Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

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 Promising Ultra-Fast Internet

kdawson posted more than 6 years ago | from the whole-lotta-hd-video dept.

Networking 314

Espectr0 writes "Comcast's CEO Brian Roberts gave The Associated Press a preview of his speech for the Consumer Electronics show, and said that Comcast expects to demonstrate a technology that delivers up to 160 megabits of data per second over cable. At that speed you could download a high-definition copy of 'Batman Begins' in four minutes. The technology, DOCSIS 3.0, will start rolling out this year." Here's a note about Cisco's announcement of their DOCSIS 3.0 cable modem.

cancel ×

314 comments

That's Incredible. (4, Insightful)

cromar (1103585) | more than 6 years ago | (#21957586)

Too bad we aren't going to see any speed close to that for personal use, at least not without forking over hefty sacks of bling.

Re:That's Incredible. (3, Insightful)

ccarson (562931) | more than 6 years ago | (#21957746)

Step 1.) Create super fast Internet
Step 2.) Lobby anti-net neutrality
Step 3.) Charge extra for super fast Internet
Step 4.) Profit!

Re:That's Incredible. (4, Interesting)

gbulmash (688770) | more than 6 years ago | (#21957754)

Too bad we aren't going to see any speed close to that for personal use, at least not without forking over hefty sacks of bling.

Yeah. Comcast is bitching and moaning about bandwidth usage at current speeds and doing all sorts of dirty stuff to "shape" usage. If they increase speeds by 15-20x, their wailing and gnashing of teeth will know no end (or upper decibel level).

On the consumer side, they'll probably roll out speeds and pricing only comparable to FIOS and not get anywhere near the higher end speeds at all, or they'll offer 50-100 megabit speeds on business accounts for $200-300 a month.

Still, Verizon just made FIOS available in my neighborhood. I was waiting to see if they'd roll out FIOS TV too and get the package (dump Comcast altogether). Now I may wait to see if Comcast rolls out the new speedy stuff around here to compete with FIOS in the near future. Could be worth the wait.

- Greg

Re:That's Incredible. (1)

SCHecklerX (229973) | more than 6 years ago | (#21957886)

Somewhat related.

I just moved, and decided that it would be easier to deal with transferring current comcrap than to initiate service with somebody else. I told them to move my existing service, so if they gave me something else, I'll argue and not pay....

But my bandwidth has been peaking at about 20Mbps, and averaging around 15-17 inbound, and 2-5Mbps outbound. This is up from about 8Mbps/300kbps at the previous residence. Nifty fast.

I'm not sure if it's because I'm now in a more rural area and not having to share with as many people or what, but I won't complain about it.

Re:That's Incredible. (1)

ynososiduts (1064782) | more than 6 years ago | (#21958420)

I live in the New York Metro area, next to Newark NJ, and not only do I not have problems with Comcast but I get nearly 3 times the advertised bandwidth. They advertise 8, but I get closer to 18 - 22. 0 throtlling of Bittorrent traffic too. I think I may have a unique case though considering all of the anti-Comcast talk around here.

Re:That's Incredible. (1)

TheWanderingHermit (513872) | more than 6 years ago | (#21957824)

And if we do see that kind of speed for personal use, anyone actually using it to download a fair number of DVDs will find themselves dropped from Comcast.

Re:That's Incredible. (0, Offtopic)

sm62704 (957197) | more than 6 years ago | (#21957832)

Too bad we aren't going to see any speed close to that for personal use, at least not without forking over hefty sacks of bling.

Dude, you need to stay away from the east side of town! [uncyclopedia.org]

Re:That's Incredible. (-1, Flamebait)

cromar (1103585) | more than 6 years ago | (#21958050)

Wow. That's some of the most racist tripe I've seen in a while, you yuppie little shit.

Re:That's Incredible. (2)

sm62704 (957197) | more than 6 years ago | (#21958366)

Racist? What have YOU been smoking, son?

Re:That's Incredible. (3, Funny)

evanbd (210358) | more than 6 years ago | (#21958382)

you yuppie little shit.

And this is better because...?

Re:That's Incredible. (3, Insightful)

CMF Risk (833574) | more than 6 years ago | (#21958068)

All the bling in the world will do you no good when they only roll it out to already bandwidth-saturated markets(with FIOS and more), while they leave everyone else out in the cold.

