Comcast Cap coming?

[Regs]

Originally posted by: nismotigerwvu

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Canai
I still fail to see how using bandwidth that I paid for is abusing it.

I don't know how to make it any more simple. You are NOT paying for that kind of bandwidth at normal market rates. You are paying for a residential connection. If you want to slam your connection 24x7 then pay for it - business class service.

I'm calling your bluff. I just got off the phone with a Comcast rep (which oddly enough was a girl I met casually before from the university of Pittsburgh) and you can only have a business account at an address that is zoned accordingly. She wasn't sure if this was going to change when the user agreement changed but the entry level tier starts at almost $60 a month. I say hello verizon. I also called you in that my post full of valid points would go ignored. You lost what little credibility you once had. Have fun trolling away, you're migrating (with oden) to my ignore list.

Why don't you go stick a brick on your gas petal for 24x7, and complain how the price of gas is so high?

What don't you get? Bandwidth is not made out of thin air. Until the government forces companies to spend billions of dollars for overhauling their infrastructure, then there is nothing you can do. Hey, maybe the government will force them and subsidize it (because not many can pay billions), but guess where that money is coming from? Taxes!!! So you'll be paying for it no matter WTF YOU DOOOOOO.

 

[nismotigerwvu]

Originally posted by: Regs

Originally posted by: nismotigerwvu

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Canai
I still fail to see how using bandwidth that I paid for is abusing it.

I don't know how to make it any more simple. You are NOT paying for that kind of bandwidth at normal market rates. You are paying for a residential connection. If you want to slam your connection 24x7 then pay for it - business class service.

I'm calling your bluff. I just got off the phone with a Comcast rep (which oddly enough was a girl I met casually before from the university of Pittsburgh) and you can only have a business account at an address that is zoned accordingly. She wasn't sure if this was going to change when the user agreement changed but the entry level tier starts at almost $60 a month. I say hello verizon. I also called you in that my post full of valid points would go ignored. You lost what little credibility you once had. Have fun trolling away, you're migrating (with oden) to my ignore list.

Why don't you go stick a brick on your gas petal for 24x7, and complain how the price of gas is so high?

What don't you get? Bandwidth is not made out of thin air. Until the government forces companies to spend billions of dollars for overhauling their infrastructure, then there is nothing you can do.

Why don't you make a sensible point. Did I complain about gas prices? Do you have anything to say that isn't just a simple flame-bait personal attack? I simply pointed out that as of a few minutes ago, a Comcast rep was NOT able to sell a commerical account to a residentially zoned address. Telling a Comcast subscriber that finds a cap offensive to simply pay for the commercial package is nonsense. *Sigh* chalk another one up to the ignore list.

 

[Linflas]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Canai

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Canai
I still fail to see how using bandwidth that I paid for is abusing it.

I don't know how to make it any more simple. You are NOT paying for that kind of bandwidth at normal market rates. You are paying for a residential connection. If you want to slam your connection 24x7 then pay for it - business class service.

Still though, just because I use my residential connection to its fullest hardly qualifies as abuse. I think the broadband networks are just suddenly realizing that they can force people to pay more instead of upgrading their infrastructure to handle higher usage. Internet contracts are sold by max connection speed, not max transfer / month.

Now, if I were to mess with my modem / the network to increase my bandwidth, that would be abuse.

Honestly, I think this is a butt hurt Comcast trying to stop P2P networks in another quasi-legal way.

Wow, you really don't know what you're talking about.

Some contracts for data communication services are sold wholesale for actual speed and you can use as much as you want - these are VERY expensive. Some are sold as burstable services where you get a lower cost but pay for the amount that exceeds your 95th percentile usage but it still isn't cheap. Then you have residential connections where you are getting ludicrous speed at insanely cheap, you get what you pay for.

All in all the connection speeds you get with residential broadband would cost thousands of dollars per month if not 10s if you actually paid market rates.

