand the need for DOCSIS 3 when carriers are not offering full DOCSIS 2 speeds. When we were with Comcast we were still on DOCSIS 1.1 But that was before U-verse really expanded in my area.
Docsis 1.1 or 1.0 are 42mbps/10mbps
Even speed of 50/10 offered only use a fraction of docsis 3 »en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DOCSIS
50/10 are only in select area that compete with verizon
OOL also do this so user won't switch to Verizon Fios, their competitor
OOL cap user for uploading for more then 15min to 150kbps is about 16kb/sec???
Optimum Online can raise the speed all they like but with usage and speed cap its an inferior service to verizon fios infinite usage. No caps and no extra charge for unlimited bandwidth.
For Comcast, Cox, Timewarner, Charter most user are not upgraded yet to higher speed of 10mbit,12mbit,16mbit,20mbit.
The reason is that if their is no higher offering in your area, you will never get the upgrade and will be stuck with their inferior mediocre speed tier of measly 5-8mbit,384k-1mbit
majortom1029

join:2006-10-19
Lindenhurst, NY
kudos:1

2 edits

Re: I don't

IF your not in an ool territory dont spread lies. OOL does not cap anymore.

So stop with the lies.

Ps cablevision uses docsis 2 and has the boost package which is 38/5 (advertised as 30/5). Download is uncapped meaning the only thing limiting your download speed is node congestion. Upload is at 5 .

Cablevision does not cap anymore. Infact you can have ports 80 and 25 opened up on boost and run those servers. I do not see fios doing that.

RARPSL

join:1999-12-08
Suffern, NY

Re: I don't

said by majortom1029:

IF your not in an ool territory dont spread lies. OOL does not cap anymore.

So stop with the lies.

Ps cablevision uses docsis 2 and has the boost package which is 38/5 (advertised as 30/5). Download is uncapped meaning the only thing limiting your download speed is node congestion. Upload is at 5 .

Cablevision does not cap anymore. Infact you can have ports 80 and 25 opened up on boost and run those servers. I do not see fios doing that.
To be totally accurate, while the OOL download is uncapped (ie: You will get the max of 38Mbs that the node can handle while allowing for any current congestion related speed reduction OR the speed your source is feeding at after the Internet Latency is allowed for [ie: If it is feeding at 15Mbs, that is what you will get]), the upload is now capped at 5.5Mbs not the 5Mbs you state (when the download was switched from a 30Mbs cap to uncapped, the upload cap was raised from its old 5Mbs to its current 5.5Mbs).

jadebangle
Premium
join:2007-05-22
00000
Reviews:
·SureWest Internet
·AT&T Yahoo
·Comcast
said by majortom1029:

IF your not in an ool territory dont spread lies. OOL does not cap anymore.

So stop with the lies.

Ps cablevision uses docsis 2 and has the boost package which is 38/5 (advertised as 30/5). Download is uncapped meaning the only thing limiting your download speed is node congestion. Upload is at 5 .

Cablevision does not cap anymore. Infact you can have ports 80 and 25 opened up on boost and run those servers. I do not see fios doing that.
This is true for cable internet anywhere in the world
OOL have upload cap, are you saying this has changed? like comcast its call invisible cap this mean that those who use most will be disconnected. Some Verizon Fios User are Ex OOL User Optimum Online Internet infact paved the way for speed throttling.

1. Max out your connection for 15min or over, you get shaped down to a measly 150kbps
2. You use too much bandwidth... you get your connection shut off.
Comcast is doing this now but they didn't invent the wheel.
If other cable company does it why can't they?
I wish we do away with all these silly cap remember I am not in favor of limited use
I'm against it so don't get me wrong...