Yay for market lock-ins

Re:That's Incredible. (1)

hal2814 (725639) | more than 6 years ago | (#21958332)

"Too bad we aren't going to see any speed close to that for personal use, at least not without forking over hefty sacks of bling."

So I'm going to have to give my service provider a bunch of gold teeth, spinner rims, and chrome things that aren't usually made of chrome just to get some decent bandwidth?

Of course you will... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21958372)

Well, you'll be able to actually get about half that speed. But it'll only last for 30 seconds, at which point you'll hit the invisible bandwidth cap and get booted via the "for any reason" type clause in their ToS.

Re:That's Incredible. (4, Interesting)

jonsmirl (114798) | more than 6 years ago | (#21958452)

FIOS OTN is my basement is running at 680Mb/s. I'm paying $40 to get 20Mb/s of that. They have 2.4Gb/s OTNs but there's no need to deploy them yet. Coax cable plants are legacy.

bittorrent (4, Insightful)

sankekur (998708) | more than 6 years ago | (#21957592)

maybe fast for other things but not for bittorrent

Re:bittorrent (1)

Conspiracy_Of_Doves (236787) | more than 6 years ago | (#21958128)

Tell your bittorrent client to force encryption.

I will assume you are using it to download things like movie trailers and free software.

Re:bittorrent (0, Troll)

westlake (615356) | more than 6 years ago | (#21958130)

maybe fast for other things but not for bittorrent

Fine by me.

Who needs BT if the legit on-demand video launches and plays at HD resolution as soon as you request it?

Re:bittorrent (5, Informative)

_xeno_ (155264) | more than 6 years ago | (#21958364)

Oh, I don't know, people using BitTorrent to download legal things, like Linux distros, OpenOffice.org, World of Warcraft patches, or anything else that offers BitTorrent downloads.

Seriously, why is that insightful? There are plenty of legal uses of BitTorrent that don't involve pirating movies.

(And, of course, things like, uh, porn and fansubs may not be available on demand. Not that I'd know anything about that. Oh, and indie films and less popular films and all sorts of digital things that aren't likely to be available on demand.)

Upload bandwidth? (1)

timeOday (582209) | more than 6 years ago | (#21957604)

I think that's the question on all our minds.

Re:Upload bandwidth? (1)

Pahroza (24427) | more than 6 years ago | (#21957704)

108 Mbit/s is the max usable upload speed based on the DOCSIS 3 standard.

Re:Upload bandwidth? (5, Informative)

mi (197448) | more than 6 years ago | (#21957744)

RTFA. The description [xchangemag.com] of Cisco's DOCSIS 3.0 "modem", linked to from the summary, says:

Cisco Systems Inc. is demonstrating a DOCSIS 3.0 modem that would let operators support downlink speeds of 160mbps and uplinks of 120mbps [emphasis mine -mi].

Whether Cable companies will allow you to use all this is another story — probably not, because that's the simplest way for them to combat file-sharing without affecting downloads from "legitimate" servers... And I'm pretty sure, they'll continue blocking port 80, etc.

But you'll continue buying it, because the awesome download speed will trump all other concerns...

Re:Upload bandwidth? (1)

AvitarX (172628) | more than 6 years ago | (#21957760)

Hell yeah.

NNTP FTW

Re:Upload bandwidth? (1)

IdleTime (561841) | more than 6 years ago | (#21958056)

Here is how I bet they will do it:
1. When you buy the movie download option, the movies will be delivered at full blazing speed to you.
2. When you do p2p or other download protocols (ftp, nntp, etc), they limit the available bandwidth.

Re:Upload bandwidth? (1)

mi (197448) | more than 6 years ago | (#21958290)

Possible — it is their network, after all... The only thing you can complain about is false advertising.

The right way to address this problem (should it really appear) is to stop creating artificial mono- and duopolies and allow multiple companies to compete in all markets.

For years and decades the government was violating the freedom of the Market in order to avoid things like multiple cables running along each other to each house, etc. I'm afraid, the loss of competition outweighed the gains from the reduction of effort-duplication.

