×

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 Launches Superfast Internet To Fight FiOS

timothy posted about a year and a half ago | from the market-laws-are-like-physical-laws dept.

Networking 209

jfruh writes "Comcast customers who dream of superfast download speeds drooled when they heard the company would be offering 305 Mbps service. There's only one catch: the high speeds are only available in markets where the cable giant is going head-to-head with Verizon's FiOS service. It seems that competition really does improve service quality when it comes to ISPs."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

209 comments

Yeah, right... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40776991)

So you can hit your level cap even faster?

Re:Yeah, right... (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40777049)

Maybe not - "Crucially in markets which are not part of its trial, the company will suspend enforcement of its current 250 GB cap." The test is here [reuters.com] .

Get it while the getting is good. Looks like the buffet is back.

Re:Yeah, right... (0)

Culture20 (968837) | about a year and a half ago | (#40777439)

"Crucially in markets which are not part of its trial, the company will suspend enforcement of its current 250 GB cap."

so the 300Mb people still have the cap but everyone else doesn't?

Re:Yeah, right... (4, Interesting)

Catbeller (118204) | about a year and a half ago | (#40777619)

Subject to their terms of service - and whims. And they will reinstate the caps after the suckers sign on for a few years. Come on, we've seen this so many times now, we know how the heroin trade works. First shot is free, then the price goes up forever after they are the only game(s) in town.

Re:Yeah, right... (1, Informative)

cpu6502 (1960974) | about a year and a half ago | (#40778073)

Dear AC: The article you linked has NO relevance to the Comcast v. FiOS competition and increase of rates to 305 Mbit/s.
The article you linked is old news (May) and about usage-based billing ($/gigabyte) in two test cities and a completely-separate issue from the ultrafast internet Comcast is introducing to fight FiOS.

Re:Yeah, right... (3, Informative)

19thNervousBreakdown (768619) | about a year and a half ago | (#40777105)

With a 250GB cap, you can run out of bandwidth in 1 hour, 49 minutes, and 17 seconds. Even at a terabyte it's less than 8 hours, or about 1% of a billing period.

Re:Yeah, right... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40777911)

WTF are you downloading that you would do that in two hours?

Re:Yeah, right... (1)

ifrag (984323) | about a year and a half ago | (#40778023)

WTF are you downloading that you would do that in two hours?

Not really that hard to hit actually. Several HD quality multi-season TV shows would do it. Assuming you can find that many worth actually watching, that's the hard part.

Re:Yeah, right... (2, Insightful)

magarity (164372) | about a year and a half ago | (#40777215)

They are hoping anyone who makes enough to afford the $300/mo isn't sitting at home using it often enough to hit the cap.

Re:Yeah, right... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40777509)

Techie people who work from home. Whether its remote desktop or running straight data. However its doubtful the corporate end could keep up... it does enable someone to stream lots of netflix while they work, monitor their torrents, etc.

Re:Yeah, right... (3)

cpu6502 (1960974) | about a year and a half ago | (#40777679)

Never happy.
Comcast is offering 300 Mbit/s which is faster than Sweden or Japan's national average (~20 Mbit/s), and yet still you complain. This rollout will put my state Maryland, which is almost exclusively Comcast territory, in the top 10 fastest of all EU or US states.
And all you can do is complain.
Personally it makes me happy.

Re:Yeah, right... (2)

pla (258480) | about a year and a half ago | (#40778103)

And all you can do is complain.

Yup.

Yet another rollout of unicorns and rainbows to people living somewhere that Comcast can cheaply and conveniently serve. Woo-hoo.

Meanwhile, let me know when I can get even lowest-of-the-low tier DSL or cable internet in my area (not urban, but not exactly the middle of nowhere either).

And my car gets 60 MPG going downhill (4, Insightful)

sacdelta (135513) | about a year and a half ago | (#40777033)

So you get 305 Mbps during the 15 minutes out of the day when they aren't throttling. What is it the rest of the time? Speeds should have to be reported as average access speed not peak potential.

