[chuckchuck]

The Cap is crap - I've said this before I'll say it again - this is not about bandwidth but money.
Fact: this is to affect less than 1% of Comcast users.
Fact: 99% don't come close to such bandwidth use.
Fact: If 100 subscribers pay to download up to 250 GB but only 1 does - 99% overpaid.
Fact: This means it's a money game.
Solution #1: Don't cut or limit anyone's bandwidth - it all washes out in the end. In other words, leave it the way it was.
Solution #2: Since Comcast is aparently dying for more money, then go ahead and limit us, but rather than cut anyone off, charge us for going over the 250 GB. In other words, don't threaten us - just ask for the money and shut up.
If I pay for a service, I expect to use it - if I have exceded the maxium of that service, then I'm willing to pay for more and better service.
Comcast already offers different speed plans - why not different download plans? You know why? Because 99% would go for the lower end plan (since they admit themselves that figure). Only 1% would opt for a more expensive plan.

[tommygolstch]

It isn't necessarily just comcast. It is these moron politicians who
give comcast or any cale company a geographical monopoly
on cable. Cable companies are not
charities, they have one thing and only one thing in mind - profit, and how to get more of it.

[rapope]

I guess people wanting to download software updates (e.g., disk [DVD] images of Linux distributions) will be out of luck? That was one of the advantages to having a broadband connection in the first place was to be able to download disk images and not have to pay for/wait for the media to be shipped!
Too bad most people wouldn't be able to jump ship to the competition (depending on the locality).

[HighSierra]

My ISP has bandwidth limits. However they provide a way for you to check your usage, and will send you a notice when you approach the limit. If you go over you pay extra.



So this would mean that the technology is there for Comcast to provide this information to its customers.
Message was edited by: HighSierra

[HighSierra]

Test. OOPs
Message was edited by: HighSierra

[HighSierra]

Test, OPPs again.
Message was edited by: HighSierra

[Asanath]

ChuckChuck is absolutely correct in his assessment of the situation.
By all standards, 99% of the users of Comcast's service are OVERPAYING. 99% overpayment isn't enough for them, huh? Most astute posting that I have seen in months, chuckchuck...kudos.

[frankie3100]

It's kinda like leasing a car that allowes 12,000 miles a year and then ripping out the odometer. I have comcast internet and cable. I have tried a "free" bandwidth meter but it balled up my Vista computer. Comcast needs to furnish it's customers with a place to check the bandwidth they have used. What's so hard about this?? I for one would be very interested in how much bandwidth I use since I do quite a bit of web camming with family. If they don't want to do this then your all correct. It's all about the money and controlling usage. Shame on Comcast. But ATT U-verse is available in my area so I do have options. Maybe if Comcast bothers to read these comments a bandwidth usage meter will be offered. I absolutely will not pay for one!!!!!

[YAcomment]

A bigger picture is being missed here, innovation will be absolutely stalled!
Please think of all the new services that offer online streaming now or utilize the internet somehow. For example, Netflix offers full movies at decent quality streamed over the net. A blu-ray player that recently entered the market has incorporated Netflix's streaming movies feature into its player. A first of its kind - that is innovation! The quality would improve if more people adopted this but now they can't. Who would want new technology that uses the internet when it will add to their bandwidth consumption? Imagine Netflix adopting x264 for streaming movies. A regular length film with 720p video and 5.1 sound will need 4.5 GB of data downloaded. A family would be at that cap fast but guess what, that will never happen due to useage caps. Netflix has no reason to be innovative and adjust their service. Capping is only to protect their money machines of DVRs, phone service, etc. The future is the internet but will be destroyed by greedy ISPs. If people want a cap then the families that do not use the internet much should be offered lower rates and everyone else keep the same rate for unlimited use. Prices always go up, never down! Finally, if anyone in the IT industry is reading this article they will be shaking their heads and screaming BS! Bandwidth is not scarce and networks can always grow with new equipment. ISP mentality "But why do that, technology isn't the solution for more efficient networks, but high rates and capping is!"

[egodraconis]

So, today, I installed a third party bandwidth monitor on my PC called Bitmeter. I immediately watched a 90 minute movie streaming through Netflix. Usage: 2.5Gig. Afterwards, I spent an hour listening to Oregon Public Broadcasting's internet radio station for an hour. Usage: 1.2Gig. So, in 2.5 hours, I used up 3.7Gig. This was doing nothing else whatsoever on the internet. Within 30 days with just this 2.5 daily hours worth of use, I would have used 111Gig of bandwidth. If my wife decided to watch a movie per day and listen to an hour of streaming radio as well, then this would be an additional 111Gig per month -- or 222Gigs. We're almost over capacity. I really do not think that our level of usage is different than other internet users. I believe that Comcast is lying when it says that only 1% of its customer base used 250Gigs+ per month. It is a lie, and it is just a way to make more money. Notice, I haven't seen where a single Congressman of EITHER PARTY, FCC official, or city mayor has spoken out against Comcast on this limit either.

