Beta
×

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!

Comcast's 105MBit Service Comes With Data Cap

timothy posted more than 3 years ago | from the so-best-pace-yourself dept.

The Internet 372

itwbennett writes "Comcast just announced the ultrafast, ultra-broadband 'Extreme 105' 105 Mbit/sec Internet service for an introductory price of $105, when bundled with other services. That's the good news. The bad news: Comcast 'put a data cap on the service of 250 GB per month — about five hours worth of full-bandwidth use,' writes blogger Kevin Fogarty."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

TIN FOIL CAPS IT IS THEN !! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35838822)

We can't have them downloads our stuff at the speed of fiber all the time now can we ??

WHO THE FUCK CAPS IN BITS ?? (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35838838)

250 billion bits? That sounds as stupid as a republican opening her mouth !! Caps are ALWAYS given in bytes. Another hack without a clue is on the loose !! SAGA !!

Re:WHO THE FUCK CAPS IN BITS ?? (1)

electrosoccertux (874415) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839302)

250 billion bits? That sounds as stupid as a republican opening her mouth !! Caps are ALWAYS given in bytes. Another hack without a clue is on the loose !! SAGA !!

its to generate comments like yours, duh.

Re:WHO THE FUCK CAPS IN BITS ?? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35839352)

Hurr durr I'm too ignorant to recognize a typo when I see one, uhuh uhuh...

That's normal (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35838848)

250 gigs of data is their normal cap across the board.

Re:That's normal (1)

thomasdz (178114) | more than 3 years ago | (#35838854)

250 gigs of data is their normal cap across the board.

Just like "corrupt government".... it's normal. don't complain. accept.

Re:That's normal (1)

supertrinko (1396985) | more than 3 years ago | (#35838876)

Really? I hate living here. My plan is 10GB/Month.

Re:That's normal (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35838896)

250 gigs of data is their normal cap across the board.

So? What's the point in having that speed with that cap? It just doesn't make sense. If I have a great big pipe then I'm going to want to use it - otherwise I'll stick on my slow pipe and carry on planning ahead. Just goes to show that ISPs don't have a fucking clue about their customers demographics or their requirements.

Re:That's normal (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35839166)

Just goes to show that ISPs don't have a fucking clue about their customers demographics or their requirements.

Oh but they do. 105Mbit sounds nice and looks great on adverts. Those pesky 250 gb are hidden somewhere in the fine-print that nobody reads. People - dumb as they are - fall for it.

Re:That's normal (5, Insightful)

vakuona (788200) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839290)

Speed is not just about downloading more. It is also about downloading stuff quicker, believe it or not. Even if I wouldn't go anywhere near the cap, I would love that speed if I needed to download a movie or two onto my iPad to take on a long journey, because I might not think about it until it's rather late. If I can do that in 10 minutes, then grand.

And ISP have a clue, believe it or not. They know that only about 0.5% or less of their customers regularly go over the cap, and very few actually find the caps to be a problem. If they could just not take that bothersome 0.5% as customers, they would probably be better off. Here in the UK, I just signed up for a broadband deal that has a 60GB cap, but allows me unlimited downloads that don't count towards my cap between midnight and 8am. That seems a reasonable compromise to me. Downloads as much as you want but don't affect other customers who have lower needs, but who still want to watch Youtube videos in HD.

Re:That's normal (2)

sunderland56 (621843) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839150)

250 gigs of data is their normal cap across the board.

And that limit is very easy to approach, even on their slowest line, with moderate netflix + gaming. Their penalties for going over 250 are pretty severe.

Business Accounts (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35838858)

Just be sure to get a business account when you're calling to get the new service hooked up. As they don't have a 250Gb cap and can actually cost less than a residential line if you haggle the dealer on the phone a bit ;)

Re:Business Accounts (5, Informative)

Seumas (6865) | more than 3 years ago | (#35838912)

Business accounts have a limit. It just isn't acknowledged as any specific limit. You can easily use a terabyte or maybe even two without running into problems. After a certain point, they're likely to want to speak with you about signing up for a more dedicated service at a higher cost.

It's interesting, however, that in the same physical location, they can't afford more than 250gb/mo, because it is consuming all of their precious resources. Pay them an extra $40, however, and that same location and network can suddenly handle six or eight times that much bandwidth. Of course, the other important reason to get their business service is that you can get 5, 10, or even 50 mbps *up*, instead of 768kbps.