Either give us unlimited bandwidth, no traffic shaping or don't do business with any of us.
Instead of who offer the best speed, its who offer the most cap.
majortom1029

join:2006-10-19
Lindenhurst, NY
kudos:1

Re: I don't

I am saying there is no traffic shapping. You have basically 30/5 or 15/2 and can do anything you want with it. If you upload alot you will not get your traffic shaped.

powerspec88
Premium
join:2007-03-11
Lenexa, KS
Reviews:
·SureWest Internet
·AT&T Yahoo
·Embarq Now Centu..
·Sprint Mobile Br..
The town north of me still has DOCSIS 1.1 w/o powerboost! So when comcast says 100% by 2010 is a lie. But comcast has nothing to worry about, the DSL provider in that town fastest speed is 1.5/868 for 100$.....
--
»twitter.com/powerspec | »netisinc.com
jimbopalmer
Tsar of all the Rushers

join:2008-06-02
Greenwood, MS
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Windjammer Cable

Re: I don't

said by powerspec88:

The town north of me still has DOCSIS 1.1 w/o powerboost! So when comcast says 100% by 2010 is a lie.
Had Comcast promised DOCSIS 3 by 2008 I can see how they lied, I can't see ANY WAY to know they lied about 2010 until it is over.
--
I tried to remain child-like, all I achieved was childish.

powerspec88
Premium
join:2007-03-11
Lenexa, KS
Reviews:
·SureWest Internet
·AT&T Yahoo
·Embarq Now Centu..
·Sprint Mobile Br..

Re: I don't

I know 2010 is far off, but i don't see in anyway getting DOCSIS 3.0 in a town less than 3,000 and offering 50Mbps+ speeds. Peculiar is the farthest town south from KC that has Comcast so i would guess their backbone to that town is not very big. Last time i checked, the fastest speed i could get from Comcast is 8/768, which all i can pull from that is ~6Mbps down at any time.
--
»twitter.com/powerspec | »netisinc.com
jimbopalmer
Tsar of all the Rushers

join:2008-06-02
Greenwood, MS
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Windjammer Cable

Re: I don't

said by powerspec88:

I know 2010 is far off, but i don't see in anyway getting DOCSIS 3.0 in a town less than 3,000 and offering 50Mbps+ speeds. Peculiar is the farthest town south from KC that has Comcast so i would guess their backbone to that town is not very big. Last time i checked, the fastest speed i could get from Comcast is 8/768, which all i can pull from that is ~6Mbps down at any time.
1) I am not saying they are not lying, I just couldn't (and can't) see how you know they are. You have not shown any facts that make your position stronger. So far it seems like mean spirited fear mongering on your part, but I await actual proof of Comcast lying. (Comcast has not claimed 50+ megabit speed everywhere, so far as I know, just DOCSIS 3)

2) You seem to be ignoring completely how nice it is for a company if all the equipment uses the same command set. Yes, that implies more capital cost to reduce operational costs, but if Comcast plans to bite that bullet, I applaud them.

3) When I buried cable and wired buildings for my LAN, the computers used 10 meg ethernet and the routers used 100 meg FDDI. (1992) Ten years later, those same fibers and wires were gigabit. Today the fiber can be 10 gigabit. Once you replace the electronics on each end, getting more speed out of fiber is pretty easy and copper is not impossible. If Comcast upgrades 100 per cent of its CMTS to DOCSIS 3, perhaps the bandwidth will be there, held back today by current electronics.
--
I tried to remain child-like, all I achieved was childish.

jester121
Premium
join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL
Who says they can't skip D2 and go straight from D1.1. to D3?
iansltx

join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Comcast
·Verizon Online DSL
Qwest goes up to 4.2/700...erm...5/896 here. Comcast is still DOCSIS 1.1. With caps and throttling they're getting lamer by the minute. One can only hope that we'll at least get DOCSIS 2.0 out here so upstream doesn't get congested so easily. DOCSIS 3 would be really nice but largely unnecessary due to Qwest's EPIC FAIL they try to pass off as competition.

Then again, I just referred a few people to Qwest. They use BitTorrent and
1) BitTorrent will be stabler on Qwest due to no throttling
2) They'd be on my node if they bought Comcast...