Re:Upload bandwidth? (2, Informative)

timeOday (582209) | more than 6 years ago | (#21958272)

Is your Comcast port 80 blocked? I've been running a webserver on mine ever since I first signed up (2000 or 2001, it was @Home then), and it still works.

Re:Upload bandwidth? (2, Informative)

stubear (130454) | more than 6 years ago | (#21958410)

"And I'm pretty sure, they'll continue blocking port 80, etc."

I've been running my web server (IIS7 with DNS2GO) on ports 80, using 5150 as a automatic fall back should 80 be blocked. So far all my traffic has been going through 80 for quite some time now.

Re:Upload bandwidth? (1)

Znork (31774) | more than 6 years ago | (#21958460)

"But you'll continue buying it, because the awesome download speed will trump all other concerns..."

Heh, really tho. I dont think I've _ever_ bought an internet connection for speed. Every single time has been for price (and/or not-screwing-with-my-connection-policies). In the last five years I havent initiated a single change, yet I've had my speed upgraded three times.

With cable companies and DSL providers upgrading consumers just because they can it's no wonder they're whining about having to pay for network upgrades.

How about, you know, not upgrading customers and assigning them the actual bandwidth they have, rather than upgrading the hardware then cutting it down to modem speeds.

How about (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21957622)

Some ultra-fast frist psoting instead?

Re:How about (1)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 6 years ago | (#21957668)

Or...perhaps some ultra-slow failing?

Re:How about (1)

sm62704 (957197) | more than 6 years ago | (#21957916)

IMO any time anyone fails at the "first post" and mistypes to boot should get modded "funny". Unless they troll [kuro5hin.org] it liks so many do.

-mcgrew (latest journal) [slashdot.org]

160 Mbps?! ha! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21957626)

I already don't get anywhere near the 4 Mbps I'm buying from Comcast. As sexy as 160 Mbps sounds, what are the chances you'll actually end up getting anywhere near it?

Re:160 Mbps?! ha! (1)

quanticle (843097) | more than 6 years ago | (#21957782)

Really? You don't get 4Mbit/sec? Are you in a heavily settled area or something? I know that I get 5Mbit/sec. on a consistent basis, and my throughput peaks around 7Mbit/sec. Of course, I'm paying for 8Mbit/sec, so what do I know?

I'll believe it when I see it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21957630)

Will this be just like Verizon and their FIOS. Yeah it exists, but if not for the masses than who cares...

Try (0, Troll)

indros (211103) | more than 6 years ago | (#21957642)

Well, with having downloaded 750GB from comcast on cable one month last year, I am certainly willing to help them find out if it's a viable goal.

Wow (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21957714)

I had no idea there was that much Brazillian tranny midget porn produced in a month.

I resent that. I demand an apology. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21957794)

It's Paraguayan!

Re:Try (1)

markswims2 (1187967) | more than 6 years ago | (#21957956)

that's a whole lot of pr0n.

seriously, how are you supposed to use all of that bandwidth if all your "illegal" torrents are capped.

Ultra-Fast Internet? (1)

kevin.fowler (915964) | more than 6 years ago | (#21957648)

How about Comcast comes out with "cable infrastructure in my thickly settled neighborhood that doesn't cripple my television and internet bandwidth". I'm in for 2.

Now it makes sense (1)

InvisblePinkUnicorn (1126837) | more than 6 years ago | (#21957652)

When I heard about it this morning, it suddenly made sense why Comcast would want to kill off bittorrent: competition! Well, that, and they also wouldn't be able to provide the bandwidth claimed in the contract with their customers.

Slick! (4, Informative)

Pahroza (24427) | more than 6 years ago | (#21957658)

Speeds as listed here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DOCSIS#Speed_Table [wikipedia.org] are rather impressive. Max usable down and up speeds are 152/108 Mbit/s, respectively.

Hopefully they'll roll this out with an affordable pricing plan; they already announced that they'll be raising prices in February.

well not quite (1)

taniwha (70410) | more than 6 years ago | (#21958004)

you're sharing the downstream with your neighbors - upstream is contention - people get assigned slots - one guy doesn't get all of them and you collide/retransmit with your neighbors

Re:Slick! (1)

ivan256 (17499) | more than 6 years ago | (#21958018)

It's important to point out that previous versions of DOCSIS also allowed much higher speeds than what is sold to individual customers by Comcast. Since cable is a shared medium, they are forced to sell a fraction of the line's capable speed to each customer in order to spread load. The most they can responsibly sell to an individual customer using this technology is likely in the 30MBps range.