Re:Business Accounts (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35838982)

I said they don't have a 250Gb limit. Didn't say anything about NOT having a limit ;)

And, yeah, if you use more than 2TB of bandwidth every month, which is a LOT in residential terms; I would suggest getting a colo-server/seedbox any ways.

Bytes or bits? (2)

Haven (34895) | more than 3 years ago | (#35838862)

Gbit or GB?

GB not Gbit. (1)

elucido (870205) | more than 3 years ago | (#35838886)

It's 250 GIGs per month. Got it?

That is plenty for me.

Re:Bytes or bits? (4, Informative)

Fnkmaster (89084) | more than 3 years ago | (#35838928)

Clearly they mean bytes, not bits. 5 hours of full bandwidth usage would be about 1890 Gbit, or roughly 235 GB of usage, so there is a mistake in the summary and the story itself.

So yeah, it's annoying, but not as bad as they made it sound.

Re:Bytes or bits? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35839122)

250 giblets/month, depending on which weapon you've acquired.

I'm using the 105Mbit service. The datacap is real (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35838866)

It has around a 250GB per month datacap. There is on reasonable way anyone can use up 250GB per month even with a 105Mbit connection. But it sure does make the web much faster as long as you aren't setting up servers with it.

Re:I'm using the 105Mbit service. The datacap is r (4, Interesting)

Seumas (6865) | more than 3 years ago | (#35838940)

No reasonable way to use 250gb a month? Really?

Streaming HD is around 2gb/hr. Watch two movies per day (simple in a household) and you're looking at around 250gb.

Just because you and your grandmother only use it for email and printing out coffee cake recipes doesn't mean the rest of us do.

Re:I'm using the 105Mbit service. The datacap is r (3, Interesting)

SanityInAnarchy (655584) | more than 3 years ago | (#35838944)

Sure there is: Netflix. YouTube. Online backup.

The fact that you can't come up with a reasonable way doesn't mean that there is no reasonable way.

Re:I'm using the 105Mbit service. The datacap is r (1)

foniksonik (573572) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839004)

A HD movie on iTunes is 4.7GB down. One movie a day 30 days = 141GB. Now let's do some TV. 4 shows a day also HD ~1GB per. (22min for 3 and 1 40min show) that's another 4 GB * 30 = 120 GB and voila, 262 GB / month.

Not counting any YouTube, software, gaming, general Internet, skype or FaceTime, Flickr or anything else.

Re:I'm using the 105Mbit service. The datacap is r (0)

acvh (120205) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839074)

A HD movie on iTunes is 4.7GB down. One movie a day 30 days = 141GB. Now let's do some TV. 4 shows a day also HD ~1GB per. (22min for 3 and 1 40min show) that's another 4 GB * 30 = 120 GB and voila, 262 GB / month.
who the hell watches one movie and four tv shows per DAY? if it's you, turn off the tv and take a walk.

Re:I'm using the 105Mbit service. The datacap is r (5, Insightful)

zero0ne (1309517) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839140)

Why are you judging? Maybe he has more than one kid? One child is watching the new pixar movie, while another is upstairs working on a online college course that has them running through some online lectures.

Then, you have the Mom, who is a work at home mom and has to constantly keep up-to-date with their training materials.

Now, this mom that works from home, always has to have some type of white noise in the background so jumps onto a hulu channel herself.

250GB is easy to burn through if you are single, and EVEN EASIER to burn though if you are married and have kids.

Re:I'm using the 105Mbit service. The datacap is r (1)

Hultis (1969080) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839164)

What you are missing is that an internet connection is generally shared by everyone in the apartment/building, i.e. the whole family. Split those movies and tv series on four-six persons and it doesn't seem overkill at all.

Re:I'm using the 105Mbit service. The datacap is r (1)

dlingman (1757250) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839170)

While obviously not slashdot readers, anyone with teenaged kids can easily find themselves in that type of position - while they might not each watch a movie per day, when you take a couple kids watching a different movie each every few days, or watching different tv shows, in addition to the usage that the parents are using. Heck, my 5 and 7 year old don't watch the same shows - the ones the 5 year old likes are too babyish for the 7 year old, and the ones the 7 year likes are too scary for the 5 year old. Then add in streaming stuff for us to watch... You can very rapidly hit the required number of viewing hours, if you remember that you don't all have to be locked in a single room, watching the same stuff all the time.

