×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Cablevision To Offer 101 Mbps Down, No Caps

kdawson posted more than 4 years ago | from the like-a-drug dept.

Businesses 375

nandemoari alerts us to news over at DSLReports that Cablevision will be offering subscribers 101-Mbps download service, a new US record. That's fast enough to download an HD movie in less than 10 minutes. The package, known as "Ultra," will launch on May 11 and will cost $99.95 a month. Upload speed is 15 Mbps and there are no monthly limits. Cablevision is also doubling the speed of its Wi-Fi service, which is available free to subscribers using hotspots across the Northeast. "...the company will be launching a new 'Ultra' tier on May 11. The new tier features speeds of 101Mbps downstream and 15Mbps upstream for $99.95 a month. That's an unprecedented amount of speed at an unprecedented price, suggesting that Cablevision just took the gloves off in their fight against Verizon FiOS. ... Cablevision spokesman Jim Maiella confirmed for me that the $99.95 price is unbundled, and the new tier does not come with any kind of a usage cap or overage fees."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

375 comments

Starting to pack my things... (5, Funny)

nschubach (922175) | more than 4 years ago | (#27747925)

Now I need to find a town with Cablevision service to move to...

Re:Starting to pack my things... (5, Informative)

Hadlock (143607) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748027)

I had my card in hand, looking for the local number to switch here in Dallas, but the story doesn't point out that they're only located in the Tri-State (NJ-NY-CT) area. Bummer. Cablevision, do you hear me?

Re:Starting to pack my things... (5, Insightful)

bee-17 (893779) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748099)

Before you do, ask how much bandwidth Cablevision provisions to serve each neighborhood. A 100 Mbps last-mile connection isn't worth didly-squat if the CMTS head-end only has a 155 Mbps uplink. Even a gig uplink is only enough for about 80 customers, given typical 8:1 oversubscription. Many ISP's don't mind 100:1 oversubscription or worse!

Re:Starting to pack my things... (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27748537)

I live in central jersey and I pay an extra $10 a month for their 30/5 plan right now. I can tell you that anytime I run a speed test I come in right around 27-30/5 regardless of when I run it. Cablevision's normal plan is 15/2 and most of the people who's houses I have been to can always hit that speed regardless when it is.

Re:Starting to pack my things... (1)

NeoSkandranon (515696) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748547)

"A 100 Mbps last-mile connection isn't worth didly-squat if..."

All depends on the type of neighborhood. In, for example, my hometown I'd be willing to bet I'd have most of that bandwidth all to myself. Probably less so where I am currently (apartment complex in a "planned" neighborhood full of young people)

Re:Starting to pack my things... (2, Informative)

Z00L00K (682162) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748207)

I have had 100Mbps for years now... That single megabit won't make any difference.

Re:Starting to pack my things... (5, Funny)

QuantumRiff (120817) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748565)

I was going to moderate your post, but realized there is no '-1 Smug Bastard' rating...

Isn't it time slashdot gave us a few more choices to moderate with? I'm nominating that one...

Re:Starting to pack my things... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27748587)

I have had 100Mbps for years now... That single megabit won't make any difference.

Nigel: Well, it's one faster, innit? It's not 100. You see, most blokes, you know, will be downloading at 100. You're on 100 here, all the way up, all the way up, all the way up, you're on 100 on your laptop. Where can you go from there? Where?

Marty: I don't know.

Nigel: Nowhere. Exactly. What we do is, if we need that extra push over the cliff, you know what we do?

Marty: Put it up to 101.

Nigel: 101. Exactly. One faster.

Marty: Why don't you just make 100 faster and make 100 be the top number and make that a little faster?

Nigel: These go to 101.

Hmmm (0)

powerslave12r (1389937) | more than 4 years ago | (#27747933)

I smell RIAA/MPAA, could it be?

Re:Hmmm (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27748349)

Are you implying the RIAA is subsidizing high speed internet in order to catch people uploading their content?

Wow...