Re:And my car gets 60 MPG going downhill (4, Insightful)

Desler (1608317) | about a year and a half ago | (#40777069)

Not that I like Comcast but how exactly do you expect Comcast to do that when the average speed is highly dependent on the ever changing network utilization? The only thing they can really guarantee is peak rate and the bare minimum.

Re:And my car gets 60 MPG going downhill (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40777109)

How do power and water companies do it? They key is to not oversell your product by such a huge margin, but in the BS numbers game that ISPs play, that's simply not an option.

Re:And my car gets 60 MPG going downhill (-1, Troll)

Desler (1608317) | about a year and a half ago | (#40777179)

How do they do what? Power and water companies give me average download speed ratings? Also overselling doesn't change that network utilization still fluctuates all through the day.

Re:And my car gets 60 MPG going downhill (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40777219)

Pedantry is a poor substitute for argumentation. Overselling network capacity is exactly what /makes/ fluctuation of network utilization an issue. Stop being obtuse.

Re:And my car gets 60 MPG going downhill (1)

Desler (1608317) | about a year and a half ago | (#40777255)

Because you somehow get infinite network capacity when you undersell?

Re:And my car gets 60 MPG going downhill (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40777339)

When provider network capacity is undersold, provider network utilization does not impact throughput across the provider's network. I refuse to believe that you are too stupid to work that out on your own, and fully expect you to move the goalposts and begin arguing a completely different point.

Re:And my car gets 60 MPG going downhill (1)

Desler (1608317) | about a year and a half ago | (#40777419)

Sure, but your average speed has very little to do with the throughput of Comcast's network alone. So again, how is Comcast going to reliably give ou the figure when it highly dependent on network utlization especially on networks out of their control?

Re:And my car gets 60 MPG going downhill (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40777403)

Is is just me, or are we all a little sick of people saying "Because ..." and then adding adding a stupid statement that they don't believe, thinking this actually supports or even proves an unstated position which they're too cool to actually articulate. This is lazy internet hipster sophistry, and it's been done to death, people. At least back in 1999 it was amusing, but it's never been rhetorically useful. If you have a point, state it. If think you actually have a proof by contradiction, then lose the irony and show your work! Jesus Effing Christmas, people...

Re:And my car gets 60 MPG going downhill (1)

ethanms (319039) | about a year and a half ago | (#40777355)

Power companies do not sell you average, the voltage is not variable in a meaningful way through-out the day. Brown and black outs are rare enough events these days.

Water is about the same, it doesn't vary in a meaningful way for residential users. Then again I don't live on a street where everyone has lawn sprinklers, let alone all turns them on at the same time as each other...

Re:And my car gets 60 MPG going downhill (1)

cpu6502 (1960974) | about a year and a half ago | (#40777465)

I do. The government-owned water company drains to a trickle whenever the local business is on lunch break. And brownouts (too many people and not enough electricity) are not unheard of during summer months. Water/electric is really no different than internet, where they are unable to meet peak demand.

Re:And my car gets 60 MPG going downhill (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40777613)

When high speed internet has been around as long as electricity and water utilities I suspect it may be different. Do you think the water and electric system was this reliable when it was as young as high speed internet?

Re:And my car gets 60 MPG going downhill (2, Insightful)

Catbeller (118204) | about a year and a half ago | (#40778035)

Yes. After a few years, they were as reliable as they are now. They were not operated by financialists trying to game the system by pretending they had to short your water supply because, well, just because gobbledygook yak yak yak. They built the damned pipes and people got enough water. Same with power.

They did what they did because they were regulated monopolies that were required to plough profits back into their infrastructure instead of being free to drain those profits into outside ventures and their managers' pockets. It is a fact, QED, an open in-your-face fact, that regulated monopolies work, and worked well for over a century. What has changed is the worldwide adoption of free market fundamentalism and the idea that markets provide optimum price. They do not, because business people, unlike electrons or game sprites, are aware of the system they play in and cheat like motherfuckers.