Re:I'm using the 105Mbit service. The datacap is r (1)

qubezz (520511) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839222)

The coward is right with his typo: there is one reasonable way anyone can use their 250GB/mo 105Mb/s service, to download one uncompressed hd video [archive.org] in four hours. There are no two reasonable ways, once you have used up your one reasonable way for the month, you are SOL.

Misogynist analogy (3, Funny)

Shin-LaC (1333529) | more than 3 years ago | (#35838868)

Basically, it's like marrying a gorgeous woman. She looks really hot, but you can never just let your lust run wild, because she thinks too highly of herself. Every instance of intercourse must be bargained for, and you're lucky to get it once a week; and when you do, she just lies there like a dead tuna. Soon, you begin to question whether it was worth spending so much money and effort on her.

Re:Misogynist analogy (4, Funny)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 3 years ago | (#35838894)

Gee I'd be doing really well if it was once a week.

Re:Misogynist analogy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35838936)

Amen.

I'm using the 105Mbit service and the cap is real (3, Informative)

elucido (870205) | more than 3 years ago | (#35838874)

But it isn't that bad.I haven't come close to maxing it out and I tried. I don't know, how exactly do you use more than 250GB in a month?

There is no speed cap and its the fastest internet available in my area so why not use it? It's not perfect but it beats DSL.

Re:I'm using the 105Mbit service and the cap is re (0)

LordNimon (85072) | more than 3 years ago | (#35838924)

The whole point is that it's ridiculous to pay $105 for five hours of Internet use.

But thats not true (2, Insightful)

elucido (870205) | more than 3 years ago | (#35838998)

Downloads are around 10Megs per second on a good day, you can download all day for 5 days at this rate and still not max out the 250GB per month. You would would have to deliberately max your speed out all day every day for about a week before you max out the 250GB. Honestly I doubt many people would be able to do it if they were challenged to.

Re:But thats not true (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35839050)

So that's not 5 days, only 5 hours like mentioned, you can download:

10MB/s * 60 second/minute * 60 minute/hour * 24 hour/day = 864GB/day

Re:But thats not true (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35839052)

You fail at math. At 105mbit/s, you can do almost 50GB per HOUR.

Re:But thats not true (1)

wisnoskij (1206448) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839378)

I have used far more then that with far less speed, it is easily possible, there are single torrents bigger then 250Gigs.

Obligatory Car Analogy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35839066)

It's kind of like leasing a car, and then complaining that you can only use it 6 hours a month. Yes, it may be technically true that if you drove it at its top speed of 150mph, you would reach the mileage limit of your lease in 6 hours. But it's otherwise basically irrelevant.

Re:Obligatory Car Analogy (1)

Kumiorava (95318) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839172)

Isn't this how leases work? Leases always have some limited number of miles and any miles above that will be charged at very expensive rate.

Re:I'm using the 105Mbit service and the cap is re (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35838946)

to be fair it's still certainly useful in that case. Someone who regularly uploads or downloads new iso os images for example.
Video teleconferencing etc.

Re:I'm using the 105Mbit service and the cap is re (1)

Seumas (6865) | more than 3 years ago | (#35838956)

HD podcasts, streaming music, streaming HD netflix, streaming video events, Steam downloads, VPN and VNC work, remote backups, gaming.

I'd be more interested in knowing how someone can *not* use 250gb a month.

Dude (1)

elucido (870205) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839006)

How many movies do you watch a month? I do all of that stuff and I've not been able to max out past 200GB in any month.

Re:Dude (0)

ngileadi (966224) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839316)

The cap mentioned in the article is 250Gbit, not 250GB. 31GB is about 20 hours of HD video.

Re:I'm using the 105Mbit service and the cap is re (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35839014)

HD podcasts, streaming music, streaming HD netflix, streaming video events, Steam downloads, VPN and VNC work, remote backups, gaming.

I'd be more interested in knowing how someone can *not* use 250gb a month.

Leave the house once in a while

Re:I'm using the 105Mbit service and the cap is re (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35839308)

HD podcasts, streaming music, streaming HD netflix, streaming video events, Steam downloads, VPN and VNC work, remote backups, gaming.

I'd be more interested in knowing how someone can *not* use 250gb a month.

Seriously? You think everyone uses a quarter ofna terabyte of transfer per month?

Re:I'm using the 105Mbit service and the cap is re (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35838964)

The article stated "of 250 Gbit per month", thats not GB its Gb!
250 gigabits is about 31.25 gigabytes
I don't know about you but thats not much at all

Re:I'm using the 105Mbit service and the cap is re (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35839084)

I have a similar service with the same 250GBytes monthly cap at 30Mbit/s and i come very close to max it, and already maxed it once or twice. Since then i'v been more carefull but annoyed since it was one of those advertised as an "unlimited" service.