The problem really is that Comcast and every other broadband ISP spent 8-10 years selling the idea that they were delivering high speed unlimited connectivity. You can't do that kind of marketing then suddenly do a 180 shift and not expect people to complain.

 

[Regs]

I'll likely forget about you in a day and I likely won't care what your opinion is on the matter after I wake up tomorrow.


This 250 GB cap is likely just and idea or even a rumor.

My question is what logic you are using when you think service providers have to owe you unlimited, unrestricted, unprohibited bandwidth?

I would understand how you can be mad at getting 20KBs a second when they advertise up to 20GBs/Sec and your connection drops every 10 minutes. Though why would you be mad at a 250GB cap?

 

[Canai]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Canai

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Canai
I still fail to see how using bandwidth that I paid for is abusing it.

I don't know how to make it any more simple. You are NOT paying for that kind of bandwidth at normal market rates. You are paying for a residential connection. If you want to slam your connection 24x7 then pay for it - business class service.

Still though, just because I use my residential connection to its fullest hardly qualifies as abuse. I think the broadband networks are just suddenly realizing that they can force people to pay more instead of upgrading their infrastructure to handle higher usage. Internet contracts are sold by max connection speed, not max transfer / month.

Now, if I were to mess with my modem / the network to increase my bandwidth, that would be abuse.

Honestly, I think this is a butt hurt Comcast trying to stop P2P networks in another quasi-legal way.

Wow, you really don't know what you're talking about.

Some contracts for data communication services are sold wholesale for actual speed and you can use as much as you want - these are VERY expensive. Some are sold as burstable services where you get a lower cost but pay for the amount that exceeds your 95th percentile usage but it still isn't cheap. Then you have residential connections where you are getting ludicrous speed at insanely cheap, you get what you pay for.

All in all the connection speeds you get with residential broadband would cost thousands of dollars per month if not 10s if you actually paid market rates.

You're right that I really don't know anything about this, but now is the time for me to start learning about it, before my ISP decides to do something similar.

Another thing I just thought of is that 250Gb may seem like a lot today, but with sites like veoh, hulu, youtube etc... constantly improving their quality and the availability of streaming movies ever increasing, how long will it be before 250Gb/month will limit what you can watch? What's going to happen when suddenly bandwidth caps start preventing people from watching ad-supported steaming shows? I don't think the networks will like that.

I don't even have a TV anymore, I just watch streaming shows, usually daily, and platforms like Steam offer downloads of games - I've probably pulled 30Gb+ of games off Steam in the past month, and another 30-40Gb of mods and addons - and that's just Steam games.

Originally posted by: Regs
I'll likely forget about you in a day and I likely won't care what your opinion is on the matter after I wake up tomorrow.


This 250 GB cap is likely just and idea or even a rumor.

My question is what logic you are using when you think service providers have to owe you unlimited, unrestricted, unprohibited bandwidth?

I would understand how you can be mad at getting 20KBs a second when they advertise up to 20GBs/Sec and your connection drops every 10 minutes. Though why would you be mad at a 250GB cap?

Well, since I signed up for X speed, not X bandwidth, I'd expect unlimited bandwidth at the speed I selected. I wouldn't expect to have to start paying more once I hit a magical abuse number that they pulled out of their asses.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: Linflas
The problem really is that Comcast and every other broadband ISP spent 8-10 years selling the idea that they were delivering high speed unlimited connectivity. You can't do that kind of marketing then suddenly do a 180 shift and not expect people to complain.

Well you certainly hit the nail on the head. Seriously. The usage patterns have changed dramatically and the all you can eat model just isn't working anymore. It doesn't help when you have a small number of people draining your capacity.

 

[Canai]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Linflas
The problem really is that Comcast and every other broadband ISP spent 8-10 years selling the idea that they were delivering high speed unlimited connectivity. You can't do that kind of marketing then suddenly do a 180 shift and not expect people to complain.

Well you certainly hit the nail on the head. Seriously. The usage patterns have changed dramatically and the all you can eat model just isn't working anymore. It doesn't help when you have a small number of people draining your capacity.