To put that another way, the next generation of cable internet is going to be 70% slower than what is already available on the market using FTTP.

Re:Slick! (4, Insightful)

garcia (6573) | more than 6 years ago | (#21958182)

All this shows is that it doesn't make one bit of a difference if it's DOCSIS 1.0, 2.0, or 3.0 because Comcast is still going to throttle you via a config file and you will probably never see 150mbit connections on their network unless you're getting on-demand movies.

If we were currently seeing 38mbit/(9|27)mbit connections now, I might be inclined to say, "yeah, they're going to give us 150+" but because they're operating at about 6mbit/less than 1mbit for the majority of connections (yes, they go a higher for short bursts) this is nothing more than fluff for CES.

Re:Slick! (1)

orionop (1139819) | more than 6 years ago | (#21958214)

I don't understand this...its not in 'Batman Begins' per minute!

Re:Slick! (2, Insightful)

JeTmAn81 (836217) | more than 6 years ago | (#21958296)

Ironically enough, the sales of the core Batman comic book have been used as a base metric for comic book sales for a while now.

Who cares? They don't max out DOCSIS 1! (3, Interesting)

Danathar (267989) | more than 6 years ago | (#21957662)

Having your modem capable of these speeds is good technically, but I have the "premier" comcast service now and it does not come even close to maxing out DOCSIS 1.x.

having a DOCSIS 3.x modem would be like having a firehose into your house but only having measly garden hose pressure amount of water going through it.

Re:Who cares? They don't max out DOCSIS 1! (1)

HouseArrest420 (1105077) | more than 6 years ago | (#21958346)

Not entirely, especially when you keep in mind that if the "securities" used in DOCSIS 3.0 are more tight that DOCSIS 1. DOCSIS isn't about speed at all...its about effeciency (which in this case is the cause of the speed).

I would put money to the fact that if your internet stops working and you call comcast and say you have a docsis 1.x modem you're going to hear the term EOL, and be told to either upgrade or forget your internet. Now this of course doesn't mean that your 1.x will absolutely NOT work in 3.x sysytems....most certainly not, so don't be fooled into getting a new modem because of it. But it's will be like having your modem look for the "info" thru one of many wholes that it could possibly travel thru....and if it can't find that info...well geuss who's going to get a nice limited/no connectivity msg from windows?

Good news and bad news (1)

sm62704 (957197) | more than 6 years ago | (#21957664)

The good news is that Comcast just bought out Insight, the cable company here in Springfield.

The bad news is that slashdot stories about Comcast are all full of horror stories with Comcast the monstrous villian. Yikes!

-mcgrew [slashdot.org]

Re:Good news and bad news (1)

demopolis (872666) | more than 6 years ago | (#21957816)

Get Ready for price hikes. When Comcast took over for Time Warner in the Twin Cities, They wasted no time in doubling DVR fees and raising every other price point they had. It basically drove me to satellite to keep from getting raped.

Re:Good news and bad news (1)

sm62704 (957197) | more than 6 years ago | (#21958116)

I'll probably go back to dialup...


Completely offftopic but it appears I type too fast, as slashdot said "you have 1 new messages" so I clicked. I saw your comment and typed "I'll probably go back to dialup...", hit "enter", and slashdot says "slow down cowboy! It's been fifteen seconds since you hit reply!

I swear, some of the bots slashdot cooks up are fucking brain dead. I should NEVER EVER get a "slowdown cowboy" when responding from the "messages" page! Who coded this kludge anyway? From a useability standpoint this is incredibly shitty design. Someone please fix this! kthxbye

Re:Good news and bad news (2, Funny)

mh1997 (1065630) | more than 6 years ago | (#21957992)

I've had both Comcast and Insight (because comcast bought insight)...if they would offer ultrafast customer service I would have been thrilled with the normal connection speeds.