Re:And my car gets 60 MPG going downhill (1)

LiMikeTnux (770345) | about a year and a half ago | (#40777819)

If you over-utilize a power distribution network, your voltages will drop, wonky things will happen, and eventually you will throw a shunt or breaker and hell will break loose. I can see it.

Re:And my car gets 60 MPG going downhill (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40777567)

They don't. Ever had a brown out? That's overselling capacity. Ever had a water main break? Thats lack of infrastructure maintenance. Worse yet, the water company can tell you what you can and cannot do with your water. During a dry spell they just make it illegal to wash your car, water your lawn or fill a swimming pool.

Re:And my car gets 60 MPG going downhill (4, Insightful)

Catbeller (118204) | about a year and a half ago | (#40777885)

Or you can spend money on water pipes instead of football stadiums or CEO stock options and pay. There is no "shortage" of power, water, or internet capacity. There is simply an incentive not to build or maintain infrastructure, because when scarcity occurs, you can raise prices. Scare = expensive. Come on Enron was ten years ago, you all still remember. They throttled power and raised prices to make lots and lots and LOTS of money. It was a scam. There was enough power.

And in rare cases, such as a small town in the middle of nowhere, or an area in a drought, there really isn't enough water. Too many people, unsustainable landscape. Those people should move. Canada is full of water. The world's population lives next to free water. Go where the water is. Droughts will increase in severity, and we aren't going to see the end of those.

But internet? The cost of the "pipes" and "water" is tiny, and shrinking constantly. There is no incentive to build past an optimum scarcity/profit intersection. They want to raise prices. And we, being free market fundamentalists, believe their lies. Hell, THEY believe their own lies.

Re:And my car gets 60 MPG going downhill (1)

pellik (193063) | about a year and a half ago | (#40778091)

I thought water pipes were illegal to sell in most states now.

Re:And my car gets 60 MPG going downhill (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40777945)

But you can turn on your faucet and the water still comes out at 80PSI. How would you like it if they came by and cranked your main down to 10PSI after your first two showers every month? There's a huge difference between selling to capacity and overselling capacity -- if the water company truly did the latter to anywhere near the extent that ISPs do, you would be purchasing jugs of water at the grocery store just to wash your hands.

Re:And my car gets 60 MPG going downhill (1)

SebNukem (188921) | about a year and a half ago | (#40777475)

Your car only gets 60MPG going downhill? I've got to release the handbrake a little.

Duh (1)

Desler (1608317) | about a year and a half ago | (#40777039)

Well duh. The issue of shitty speeds and service was never due to the bullshit they gave such as people 'abusing' their service by actually doing the things Comcast said you could do. The DoJ needs to step in about the lack of competition and rather obvious collusion not to intrude on each other's markets too much.

One step further (5, Insightful)

Sarten-X (1102295) | about a year and a half ago | (#40777051)

Competition not only improves quality, but it's the only reason this is being deployed at all. Providers' repeated claims that they should be allowed to merge because they'd innovate anyway is now demonstrated yet again to be utter bullshit.

Re:One step further (1)

the22rules (2625827) | about a year and a half ago | (#40777117)

Wish there was some competition where I live, it's Comcast or bust.

Re:One step further (3, Insightful)

Sarten-X (1102295) | about a year and a half ago | (#40777169)

Nonsense. Comcast will happily point out that there's a handful of dial-up ISPs you can use if you get an acoustic coupler for your AT&T cell phone, so they're not a monopoly at all...

Re:One step further (4, Insightful)

Kjella (173770) | about a year and a half ago | (#40777303)

As long as they actually compete in the same space, delivering to the same customers. If you just slice up a big monopoly you only get a bunch of mini-monopolies, it really doesn't make much of a difference. My impression is that with exclusivity agreements most people in the US live in some form of mini-monopoly or mini-duopoly even if they're with a small ISP..