That makes sense. It just seems silly to me that in an era of ever-increasing file sizes and connection speeds, the ISP's would decide to place bandwidth limits instead of looking to stay ahead of the game and upgrade their networks to handle the additional traffic.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: Canai
You're right that I really don't know anything about this, but now is the time for me to start learning about it, before my ISP decides to do something similar.

Another thing I just thought of is that 250Gb may seem like a lot today, but with sites like veoh, hulu, youtube etc... constantly improving their quality and the availability of streaming movies ever increasing, how long will it be before 250Gb/month will limit what you can watch? What's going to happen when suddenly bandwidth caps start preventing people from watching ad-supported steaming shows? I don't think the networks will like that.

I don't even have a TV anymore, I just watch streaming shows, usually daily, and platforms like Steam offer downloads of games - I've probably pulled 30Gb+ of games off Steam in the past month, and another 30-40Gb of mods and addons - and that's just Steam games.

The 250 GB limit was based on the usage patterns of their subscribers and I'm sure a full cost analysis was performed. This cap affects 1% of their users. One Percent.

As I stated earlier as overall consumption rises so will the cap. It's not about trying to prevent people from using their connection, it's more about making sure their capacity and money out is not dominated by 1% of the revenue stream.

You can call me a troll all you want (not you Canai), but I've been doing this shit for 15 years. I understand what the providers are facing and thankfully they pay me to understand. No I don't work for Comcast.

 

[Canai]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Canai
You're right that I really don't know anything about this, but now is the time for me to start learning about it, before my ISP decides to do something similar.

Another thing I just thought of is that 250Gb may seem like a lot today, but with sites like veoh, hulu, youtube etc... constantly improving their quality and the availability of streaming movies ever increasing, how long will it be before 250Gb/month will limit what you can watch? What's going to happen when suddenly bandwidth caps start preventing people from watching ad-supported steaming shows? I don't think the networks will like that.

I don't even have a TV anymore, I just watch streaming shows, usually daily, and platforms like Steam offer downloads of games - I've probably pulled 30Gb+ of games off Steam in the past month, and another 30-40Gb of mods and addons - and that's just Steam games.

The 250 GB limit was based on the usage patterns of their subscribers and I'm sure a full cost analysis was performed. This cap affects 1% of their users. One Percent.

As I stated earlier as overall consumption rises so will the cap. It's not about trying to prevent people from using their connection, it's more about making sure their capacity and money out is not dominated by 1% of the revenue stream.

I'm just afraid that they won't raise the cap until they absolutely have to, once 95% of their subscribers are using close to the cap amount. Comcast isn't really well known for being a friendly, comforting company.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: Canai
I'm just afraid that they won't raise the cap until they absolutely have to, once 95% of their subscribers are using close to the cap amount. Comcast isn't really well known for being a friendly, comforting company.

We'll have to cross that bridge when we get to it. Consumer broadband, along with triple play (voice, TV, data) is about as competitive as it gets. A GREAT time to be a consumer because all the providers are sitting there trying to duke it out.

 

[nismotigerwvu]

Originally posted by: spidey07
You can call me a troll all you want (not you Canai), but I've been doing this shit for 15 years. I understand what the providers are facing and thankfully they pay me to understand. No I don't work for Comcast.

It doesn't matter how long you've worked in network administration, act in manner much akin to a troll and prepare to be treated as such. The fact that you know what you are talking about and still spill nonsense is what really amplifies this feelings. that and the fact that you crop up in every thing thread that has anything negative to say about Comcast (even ones without Comcast mentioned in the tagline) really makes things smell like nRollo.

 

[Reckoner]

It's pretty reasonable IMO. Only thing that may be troubling is when you have a household where several people are using internet via wifi.

 

[Linflas]

Originally posted by: Regs
I'll likely forget about you in a day and I likely won't care what your opinion is on the matter after I wake up tomorrow.


This 250 GB cap is likely just and idea or even a rumor.

My question is what logic you are using when you think service providers have to owe you unlimited, unrestricted, unprohibited bandwidth?