How do i use more than 250GB? Software (Open source or "Demos" also some games from Steam and sometimes F2P mmo's that end up uninstalling very soon), music (radios on shoutcast or such), videos such as live broadcast news for example. I have at least one video news feed streaming in almost all the time. Sometimes more, with them muted momentarily to view and hear some debate on another source or relax to music.

So its not hard to max it at all. Try it and you'll be maxing it without realising.

Re:I'm using the 105Mbit service and the cap is re (1)

Zeikzeil (1099785) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839160)

I'm on an 8Mbit connection as that is the fastest I can get around here. There's no data cap or anything, not even a fair use policy (something that has been used a lot here in The Netherlands). I download around 1.2 TB per month. So even on my connection I max out your cap in less than a week. You say it isn't that bad but I would never get a connection with a cap as low as that. Especially if I would have such speeds available.

Re:I'm using the 105Mbit service and the cap is re (1)

MrL0G1C (867445) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839200)

10mbit for 1 day = 540 Gigabytes

Re:I'm using the 105Mbit service and the cap is re (1)

MrL0G1C (867445) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839214)

108 gigabytes for 1 day duh, 5 days at 10mbits = 540 gigabytes.

Re:I'm using the 105Mbit service and the cap is re (1)

Hatta (162192) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839220)

how exactly do you use more than 250GB in a month?

Rsync.net. Why do you need 100 mbits/second if you're not really going to use it?

Re:I'm using the 105Mbit service and the cap is re (1)

mattr (78516) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839226)

Just put a 1 megabit/sec camera feed on it and you're over.
FWIW within Japan you get similar insane speed but again a similar 300GB cap as far as I know.
Not that I have ever run into such a cap. But it may affect a video application I'm planning now.
If they would just give a clear service menu as to what it costs to get the real thing.
But that would be like a contract that lets you run your own ISP and would likely be at least twice the price.

Re:I'm using the 105Mbit service and the cap is re (0)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839276)

I'm glad you have it right, it's 250GB, not 250Gb. When I had comcast it was 90GB, and I still only got one letter for abuse of the AUP. You have to be a hardcore downloader to go over the cap. You can watch streaming video every day and still download several, uh, ISOs and still be fine. Maybe you can't watch streaming HD video all day every day but like, get a fucking life.

Am I missing something here? (1)

Hultis (1969080) | more than 3 years ago | (#35838902)

250 Gbit = 256 000 Mbit
256 000 Mbit / 105 = 2438 seconds, or roughly 40 minutes using the full bandwidth. Who would pay $105 for 40 minutes of internet usage!?

Not to mention that 250 Gbit is 31.25 GB, or roughly a single movie in blu-ray quality a month. I used much more than that, even when my connection speed was considerably slower than this, not counting downloads. I really hope Kevin meant GB rather than Gbit...

Re:Am I missing something here? (1)

Hultis (1969080) | more than 3 years ago | (#35838952)

Apparently some others pointed out it's supposed to be GB while I was writing, so my point is moot. 250 GB is much more humane, although having it would still feel like buying an awesome sports car (sorry about the car reference) but not having any money left to buy fuel.

I cant help but think..... (2)

metalmaster (1005171) | more than 3 years ago | (#35838910)

Do packages like this encourage piracy?

If you think about it, streaming services can only go so fast. If youre streaming HD video from Netflix 105Mbit/s sounds a bit like overkill. The same can be said for streaming audio. Your media will still playback one second at a time. However, 105Mbit sounds lightning quick if you think about it in terms of downloading content. There are paid services where you can get your media, but they have to limit your speeds. Thousands of people trying to grab files from a server as fast as they can has the potential to cripple the infrastructure

So, where is this speed most effective? P2P applications

Re:I cant help but think..... (1)

Hultis (1969080) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839018)

I don't know about encourage, but the market for them would be extremely niche if it wasn't for piracy. In general, streaming services (even HD) works great on a 10 Mbit/s connection.

However, P2P isn't used exclusively for piracy. Spotify, for example, serve the majority of their music either via the local cache or P2P, and only a fraction is actually streamed from their servers. I don't know about the video streaming services out there, but if they would start using P2P like Spotify does these connection speeds could very well get a widespread legitimate use.