Canada (1)

deemen (1316945) | more than 4 years ago | (#27747945)

I wish we had this kind of speed in Canada. I guess it's not so much the speed as the bandwidth caps. What the hell are we supposed to do with a 20 GB download limit?

Somehow Canada missed the boat with Unlimited download/upload.

Re:Canada (1)

al0ha (1262684) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748089)

Well don't feel too bad because the quote in the story copied below should be appended with, "; yet." in order to represent the real world.

"Cablevision spokesman Jim Maiella confirmed for me that the $99.95 price is unbundled, and the new tier does not come with any kind of a usage cap or overage fees."

Re:Canada (1)

Lord Pillage (815466) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748187)

Here on the east coast, my Eastlink service doesn't seem to be capped. They usually have decent customer service too. Torrents are sometimes slow, but I don't think that's the fault of the ISP, since some reach ~500kB/s. The highest d/l speed I've had was about ~2MB/s = ~16Mb/s (It's rated at 15Mb/s). I'm not sure what I d/l in a month, but I'm sure some months is been > 30 GB. Cost is roughly $50-$60/mnth (Canadian dollars).

Re:Canada (1)

JO_DIE_THE_STAR_F*** (1163877) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748193)

In Edmonton for $93.00CA there is shaw's High-Speed Warp [www.shaw.ca] that gives you
# Up to 25 Mbps download speed
# Up to 2 Mbps upload speed
# 150 GB/month data transfer (Thats a bit better than 20 GB but by no means unlimited.)
I just don't know what the hell "UP TO" means.

Re:Canada (4, Insightful)

Chabil Ha' (875116) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748443)

"UP TO" means that they're advertising that speed, but their TOS will say that they don't guarantee that you'll actually get that. I have found with the various ISPs I've had that download is usually 75-90% what they advertise and upload is 40-60%, which is pretty galling, considering I would much more prefer a faster upload than download.

Re:Canada (1)

perryizgr8 (1370173) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748579)

i feel real jealous right now. i just ask for unlimited download only at 2mbps. i'll be happy. but no, everyone in my country is fucking around with non-issues and the one thing that could change everything (internet) is being ignored.
i say, fuck the terrorists, fuck the corrupt politicians and fuck everything else. just let me work hard and get adequate compensation for my innovation/dedication. and let me buy anything at reasonable prices.
its so easy to create massive infrastructure but no one is doing it because we think like poor people. we are trapped in our own minds. more than anything, poverty is a state of mind.
and when i express my desire to immigrate to somewhere else where my work will be appreciated, all i get is hypocritical bullshit.

Funny how behind the US is (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27747959)

So in 2009 the US finally gets some decent speeds with no caps. My provider in Romania in 2005, four years ago and in a much less developed country, offered speeds sufficient to download a film in about 10 minutes (there was no HD then, but we were happy) for all of 15 euro a month. They also set up a DC++ server for the town where everyone could share films and music with their neighbours. I suspect this offer from Cablevision won't last long, and $99 is ridiculously overpriced for something that ought to be nearly free like air and water.

Re:Funny how behind the US is (4, Informative)

Spazztastic (814296) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748171)

I suspect this offer from Cablevision won't last long, and $99 is ridiculously overpriced for something that ought to be nearly free like air and water.

Water isn't free. You pay for clean water via your taxes and/or water bill. Or you buy it bottled.

Re:Funny how behind the US is (4, Funny)

AnotherBlackHat (265897) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748425)

Water isn't free. You pay for clean water via your taxes and/or water bill. Or you buy it bottled.

Isn't it amazing how some people act like water falls free from the sky.

Re:Funny how behind the US is (1)

getclear (1338437) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748481)

Air isn't free either. Think about the taxes paid and money we shell out to plant more trees and make the world a greener place. $100 bucks for internet isn't that bad if it is your livelihood.

Re:Funny how behind the US is (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27748189)

On the other hand, we don't have to live in Romania, which to me is a fantastic trade-off for less convenient pirating abilities.