Re:One step further (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40777845)

Competition not only improves quality

First, this meme needs to be put to rest. Cooperation improves everything, competition makes everything worse.

Second, Comcast and Verizon are in collusion. My understanding is that Comcast has given Verizon Wireless some spectrum and in return Verizon has stopped deploying FiOS.

so WTF do you need this for? (3, Interesting)

alen (225700) | about a year and a half ago | (#40777071)

i'm at 10-15 now and going down to 5 once i cancel cable and go a la carte cable internet. 3-5 megabits is enough to stream netflix and amazon.

a lot cheaper to let steam update at night than to pay for super fast internet too

Re:so WTF do you need this for? (1)

Desler (1608317) | about a year and a half ago | (#40777139)

It get 30 mbps down from Time Warner for $55 a month. That's less than 2 hours of salary. It's hardly breaking the bank. I also like my games to download quickly after I buy from Steam rather than wait overnight. My needs obviously differ from yours.

Re:so WTF do you need this for? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40777151)

I hope you drive a big truck. Otherwise, how else will you let everyone know how big your penis is?

Re:so WTF do you need this for? (1)

alen (225700) | about a year and a half ago | (#40777243)

honda cr-v and i have an iphone

Re:so WTF do you need this for? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40777369)

So you're saying you have a tiny penis, then?

Re:so WTF do you need this for? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40777869)

Oh God... you're one of them. CRV and RAV4 owners are the two worst vehicle drivers I confront on a daily basis. I have hours of dash cam video of CRV/RAV4 driving faux pas from these two vehicles alone.

Re:so WTF do you need this for? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40777491)

Pants are soooooo 2011.

Re:so WTF do you need this for? (3, Interesting)

captainstormy (1107081) | about a year and a half ago | (#40777213)

i'm at 10-15 now and going down to 5 once i cancel cable and go a la carte cable internet. 3-5 megabits is enough to stream netflix and amazon.

a lot cheaper to let steam update at night than to pay for super fast internet too

It depends on what you do with your home internet. If all you do is some Netflix streaming and web surfing then 3-5 down is plenty and your upload speed really won't matter. I work from home myself so I typically get the fastest internet speed I can. I don't need super fast internet all the time, but when I'm moving a lot of data between my home office and the main office I can see the difference and it affects my working day. More-so with upload speed than download speed. I've currently got a 50/5 package and it's great. I don't really need the crazy high download speeds, but I do notice the increase in upload speed.

Re:so WTF do you need this for? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40777343)

I work from home and my job requires regularly downloading 3-5 gigabytes at a time (point clouds are HUGE). I would kill for this kind of speed. Instead I'm stuck on shitty Time Warner. *facepalm*

Re:so WTF do you need this for? (1)

AngryDeuce (2205124) | about a year and a half ago | (#40777453)

This may totally blow your mind, but other people sometimes have preferences that differ from yours.

I only have a limited number of hours in the day with which I can even think about playing a game. I don't want my bandwidth to be the limiting factor anymore than it already is.

Re:so WTF do you need this for? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40777517)

that's great for one user. I have a family who will all be doing their own streaming, gaming, downloading simultaneously. it's nice to have the head room to do that so no one notices. and, if I decide to download VS or a new game i want to play, I don't have to wait until i get home from work the next day to play around with it. i have to wait until after dinner. Well...practically speaking, after dinner and putting the kids to bed.

*ugh -- really? captchas??

Re:so WTF do you need this for? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40777963)

Well, you cannot watch high def (1080p) video's on 5Mb as it requires about 10Mb. Of course if you only have 720 then it does not matter.

On the other hand if you download ISO images then it makes a big difference in how long you wait.

My guess is that anyone arguing for less of things such as bandwidth, memory, CPU speed, multiple monitors and so on, often does not have the ability to have it themselves for whatever reason.

