Comcast charging for Netflix usage

[Red Squirrel]

I'm glad we got FTTH here and that they are pretty good when it comes to net neutrality. They don't have caps and don't throttle anything. In fact they had caps for packages over 50mb down and they removed them a while back. In some regions you can get 400/350 and it's unlimited. I don't think I can get that here yet though. If they don't allow servers on that package it's kinda pointless though. Sadly they don't allow servers with the current packages. With they did as even 50/30 would be fast enough for my web stuff. I don't get that much traffic.

 

[ch33zw1z]

Comcast could only bill you if it knows you are using Netflix. Now I do not pretend to be an expert so I could be wrong, however if you sign up for a free VPN and use it I don't believe Comcast would know. Maybe someone who has a clue will opine on this one way or another.

They will still measure total I/O's from your connection. I agree to an extent, but for Comcast to implement this then they will want to abolish net neutrality so they can QoS certain packets. Basically creating "fast lanes" for certain services, which of course will create tiered services. Oh? You want to stream from Netflix? That's part of our streaming package, and it's twice as much as the base package. etc...

Check this out:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/24/b...netflix-reach-a-streaming-agreement.html?_r=0

So since I'm paying for Comcast's network already, and now Netflix is, Comcast is effectively getting paid twice to move the same traffic.

And if Comcast gets their way, they'll be creating the fast lanes.

 

[Dari]

2013: To put 300GB in context, our median customer’s data use is about 16 to 18GB per month.

2014: XFINITY Internet customers' median monthly data usage is 20 - 25 GB per month.

Edit: removed sarcasm as it was I who misread. Corrected downstream...

I don't think you understand. The percentage of users hitting that cap will go up as time goes on. Most likely, a lot of Comcast users also have cable tv service so they don't watch a lot of Netflix or use other streaming services. As more people cut the cord their streaming usage will skyrocket, making the 98% more like 50% in a couple of years. Add 4K streaming and those numbers could skyrocket. So, the people going over this limit are in the vanguard. The rest of America will catch up.

 

[VirtualLarry]

yep comcast charges when you go over the limit, not because of netflix.
people who think streaming anything is the future are obviously oblivious to data caps.

I think that you have that exactly backwards. In order to protect their video-distribution monopoly, Comcast has instituted caps, to prevent people from fully utilizing video streaming over their internet connection.

The caps are BECAUSE of Netflix.

 

[VirtualLarry]

This model is FANTASTIC. At the end of the day, if you use more of a resource, you need to pay more. Electricity, water, natural gas, and every other utility is already metered and tiered. Internet is utility. You don't deserve unlimited access until your usage has 0% impact on everyone else.

Edit 2: Updated numbers for 2014. A whopping 25 GB!

Except, that's not the model. It's not true metered usage. If it were, then most people would pay LESS for their internet connection, having modest usage. But right now, everyone has to pay the equivalent of an "unlimited" plan, except Comcast decided to not make it unlimited any more, and is charging EVEN MORE ON TOP for "heavy" users. (Which, means "average Netflix family".)

 

[Staples]

lol @ all of you complaining about data caps. 99% of people don't get anywhere near the cap. If you're using more of something than 99% of the other people who use it, you deserve to pay more. That's life. Also, go outside and stop staring at the computer all night.

Edit: sorry, 98%.

Well said.

 

[HeXen]

It's actually kind of disgusting how much TV people watch. I haven't owned a TV in 7 years and I'm better off as a result.

I don't hardly watch it either but if people have spare time then it really doesn't matter what they do with it since it's healthy for the mind to have some sort of mental engagement even if it's just watching a story unfold. Too much anything is never good for onself or others around but at least TV viewing can be a family gathering moment vs playing PC games or browsing a website like this.

I would argue that too much internet, video games and smart phones are not any better. Even people that read too many books have a problem and can create social problems with family.
My mom read too many books and it was not very good for my childhood.

 

[Engineer]

Except, that's not the model. It's not true metered usage. If it were, then most people would pay LESS for their internet connection, having modest usage. But right now, everyone has to pay the equivalent of an "unlimited" plan, except Comcast decided to not make it unlimited any more, and is charging EVEN MORE ON TOP for "heavy" users. (Which, means "average Netflix family".)

This. Data for the ISP's is getting cheaper and cheaper and cheaper but the rates are going up and the amount lotted is going down. If they want to make it a utility (and hence more regulated than it currently is - fine), go ahead. Lower the 'service charge' down to a small fee like other utilities and then charge by GB.

Of course, half of the internet economy would collapse at the fun of the ISP's but that would be on them and those that like the model.

And while we're at it, maybe we can get a pay per use TV account too. Only pay when you watch, otherwise, little to nothing (service fee).

 

[drebo]

Sorry but Internet is a necessity nowadays.

Ok, so my point stands, then.

You can't have it both way. Either people pay their fair share or they don't, according to you. Clearly the top 2% of Internet users aren't paying their fair share for their (according to you) life necessity.

So, why do you have a problem with ISPs charging the top 2% of users more when it's right in line with your own admitted ideology?

 

[MagickMan]

This model is FANTASTIC. At the end of the day, if you use more of a resource, you need to pay more. Electricity, water, natural gas, and every other utility is already metered and tiered. Internet is utility. You don't deserve unlimited access until your usage has 0% impact on everyone else.

Edit 2: Updated numbers for 2014. A whopping 25 GB!

Except that bandwidth, unlike physical materials, isn't a limited resource. Right now what's holding back internet speeds here in the USA are ISPs who refuse to upgrade their infrastructures to meet the standards set in the 1996 Telco Act.

We have, quite literally, paid all the ISPs for unlimited gigabit ethernet several times over via tax breaks and subsidies since then, but what they've done instead is use that money to buy up each other (creating a patchwork of mini-monopolies over the entire country), and line their pockets. In essence, they've created an artificial limitation based on their own refusal to meet the standards that they agreed to nearly 20 years ago. This is the abuse of corporate welfare at its worst, and we as taxpayers continue to pay them for it.

 

[MagickMan]

Ok, so my point stands, then.

You can't have it both way. Either people pay their fair share or they don't, according to you. Clearly the top 2% of Internet users aren't paying their fair share for their (according to you) life necessity.

So, why do you have a problem with ISPs charging the top 2% of users more when it's right in line with your own admitted ideology?

We've already paid our share with taxes, many times over.