Forums | MacLife

Fried Chicken wrote:

ScifiterX wrote:

At the time being 250 GB is somewhat reasonable for most regular cable customers

So, why put that cap in in the first place?

There is a very simple workaround to this.  Get an unlocked modem which will get you unimaginable internet speeds, almost complete anonymity, and no bandwidth caps.

And I can get free cable with a black box!

I have FiOS, too...  Signed up for the trio -- faster, cheaper, more channels, 100% digital (TV), etc...  Oh, and there's no cap.

justine wrote:

D'Eyncourt wrote:

justine wrote:

I don't now why everyone has their panties in a bunch about this. What are you guys uploading/downloading that you're upset about this cap?

In Japan people think nothing of posting a copy of their latest home movies (in HD!) so that gramma can see her grandchildren. In the US we don't even think of this being possible because of our caps.

If gramma wants to see the grandkids, there are better options than that, like video chat. They can always mail a dvd.

You are accommodating the limitations of the US ISPs. Sure a DVD can be mailed, but if you could wouldn't you rather send a link to the movie on your web page so it becomes available right now?

As good or bad the video quality may be, that video chat also counts against your ISP's download limits.

D'Eyncourt wrote:

justine wrote:

D'Eyncourt wrote:

In Japan people think nothing of posting a copy of their latest home movies (in HD!) so that gramma can see her grandchildren. In the US we don't even think of this being possible because of our caps.

If gramma wants to see the grandkids, there are better options than that, like video chat. They can always mail a dvd.

You are accommodating the limitations of the US ISPs. Sure a DVD can be mailed, but if you could wouldn't you rather send a link to the movie on your web page so it becomes available right now?

As good or bad the video quality may be, that video chat also counts against your ISP's download limits.

Exactly. You've pretty much proven the problem, Justine. The only reason "there are better options than that" is because of smurf like what Comcast is pulling. There's certainly no reason not to share a HD movie of the kids beyond the fact that ISPs just make it so damn difficult.

I don't think I've ever used 250GB in a month. It seems reasonable, but I'm not upset about the number at all. I'm upset about the principle.

I've hated Comcast since day one and I'd switch in a heartbeat if there was any other option. I live IN Boston (Not some 'burb. My mayor is Mumbles Menino.) and Comcast is the only broadband ISP I can get here. I feel like I'm a victim of a monopoly, tho I know technically somehow this is not really a monopoly. DSL won't work in my building (old wiring). I barely get cell reception. RCN ended their fiber line a mile short of my street and Verizon FiOS is perpetually "Coming Soon!". The picture quality sucks. The hardware sucks. Their customer support sucks. I pay $30 more/month than my brother that lives way out in the woods who subscribes to the exact same Comcast package. The only good thing I can say about them is that I always get EXACTLY the 8000/768 speeds they advertise, but that just seems like further proof that this whole bandwidth cap is a solution to a nonexistent problem.

LLEVIATHANN wrote:

Considering the few articles I've read I'm assuming the 250Gb cap is on total usage. However none of the articles have been that specific. Is the cap on downloads, uploads or both?

**Hugs my AT&T Uverse**

It's teh company's choice.

Ask yourself, "who did i piss off today?"

Aahhh Comcast how do I love thee, how do I count the ways? I won't, because I don't.
I was considering switching to Verizon FIOS last year, but it's expensive and there are just as many complaints.
At least Comcast is coming out a little more on how they're going to manage usage. 

Macskeeball wrote:

I'm interested in Pariah's thoughts on this. I recall him saying a while ago that he regularly uses a large amount of bandwidth with Usenet, that he's on cable, and that he doesn't consider DSL "real broadband.".

LOLWUT ?

My dsl connection is 14656 kb / 897 kb at this very moment.


HOW MORE BROAD DO WANT IT ?