[sachman]

It's all about video IMO...
http://tinyurl.com/5tptac

[KiSSJouR]

egodraconis ...you are so on the money...Let me break it down for people. I Have 4 computers in my house, one for me , one for my wife, one for my son and one for my daughter..now i use mine for sending and getting Cad key Files to company's all over the world, avg file 5-20 gig files, I'm retired, and help my friends all over the world with electronics diagrams and new tech. review them and make changes, a simple bolt or screw for a TV or VCR or PC whatever could be as big as 1 gig, for cad key file, all specs of this one simple screw or bolt size, shape, threads etc, etc, now imagine a whole Plane or even a car or truck...I do this for friends and not for profit ..so I'm not included in buisness class, my wife now watches vonage or netflix movies HD 1080 size 5-20 gigs each for are plasma tv, listens too music or streams videos...my son ok here's a movie horror buff that pays for his own movies and always on WOW god only knows how many gigs that is movies not the WOW but that's one 24/7.......my daughter watches movies and gets songs she pays for from her babysitting money.....now if add everything up, I for one know our household is well over the 250gigs mark.....I would pay for anything extra above that like $10 for another 100gigs...but when I signed up and payed for more 6 years of comcast service that was suppose be unlimited, do I now have tell my wife my kids and my friends sorry but only have 30 minutes a day on internet cause comcast put a limit on our internet...usage?? I think I will call a lawyer and my congressman and my friend in FCC and start class action suit, 1) for false advertisement 2) for overcharging 4.5 million people last 8 years 3) putting monopoly on my internet, cause I don't want another crappy ISP provider, and There is no other one around..
Signed
Very unhappy ComCast customer

[xpinfinity]

If providers begin to limit bandwidth usage, then they will have to regulate content and browsers.Vampire-bandwidth usage, (also known as 'vam' ) is the defined culprit. Vam, namely appears in the form of pop-ups, advertisements, side-bar animations of features and services, news articles,videos on front news-pages, e-mail attachments, viruses, worms, and malware.
Voip will soon be threatened yet, innocent surfers trying out a web page will be hit with an autoplay video that begins to download immediately. Many will complain that this is a restriction of commerce and free speech. But who will want it if it costs us?
This is not the biggest problem as much as the global and global pirate activity that will continue from unregulated countries. Much like telemarketers who target cell phone numbers, it is the subscriber who pays for the call. In the case of bandwidth limitation that disadvantage goes to the subscriber.
Home restrictions for students will have to increase and as well, public libraries, schools, special organizations,and unsecured wireless home networks. Educational and medical communities might be granted special usage licenses but the future of the internet will be compromised. A subscriber should not pay for splash screens and windows that are not requested. This goes for users of myspace, facebook, and youtube.
Furthermore, should you use your wii phone to browse or even so much as do institutional research, you will find that you have splash alerts that your very usage being metered.Not a smart idea. Then as if there will be a new marketing formula, the company that comes out with unlimited bandwidth usage online service will be the one most favored. AOL, stand aside.
Eli Green
Internet Analyst
California

[jinx101]

"And again I ask one simple question, why is Comcast's VIOP not taken from your 250GB limit but Vonage's service is?"

You make a good point here and this is where they will end up getting in trouble and having to change their terms some what. By doing this, they are creating an anti-competitive market on their network that exists because of the government has given them domain to run their cables everywhere. It creates an unfair advantage for them and if I were Vonage I would be suing and trumpting the horn.

[rtfire1]

when i moved i droped crapcast and when to dsl that what the gf had at her home. how comw her dsl is fast then crapcast? me moved up to charter with the 10meg plus a sec upgrade. dsl was not as fast but make crapcast look so slow i don't know how I ever lived with it. vonage is also much better then comcast so thats why there part of the limit.

[6c1452]

A CD image is 700 MB. A DVD image is 4 GB. You would have to download ~300 CD images or 60 DVD images to hit the cap. I can see this being a problem for people streaming HD movies on a daily basis, but a few disk images? No.
On the other hand, what we're moving toward is using the internet to deliver all forms of media - television, games, video rentals, etc. Sooner or later this will get in the way. The solution is investing in more bandwidth, which will certainly happen.
egodraconis: I call BS. NWIH does streaming audio take 1.2 GB in an hour. Even if it was using a lossless codec, which it wasn't, you'd barely break 500 MB.


(edited) the high transfer rates make file transfers fast, but they are possible because only a few people are downloading at a time. If everybody were to download at full speed all the time, comcast would have to either charge much more because they would have to buy much more bandwidth, or charge the same rates for much, much slower connections. It's a little like overbooking on airlines, except instead of 5% of the passengers not showing up the number is close to 99%.
Which would you prefer? I think that fast and cheap is a pretty good alternative to slow and cheap or fast and expensive. If I have to watch my bandwidth usage to make that possible, that's fine with me.
Message was edited by: AuroraDizon no personal attacks

[Number3124]

Crap by any other name is still crap.

[noia]

As a radiologist, I'm very concerned about the possibility that these wide-ranging bandwidth caps will stifle growth. Radiologists often take call from home, looking at urgent patient studies remotely. These studies are huge (several GB for CT or MRI in DICOM format) and one could review 40-50 studies in an evening. I could approach my monthly limit in just one night. If I hit it, will Comcast turn off my access in the middle of a trauma interpretation? There should at least be an application process by which certain people could get exemptions to their policy. It also stifles other legitimate uses, such as downloading HD content and teleconferencing. Very heavy handed, especially when other solutions, such as P4P iTracker technology could save the telecoms a large amount of money, improve service, and eliminate the need for caps at all. Or they could finally upgrade their network to fiber FiOS at last.