When I reported outages, it would take days for them to respond. When I called to cancel my service, the customer service guy reviewed my history and asked why it took so long for me to cancel.

Re:Good news and bad news (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21958252)

I think the top brass at Insight is a bunch of corporate shills to begin with. It was only a matter of time for the Insight buyout to happen. I'll never understand why Insight is HQ'd downtown NYC when they only serve parts of Illinois, Indiana, Ohio and Kentucky. Why not setup shop in Indianapolis or Cincinnati or Louisville, etc where your coverage and customers are at? To me that says something.

I had Insight for 8 years before moving to a new city. I doubt you'll see any difference in service from the Comcast buyout, other than a new logo, some price changes and a crappier interface for your digital cable.

Four minutes!?@# (1)

racecarj (703239) | more than 6 years ago | (#21957670)

But i want it now!

It's all about the cash. (1)

elsJake (1129889) | more than 6 years ago | (#21957682)

I doubt it's so much of a technological problem as it's economical. Sure they'll be able to do it , but that doesn't mean it's going to come at the same price.

More Empty Promises (1)

quanticle (843097) | more than 6 years ago | (#21957688)

The Internet industry has been promising us higher speeds for nigh on a decade now. However the rollout of this new technology has always been slow to nonexistent. What guarantee do we have that Comcast will roll out DOCSIS 3.0 over any kind of reasonable timespan? Also, given that this is Comcast, what guarantees do we have as far as network neutrality goes? I know that one of major arguments used by proponents of traffic discrimination is the reality of limited bandwidth. Now that bandwidth will be becoming plentiful again, will proponents of traffic discrimination drop those arguments?

New Term For Empty Promises On The Net (1, Interesting)

Chabil Ha' (875116) | more than 6 years ago | (#21957900)

Vapornet. This holds especially true on the States side where an oligopoly controls the communications infrastructure. They promise a ton to keep people's hopes alive for a thriving 'Net, but we don't ever see it. The WiMax promise is still unfulfilled. The 'fiber in every pot' (am I confusing something here? ;) promises are gone. This is the newest Telecom Tale that definitely deserves to be labeled 'Vapornet'.

Good News/Bad News.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21957692)

I imagine the media cartels will want this 'locked down' to hamper the already rampant media infringement ('piracy').... :P

But otherwise great news for the people and businesses who could use the faster/extra bandwidth. :)

that's some interesting math right there... (3, Insightful)

MarcoAtWork (28889) | more than 6 years ago | (#21957698)

4 minutes would download about 4.5 gigs, which is basically DVD quality... of course you can upconvert this to whichever HD resolution you want, but it's still going to look like crap compared to a 'proper' 30-40 gigs encode. OTOH having something that could d/load a blue-ray/hd-dvd level encode in less than an hour would be pretty good, but in any case the odds of getting that kind of transfer speed connected to a real site are pretty low IMHO.

Re:that's some interesting math right there... (2, Informative)

riff420 (810435) | more than 6 years ago | (#21958162)

4.5 GB isn't necessarily limited to DVD quality. Encoded with x264, 1080p = ~50min @ ~5GB. 720p = ~120min @ MAYBE 6-8GB. Both could contain 5.1 AC3, and would be virtually indistinguishable from the source content, which is generally HDDVD/Bluray.

Re:that's some interesting math right there... (3, Informative)

cnettel (836611) | more than 6 years ago | (#21958310)

Well, while not as good as proper HD disc, VC-1 or MPEG-4 or anything at 4.5 GB will give far greater quality than DVD MPEG-2.

And you get this for... (5, Funny)

BUL2294 (1081735) | more than 6 years ago | (#21957742)

...the low, low price of $1000/month. But if you also sign up basic cable, home phone, and HBO/Starz, the package will cost $1050/month (for the first 3 months)--plus taxes and regulatory fees. It's Comcastic!

Comcast - We own you.

Re:And you get this for... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21958104)

And two months later it is $2500/month. The year later.. $10000/month. I really hate Comcast, but I cannot have satellite where I'm living (and no, I'm not ready to move just yet.) Why they are allowed to do this is beyond me.

Faster internet, faster disconnection (4, Funny)

Jailbrekr (73837) | more than 6 years ago | (#21957758)

So at that speed, how long do you think it'll take be be cut off for 'excessive use'? I'd give it 5 minutes, tops.