Did 56k or DSL encourage piracy? (1)

elucido (870205) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839030)

No of course not. There are plenty of sites which make use of the speed. HDTV streams, youtube, the cloud.
The faster your connection the higher the quality of stream you can use, and the more HDTV streams you can have at once. So you can stream 4 HDTV movies at once without any pauses or slowdown.

Re:I cant help but think..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35839252)

Do packages like this encourage piracy?

The internet encourages piracy, computers encourage piracy, hell people encourage piracy. The only way to be entirely safe from piracy is to kill everyone. But even then the cosmos won't be safe from piracy, eventually another, lower, species will evolve to take our place and encourage piracy! We must destroy everything! Even hydrogen! Given enough quantity, space and time hydrogen will lead to piracy!!!!

Do packages like this encourage piracy? (1)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839350)

No, they simply support the new wave of everyone streaming their content from places like netflix, pandora, amazon, etc.

Of course if you do this you get penalized, but that's not my point.

Bad combination (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35838914)

Streaming porn doesn't need 105Mbps.
Neither do movies.

Besides those, who really needs more than 250Gbits/month? (excluding some 0.1% of the population)

Clearly badly targeted plan.

Re:Bad combination (1)

Hultis (1969080) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839060)

I would say that the group of people who need 105Mbps probably has a rather large overlap with the 0.1% who needs more than 250GB/month...

Re:Bad combination (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35839128)

I don't download a lot, but when I do, I want that file 30 seconds ago. Even at 100 Mbit/s a 2 gigabyte file takes almost 3 minutes to download if you max out your line. I hate waiting, even if it's just 3 minutes. In the same vein, I also want connections that are tuned for low latency, even under load.

I'd consider getting that plan. It all depends on what happens after you exceed 250 GB/month. Do they slow you down? Bill you for overages - how much? Or even outright cut you off. Do you get to carry the excess GB over each month? (Dream on...)

easter bunny hops on land mine, world in shock (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35838926)

as metal caps & tiny chains are screwed to his little stubs, he bravely retorts; better me than jesus. the kids i was delivering to early were being carpet bombed anyway. now, finally, something must be done.

Same old... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35838930)

This isn't really news, all of Comcast's internet connections have had a 250 gigabyte per month cap. Not that I don't think it's bull, but it's not really new.

I LOL'd (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35838948)

They give you 105Mbit/sec, charge $105/month, but cut you after after five hours? Oh you marketing guys. You so silly.

bandwidth racket (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35838958)

If Comcast or AT&T were run by Italians in New Jersey, the feds would shut them down for running a racket. These caps are anticompetitive against online video providers and an obvious attempt to lock in users of their shitty over priced video services. 250 GB is a lot for now, but as technology moves, these caps will not and we will be screwed 3-4 years down the road.

Math Fail? And what's the problem? (1)

QuasiSteve (2042606) | more than 3 years ago | (#35838970)

250Gbit / 105Mb/s = "about five hours worth of full-bandwidth use". Since when? 250,000,000,000 105,000,000 250,000b / 105b/s ~= 2381s 2381s / 60s/m ~= 40m Either one of the numbers is wrong or his math is way off. Not that this paints a prettier picture. Then again: 250Gbit / 8bit/byte = 31,250,000,000 Who downloads 31Gb per month but doesn't get a dedicated line for the purposes? Well I can guess who - but even a typical blu-ray rip (not an ISO) is what.. 4GiB? That's still about 8 such movies in a month if you're into that sort of thing. If you really need the bandwidth -and- lack of cap.. get a dedicated line. This offer seems to be for people / small business who might need a high burst rate for certain things (i.e. on the phone, need to send a 50MB file being referenced, don't want to wait 2 minutes on the phone for receipt, etc.) but wouldn't typically hit the cap. As long as these caps are clearly advertised.. who cares?

Re:Math Fail? And what's the problem? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35839040)

WTF are you talking about. 250/(105/8/1000*60*60) = 5.5 hours.

Explanation: 250 is the cap. 105 is Mbit/sec; 105/8/1000 is Gbyte/sec; *60*60 is Gbyte/hr

Re:Math Fail? And what's the problem? (1)

QuasiSteve (2042606) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839118)

What I was talking about was already pointed out by others while I was typing my post - but seeing as I have to wait half an eternity to post another comment, the following didn't get included 15 minutes ago:

Right. 250GB. Gigabyte. That's what I get for even double-checking by reading the blog post:

Good: Comcast just announced the ultrafast, ultra-broadband "Extreme 105" 105 Mbit/sec

Bad: It put a data cap on the service of 250 Gbit per month

250Gigabyte cap does result in 5 hours. On the other hand, it also results in a 250Gigabyte cap.

