|
Comcast considers official limits on downloads
|
|
The following comments relate to this news article:
article published on 7 May, 2008
Like a number of broadband ISPs, Comcast has a policy of contacting subscribers who use an excessive amount of bandwidth, and giving them the choice of either reducing downloads or having their internet service canceled. However, as we reported last year even when the company terminates service the customer isn't told exactly where the line they supposedly crossed was.
As part of what ... [ read the full article ]
Please read the original article before posting your comments.
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
8. May 2008 @ 00:58 |
Link to this message
|
250 gigs is still A LOT of bandwidth! I see no reason why anybody should complain with that. I understand in the past Comcast has canceled service with no real number given to the question "how much is too much," but now that there is a concrete data figure, people should be happy.
And if you complain about 250 gigs not being enough, it is clearly time to open the door, turn off the comp, and come to terms with the fact there IS LIFE outside the internet.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
|
b18bek9
Member
1 product review
|
8. May 2008 @ 01:02 |
Link to this message
|
i hardly doubt i'll download 250 gigs a month but if i pay for a service i would think i should be able to donwload as much as i want i pay for a isp to give me watever bandwidth i pay to use.
|
|
nobrainer
Suspended permanently
|
8. May 2008 @ 02:26 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by svtstang:
250 gigs is still A LOT of bandwidth! I see no reason why anybody should complain with that. I understand in the past Comcast has canceled service with no real number given to the question "how much is too much," but now that there is a concrete data figure, people should be happy.
And if you complain about 250 gigs not being enough, it is clearly time to open the door, turn off the comp, and come to terms with the fact there IS LIFE outside the internet.
250 is ok for the moment but what about them HD streaming services and downloads that are poised to flood the web?
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 8. May 2008 @ 02:28
|
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
8. May 2008 @ 02:55 |
Link to this message
|
250 Gb is a lot for a month. But as previously stated, what happens when HD streaming comes ?
"The flimsier the product,the higher the price"
Ferengi 82nd rule of aqusition
 |
Member
|
8. May 2008 @ 03:49 |
Link to this message
|
Ok well I somewhat get this.
But if people download programs does that count.
I would like too know too if anyone has heard of the problem coming in 2010 where it will all go kaputt because of the bandwidth.
Will someone give me a web site or in layman's terms what bandwidth means and what it does and how it is used.
I must be slow I read the bandwidth def and still doesn't make since since we all are on the Internet why is there bandwidth control if there wasn't what really would happen.
I say nothing.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 8. May 2008 @ 03:55
|
|
nobrainer
Suspended permanently
|
8. May 2008 @ 05:01 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by wolf123:
Ok well I somewhat get this.
But if people download programs does that count.
I would like too know too if anyone has heard of the problem coming in 2010 where it will all go kaputt because of the bandwidth.
Will someone give me a web site or in layman's terms what bandwidth means and what it does and how it is used.
I must be slow I read the bandwidth def and still doesn't make since since we all are on the Internet why is there bandwidth control if there wasn't what really would happen.
I say nothing.
all internet traffic including web pages, youtube videos, online virus checkers, iPlayer, iTunes,ect, ect, ect, is included in totals.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 8. May 2008 @ 05:09
|
Member
|
8. May 2008 @ 06:19 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
Originally posted by wolf123:
Ok well I somewhat get this.
But if people download programs does that count.
I would like too know too if anyone has heard of the problem coming in 2010 where it will all go kaputt because of the bandwidth.
Will someone give me a web site or in layman's terms what bandwidth means and what it does and how it is used.
I must be slow I read the bandwidth def and still doesn't make since since we all are on the Internet why is there bandwidth control if there wasn't what really would happen.
I say nothing.
all internet traffic including web pages, youtube videos, online virus checkers, iPlayer, iTunes,ect, ect, ect, is included in totals.
I guess people are fraked!!!
|
|
nobrainer
Suspended permanently
|
8. May 2008 @ 06:42 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
I guess people are fraked!!!
setting a limit is far more friendly that the current model of traffic management as isp's seem to have forgotten what net neutrality is. They are happy for you to pay for the service but not willing to let you actually use bandwidth you pay for as it eats into their profit margins so unless their bonuses are protected they are atm throttling pages and protocols to a complete standstill.
here is a great easy to use tool for measuring your bandwidth consumption http://www.dumeter.com/ (License: Free to try). remember if you use a router the traffic locally will also be included.
What is Net Neutrality? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JP_3WnJ42kw could it be courporate, capitalist scumbags stealing from us?
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 8. May 2008 @ 06:43
|
|
subpopz
Newbie
|
8. May 2008 @ 07:35 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by svtstang:
250 gigs is still A LOT of bandwidth! I see no reason why anybody should complain with that. I understand in the past Comcast has canceled service with no real number given to the question "how much is too much," but now that there is a concrete data figure, people should be happy.
And if you complain about 250 gigs not being enough, it is clearly time to open the door, turn off the comp, and come to terms with the fact there IS LIFE outside the internet.
That's enough is it?