Corehhi

join:2002-01-28
Bluffton, SC
Reviews:
·Hargray Cable

Won't help me

quote:
Of course the big question will be just how big the coverage gap will be; carriers in uncompetitive areas doing battle with slow DSL may not see the competitive necessity to move past DOCSIS 2.0.

I have one company and one company that provides high speed. I'm sure 3.0 is not coming here any time soon.
zed260
Premium
join:2007-09-30
Cleveland, TN
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Charter

1 edit

Re: Won't help me

doubt i will see it here anytime soon

probably wont see docsis 3 in cleveland for a while

i dont see it comming until uverse is here and then it will probably be a few years after words depending on who takes over charter when it goes bankrupt

even when they roll it out it will probably cost and arm and a leg
Mr Matt

join:2008-01-29
Eustis, FL
kudos:1
Reviews:
·CenturyLink
·Comcast
·Embarq Now Centu..
·Millenicom

How do I get a free modem to replace the one I purchased?

Will subscribers get a free DOCSIS 3.0 Modem to replace the Modems that they purchased and are now obsolete? Will subscribers be forced to lease their modem if they are not leasing their modem now? Can we continue to use our existing modems if we do not want to upgrade? Those questions should be answered before customers are forced to upgrade.

I do not want to be stuck with a modem lease fee plus crap charges added to my current high monthly broadband charge. Maybe the best solution for me, would be to do what a friend of mine did when Adelphia began charging a lease fee for their cable modems. He switched to DSL until the cable companies offered free modems as an incentive to sign up for cable broadband service.

major marco
Res Firma Mitescere Nescit
Premium
join:2003-02-13
Stepford, CA

1 edit

Re: How do I get a free modem to replace the one I purchased?

said by Mr Matt:

Will subscribers get a free DOCSIS 3.0 Modem to replace the Modems that they purchased and are now obsolete? Will subscribers be forced to lease their modem if they are not leasing their modem now? Can we continue to use our existing modems if we do not want to upgrade? Those questions should be answered before customers are forced to upgrade.
Depends on how much competition there is in your area. Here, there is 1 other BB provider: DSL. When Cocks decided to "powerboost" last summer, they replaced the crappy rental modem with an even crappier freebie, but I'm sure only those subscribers with "triple" play got it. Everyone else subscribing only to high speed cable probably had to pay for it or buy their own.
--
The Toll

Tracking Lord Stanley

RARPSL

join:1999-12-08
Suffern, NY
said by Mr Matt:

Will subscribers get a free DOCSIS 3.0 Modem to replace the Modems that they purchased and are now obsolete? Will subscribers be forced to lease their modem if they are not leasing their modem now? Can we continue to use our existing modems if we do not want to upgrade? Those questions should be answered before customers are forced to upgrade.
If you have your own purchased modem, you can still use it so long as you do not want the DOCSIS3 Tier. If you want it, you will need to either lease or buy a D3 Modem. I see no reason why you feel you are entitled to a free OWNED D3 Modem if you are not leasing your D1.1/D2 modem now. If you are leasing, you should get a free swap (at the same leasing rate). This is assuming that the ISP is charging a lease fee if you do not supply your own modem. If there is no discount for using your own modem, then you are entitled to a "free" leased modem but not one that you will own (ie: It must be returned at the end of your service).

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
Probably not... why would they? I don't see any free HDTV's to replace SD TV's....

fifty nine

join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ
kudos:1

Re: How do I get a free modem to replace the one I purchased?

said by KrK:

Probably not... why would they? I don't see any free HDTV's to replace SD TV's....
Well, when I upgraded to DOCSIS3 I got the modem from the company free of charge. Of course it's still their modem, but they don't charge for it anyway.

elwoodblues
Elwood Blues
Premium
join:2006-08-30
HarperLand

Not By Robbers

I can't see Rogers in Canada doing this, they'd actually have to spend money on their infrastructure

Morac

join:2001-08-30
Riverside, NJ
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Comcast

DOCSIS 3.0 doesn't necessarily mean lots of bandwidth.