1/4 Batmans per minute? (5, Funny)

X_Bones (93097) | more than 6 years ago | (#21957766)

what's that in Libraries of Congress per second?

Re:1/4 Batmans per minute? (1)

glwtta (532858) | more than 6 years ago | (#21958414)

what's that in Libraries of Congress per second?

About 1.1 LoCs/fortnight
 
(hey, turned out to be a very convenient unit).

100 Mbps fibre available here already (3, Interesting)

Ixlr8 (63315) | more than 6 years ago | (#21957786)

I happen to live in a first-to-roll-out neighborhood for fibre to each home/appartment. Available in my street in 2 months, I get symmetric 20/20 internet bandwidth for some 30 euro/month. Speeds up to 100/100 Mbps are also available (. In addition the fibre carries your voip, radio and tv signals. So I'm guessing the 100/100 is just a convenient maximum speed for internet given that most people either have 10 or 100 stuff in their home.

Wonder what this 160 is supposed to be priced at and how the technology scales in the future.

ultra-fast!? is this a joke? (1)

netdur (816698) | more than 6 years ago | (#21957808)

Its advertising that counts, not the product. (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21958140)

In USA it is all about advertising and less about the actual product.

Also, ppl in USA are not aware of an world where things are often better than in the States itself.

Re:ultra-fast!? is this a joke? (2, Informative)

homer_ca (144738) | more than 6 years ago | (#21958200)

Ah, that's nothing. This [tech.co.uk] 75 year old retired lady in Sweden has a 40Gbps connection. However it is experimental, and her son is Peter Löthberg, apparently one of the pioneers of the Internet in Sweden. Still, lots of people in Sweden and S Korea can get 100Mbps broadband.

But what's the limit? (1)

STrinity (723872) | more than 6 years ago | (#21957822)

What good does sooper dooper ultra fast connections do if they cap how much data you can transfer?

but they probably dont fix their crappy TV service (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21957848)

I've been a comcast customer for years now, at 3 different residences in 3 different cities. At all 3 I have not ever been able to get descent digital cable. Half the channels dont come in at all or are so full of visual artifacts and audio hiccups that they are un-watchable. The On-demand service works about 1/3 of the time, and when it does it experiences the same crap signal and is prone to cutting out in the middle of the movie..

These assholes should fix their fuggin' TV signals before they start even looking into anything else...

I would switch to a different provider if there was such a thing (No I'm not going to be contractually bound to DirectTV for 3 years just to watch TV, so they arent an option).

You COULD download that fast... (1)

snarfies (115214) | more than 6 years ago | (#21957868)

...IF they'll sell it to you. They won't sell it to me. I live in Philadelphia - you know, Comcast HQ? I can't buy FIOS, despite my burning desire to do so, so I can get Comcast cable internet or DSL at half the speed (but around the same price). My gf, however, lives about half an hour away in Norristown, PA, and she just got a computer (whoah). She wanted to know her options, so I looked them up for her.

She CAN get FIOS, but much to my shock I found that in her area she can get something called "Comcast Blast." 16Mbps service, as opposed to my 6 service. Like FIOS, I'd buy it, if they'd only sell it to me.

They won't sell it to me. Why bother? I can't buy FIOS or any faster alternative, so I'm stuck with whatever crumbs they'll toss me. Oh well, at least it beats Wireless Philadelphia (tried that for a few weeks - don't even waste your time).

Promises, like Xbox promises? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21957894)

Are these promises similar to the announcement of video for the Xbox Live service which can't even manage to start games nor Zune music?

Sorry..... (1)

Capt James McCarthy (860294) | more than 6 years ago | (#21957912)

You can't speed up the server or the network you are downloading from. They can claim it can do Gig speeds but that doesn't help with anything outside of Comcast networks.

Or how about that person who gets Comcast 160Mb down only to have it run into a 10/100 Ethernet Card.

Re:Sorry..... (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21958380)

The storage media is becoming the bottleneck. It's already the slowest thing on my home 1gbps LAN.

You're also assuming single server for net speed, and completely ignoring doing several things at once.