Do not laugh but here in Indonesia our provider (Indosat) offer packages like this:

1) ECO! Package (like, Economy Package)
Harga Rp. 160.000/bulan (price 18 dollar per month)
Quota 700 MB/bulan  (quote 700 MB per month)

PAKET YOU! ('YOU' PACKAGE)
Harga Rp. 350.000/bulan (USD 39 per month)
Quota 1,2 GB/bulan (1.2GB limit)

PAKET PRO! (PRO, like PROFESSIONAL PACKAGE)
Harga Rp. 625.000 /bulan (USD 69 per month)
Quota 3 GB/bulan (Limit 3GB per month)

PAKET MAX! (Max, like Maximum Package)
Harga Rp. 900.000 /bulan (Price USD99 per month)
Quota 5 GB/bulan (Limit 5GB per month)

I place, speedy (fastnet) offer unlimited download but the line very slow ....

i wish i can have the limit of 250GB!!!!

jakartaguy

More Comcast fun!

http://gizmodo.com/5045859/comcast-sues … n-reversed

Comcast has sued the FCC to overturn its order to stop slowing down P2P traffic, as was widely predicted. Even though they're fighting to have the FCC's ruling reversed, it's actually not so they can go back to mucking your P2P funtime—no, they're already way down the road of slowing down heavy users' entire connection to DSL speed for up to 20 minutes, with data caps beginning in October.

The point is to rollback the FCC's power: Comcast, and the rest of the ISPs and telcos, don't want the FCC to be able to tell them how to manage their networks. That order is previously uncharted territory for the FCC, and if it stands, it'll set a precedent that grants them fairly broad powers to look over the shoulder of ISPs, and effectively, a strong hand in the shaping the future of the internet.

FCC Chairman Kevin Martin has already responded to the suit, saying that the FCC had "put Comcast on notice" back in 2006 that it'd look into complaints about Comcast gumming up their network without properly notifying users, yet "Comcast nonetheless chose to close on that deal." For Martin, as usual, the mantra is about informing users, not so much about rules and regulations—whether or not that's just his public strategy to get the rules in place is debatable, but it is his standard script.

Macskeeball wrote:

Bat wrote:

"As part of our pre-existing policy, we will continue to contact the top users of our high-speed Internet service and ask them to curb their usage," Comcast said Thursday.

"If a customer uses more than 250 GB and is one of the top users of our service, he or she may be contacted by Comcast to notify them of excessive use," according to the AUP. "At that time, we'll tell them exactly how much data per month they had used. We know from experience the vast majority of customers we ask to curb usage do so voluntarily."

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2 … 185,00.asp

Hello. This is Comcast calling to let you know that you have one month to stop making off-site backups of your data, stop using your phone, and get rid of some of the people in your household. Failure to do so will result in the complete termination of your Internet service for one year. No, we do not give you the option to pay more for a higher cap, and we do not provide a way for you to routinely check your data usage on your own.

bandwidth for phone usage is incredibly small.
bandwidth for off site backup is also small if your client does it right - it should only need to back up delta from last backup.

I'm sure you can talk to them about a commercial business account if you really need more than that.

The issue they undoubtedly are having is people running BitTorrent on large scale. Someone has to pay for that bandwidth - and the physical hardware to provide quality service to the people who have phones, pay the same fee, but are small user.

250GB/mo is over 8GB a day. That is a lot of bandwidth.

D'Eyncourt wrote:

justine wrote:

I don't now why everyone has their panties in a bunch about this. What are you guys uploading/downloading that you're upset about this cap?

In Japan people think nothing of posting a copy of their latest home movies (in HD!) so that gramma can see her grandchildren. In the US we don't even think of this being possible because of our caps.

Um, whatever.
I don't buy that.

resedit wrote:

D'Eyncourt wrote:

justine wrote:

I don't now why everyone has their panties in a bunch about this. What are you guys uploading/downloading that you're upset about this cap?

In Japan people think nothing of posting a copy of their latest home movies (in HD!) so that gramma can see her grandchildren. In the US we don't even think of this being possible because of our caps.

Um, whatever.
I don't buy that.

You don't think that your online behavior would change if your up/download speeds were more like 1000 Mb/sec rather than the typical US speeds of under 10 Mb/sec? Perhaps yours wouldn't but many people's would.