That's not 8 BD movie tips. That's 62 BD movie rips.

Now I really don't understand what the fuss is about and I stand by my earlier statement... if you want that 24/7, no cap, get a dedicated line.

And given that there is this posting frequency limit... I know perfectly well how people use their connections. People who watch YouTube all day long or fully use their Netflix account - not just piracy. I get that. But for those people, perhaps a lower speed account with a higher cap (or 'fair use policy' type cap) would be more appropriate?

Re:Math Fail? And what's the problem? (2)

elucido (870205) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839054)

250Gbit / 105Mb/s = "about five hours worth of full-bandwidth use". Since when?

250,000,000,000
            105,000,000
250,000b / 105b/s ~= 2381s
2381s / 60s/m ~= 40m

Either one of the numbers is wrong or his math is way off.

Not that this paints a prettier picture.

Then again:
250Gbit / 8bit/byte = 31,250,000,000

Who downloads 31Gb per month but doesn't get a dedicated line for the purposes?
Well I can guess who - but even a typical blu-ray rip (not an ISO) is what.. 4GiB? That's still about 8 such movies in a month if you're into that sort of thing.

If you really need the bandwidth -and- lack of cap.. get a dedicated line. This offer seems to be for people / small business who might need a high burst rate for certain things (i.e. on the phone, need to send a 50MB file being referenced, don't want to wait 2 minutes on the phone for receipt, etc.) but wouldn't typically hit the cap.

As long as these caps are clearly advertised.. who cares?

You don't have a clue how young people use the internet. I'm guessing you've never been to the tube sites. You probably think the only way to download more than 30 gigs a month is piracy. If you watch HDTV on your computer, and each show is a few gigs, you will easily get up to 30 gigs in a month. You might even get up to 150 gigs. But you probably will not get up to 250 gigs.

As far as dedicated lines go, this service is meant to compete with FIOS and bring the USA up to speed with China, Japan and Europe.

soo this means... (1)

FudRucker (866063) | more than 3 years ago | (#35838980)

with this service your browser will load a web page incredibly fast (no lag surfing) but good luck trying to download a Linux ISO on dvd (about 4.5 gigs)

oh, you actually want some content in your content?

Welcome to no Net Neutrality (1)

WyzrdX (1390963) | more than 3 years ago | (#35838994)

Sounds to me like they are trying to circumvent Net Neutrality.

For a nation made up of 'We The People', Corporations have the one and only voice.

Constitution should read 'We The Patrons Of The Companies'

Re:Welcome to no Net Neutrality (2, Insightful)

ScentCone (795499) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839110)

For a nation made up of 'We The People', Corporations have the one and only voice.

There is absolutely nothing stopping you from starting your own broadband company, and then charging a flat rate with absolutely no limits on usage. There may be some trouble with you keeping that going, though, because you'll have to charge higher than the ongoing rates to keep it alive, or will go out of business. This isn't about who has a "voice," it's about businesses providing services, and people who want higher speeds deciding whether or not that higher speed - with a usage cap - is a good fit for how they use bandwidth every month.

Constitution should read 'We The Patrons Of The Companies'

You'd prefer, "We the people who get to force each other to do whatever we tell them to do, but not me, because if I run a company myself, I don't want anyone telling me what prices to charge, only other people should be told that." ... right? Do you even understand the purpose of the Constitution? It essentially defines the things that government may not do to interfere with your life. It also outlines the manner in which the government is structured and managed. It doesn't say anything about getting involved in telling one person what to charge another person for a basket of vegetables (or what color those vegetables should be), the use of a piece of fiber attached to their network, or what it should cost to have your car waxed.

Just say what you mean. You want a centrally managed economy that prevents Eeeevil companies from competing with each other and trying to price things to win your business while managing to also stay in business. You consider that all to be too messy and unfair to you. So you'd rather that The People get to dictate prices by way of ... what? The Bureau Of What All Things Should Cost? Do you understand that you, yourself, would be one of those things that has a price set on it?

Wait a minute ... I get it now. You don't actually work for a living. You don't actually charge anyone for your time, and you don't have any patrons of your own. This explains a few things.

Re:Welcome to no Net Neutrality (1)

bmo (77928) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839320)

>There is absolutely nothing stopping you from starting your own broadband company

Oh look, we've got a so-called "Free Marketer" here.