Re:Funny how behind the US is (2, Insightful)

InsaneProcessor (869563) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748273)

Your infrastructure went from nearly nothing to nearly state of the art. Your infrastructure was developed in the U.S. When you have to upgrade because what you have doesn't work that is one thing. The infrastructure in the U.S. is gradually upgraded so, you have to pay for the existing before you can upgrade. This infrastructure is costly to keep up with. A moving target is much more costly than a fixed one.

At some point the broadband in the U.S. will pass you up but, it will be in the future when yours is aging.

Re:Funny how behind the US is (1)

LilGuy (150110) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748451)

I have about an average of 22 mbps/1 mbps through my apartment complex with no caps and a static IP.

I really don't need anything higher than 22 mbps down, since most websites load instantly for me, and big downloads rarely utilize my full bandwidth anyway. I would appreciate at higher upstream, but that also is not necessary since I do not run any servers.

I guess I'm lucky that my apartment complex is considered university housing so we have direct dsl2 connections to the university's network for free.

Re:Funny how behind the US is (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748501)

My provider in Romania in 2005, four years ago and in a much less developed country, offered speeds sufficient to download a film in about 10 minutes (there was no HD then, but we were happy) for all of 15 euro a month.

How many potential customers did they serve?

The explicitly avoided topic... (4, Insightful)

Pahalial (580781) | more than 4 years ago | (#27747961)

Traffic shaping! It's fine if they do or don't do it, but will companies PLEASE start being up-front about it? Put as much spin on the damn thing as you want, just at least mention it if you're doing it.

Re:The explicitly avoided topic... (2, Informative)

Andy Dodd (701) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748071)

Yeah. Cablevision is notorious for some shady "stealth capping" policies, or at least was back in 2003-2004.

If you used too much of your upload bandwith (with "too much" being undocumented to the customer), you would have your upstream cap lowered to 150 kilobits/sec (from something like 1.5 Mbits) without any notice.

Re:The explicitly avoided topic... (4, Informative)

MeanMF (631837) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748111)

Yeah they used to do that and it was really annoying since they wouldn't tell you what was acceptible. But they dropped that practice years ago, and the upload speed for their least expensive service is now 2Mbps.

Re:The explicitly avoided topic... (1)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748259)

Yeah. Cablevision is notorious for some shady "stealth capping" policies

Ha. Are we talking about Cablevision here or Comcast?

Re:The explicitly avoided topic... (3, Insightful)

Andy Dodd (701) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748317)

Comcast's approach (bogus RST injection) was even nastier in some ways, since it would outright kill a connection instead of slowing it down. If you were using a protocol that didn't resume partial uploads (like Lotus Notes) you were completely screwed.

At least with CV's approach, you could still upload stuff, it just took forever because it was so slow.

In both cases, the companies never acknowledged that they engaged in such practices, at least not until quite a while after the public outcry.

Re:The explicitly avoided topic... (1)

AndrewNeo (979708) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748571)

I think you meant Charter, they had the same problem where there was some sort of limit on upstream, but they wouldn't tell anyone what it actually was.

Re:The explicitly avoided topic... (1)

MeanMF (631837) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748075)

As far as I can tell, the only traffic shaping they do is to prioritize VoIP traffic for their Optimum Voice service. That's not to say that the bandwidth is always constant... During peak hours it's not uncommon for download speeds to drop by 30-50% depending on where you live, but that's likely more of an oversubscription problem than them doing any kind of traffic shaping.

Re:The explicitly avoided topic... (1)

RiotingPacifist (1228016) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748235)

Aslong as the 'spin' isn't just flat out lies: virgin [virginmedia.com] simply lie here, the reality of being on virgin is if
1) you have unencrypted torrents
2) you upload more than 10,25,45 kb/s (yes there are 3 distinct caps even though they claim 2) for more than a few minutes
3) all your traffic slowed (not 75% but 100% of pings to Google will take >3s)
So they have two pages on their site explaining what they do and how they do it, no mention of phorm and only a hint of truth between both of them.

Yes, BUT! (3, Funny)

C_Kode (102755) | more than 4 years ago | (#27747967)

They still don't offer NFL Network so, OFF WITH THEIR HEADS!!!