That's barely 13 HD movies at 18GB a piece. (1080p, x264)
And its only legal HD that's 'poised' to start chewing up bandwidth. As always its the regular users (re:pirates) ahead of the industry, since full HD downloads have been available for a long time now.
But when it does become mainstream, look out.
Bandwidth limitations are ridiculous. ISP's just need to be forced to upgrade with the times.
Here's the next step I forsee: We will be paying different ISP packages $xx.xx for basic, $xx.xx for 250GB, $xx.xx for 500GB, and so on.
|
Junior Member
1 product review
|
8. May 2008 @ 07:58 |
Link to this message
|
A limit would be bad esp for HD, but I don't think it's even possible for me to download 250GB in a month with my 3Mbps connection [that's all I can get]. I'd have to do the math...nope, too lazy.. ;-)
My relatives' package in Ozzie land ReAllY stinks. They get a limit of 12GB on a 1.5 Mbps line, which slows to 64 Kbps once the limit is reached. I light of that, I think 250 GB is pretty liberal.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 8. May 2008 @ 08:00
|
|
stuntman_
Member
|
8. May 2008 @ 11:30 |
Link to this message
|
|
250 is pretty good considedring my ISP is going to switch to a 10 GB limit per month starting in July
|
|
emugamer
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
8. May 2008 @ 11:48 |
Link to this message
|
My ISP hasn't complained yet, and I average between 150-175 GB/month. But I'm confused - this includes web browsing? And streaming various multimedia from websites? So if I browse on YouTube and watch a few clips, that counts toward the 250GB? That would suck if I had Comcast. I know my wife is online all during the day. She's not downloading anything, but she's definitely using bandwidth. Not a good deal if you have a family with kids.
|
Member
|
8. May 2008 @ 12:23 |
Link to this message
|
|
Keep the pressure up by switching people!
The a*sh*les deserve to die.
|
Senior Member
2 product reviews
|
8. May 2008 @ 12:59 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by emugamer:
My ISP hasn't complained yet, and I average between 150-175 GB/month. But I'm confused - this includes web browsing? And streaming various multimedia from websites? So if I browse on YouTube and watch a few clips, that counts toward the 250GB? That would suck if I had Comcast. I know my wife is online all during the day. She's not downloading anything, but she's definitely using bandwidth. Not a good deal if you have a family with kids.
All activity would be included in your totals (surfing, email etc.) and not just what you actually download, as far as I can tell.
Personally, if this came to reality, I think a few things need to happen:
1. An automated email needs to be sent to subscribers when they are getting close to the download limit (i.e 50GB left) so they know they are almost over the limit and need to throttle back to avoid being charged.
2. If Comcast doesn't setup some sort of notice for individuals who are close to their bandwidth limit they would probably face all sorts of backlash (possible lawsuits, or even just loosing a decent size of their customer database) when hundreds or thousands of individuals get hit with massive "overage" charges.
That being said, I believe 250GB is a decent amount, although I personally think if a limit was to be imposed at all it should be 500GB or more instead of 250GB.
Peace
EDITED by Pop_Smith: Grammar issues :P
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 8. May 2008 @ 13:01
|
|
rob0t3ch
Suspended permanently
|
8. May 2008 @ 14:26 |
Link to this message
|
First off...........Comcast is shady, expensive and poorly customer serviced. They are a disgrace to American Business.
Second, I don't have their TV; rather I have Directv and because of this, Comcast somehow feels inclined and righteous to charge me (and every other customer in the same position) a whopping 57.95 for internet service alone. HOW IS THAT RIGHT??? Isn't that "extortion"?? Kinda like saying "Buy all my services or you'll be sorry with an extraordinary pricetag for only 1"
NOW...........at nigh 60 bucks a month...........my ass should be able to download whatever the frak I want and however much I want. No ifs, ands or buts.
Cap my bandwidth (unfairly of course as 250GB MAY not be bad, except the streaming issues) and I will go somewhere else.........EVEN DSL. If unavailable then I'm hittin' up Sat internet. Little pricey but I guess that may just be the "price" to pay huh?
|
|
EnigmaCM
Junior Member
1 product review
|
8. May 2008 @ 14:32 |
Link to this message
|
250 Gigs is not enough and more like an abuse. I have their 8mps package so I pay a good amount to be able to be used through three pc's, my Palm, my Xbox, my PS3 and my PSP. 250 might seem like a lot but when two of those computers is in the hands of college students who surf a lot and also watch a lot of You Tube videos and email constantly than the bandwidth usage will be used up rather quickly if the browsing and the streaming is included in the deal. Not that I am attacking the statement svstang made about having a life when it comes to being online, unfortuneatly my two sisters (the college students) are usually online a good 8 hours at a time not including my habits and the fact that I also sometimes work from home, 12 hours a day.
|
|
ikari
Junior Member
|
8. May 2008 @ 16:18 |
Link to this message
|
Err....I think before everyone says that it is too little or too much, maybe you should see how much you actually use. You might be surprised.
For those worried about streaming from Youtube, don't they use the .flv format? If so, the file sizes are pretty small. I am sure, if you tried, you could use all 250GB in a month but that would be 1,000s of videos. Now HD streaming...that is another story.