Let me clue you in, there is no such thing as a free market, even without government regulation. There are the incumbents that will do anything and everything to keep you out of the market. An example of this would be the deliberate jamming of competitors in the radio market before the advent of the FCC (thus also demonstrating in reality the "tragedy of the commons")

And let's not even talk about VZN techs snipping Cox coax deliberately. Nope, never happens.

Since all arguments need to have every link in the chain to be true for the conclusion to be true, your argument fails on its first premise.

Good day.

--
BMO

Re:Welcome to no Net Neutrality (1)

hjf (703092) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839386)

Are you autistic? Have Asperger's syndrome maybe?

Life is not that orthogonal, cause-and-effects. Do some research into "corruption", "lobbying", "monopoly", etc.

Why doesn't the government have their own ISP (where they sell internet to people, yes), to compete with Comcast and other companies out there? Space travel, The Bomb, nuclear energy... those projects raised the bar on science. And they weren't backed by companies, it was the government who spend the money in R&D and that's what put America in the map. Now you're just struggling behind the chinese. It's the government's job to lead the economy in one direction, one strategic plan. You're just confusing capitalism with anarchism.

What about voice? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35839020)

Does Comcast's voice service (delivered via VoIP) count against this data cap? Does comcast's internet video services count? Because I will have a really serious problem if they don't count against the cap.

Is this really a surprise... (5, Insightful)

QuietLagoon (813062) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839022)

... coming from a company that made it into the final four of the worst companies in America [consumerist.com] ? It took a company as bad as BP to knock Comcast out of the running.

Re:Is this really a surprise... (1)

elucido (870205) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839080)

We invented the technology.

Fast Speed, Caps, and no regulator (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35839024)

Time for a car analogy.

The internet service provided by Comcast is a car.
105Mbits is the max speed of the car.
250Gbits per month is how much gas the car has.

With a normal vehicle, I can control how fast I can go. I can smash on my accelerator and burn off gas like a madman going 100mph. I can lightly touch the accelerator and keep myself right at 45mph. I can even coast in neutral and use basically no gas for periods of time. I have absolute control over how quickly I use my gas up.

How about on the PC? Web browsers don't come stock with bandwidth speed gauges. I don't have an onscreen display showing me how much monthly bandwidth I have left at any given time. Most modern web applications run at one speed: As fast as possible. Joe blow would be more sensible with his internet usage if the service providers gave him access to cheap QOS tools.

But all of that implies an interest in the well being of the customer. Yeah, I know. crazy.

This is a good way to battle broadband data caps (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35839034)

FCC should require all ISP who use data caps to in include in their ads how many theoretical hours it would take to hit the cap at the max advertised broadband speed.

Got a better Idea; tell the FCC

http://fccdotgov.uservoice.com/forums/105541-fcc-gov-feedback [uservoice.com] .

Americans.. (0)

DiSKiLLeR (17651) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839056)

I don't get why Americans think they are so entilted to unlimited broadband.

The rest of the world has had caps since day one.

Once upon a time I remember bandwidth caps were 1gb or 3gb a month on BROADBAND (cable or adsl.)

Now its 10gb for entry level, and 20gb or 40gb for higher users.

Common all over the world my friend.

Your caps are VERY generous. I wouldn't be complaining.

Re:Americans.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35839104)

You should at least specify which part of the world, instead of just assuming the rest of the world has caps. Here we don't. When they tried to impose caps, the regulators said it couldn't be done.

Re:Americans.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35839182)

I don't get why Americans think they are so entilted to unlimited broadband.

The rest of the world has had caps since day one.

Once upon a time I remember bandwidth caps were 1gb or 3gb a month on BROADBAND (cable or adsl.)

Now its 10gb for entry level, and 20gb or 40gb for higher users.

Common all over the world my friend.

Your caps are VERY generous. I wouldn't be complaining.

I'm living in Europe and I have no download cap (I won't ever subscribe to a service that has a ridiculously low cap like 40GB).

Btw not American. I'm Canadian. We're also big believers in not having caps - whooot

Re:Americans.. (1)

matthiasvegh (1800634) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839190)

I torrent, and my household moves ~500Gb a month. I live in central europe. And I have not only not been restricted, but offers have been made for stepping up a package for no additional cost. You would think the U.S. would fair better. For reference, dirt cheap landline phone, ~40TV Channels and 30/5 mbit line. I use one of the more expensive telcos, and spend less than 40 usd.