Re:Yes, BUT! (3, Funny)

nschubach (922175) | more than 4 years ago | (#27747979)

What self respecting nerd/geek watches the NFL? Are you a spy for the jocks?

Re:Yes, BUT! (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27748023)

Maybe he's just in it for the stats?

Re:Yes, BUT! (1)

MightyYar (622222) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748219)

What self respecting nerd/geek watches the NFL?

I think you are thinking of NASCAR. Every geek in my department plays fantasy league.

Re:Yes, BUT! (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27748059)

Neither will Comcast as of May 1.

Two choices (3, Insightful)

pathological liar (659969) | more than 4 years ago | (#27747989)

Either they're really going to regret promising that, or they're hiding some dirty little secret...

Re:Two choices (0, Redundant)

Andy Dodd (701) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748097)

They've been hiding a "stealth capping" secret for 5-6 years now.

Or at least they were 5-6 years ago, my guess is that they still are. (See my previous post in this topic for details.)

Re:Two choices (1)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748269)

Either they're really going to regret promising that, or they're hiding some dirty little secret...

At a minimum, read the fine print.

Re:Two choices (1)

t00le (136364) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748355)

Either they're really going to regret promising that, or they're hiding some dirty little secret...

Layer four intercepts to caching engine - check
ToS to suspend accounts for violation - check
Assorted forums to complain about the man - check

Re:Two choices (1)

MindStalker (22827) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748437)

Or maybe they have deals with content providers for something, who knows why they are offering the service, but they won't regret it. I read a recent analysis of TWC's SEC report and it basically states that TWCs cost of providing broadband, including service, repair, cable modems, everything was $5 per broadband customer per month. Buying programming from the networks is in the $30 a month range. Which has the biggest profit margin. If you cut your TV part of your service and get the $99 a month system, even if 100Mbs is costing them $20 a month they are still making a bigger profit than having to deal with the likes of Viacom..

About time - had that in research for years (1)

WillAffleckUW (858324) | more than 4 years ago | (#27747995)

We've had that speed at major universities and in Japan for years now.

What slackers ...

DOCSIS 3.0 (5, Informative)

TehCable (1351775) | more than 4 years ago | (#27747997)

Don't get ready to move across the country for this service just yet. This is just the beginning. DOCSIS 3.0 is the new standard that supports bonding together traditional cable modem channels to support these kinds of speeds, and the equipment that supports it is currently in late development stages and is being tested by all of the major cable operators. You are going to see a lot more announcements like this one over the next few years, possibly in your area.

Re:DOCSIS 3.0 (5, Informative)

sarahbau (692647) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748109)

Not likely. In areas where there is no competition for broadband (like RTP for example), the cable companies have no incentive to increase bandwidth, and have shown over the last 10+ years that they will keep bandwidth at a minimum. Time Warner is really the only option here in Raleigh, NC. There are a few pockets that can get DSL, but there is no FTTH. The fastest DSL here, if you can get it, is 6Mbps, so Time Warner offers 7Mbps down/384 up for $50 a month. I don't see that increasing until there's some competition. Time Warner is currently trying to push a bill through in NC that makes it so cities can't even provide their own broadband to compete with them.

Re:DOCSIS 3.0 (2)

DigiShaman (671371) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748609)

I would like to see Comcast or TW offer 50Mbit Up/Down for traffic inside their own networks. Basically, enhanced speeds for all users inside the same WAN (local ISP). They own the network right? I'm willing to bet businesses with local branch offices would flock to the service.

...And then Time Warner will come... (1)

getclear (1338437) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748009)

So how long until Timer Warner comes and tries to seek more legislation since they refuse to complete, or will not compete?

I think we are starting to see the little guys starting to move into the limelight, and the big boys will use bureaucracy to manage their inabilities to compete. Maybe a breakthrough will be made. Lets cross our fingers!

Re:...And then Time Warner will come... (2, Insightful)

Andy Dodd (701) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748119)

Time Warner has no influence over Cablevision, other than being "buddy buddy" with them.