I have 12G RAM and need to get more. Why, because I have a lot of virtual machine and development use. I also have 4 monitors for the same reasons. But listening to many "less is more" arguments you would think nobody could use "more".

Removing bottlenecks may they be the CPU, Internet connection or whatever, usually results in higher productivity.

Re:so WTF do you need this for? (1)

BZ (40346) | about a year and a half ago | (#40778093)

TFA, which you may have read, talks about working from home.

If you work from home, that often means moving large amounts of work data back and forth. It's common for me to want to grab a 40MB chunk of data on short notice and be blocked on work until it comes down. At that point, 25Mb (13 seconds) is way better than 5Mb (65 seconds, you're likely to go read webcomics and so forth). 300Mb would be 1s, which is _really_ good because it doesn't interrupt your workflow at all.

Re:so WTF do you need this for? (1)

misexistentialist (1537887) | about a year and a half ago | (#40778141)

Even opening a bunch of sites in separate tabs can bog down a 10mbps connection for several long seconds. And really it's time for Netflix to upgrade qualiy (here's where you say you can't tell the difference in resolution because you are legally blind)

Of course (3, Insightful)

nine-times (778537) | about a year and a half ago | (#40777095)

I don't think anyone doubted that competition between ISPs improves service. The question is more about whether there is *enough* competition, or even whether there could ever be enough.

Right now, in most places, there's a duopoly if you're lucky. Where I live, in NYC, I have no real choice. It's basically Time Warner Cable or dial-up. In order to have a robust market, I'd say you need at least 5 real ISPs going head-to-head, but you would never be able to get 5 different companies to lay down 5 different and independent infrastructures in my neighborhood.

So it makes sense that Comcast isn't even bothering to roll this out except where they're competing with FIOS. So, absent competition, what do we do?

Re:Of course (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40777241)

In before Commodore64Love, oh wait, cpu6502 tells us that dial up is a viable choice and is cheaper and has a higher cap...

What about EPB in Chattanooga? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40777113)

Oh wait, we just get a bunch of advertising that promises some vague things that apparently we're supposed to be missing but which they don't identify.

While giving other markets the shaft (5, Insightful)

sa666_666 (924613) | about a year and a half ago | (#40777129)

Of course this is only available where it absolutely needs to be; where they're being hammered from competition. Meanwhile, other markets are left to be price-gouged as long as possible. This only proves that they have the ability to upgrade the network, they just won't until they're dragged kicking and screaming. Of course many businesses have that attitude, but it isn't often so obviously apparent as in this case.

Re:While giving other markets the shaft (1)

diamondmagic (877411) | about a year and a half ago | (#40777225)

s/price-gouged/profitable/

Seriously, it's not like ISPs are some of the most profitable businesses in the world (and even if they were, that's still good as it would attract capital). Keeping a competitive price is probably just what they have to do to minimize losses, until they can find a better solution.

Re:While giving other markets the shaft (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40777621)

proves that they have the ability to upgrade

But at what cost? And I do not mean $$$. The wire can carry only so much information. They will trade off (lower) picture quality, allowing them to reallocate channels to pure data. Given Comcast isn't known for high quality video, this will not help their image (har har).

server speeds (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40777141)

How many sites can even deliver content that fast? 305 Mbps works out to a few tens of megabytes per second. I guess you can get an entire Linux CD ISO in around 20 seconds, but it seems like not very many servers will serve content that fast. Even if they could, they usually throttle each connection to something less than that rate.

And for loading web pages and stuff, same situation, plus you have the overhead of all the separate connections that get made per page.

In practice, does this kind of speed really matter? Will you really notice the difference over and above a 20 Mbps connection, which itself is more than capable of streaming high def video?