Because I don't know, I am curious as to how much bandwidth a MMORPG uses per hour. Some of those hardcore WOW guys/gals could be in trouble.
On the note about the possibility of pay packages for GB amounts, you can think of it exactly like a cell phone plan. I pay $45.00 a month for 1000 anytime minutes and unlimited text messaging. I honestly don't see why ISP didn't do this from the start. But then again, if they did, the internet might not be as big as it is today.
Sadly, as I get older I start to realize something:
I used to pay less and get more. Slowly, I am paying more and getting less.
|
Senior Member
|
8. May 2008 @ 18:20 |
Link to this message
|
Couple of things...
A) no matter if 250GB is alot or not... it's still not "unlimited" which has been the gripe all along. Sell me "unlimited" and I'll use "unlimited"...
B) A "tiered" plan where you pay a certain amount based on your bandwidth needs will not adhere to the "net neutrality" standards and would/should be dealt with as such by the FCC.
This is what these guys want. They want to be able to charge you based on your usage. The big guys pay a small amount per use while you and I will pay out the nose because we don't have lucrative high bandwidth websites and extensive "deals" with ISPs.
|
|
jetyi83
Member
|
9. May 2008 @ 02:01 |
Link to this message
|
250 is not a lot, i dont use that every month, but there are definitely months where i can use double that. thats only 20 hd movies in a month, and normal web browsing.
20 movies isnt much when youre building a library
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
9. May 2008 @ 14:08 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by jetyi83:
250 is not a lot, i dont use that every month, but there are definitely months where i can use double that. thats only 20 hd movies in a month, and normal web browsing.
20 movies isnt much when youre building a library
This is what bothers me. Only people that are bothered by a 1/4 tb cap per month are pirates who believe paying for a high speed connection entitles them to everything on the net. A tad delusional me thinks.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 9. May 2008 @ 14:09
|
Member
|
9. May 2008 @ 14:31 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by svtstang:
Originally posted by jetyi83:
250 is not a lot, i dont use that every month, but there are definitely months where i can use double that. thats only 20 hd movies in a month, and normal web browsing.
20 movies isnt much when youre building a library
This is what bothers me. Only people that are bothered by a 1/4 tb cap per month are pirates who believe paying for a high speed connection entitles them to everything on the net. A tad delusional me thinks.
Sounds like you work for a cable company. :-)
Frankly, any caps are idiotic. Why are we allowing these clueless gatekeepers to charge us for something that should be ours, anyway? When you count up the government subsidies these losers get, and all of the infrastructure that we, the taxpayers, already paid for, where do they get off putting limits on it?
And why are we allowing these greedy jerks to hold us back technologically? We all know they're hoarding fiber to drive the prices up. We all know they're lying about how "hard it is" to "maintain" the Internet (like they're doing that anyway).
So why not decapitate them?
Everybody's crying for nationalization and socialization of resources nowadays, so why not put these fat, greasy corporate heads out to pasture?
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
9. May 2008 @ 15:31 |
Link to this message
|
|
Lol nah, nowhere close to working for a cable company. What people do on the net is their own business, I just find it amusing what some people think they "deserve" for spending 50 bucks a month for their 8 meg connection. Pirate if you want, just don't make ridiculous arguments that a cap, a large one at that, is not enough because you can't pirate as many movies as you would have otherwise. You must admit, that sounds ridiculous doesn't it?
|
Senior Member
|
9. May 2008 @ 15:55 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
I just find it amusing what some people think they "deserve" for spending 50 bucks a month for their 8 meg connection. Pirate if you want, just don't make ridiculous arguments that a cap, a large one at that, is not enough because you can't pirate as many movies as you would have otherwise.
What I think I "deserve" is exactly what I paid for, which is "unlimited". Unlimited means as much as I am capable of getting with my "promised" speeds. If I want to open the pipe and stream the entire fricken internet onto a HD at my measly bitrate that the cable company allows me to use then that is what I "deserve".
The US is LAGGING in the world when it comes to speed. We have nothing compared to Asia. Our current greedy companies cannot keep up with the world or with US demands and so are trying to weasle out of their commitments with this bullcrap.
Try this. UPGRADE YOUR FRIGGEN INFRASTRUCTURE TO FIBER OPTIC AND GIVE US REAL BANDWIDTH ... and quit griping about how much bandwidth Johhny Moviewatcher is stealing from Grandma.
|
Member
|
9. May 2008 @ 16:18 |
Link to this message
|
Try this. UPGRADE YOUR FRIGGEN INFRASTRUCTURE TO FIBER OPTIC AND GIVE US REAL BANDWIDTH ... and quit griping about how much bandwidth Johhny Moviewatcher is stealing from Grandma.
It was changed over too fiber optics!
It is too live life too the fullest then never lived at all.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
emugamer
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
9. May 2008 @ 19:57 |
Link to this message
|
|
lol.....edited for, well.....it's too tempting to stir the pot :P
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 9. May 2008 @ 20:13
|