Each has their own monopoly over their given geographic area. In fact, the big boys (and CV is DEFINATELY one of them, not a "little guy" by ANY means!) have their own effective cartel with CableLabs.

Correction... (4, Insightful)

Foolicious (895952) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748015)

Upload speed is 15 Mbps and there are no posted and well-defined monthly limits for now.

(As always...) there you go, fixed that for you.

Re:Correction... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27748293)

Fucking homosexual faggot.

How will they handle this? (0)

davidwr (791652) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748061)

1) Traffic shaping, as suggested by others
2) Good prior planning - maybe they know who their high-end customers are and have the infrastructure in place
3) Untargeted throttling - if your neighborhood gets saturated, everyone gets throttled to the same temporary maximum bandwidth until demand goes down
4) Targeted throttling - throttle certain users based on what or how much they are downloading or other factors
5) Eat the financial loss needed to rapidly upgrade neighborhoods as they overpower their existing tubes
6) Start off really uncapped but change their minds after a few weeks or months and institute some form of limits to keep #5 from sending them into bankruptcy.

Re:How will they handle this? (1)

sonicmerlin (1505111) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748145)

Dude, financial losses? Bankrupty? Are you just trolling or are you seriously unaware of the previous threads detailing the costs to cable companies of providing broadband and upgrading their network? These companies make incredible amounts of profit, and providing internet service is incredibly cheap. In fact the costs of maintaining their networks continues to go down year after year. Docsis 3.0 is itself a network upgrade that costs very little to implement. It's not like they're offering higher speeds with the same network.

Great for leechers ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27748063)

... not so great for seeders.

Just Curious (1)

Povno (1460131) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748069)

What does this mean to the average home user who purchases the high speed service; unaware that when they bought their new PC they chose the cheaper option for their NIC card - which then becomes the slowest component on their network - wasting both money and speed?

Re:Just Curious (1)

Dog-Cow (21281) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748553)

What is a NIC card and where can you find a new PC that comes with 10Mbit interface?

Great for botnets (4, Insightful)

ericferris (1087061) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748077)

The last Cablevision subscriber I saw was a friend who had a Windows machine plugged in directly into the small cable modem, with a world-routable IP address. The machine was idle and the modem was blinking constantly during the whole time I was there, without any one logged it. Needless to say, my friend complained his machine was "starting to get slow". Translation: the machine was pwnd.

I shudder at the thought of having botnets take hold of vulneratble machines sitting on 100 Mbit/s pipes.

Re:Great for botnets (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27748155)

That blinking may not mean much. Mine blinks (quite furiously) with no network plugged into it...

Re:Great for botnets (1)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748315)

That blinking may not mean much. Mine blinks (quite furiously) with no network plugged into it...

You're right, it means nothing at all. Why do people always assume that just because they don't happen to be doing anything that the network should be completely idle? You put a bunch of machines on a network and there's constant network management traffic between them, among other things. Sure, they dude's friend could have been pwned ... but a blinking LED doesn't prove it.

Re:Great for botnets (1)

ericferris (1087061) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748623)

A good point. But I also could see the Ethernet port, an old-fashioned card with two LEDs for TX and RX (yes, old machine). And both were blinking furiously.

Otherwise, yes, you are right, the activity light of some cable modems is blinking simply when there is some traffic on the local segment, not necessary from or to the attached machine.

Sorry I wasn't more specific.

The concern is that many cable companies don't have even a minimal firewall in their cable modems. This changes every unaware consumer's PC into a potential zombie.

Re:Great for botnets (1)

db32 (862117) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748263)

This does raise an interesting issue. As the price goes down and the bandwidth goes up there will eventually be a point where it would be profitable for botnet herders to subsidize infected machine connections. Like Netzero only a little more sinister.

Re:Great for botnets (1)

xero91 (999293) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748361)

The machine was idle and the modem was blinking constantly during the whole time I was there, without any one logged it. Needless to say, my friend complained his machine was "starting to get slow". Translation: the machine was pwnd..

The constant blinking was probably the result of the ARP flood issue that's plagued Optimum for years...