You forget Swarm Downloading and CDNs (1)

RobertLTux (260313) | about a year and a half ago | (#40777429)

plus of course if you have the pipe you can download a buncha stuff at the same time

Of course... (5, Interesting)

AngryDeuce (2205124) | about a year and a half ago | (#40777145)

Amazing what a little competition can do. It was never about them being unable to bring people these speeds, or it being cost prohibitive...they just don't want to spend the fucking money until they're losing more customers than they're signing up in a given quarter. I've had techs from my ISP, Charter Communications, basically tell me that my local node is way oversaturated due to this being a very densely populated area, and that the main hardware is complete crap, but that corporate isn't going to upgrade until the amount they're spending on service calls exceeds the cost of upgrading the node. You know it's fucked up when the company's own fucking techs are exasperated enough to start telling customers shit like that...

And it sucks for some of us... (1)

BigDaveyL (1548821) | about a year and a half ago | (#40777229)

Some of us do not live in markets that Verizon serves. And Verizon is not rolling out any new fiber (I could be wrong).

For example, here in Rochester, NY the local phone company (Frontier) is no longer pushing Time Warner Cable to have better service. Frontier isn't rolling out any fiber as far as I know. It would be nice to have some competition. The cable bill goes up, yet I get the same service.

Re:And it sucks for some of us... (1)

value_added (719364) | about a year and a half ago | (#40777497)

Some of us do not live in markets that Verizon serves. And Verizon is not rolling out any new fiber (I could be wrong).

Someone is paying attention.

From a randomly selected source [washingtonpost.com]

[Posted at 02:58 PM ET, 12/08/2011] And even though [Verizon Chief Executive Lowell McAdam] insisted that Verizon will rigorously promote its FiOS video and Internet service in areas that compete with cable, the company said it doesn't have plans to expand the expensive fiber network beyond what's already been announced and scheduled for buildout over the next couple years.

Fastest to the finish line (2)

Catbeller (118204) | about a year and a half ago | (#40777233)

So we can reach our bandwidth cap in, what, five minutes? Unless it is a Genuine Comcast Internet Content, of course - bandwidth doesn't seem to matter then.

Fastest to the finish line is useless when the finish line is five feet away from the starting line.

Munis should build the infrastructure and operate as non-profits. Shut the telecoms and cable conglomerates down - they are bringing the internet age to a grinding crawl. Internet isn't cable, and it should't be operated for a profit any more than the street system.

Re:Fastest to the finish line (1)

zzsmirkzz (974536) | about a year and a half ago | (#40777387)

Munis should build the infrastructure and operate as non-profits. Shut the telecoms and cable conglomerates down - they are bringing the internet age to a grinding crawl.

I propose a compromise. The Muni's should seize all the lines (cable/fiber) and lease it back to any ISP that wants to provide service. Viola competition.

Re:Fastest to the finish line (1)

DaMattster (977781) | about a year and a half ago | (#40777427)

Why not tax incentives for people to come in and attempt to break up the telecom oligarchy?

Re:Fastest to the finish line (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40777523)

Because we already gave them 200 billion of public money to upgrade their lines, which they never did.

Re:Fastest to the finish line (5, Insightful)

ewieling (90662) | about a year and a half ago | (#40777887)

Because people don't want 5 different ISPs with 5 different lines going down their street. Local infrastructure for telecom, cable, water, electricity, gas, etc is a "natural monopoly". I don't care if the government or a private company owns/manages the wires in the ground, but the one company I do NOT want managing the wires in the ground is my ISP. I want a company with no incentive whatsoever to give preferential treatment to one ISP over another.

Re:Fastest to the finish line (4, Funny)

Anubis IV (1279820) | about a year and a half ago | (#40777637)

Viola competition.

If there's one thing this country needs to put ISPs in check, it's more viola competitions. You could probably clog the tubes with all of that music. That'll show 'em.

Re:Fastest to the finish line (1)

faedle (114018) | about a year and a half ago | (#40777593)

I'm not sure letting local governments run the infrastructure is much better. For example, I can imagine many cities (especially in the US Southeast) would censor the hell out of the connection, and you think the cable/phone companies give the police a lot of access to the network for monitoring? Imagine what would happen if the PD and the infrastructure people have the same boss.