I would understand how you can be mad at getting 20KBs a second when they advertise up to 20GBs/Sec and your connection drops every 10 minutes. Though why would you be mad at a 250GB cap?

Since you posted this right after my post I have to assume you are responding to it and I have to ask where you see in it any implication that I think I am owed anything from an ISP? Personally I understand why they want to do this and really don't see 250GB having any impact on the average customer but the fact remains that these companies have been marketing their product as unlimited for at least 10 years and suddenly instituting caps is going to generate a lot of discontent even though it is unlikely to affect a large percentage of customers. To the average customer it will appear as though they are being charged the same rate for less product while the people that actually use that kind of bandwidth already know they are using it and will likely take steps to lessen their usage or choose a different option.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: nismotigerwvu

Originally posted by: spidey07
You can call me a troll all you want (not you Canai), but I've been doing this shit for 15 years. I understand what the providers are facing and thankfully they pay me to understand. No I don't work for Comcast.

It doesn't matter how long you've worked in network administration, act in manner much akin to a troll and prepare to be treated as such. The fact that you know what you are talking about and still spill nonsense is what really amplifies this feelings. that and the fact that you crop up in every thing thread that has anything negative to say about Comcast (even ones without Comcast mentioned in the tagline) really makes things smell like nRollo.

The problem is folks thinking I'm spewing nonsense. I don't care what provider or network we're talking about, the challenges are still the same and they are ALL facing it.

 

[flxnimprtmscl]

Great, now that they've locked usage down maybe they'll stop packet shaping. Or not...

In all honesty, I'm perfectly fine with 250 a month, but I really doubt the cap will stay that high.

 

[SludgeFactory]

Originally posted by: ric1287

Originally posted by: LuckyTaxi
not sure if i would ever hit 250gb

Not now, no. But what does this do to future media? Do companies like netflix and MS just say "screw it" since nobody will be able to use their service without paying $10000 a month to the ass-rapers over at comcast?

I figure the cable companies know, like everybody else here, that eventually all the media we watch at home is going to come from internet sites, which is going to kill their historic core business, cable TV. They're going to lose the ability to charge directly for content, so the next best thing is to leech $$$$ out of the future content providers by letting them know who controls the pipes.

Netflix and MS can't say "screw it," they'll do whatever they have to to make their service available on Comcast/TW/shittycableUSA. After a few hundred thousand outraged customers go over their cap with HD streaming and cancel their HD content provider, the cable companies will be able to name their price to play on their pipes. Wouldn't surprise me a bit if that eventually becomes "partnerships" where netflix and MS pay millions or billions to the cable companies, in exchange for subscribers being able to stream unlimited HD from those domains through their broadband.

The caps (TW's pathetic 40GB in particular) are as much a preemptive move against the future media providers as they are against some minute percentage of "bandwidth abusers." The abuser argument always amuses me, because for every "abuser," there are 10 (or 20 or 100) grandmas doing nothing with their broadband connection but checking email and hitting ebay twice a week.

 

[NikolaeVarius]

Originally posted by: Linflas

Originally posted by: Regs
I'll likely forget about you in a day and I likely won't care what your opinion is on the matter after I wake up tomorrow.


This 250 GB cap is likely just and idea or even a rumor.

My question is what logic you are using when you think service providers have to owe you unlimited, unrestricted, unprohibited bandwidth?

I would understand how you can be mad at getting 20KBs a second when they advertise up to 20GBs/Sec and your connection drops every 10 minutes. Though why would you be mad at a 250GB cap?

Since you posted this right after my post I have to assume you are responding to it and I have to ask where you see in it any implication that I think I am owed anything from an ISP? Personally I understand why they want to do this and really don't see 250GB having any impact on the average customer but the fact remains that these companies have been marketing their product as unlimited for at least 10 years and suddenly instituting caps is going to generate a lot of discontent even though it is unlikely to affect a large percentage of customers. To the average customer it will appear as though they are being charged the same rate for less product while the people that actually use that kind of bandwidth already know they are using it and will likely take steps to lessen their usage or choose a different option.