Re:Great for botnets (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27748627)

The constant blinking was most likely ARP requests. Since your neighborhood cable is basically a LAN segment carrying dozens (hundreds?) of users, there are a lot of ARP messages floating around. Normal activity.

Unpossible (2, Funny)

chill (34294) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748105)

We've already had this discussion. A company improving their service or product offerings by impetus of competition is a fiction. If the government doesn't force them, subsidize it or directly provide it, it won't happen. Period, the end.

You may now commence sticking your fingers in your ears and going "LA LA LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU LA LA LA" until Congress or some other branch of government takes credit for this.

Re:Unpossible (1)

maxume (22995) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748253)

There are too many cracks in your pottery. Try to chain things together a little more.

HD movie in less than 10 minutes?? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27748157)

HD movie in less than 10 minutes?? That isn't a true statement. 10 minutes at 101 Mbps is only 7.5 gigs, which is the size of a DVD. Blue Ray (HD) is many times that size. 101 Mbps / 8 = 12.625 megs / sec. This times 600 seconds (10 minutes) is only 7575 MB (or 7.5 GB)

Re:HD movie in less than 10 minutes?? (1)

Overzeetop (214511) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748279)

Don't know 'bout you, but the only rips I tend to see are recodes to that level for 1080, and about 4-5GB for 720. AFAIK, there are no licensed online sources for BR downloads, so it's more of a random metric. Like Libraries of Congress - it's not like anybody actually stores a LoC on a disc, but people still insist on using it as a unit of measure.

Re:HD movie in less than 10 minutes?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27748357)

Ok I guess I was comparing it to the (original) full size of a DVD that has not gone through the lossy conversion to DivX, or whatever they're using now.

But does cablevision have retroactive immunity? (2, Interesting)

drfool (1535489) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748159)

I know Verizon is exempt from any and all cases of domestic spying (which has kept me away from fIoS)

Does anybody know Cablevision's deal with Congress?

Re:But does cablevision have retroactive immunity? (1)

sonicmerlin (1505111) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748377)

Your intense paranoia is so ridiculous it makes me laugh. Denying yourself a service because you're worried that anyone cares who you are or what you're doing is pathetic. On a side note: Your existence is insignificant.

Re:But does cablevision have retroactive immunity? (1)

drfool (1535489) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748607)

Really? You've met my concern with systematic violation of privacy with that type of an insult?

I get a pamphlet in the mail daily from Verizon as well as weekly phone calls and biweekly door to door salesman visits. Their service costs more than my existing service AND they've become a puppet of the federal government's "war on terror". They cripple the hardware of their cellphones and have in the past charged my credit card without my consent and have denied it. I have plenty of reasons not to use Verizon's fiber optic network.

On a side note: if my existence is insignificant, why bother?

Dubious speed claims (4, Interesting)

KerberosKing (801657) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748191)

OK, so they double-bond cable modems, giving you twice the usual speed to your desktop. Then you get on the same clogged, shared network as the rest of your neighborhood, and hope they have enough bandwidth upstream to handle the potential doubling of clients (from double-bonding). In a dense residential area (urban apartment buildings for example), I have never seen a cable company actually be able to back up their claims of speed, upload or download.

To me, this sounds as bogus as the dual-bond 56K modems where you had to buy two phone-lines just for data, and then you would want one for voice, and heck maybe even a fourth for FAX.

What's next, a seven-bladed razor?

Re:Dubious speed claims (1)

olsmeister (1488789) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748599)

DOCSIS 3.0 does not limit the number of bonded channels. They may bond 2, 4, or more. I know a lot of cable companies are undertaking projects to increase the number of nodes in their systems to reduce the number of customers sharing that bandwidth, as well.

Re:Dubious speed claims (1)

frozentier (1542099) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748605)

I live in an apartment complex, and I get 20Mbps from Time Warner, with a guarantee of only 7Mbps.

just now ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27748251)

What's new there ?

Don't want to sound like a US basher, but I subscribed 3 years ago for my 100 mbits down / 5 up + tv + phone cable connection, all of this for about 30 / month here in France ...