No thanks. The system we have sucks, but it could be a LOT worse.

Re:Fastest to the finish line (1)

GrumpyOldMan (140072) | about a year and a half ago | (#40777687)

If this package is indeed capped, it is just as stupid and sad as the 5GB caps on 4G wireless data plans.

If my sleepy math is right, you reach the old 250GB cap in a little less than 2 hours and the rumored new 300GB cap in a little over 2 hours. If they stick with the proposed 10$ per 50GB overage charge, you can enjoy paying about $25/hr to use your 305Mb/s connection after the first 2 hours.

Re:Fastest to the finish line (1)

SirGarlon (845873) | about a year and a half ago | (#40777749)

Internet isn't cable, and it should't be operated for a profit any more than the street system.

An analogy with highway tolls comes to mind, and it scares me. Highway tolls can get diverted to other public works projects [boston.com] . Government could gouge us for Internet access just as easily as a private monopoly could, and I am sure they would think of all kinds of "wonderful" uses for that new revenue.

It's still comcast... (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40777251)

Sure, they'll claim to get that 305 mbps, but you'll only get it once in a blue moon, and for 5 seconds.
Anyone who's actually used comcast knows how crappy they are when it comes to actually delivering.

why is the US so ridiculous with speeds (1)

acidfast7 (551610) | about a year and a half ago | (#40777313)

305Mb/s ... i doubt it.

I have 16/1 service (+tele +mobile phone) for 20€/mo and most of the time it maxes out at 12-15Mb/s and 800Kb/s.

Not only will you probably never be near 300Mb/s, you'll probably pay huge amounts/mo as well

:sad_panda:

Re:why is the US so ridiculous with speeds (1)

StingyJack (1598631) | about a year and a half ago | (#40777681)

Because we view the wait time for downloads to finish and videos to buffer as a horrible waste of our time. Then we go watch Cable Pundit news, and stand in line at McD's. Go figure.

Blah blah blah (1)

smooth wombat (796938) | about a year and a half ago | (#40777319)

Comcast competes with Verizon in my area and their prices are essentially identical.

When Verizon said they were going to come in to my area, the head honcho explicitly states they were not going to compete on price. And they haven't.

If Comcast really wants to compete with Verizon they would lower their prices while increasing their speeds. As we have seen on several articles here, the U.S. ranks at the top of the industrialized world for cost of broadband and almost at the bottom for speed of broadband.

You need at least 3 choices in a market to have real competition. As it stands now, the vast majority of the country has 2 choices and thus, higher prices, lower speeds. This addition won't do anything to resolve this.

You stupid hippies. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40777361)

"It seems that competition really does improve service quality when it comes to ISPs."

The only thing that competition hurts is the incompetent. That's why liberals HATE it.

Maybe they'll fix their customer service, too (1)

Scareduck (177470) | about a year and a half ago | (#40777363)

Maybe they'll actually provide service that's worth a damn, too. Can't believe I'm saying that about Verizon, the corporate successor to the "tough luck" telephone company GTE, but there it is.

cost (1)

SebNukem (188921) | about a year and a half ago | (#40777381)

If they charge the service the same way they charge my internet cable service it should cost around $1980.50 a month.

Marginal Returns (3, Insightful)

organgtool (966989) | about a year and a half ago | (#40777391)

At this point, I feel that internet speed is more than fast enough for most of my purposes. My FIOS subscription was just upgraded from 15 Mbps to 75 Mbps without any additional cost, but I would have preferred to stay at 15 Mbps at a reduced price. Unfortunately, the sales person claims that they only offer speed upgrades for the same price, but there is no option for paying less. For those that want the extra speed, I think it's great that options like this are available (at least in limited markets), but for those who don't need the speed it would be nice to have a more reasonably priced option. It's funny how telecommunications seems to be the one sector where improvements in technology never result in cheaper prices. I guess that's what happens when companies are granted local monopolies.