The reason DOCSIS 3.0's bandwidth is greater than DOCSIS 1.0 and 2.0 isn't because DOCSIS 3.0 has better compression, it's because it uses multiple QAM channels. If a system doesn't have QAM channels to spare, DOCSIS 3.0 will do absolutely nothing.

Cable systems will need to dump their analog channels for DOCSIS 3.0 to really shine. Otherwise it will be a choice between more HD or faster broadband.
--

The Comcast Disney Avatar has been retired.

MalibuMaxx
Premium
join:2007-02-06
Chesterton, IN
Reviews:
·Comcast

Re: DOCSIS 3.0 doesn't necessarily mean lots of bandwidth.

True but most cable co's have extra channels to spare. If they dont they will make room. Comcast here dropped a few analog channels here to get more HD stations... We are on a 1Ghz network though. They have room... and if they dont they will make room...

jadebangle
Premium
join:2007-05-22
00000
Reviews:
·SureWest Internet
·AT&T Yahoo
·Comcast

Re: DOCSIS 3.0 doesn't necessarily mean lots of bandwidth.

said by MalibuMaxx:

True but most cable co's have extra channels to spare. If they dont they will make room. Comcast here dropped a few analog channels here to get more HD stations... We are on a 1Ghz network though. They have room... and if they dont they will make room...
I'm sure they do but they will not make any use of it. Timewarner, Comcast need to do away with their cap... we don't care about the 50/10,22/5,12/2, 16/2 vs 6/1,8/2 being faster with same 250gb cap.
TW has low cap but charge more for every gb after that
CC has higher cap but won't let you use more.
Either way as an end user we are being fleeced like a sheep.

BF69
Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
said by Morac:

The reason DOCSIS 3.0's bandwidth is greater than DOCSIS 1.0 and 2.0 isn't because DOCSIS 3.0 has better compression, it's because it uses multiple QAM channels. If a system doesn't have QAM channels to spare, DOCSIS 3.0 will do absolutely nothing.
The what would be the point of spending ANY money on Docsis 3.0 for that company then.

Cable systems will need to dump their analog channels for DOCSIS 3.0 to really shine. Otherwise it will be a choice between more HD or faster broadband.
most are already doing that. Charter has already moved 4 or 5 channels from analog to digital over the last 18 months and has already stated they have plans to go to all digital.
tmc8080

join:2004-04-24
Brooklyn, NY
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS

Who cares about 2013?

What consumers care about today is 100-250gb data caps implemented by cable companies.. they care about application throttling & deprioritization.. they care about out of control price increases and rental fees.. they care about higher than average voip prices..

Docsis 3.0 upgrades will not be bought on the backs of data cap overages charged to customers... what this will do put more customers in the hands of their competition in the footprint. As far as deployment of head-end, cmts and modems? This will only happen in competitive areas.. DSL areas need not apply. This includes many outer banks of U-Verse land. 80% is a little optimistic given that we have no firm numbers from the other 70% of the cablemodem market: Cox, Charter, Cablevision, Time Warner, etc-- all of these except part of cablevision & tw are deep in the heart of Verizon FIOS Land (which will probably about to something more than 20% of the industry).

The handwriting is already on the wall.. if a telco is content to do up to remote terminal & fttn 20mbit dsl-2 .. docsis 3 will not be coming to upgrades near you.

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
Reviews:
·AT&T DSL Service

Cool! Hit those caps, get overage fees in only 2 hours!

With DOCSIS 3.0, cable companies will be able to upgrade Revenue to 3.0 as users race over their caps and get murdered with massive overage charges of anywhere from $1 - $5 a gig.

What a deal... but hey, at least you'll get there fast.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini

Saturday, 11-Feb 18:31:18 Terms of Use & Privacy | feedback | contact | Hosting by nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo
over 12.5 years online! © 1999-2012 dslreports.com.