Re:Americans.. (1)

zero0ne (1309517) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839208)

Because Al Gore invented the internet, and thus the US should have the best internet infrastructure in the world.

Here is a quick comparison for ya:

Twenty 56k modems (say throughput of 5KB/sec @ 24/7) would be able to pass this cap.

Re:Americans.. (1)

Ecuador (740021) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839240)

Ehmm... I don't know where you live, but assuming there are caps everywhere just because "you had since day one", is at least ignorant. It must be a very backwards place if caps are 10-40GB.
For example, I live in one of the least developed (in Broadband service) EU countries (Greece) and the only cap I have seen is for internet on 3G Mobile networks, where it is at 30GB (it is plenty as a 3G connection is not supposed to replace your DSL). The DSL service on the other hand is never capped (unless you ask to get charged by usage) and usually costs 20-40 Euro (depending the ISP and options) for ADSL2+ up to 24Mbit service. But as I said this is also considered lame compared to, say, Northern Europe. From this year there will also be VDSL connections at 50Mbit with prices announced at around 50 Euro again with no mention of caps.
$105 for 250GB is ridiculous any way you look at it. The fact that the service is 105Mbit makes it even more likely to hit the limit.

Re:Americans.. (1)

QCompson (675963) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839374)

You sound Australian.

Your internet sucks. Stop trying to drag the rest of the world down with you.

You're ten years behind the times (1)

fullback (968784) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839082)

I've had 100Mbps fiber for 10 years now, at half that price... with no caps. One Gbps is the new 100 Mbps here.

I feel bad for Americans who are at the mercy of the duopoly who, for all practical purposes, control the internet in the US.

Caps of traffic management? (2)

neokushan (932374) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839092)

In the UK, we only really have one cable company - Virgin Media.
They offer 10, 30, 50 and 100Mbit services - all "unlimited" (with an Acceptable Use Policy attached for people who constantly throttle their full connection). The kicker is they employ some pretty heavy traffic management. Download more than about 3Gb in the evening (between 4pm and midnight) and your connection speed gets cut by 75%. So the 30 becomes about 6 or 7mbit.
The thing is, you can still keep downloading as much as you want, it's just slower - so which system is better?
They also employ traffic shaping, so between the same hours (And ALL weekend), P2P and newsgroup traffic gets slowed by 75% as well, no matter how much you're downloading.

It's a bit of a ridiculous catch. There are some decent DSL providers that have no usage limits, but they can only offer an "Up to" connection that can do 24mbit, but you're more likely to get about 8mbit (on average), whereas on Virgin you'll get the speed you signed up for (until traffic management/shaping kicks in). So /.ers which would you rather have, obscene traffic management or hard caps?

Re:Caps of traffic management? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35839250)

traffic management

Re:Caps of traffic management? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35839280)

Caps are limiting.

Throttling means you change your downloading patters to fit the system.

Both are better than having to pay the actual cost of using 100% of that line.

Re:Caps of traffic management? (3, Insightful)

CrashandDie (1114135) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839346)

I'll take the French ISP Free. No traffic shaping, no bandwidth cap, no traffic management, oh, and 100MBit down and 50Mbit up fiber connection delivered to your home – not shared by the street as it is with Virgin in the UK.

You want limits? I got limits! (1)

hauan (581019) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839198)

Try Hughesnet "broadband" -- daily cap of under 400 Mb. Can't even update my phone much less stream anything.

bytes not bits (1)

moxley (895517) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839216)

I doubt it's really 250 gBIT...... it's gotta be 250 GBYTES.

250gBIT is only about 32gigs, so there's no fuckin way that's right.

Feels good to have Fiber (1)

Jamonek (1398691) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839256)

Feels good to have Fiber with no cap. :)

Car (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35839304)

Buy this car! It can go 300 mph! But only for 250 feet. Then you have to stop and shut it off until next month. Unless you want to pay extra. You can always pay more!

5 hours of use a month. (1)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839330)

That's useful. Thanks comcrap.

not true (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35839336)

this isn't true. I promise. My own comcast says 250GB limit in my account settings on their account portal.

What I found out by calling them, however, because I have gone over so many months to 400 and 500GB, and wondering why I haven't been charged or cut off, was explained to me:

THe 250GB limit is just a guage on their site to show you what you should normally stay underneath. Their actual unpublished "cap" is set at 600GB per month.

call Comcast yourself and ask.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?