Re:Marginal Returns (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40777715)

I wish I could actually get FIOS. I live in a city less than 1/2 a mile from 3 big fiber trunks and FIOS is never coming to my neighborhood.

We are such a technologically backwards-assed country, its pathetic.

Re:Marginal Returns (1)

Dog-Cow (21281) | about a year and a half ago | (#40777961)

If you were willing to pay $X for speed Y, you are willing to pay the same $X for Y*Z. There's no reason for Verizon to cater to your desire to keep speed Y fixed and have $X fluctuate.

Re:Marginal Returns (1)

organgtool (966989) | about a year and a half ago | (#40778113)

There's no reason for Verizon to cater to your desire to keep speed Y fixed and have $X fluctuate.

Since there's virtually no competition in this market, you are absolutely correct. At this point, their only objective is to be slightly less shitty than the little competition they have and they are barely pulling that off.

TV competition has better tech and more HD (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40777395)

TV competition has better tech and more HD

Comcast is still stuck with the 90's / 00's i guide with a poor roll out plan (plan is to swap out boxes even when they can run the new guide) it's like they can't re flash them to the new guide over the cable system.

They have cut down HBO, MAX, Starzs, Movie channel, and SHOW HD channels when others have been adding them.

Still no BIG TEN ALT HD or the rest of the team HD (NBA LP and MLS DK) and game HD (MLB EI and NHL CI) channels.

Still waiting for CLTV HD RCN has it as well BIG ALT HD and the HBO, MAX, Starzs, Movie channel, and SHOW HD channels.

Myopic and Stupid (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40777449)

Verizon may not have the shiniest public image, but I'm pretty sure given the choice between the two people are either going to choose the cheaper (probably Verizon - even using real math) or the one they dislike least (probably Verizon).

Comcast shouldn't be competing directly with Verizon market for market. They should be be going after markets where they suspect Verizon is going to go next. And they should be doing it fast and hard. And then keep going into additional markets. Even with higher prices, the momentum will keep most of their customers with Comcast. Just like Verizon's momentum in the current markets will make it difficult for Comcast (even with ridiculously low introductory rates).

The only thing I can imagine they are thinking is that if Verizon is successful there, there is clearly a demand there, and so they should build there. But there's obviously demand all over (maybe not EVERYWHERE, but a little research and they'd know where...).

Re:Myopic and Stupid (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40777817)

Thing is, there are no markets where Verizon is going next - Verizon has effectively stopped rollout of FIOS, so if an area doesn't already have it, they never will.

So there's no reason to push a FIOS-level alternative in any area that doesn't have FIOS already.

designspace (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40777533)

designspace is the good company in delhi

TFS (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40777599)

Improving offerings != Improving service quality

They could sell 1 Tbps service for $20 a month, and it wouldn't be quality with 250 GB caps and over-capacity nodes that slow to a halt at 5:31 every night. 305 Mbps might be great for bragging rights, but cheap 100 Mbps service with better network maintenance and more capacity would be an actual improvement in service quality. The more capacity they can get, the less they'll have to worry about caps and bandwidth hogs. They might lose a couple high-end customers shopping for speed, but it'd be hard to agrue against something like a reliable and consistent $30 (non-promo price) 100 Mbps service with no caps.

No It Doesn't (1)

mk1004 (2488060) | about a year and a half ago | (#40777805)

It seems that competition really does improve service quality when it comes to ISPs.

No, it just means that they spends wads of cash going for "look at me, look at me" meaningless specmanship games, which the consumer eventually pays for. Raw speed != quality.

300 Mbps improves what? (1)

fahrbot-bot (874524) | about a year and a half ago | (#40778095)

It seems that competition really does improve service quality when it comes to ISPs.

Connection speed and "service quality" are not the same thing.

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...