I bet this service can be maxed out with a decently seeded torrent alone. It's easy to hit the limit on my 20/20mbps right now, you only need a handful of people with my level of service to hit the 160mbps, and that's just the US. Europe has 100/100mbps, Korea and Japan are starting on 1gbps. FiOS probably has a lot more headroom in store should cable companies start to give competition. With bandwidth comes application.

I can perform decent video conferencing with family in Europe now. In a few years the whole family could probably do the same with friends and family simultaneously.

Re:Sorry..... (1)

SeekerDarksteel (896422) | more than 6 years ago | (#21958404)

You can't speed up the server or the network you are downloading from. They can claim it can do Gig speeds but that doesn't help with anything outside of Comcast networks.

Err...what kind of servers are you downloading from that use a home user connection? When you download something most of the lines the information passes through have far greater capacity than the user until you reach close to the home user as it's the "last mile" connection that most greatly limits bandwidth.

Or how about that person who gets Comcast 160Mb down only to have it run into a 10/100 Ethernet Card.

They spend $10-$20 to buy a gigabit ethernet adapter.

Promises promises (5, Insightful)

Kelbear (870538) | more than 6 years ago | (#21957944)

I'll believe it when they actually offer it, there are plenty of ways for them to tie down that speed into an undesirable product. Excessive pricing, throttling, bundling, lock-in, hidden caps...

How fast is the upload, and for that matter, how many download sources are there that can actually hit that speed for numerous users? Even in a torrent it's tough to find enough seeders to equal those speeds. If it can be done, how many suscribers can hit that speed before they crowd each other out?

I think the biggest boost to my practical download speed would be an increase to other people's upload speeds. That sort of breakthrough would be far more exciting.

They can't deal with what they already provide? (4, Interesting)

stickyc (38756) | more than 6 years ago | (#21957950)

I'm confused - Comcast has admitted they can't handle the speeds they're already providing to customers, what's the point in providing a faster end-user connection if the back-end can't support it?

Re:They can't deal with what they already provide? (5, Insightful)

jbeaupre (752124) | more than 6 years ago | (#21958156)

Because they can charge more for delivering the same thing.

Upload speed will still be 128k though (2, Insightful)

pyite69 (463042) | more than 6 years ago | (#21957988)

If this is full duplex, then it will be a great deal. Otherwise it is just sad.

Screw Comcast (1)

Sir_Real (179104) | more than 6 years ago | (#21957996)

They could give this service away for free and I still wouldn't touch it. These idiots have proven that their customers. They think their customers are criminals and so enforce laws that don't exist on behalf of the coprorate interests to whom they truly owe their allegiance. They have used every opportunity to bleed areas they monopolize dry. Their terms of service are draconian and impenetrable. They have fought tooth and nail against the establishment of any kind of competition (wonder why you can't get muni free wifi? ask the state senator enjoying a free houseboat payment on behalf of a comcast kickback).

I would rather not have internet at all than be involved with this company in any way.

SPAM on the rise (2, Funny)

alextheseal (653421) | more than 6 years ago | (#21958016)

In other news, SPAM reaches unprecedentedly high volumes.

No thanks. (1)

pla (258480) | more than 6 years ago | (#21958042)

The technology, DOCSIS 3.0, will start rolling out this year.

Great, so my cable company will force me to buy another new modem, while I'll still only get 2-3Mbps realistic speeds.

How about we stop screwing around... Just give me my FTTP already, preferably not tied to either phone or cable (so I can ditch both).

Enough to combat FTTH? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21958048)

I think the more interesting question is whether DOCSIS 3.0 will be enough to stave of Fiber to the Home initiatives underway in the United States. On one hand, Fiber is clearly the superior infrastructure and offers much greater speeds. On the other, only Verizon appears willing to make the sacrifices required to install it. Eventually, I think the MSO's will need to wake up and get on with the infrastructure upgrades, but with their competition being so complacent, why bother?

in response to 'comcastsucks' (1)

avandesande (143899) | more than 6 years ago | (#21958078)

Yes, I agree but QWEST is worse!!!!!

They all suck (1)

jessiej (1019654) | more than 6 years ago | (#21958236)

They all suck but competition is good. This will hopefully help to lower prices for the slower speeds and encourage other companies to seek out similar advances.