Are you guys so far behind ??

Haha (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27748281)

We have 100 Mbps (up&down) and it costs 10 USD per month! (no caps) Americans are soo behind.

How are you going to stay at the forefront of development with that kind of infrastructure?

Yay for Cablevision (4, Interesting)

Areyoukiddingme (1289470) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748285)

Now all we need is for Cablevision to drop the price by one order of magnitude. Then we can be competitive with South Korea!

Oh, and for all of you in New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut, I hate you. I hate you from the depths of the Charter service area, in the midwest. Bastards.

large bandwidth != high speed (1, Informative)

mikethefreak (735706) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748305)

Just because CV is upping the bandwidth does not promise a faster connection. My current connection through them has latency anywhere from 30ms to 1sec depending on many factors.

100 bucks!?!?!? (5, Funny)

maillemaker (924053) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748329)

A hundred bucks a month for internet service is insane. For that kind of money a customer service rep should come over every other week and give me a blow job.

Feel-a-vision! (1)

geekmux (1040042) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748563)

Yeah, but with that kind of pipe(huh, huh), the HD porn streaming(huh, huh) from your PC will almost feel that real...

You've got a deal! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27748629)

Okay! You've got a deal. Just let me know which day you want him to come over.

no caps? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27748365)

i'm not sure i can handle no caps. i've been typing using caps ever since i started typing. plus, that 101mbps isn't as significant when you remove 1/8th of the bits. what is that, like 77mbps? psssh. plus it'll make slashdot look like it's being written by 13yr-olds.... err... it isn't, right?

Verizon Response... (1)

xero91 (999293) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748397)

I have heard rumors that Verizon was bumping up their speeds (including that of their base package). I can't wait to see what their response to this Optimum offer looks like.

Cablevision "expresslink" ISP caching (2, Interesting)

zerofoo (262795) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748533)

Cablevision also appears to have installed an ISP caching system they market as "expresslink":

http://www.optimum.com/online/expresslink.jsp [optimum.com]

So far, I have not noticed any ill effects of this, but it doesn't appear to be something you can opt-out of. So, even though you have a 100 mbps pipe, you may not be pulling content directly from the originating web site.

Something to keep in mind when deciding to become a Cablevision customer.

-ted

personal cablevision experience (1)

Moebius Loop (135536) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748589)

I don't have any hard data for you, but I recently moved from Yonkers, NY to Brooklyn, NY and had to give up Cablevision for Time Warner.

With Cablevision, I could regularly pull down 5-7 MBytes/sec down and had at least 250 Kbytes/sec up. It was paradise!

Of course, now that I have time warner, my max upstream is a whopping 60 Kbytes/sec, and my downstream never goes above 1 Mbyte/sec.

Granted, Yonkers is only about a tenth of the size of Brooklyn population-wise, but everyone else I knew in Westchester county (about half the size of Brooklyn) got similar speeds from Cablevision.

I doubt that CV customers will see a true 100 mbit connection, but my experiences in a densely populated area lead me to believe they will get fairly close to delivering on this promise...

Hrm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27748597)

I use Shaw here in Canada and I get 100 GB for my $40 each month. I've yet to hit the cap and I'm um... download a lot of open source software... yeah. That's what I'm doing...

Just for information... (1)

TheMask (70539) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748615)

...in Portugal we already have two triple-play service providers offering 100Mbits download using fiber-to-home, although still not available everywhere.
The prices are quite reasonable (at least comparing to Cablevision's $99.99).
64.99 euros (around $85) for 100 channels, 100Mbps/10Mbps and phone.

High costs. (1)

BlueKitties (1541613) | more than 4 years ago | (#27748619)

I'm currently paying $80.00 per month for a damn 1mb connection. Unfortunately, I live in the country, so I need special equipment (some micro-wave broadband or something.) Still, the only reason they can get away with it is because they're the only broadband providers in the area. I've heard of some locations that have the same service for half the cost -- but they actually have local competition. If that's any indicator, this sort of service will drop in price, too, once more providers start offering these speeds.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...