Time Warner Cable Bumping Base Speeds to 15 Mbps
For Most Markets Over the Next 60 Days
Speaking during the company's earnings
conference call earlier today, Time Warner Cable COO Rob Marcus stated that the cable operator will be bumping the speed of their standard broadband Internet tier by about 50 percent over the next 60 days
. For most users that means the base tier in their market will be nudged toward 15 Mbps downstream and 1 Mbps upstream. The announcement comes after a few months of very bad press for the company due to their introduction of a new $4 per month modem rental fee
that's estimated to generate an additional $300-$400 million in additional income each quarter.
Re: Just curious The technological limits are 100% the last-mile. Fiber, when set up correctly, has massive capacity way beyond that of DOCSIS. Of course that's not to say that there aren't systems out there with shiny new D3 gear running on older fiber backhaul that are backhaul limited. AT&T's shiny new 3G network was backhaul limited for years before they saturated the air interfaces with gig IP-RAN for fake 4G.
They have had to push fiber father out not just for internet, but also for VOD, which uses QAM channels. Comcast here has gotten rid of analog, and shortly thereafter, they added more HD VOD content, more HD channels, and more internet speed.
The caps aren't effective at what they need to do, which is manage peak traffic on the last-mile. However, they don't really know how to do better, and the investors of course push for monetization. I think the best solution would be to go back to "don't abuse it but we don't have a set cap" but don't kick the abusers off, just shape and throttle them during peak usage, and then let them hit it hard at 3 in the morning.
Re: Just curious Please read what I said again. I questioned "backbone to the Internet". I understand that relative to wires, fiber bandwidth is unlimited. From that perspective, yes, all the "technological" limitations are in the wire plant, not the fiber plant. However, my question doesn't have anything to do with comparing fiber with wires. I'm asking whether or not major cable players have at least reached a temporary equilibrium where a last-mile coax node is sufficiently small as to no longer represent a major limiting factor. Furthermore, if they eliminated DOCIS speeds, the aggregate bandwidth would combine and be limited by their Internet drains rather than their coax plant.
The reason I ask is because over the last several years I've witnessed a relentless march by cable providers to ever faster base speeds. I can remember when my package was 3Mbps, then 8Mbps, then 12Mbps and then 15Mbps. Although I'm currently stuck with a multi-year fixed-price deal, the base is now 30Mbps! All of these increases seem to have had no impact on peak performance and it makes me wonder how they do this and keep ~70 analog channels. It seems impossible unless their coax nodes are so small that the coax segment, at least for the moment, isn't limiting their capabilities.
Re: Just curious Yes, easier than replacing coax with fiber but how cost prohibitive is it? Does removing DOCSIS speed limits mean they have to double or triple their capacity to the Internet (i.e. add capacity from their upstream providers -- Verizon, Qwest, AT&T, Level3, C&W etc.) or in other cases, their own existing fiber WANs that feed traffic to a major Internet access cities (NYC, WDC, CHI, SF, etc.)
For instance, Charter in St. Louis appears to have built its own private WAN between STL and KC so it can serve other plants they own in the state and connect with Qwest in KC. It also appears that they have built their own WAN between STL and Chicago to trade traffic in that major hub. Although St. Louis is well connected and Charter used ATT several years ago, it appears they have bypassed local interconnects in favor of trading a lot of traffic in Chicago. I can only guess they invested considerable capital in building these links and I wonder if the constraint is now managing the capacity of these links if they were to remove DOCSIS governors.
Re: Just curious I don't think there is any way to reliably run an uncapped system. One user could use up all the bandwidth on it.
Fiber is expensive, and while telcos have to do it, or else fail (U-Verse), because copper pair wire has so little bandwidth left in it, cable operators don't, as they would be much wiser to push 8-channel bonding, new versions of DOCSIS, 1ghz plants, SDV, and all-digital before they need a new medium to deliver their service.
The constraints on DOCSIS are all in the RF plant. Backhaul is easy to add. They can, and will, add DOCSIS speed and capacity as competition makes it necessary (as it has with FIOS).
The takeaway is that Comcast is much more comfortable pushing more bandwidth, more channels of DOCSIS, and more fiber farther out into the last mile than they are competing with price, and they want to keep it that way.
Re: Just curious
By definition, that's A CAP. Uncapped means zero obstruction to using the full bandwidth of the system. If it's capable of 40, you can use all 40. If it's capable of 300, you can use all 300.
... isn't going to be exhausted by one user even if everyone is configured with 100Mbps capability.
If you don't think this is bad, or even possible, please stop by my office and I'll show you just how bad it can get thanks to ONE user! The *ONLY* thing that will put a limit in such a system is the speed of the remote side of the connection. (or connections) ISPs limit per user connection speeds and deploy queing methods to more evenly/fairly divide their finite bandwidth.
Re: Just curious But that's in the past, isn't it? Isn't all that stuff now controlled by the CMTS? (i.e. PowerBoost?) If so, that means there's no excuse, other than poor management, for one user to lay waste to the "system" (whatever that means). At worst they can impact a node but if properly managed, the CMTS should be able to use pretty basic algorithms to balance what's available across all the node's active users. I say let them have it all...unless, as I've been postulating, the last mile is, for the moment, capable enough that if they did this, the problem would reveal itself upstream.
.. AWWWW ((( Just increase the upload speed! I will take 2mbps upload!
| |banditws6Shrinking Time and DistancePremiumReviews:
·Time Warner Cable
Not too shabby, but would like more upload I was just saying to my friend yesterday (who is also on TWC) how I hoped competitive forces would push TWC to increase base speeds. Glad to see it happen. Since I am not a TV subscriber I feel like I am paying a lot for not too much (I'm on the 10/1), and this will help some.
Still, can we please get some more upload in here? 1 Mbps in the age of cloud storage is seriously painful. Even if you subscribed to the top speed tier package TWC offers in this area, you still only get 5 Mbps up. Ugh.
"The counsel of fools is all the more dangerous the more of them there are." -Ólafr Höskuldsson
Re: Which markets, caps, faster uploads, etc.? Don't think it is costing TWC 300 million to increase speeds that small amount. LoL