Wouldn't it be great to see a speed war the likes of the AMD/Intel processor competition? Unlikely, but it would be great!

160 mbits???? (1)

bizitch (546406) | more than 6 years ago | (#21958090)

At that speed - how are they gonna keep up snooping on my traffic??? and messing with my torrents?

oh that's right, they don't do that ...

Net Connection Lite (2, Interesting)

internic (453511) | more than 6 years ago | (#21958114)

Yeah, but will this ultra-fast connection come with port blocking, traffic shaping, unspecified caps on data transferred, and TOS that make you agree not to run a server of any kind?

Woohoo! (1)

saikou (211301) | more than 6 years ago | (#21958142)

At that speed you will reach your download/upload limit on your unlimited connection in just a few hours :D

US ISPs suck (1)

information_storage (1025634) | more than 6 years ago | (#21958144)

Too bad every granny in Japan and Sweden will still have higher uprates that I will have down rates - death to asymmetric stingyness!

What about customer service? (2, Insightful)

Spy der Mann (805235) | more than 6 years ago | (#21958180)

Um, have you forgot about Hammer Granny [slashdot.org] ? How about the Sleepy Tech guy [youtube.com] , who ended up falling asleep because they put him on hold for over 2 hours? (And of course, he was the one fired, while the problem remains).

No matter how fast they claim to be now, if their customer service remains a bureaucratic hell, no way.

mod d0Wn (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21958204)

at times. From uncover a Story of just yet, but I'm survey which

Batman? (3, Funny)

glitch_xl (933407) | more than 6 years ago | (#21958210)

I've already GOT batman - what else you got?

But it's still Comcast (4, Interesting)

Avatar8 (748465) | more than 6 years ago | (#21958216)

Given the company's history, I don't trust a single word the article says.


-"Up to" 160 mbps likely means "We'll sell you 20Mb for $50/mth to barely squeeze out our competition, but real speed will cost ya $$$$."
-Is it still a shared network? So if my neighbors are all downloading Batman Begins, is my internet download going to slow to 1mbps? I bet it will.
-Will the service be reliable, as in always on, 24x7x365, you know, like the phone companies and my FiOS connection are? I completely and totally doubt it.
-Will the charge per month keep increasing every six months? I think it will.
-Will you still charge customers for house calls even when the fault lies in your network and your equipment? I'm sure you will.
-Will you replace your unskilled, rude and generally ignorant customer service with talented, considerate and intelligent people? Only if Comcast decides to pay a decent wage, so I guess not.
-Will the VoD carry the latest movies as soon as they're legally available? If the CEO is using Batman Begins (2005) as an example, probably not.
-Will Comcast ever apologize or make amends for all the anguish, pain, suffering and overbilling they have caused their customers since Comcast came into existence? I'm not holding my breath.


My only wish is that Comcast executives, where ever they go will receive the same kind of service they themselves deliver.

160 megabits? (1)

IGnatius T Foobar (4328) | more than 6 years ago | (#21958232)

160 megabits ... throttled down to 2 megabits. Your cable dollars at work.

Yeah, but, is it ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21958260)

"unlimited"?

Meanwhile most universities have faster speeds (1)

WillAffleckUW (858324) | more than 6 years ago | (#21958278)

The US commercial cable networks are much much slower - and even this Comcast 160 GB/sec is much slower than you get get if you work on medical imaging or biochemical structure data networks - in the USA.

Everyone loves cable (1)

heroine (1220) | more than 6 years ago | (#21958292)

Cable TV standards R definitely the star of the show, along with the coverage of BOCA/True2way, this show is definitely a vindication of cable standards.

Related? (1)

phobos13013 (813040) | more than 6 years ago | (#21958388)

Perhaps this announcement coincides with the announcement of their Project Infinity [reuters.com] initiative... It would seem they need some kind of data network such as this to be able to shove this kind of content thru the tubes. Regardless, Comcast is still evil. They are an entertainment distributor, not an info distributor so do nothing but contribute to the dumbing of the masses. And like someone said earlier, this kind of content expansion will only come with increased costs and fees; considering all this, there is little win for consumers in these announcements.
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>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...