Because 10 years ago, most of America was still on 56k.

Now in the age where people are getting 2-3 mbps, there is a limit to how much bandwidth they can provide to the user. Also, America has started to get much more wired, so now the internet is used by 99% of people in America.

How the hell are they charged the same rate for less product? They aren't even using 248 gb of that 250 gb cap going by average rates.

My god, in my years of using torrents, I have never downloaded more than 100 gb a month. I've watched plenty of high quality streams and such, and 250 a month? I only wish I had SPACE to use that much.

 

[Anubis]

Originally posted by: tenshodo13

Originally posted by: Linflas

Originally posted by: Regs
I'll likely forget about you in a day and I likely won't care what your opinion is on the matter after I wake up tomorrow.


This 250 GB cap is likely just and idea or even a rumor.

My question is what logic you are using when you think service providers have to owe you unlimited, unrestricted, unprohibited bandwidth?

I would understand how you can be mad at getting 20KBs a second when they advertise up to 20GBs/Sec and your connection drops every 10 minutes. Though why would you be mad at a 250GB cap?

Since you posted this right after my post I have to assume you are responding to it and I have to ask where you see in it any implication that I think I am owed anything from an ISP? Personally I understand why they want to do this and really don't see 250GB having any impact on the average customer but the fact remains that these companies have been marketing their product as unlimited for at least 10 years and suddenly instituting caps is going to generate a lot of discontent even though it is unlikely to affect a large percentage of customers. To the average customer it will appear as though they are being charged the same rate for less product while the people that actually use that kind of bandwidth already know they are using it and will likely take steps to lessen their usage or choose a different option.

My god, in my years of using torrents, I have never downloaded more than 100 gb a month.

and ive done over 100GB in a weekend and you could argue that not much of that was even illigal

 

[nismotigerwvu]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: nismotigerwvu

Originally posted by: spidey07
You can call me a troll all you want (not you Canai), but I've been doing this shit for 15 years. I understand what the providers are facing and thankfully they pay me to understand. No I don't work for Comcast.

It doesn't matter how long you've worked in network administration, act in manner much akin to a troll and prepare to be treated as such. The fact that you know what you are talking about and still spill nonsense is what really amplifies this feelings. that and the fact that you crop up in every thing thread that has anything negative to say about Comcast (even ones without Comcast mentioned in the tagline) really makes things smell like nRollo.

The problem is folks thinking I'm spewing nonsense. I don't care what provider or network we're talking about, the challenges are still the same and they are ALL facing it.

Then why applaud the cheap-out tactics. Bandwidth usage has increased exponentially for god only knows how long now. If they couldn't realize this a long time ago they do not belong in the business. They have had PLENTY of time to see this point (their network becoming overloaded) coming and they sat on their hands and did nothing. Now they still wish to do nothing, instead of increasing their capacity. THAT is what I take offense to, and in MY opinion is inexcusable.

 

[Brainonska511]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Canai
I'm just afraid that they won't raise the cap until they absolutely have to, once 95% of their subscribers are using close to the cap amount. Comcast isn't really well known for being a friendly, comforting company.

We'll have to cross that bridge when we get to it. Consumer broadband, along with triple play (voice, TV, data) is about as competitive as it gets. A GREAT time to be a consumer because all the providers are sitting there trying to duke it out.

A great time to be a consumer is HIGHLY dependent on where you live.

 

[MovingTarget]

Yet another step backward in US broadband markets. FAIL. If I EVER get hit with bandwidth fees, I'm switching to DSL. Either that, or go to home depot and buy a hammer for ...ummm... personal use.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: nismotigerwvu
Then why applaud the cheap-out tactics. Bandwidth usage has increased exponentially for god only knows how long now. If they couldn't realize this a long time ago they do not belong in the business. They have had PLENTY of time to see this point (their network becoming overloaded) coming and they sat on their hands and did nothing. Now they still wish to do nothing, instead of increasing their capacity. THAT is what I take offense to, and in MY opinion is inexcusable.

They are doing something, trying to generate revenue to keep pace with demand. The all you can eat model doesn't work at that price point anymore. To say they did nothing is completely not true. ISPs have literally reached the breaking point on revenue vs. expense. The capital/expense out isn't going to change as it follows the usage. When that money out is more than money in you have a very serious problem with your business model, aka, pricing.

 

[nismotigerwvu]

Originally posted by: Brainonska511

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Canai
I'm just afraid that they won't raise the cap until they absolutely have to, once 95% of their subscribers are using close to the cap amount. Comcast isn't really well known for being a friendly, comforting company.

We'll have to cross that bridge when we get to it. Consumer broadband, along with triple play (voice, TV, data) is about as competitive as it gets. A GREAT time to be a consumer because all the providers are sitting there trying to duke it out.

A great time to be a consumer is HIGHLY dependent on where you live.

I.E. in places where FIOS is available. Which also leads to another question, if Comcast can't scrape together enough bandwidth to serve up 6Mb/768Kb service, how in the hell could Verizon be able to sell 20Mb/20Mb. The answer is simple, Verizon is a better run complany and planned for a network capable of their advertised speeds instead of letting the marketing department decide what speed they should advertise.

 

[Chronoshock]

Originally posted by: Anubis

Originally posted by: tenshodo13

Originally posted by: Linflas

Originally posted by: Regs
I'll likely forget about you in a day and I likely won't care what your opinion is on the matter after I wake up tomorrow.


This 250 GB cap is likely just and idea or even a rumor.

My question is what logic you are using when you think service providers have to owe you unlimited, unrestricted, unprohibited bandwidth?

I would understand how you can be mad at getting 20KBs a second when they advertise up to 20GBs/Sec and your connection drops every 10 minutes. Though why would you be mad at a 250GB cap?

Since you posted this right after my post I have to assume you are responding to it and I have to ask where you see in it any implication that I think I am owed anything from an ISP? Personally I understand why they want to do this and really don't see 250GB having any impact on the average customer but the fact remains that these companies have been marketing their product as unlimited for at least 10 years and suddenly instituting caps is going to generate a lot of discontent even though it is unlikely to affect a large percentage of customers. To the average customer it will appear as though they are being charged the same rate for less product while the people that actually use that kind of bandwidth already know they are using it and will likely take steps to lessen their usage or choose a different option.

My god, in my years of using torrents, I have never downloaded more than 100 gb a month.

and ive done over 100GB in a weekend and you could argue that not much of that was even illigal

That would require a ~50Mbit connection running for 48 hours straight. Comcast does not offer 50Mbit lines so your argument is invalid.

With 10Mbit down, you could have your connection maxed out for 18.5 out of 30 days.

I feel the cap is reasonable and I don't think I'll be hitting it even with heavy usage. The only points brought up in this thread with some merit are that
1) it's inconsistent with their marketing and "promise" or unlimited internet
2) its a slippery slope of lowering the caps over time
3) no assurance it will scale as "normal" bandwidth usage increases

 

[Jschmuck2]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: nismotigerwvu
Then why applaud the cheap-out tactics. Bandwidth usage has increased exponentially for god only knows how long now. If they couldn't realize this a long time ago they do not belong in the business. They have had PLENTY of time to see this point (their network becoming overloaded) coming and they sat on their hands and did nothing. Now they still wish to do nothing, instead of increasing their capacity. THAT is what I take offense to, and in MY opinion is inexcusable.

They are doing something, trying to generate revenue to keep pace with demand. The all you can eat model doesn't work at that price point anymore. To say they did nothing is completely not true. ISPs have literally reached the breaking point on revenue vs. expense. The capital/expense out isn't going to change as it follows the usage. When that money out is more than money in you have a very serious problem with your business model, aka, pricing.

You know for all of the pro-republican, anti-government stuff you say elsewhere, you seem to be all too happy to let this regulation pass.