we're just two lost souls swimming in a fish bowl

year after year

good, now I just need Cox/SuddenLink to do the same crap.

What's Comcast's definition of too much bandwidth?

Welcome my son
Welcome to the machine

Where have you been?
It's all right we know where you been...

Is this end for illegal vid? Think Napster?

welcome to "damnit I went over my bytes by 12 gigs, and now I owe comcast $3,898 AND I didn't even finish downloading the new episode of The Hills"

And did we tell you the name of the game, boy?
We call it Riding the Gravy Train.

...you've been in the pipeline filling in time
surrounded with toys and scouting for boys...

mer...

Ugh this sucks. I already hate comcast. Unfortunately they recently took my old awesome ISPs territory. Id rather not be able to seed torrents then have them fucking with my speeds for using too much bandwidth.

And how will they know if you're using up too much bandwidth because youre downloading copyrighted stuff?

Limiting bandwidth for those who use it is the best way for Comcast to lose customers. I don't pay $50/month for limited "unlimited" service. Net neutrality will be mandated, competition will fix the rest.

Can we stop suffrage while we are at it?

I'm supposed to say, "Well it's better than paying by the content I choose to look at."

But I'm still pissed off.

At least I'm not under ComCast right now, I wonder how it'll work for them.

Sounds fair to me. You can't expect to hog ginormous amounts of bandwidth (essentiall depriving it from others) for free. I use BT frequently on Cox's service and have never had an issue. They have a 15GB download per month or something like that. If you're downloading more than 15GB a month, you should probably start thinking about paying for some of it.

/.02

I just know Al Gore is behind this somehow!

As a lifelong Pink Floyd fan I take offense to your using one of their album covers in a Comcast article. Now I'll be reminded of those corporate jerks every time I hear a Floyd song...

@NutManIV:

And how will they know if you're using up too much bandwidth because youre downloading copyrighted stuff?

They don't care what you're downloading or how you're downloading it. If you're using too much bandwidth, you're going to get throttled.

There's only so much bandwidth to go around. While Comcast may not give you an explicit limit, it makes sense for them to try to make sure all their customers get a fair share.

Can i have some fries to go with that shake?

@Simple_thinking: Why is that? I buy an unlimited service to get unlimited service... And the fact is, the majority of bit users are still turning a profit for comcast. I could understand if this were joes comcastic ISP, that's squeking by and taking a paycut, but your talking about a company that turns millions in profit saying "hey, we're not going to provide more bandwith to meet demand, we're just going to create a demand by shortening supply, then charge more."

I'll believe it when I see it.

"Hello Comcast, you bastard"

Is absolutely right.

There never was an "all you can eat broadband," just marketing people who felt consumers were too dumb to understand that there is a difference between the capacity of the media connecting you to your ISP and the capacity of the network to convey data from the Internet to you.

It's high speed, yes. But no network is engineered for 100% of the subscribers to use 100% of their bandwidth 100% of the time. In the case of Comcast (and most other networks), a relatively small number of subscribers, downloading (ahem) "free" videos, will chew up a good chunk of their capacity, to the point where it impacts the rest of the subscribers.

So, while it's a good idea (for the rest of us) to limit the ravenous appetites of the few, if you are one of the few who thought Comcast really had a boundless amount of bandwidth that would allow you to build up a vast library of free movies and TV shows, you are going to feel betrayed when they spoof disconnects and limit your bandwidth.

Not nearly so betrayed as when Comcast decides to share your IP address with the MPAA and the RIAA, but still, betrayed.

@Simple_thinking: You think 15 gigs is good enough..??? 2 HD movies and you're all used up. Hello.. What year do you live in? It stifles internet media companies.

@Simple_thinking: Oh and we do pay for it... 50 bucks a month.

Hey where did that picture come from?

You know, as a frequent BT-er, I don't mind if I get nasty download speeds as long as everything finishes in the end. Of course, there's also the timeframe of throttling to be concerned about. If they clamp down on me for chewing up too much bandwith, when does that clamp go away?

Oh and 15 gigs per month? I can eat that up with just my 360 and the marketplace in next to no time.

Xaksei's post I think the main issue with comcast and their policies is that they're not upfront with them. If they were to tell me that at X-bytes/sec I'd get throttled, that's a different story. Although I don't see why they can't just implement a system where everyone gets X-bytes/sec and if the network is not congested, you'll get more. That way people are expecting X-bytes and if it goes faster, that's great. It gives the customers a much different feeling that saying you'll get "up to 10X-bytes" and end up only getting X. I don't see how the amount downloaded over a day should be an issue. I do however see why the current speed of download could be an issue.

so let me get this straight... I pay 50 buck$ for a 4 MBPS connection, but if i use it at that speed for any length of time I no longer get that speed?

adios comcast

It's just another way for a big company to milk the consumers for all they can. Much like cellular providers are doing with text messaging, Comcast is going to sell bandwidth in different levels of usage, but not make it easy to find out how much you've used. Then, at the end of the month, you'll get a bill for three times what you normally pay since you went a bit over your limit.

WTF! I USE DSL NOW AND I WILL JUST WAIT FOR FIOS TO TO RESUME MY DOWNLOADS. AWESOME!

2 GB a month, obviously.

@jtwesley17: I have comcast and I get a 100 mbps...

I was wrong about the 15 GB. It's actually 40 GB on my package.

[www.cox.com]

We can be all smarky about this, but the fact is the Comcast eventually realized that hiding their questionable practices was the wrong direction for their company. Apparently (at least for the time being) they have decided to be more transparent, and that is good for everyone. In fact, I would say that they can do whatever the heck they want on their lines, as long as they are open and honest about it.

I have Comcrap. I have no choice.

They'fe slowed me down so much and I don't use it much, but with Netflix and Microsoft teaming up with HD content I plan to use the internet a LOT more.

There's no DSL, no FIOS, nothing but Comcast and dial-up in my po-dunk town. Are there any satellite options as fast as/faster than cable?

FUCK COMCAST...seriously.

I hardly EVER get good speeds on torrents, and what is this mysterious "bandwidth amount" they have set.

I maybe download 3-10 albums, 2-4 programs, and 5-10 TV episodes a month via bit torrent...if that is considered a lot and I get throttled when I am playing Brawl or PSN games online I will be pissed, and I couldn't imaging the guys that download 5-10GB a day...they will be PISSED.

I bought over 20 movies through iTunes in a two day period and I did not get a large bill, a phone call or the men in black show up at my front door. However, I did see a black helicopter the other day that could have been following me.

I do not particularly care for comcast but the ability to change providers is controlled by you, the user. Comcast is the cheapest in my area for the service they provide. I look at it like I am using a low-end provider and I expect to get as much in return. I could go to Covad but they are too expensive for me.

I don't know what people are complaining about. Even though you are paying for "UNLIMITED" access, you and I both know there is only LIMITED bandwidth to go around. If some kid down the block was leeching up YOUR bandwidth, slowing your connection to a halt, you know something would need to be done about it. What they really need to work on is some type of dynamic bandwidth load balancing system. It should only throttle bandwidth when other people actually need it. If it's the middle of the night and there is bandwidth to share, go at it.

@Cliff_Dangers: 2 HD movies? Are you downloading these to "stick it to the man" or because you don't want to pay for them? I'm not trying to sound high and mighty or anything because I download "illegal" torrents all the time as well. The difference is that I understand what I'm doing is "wrong" and impedes the quality of service to other users who have legitimate uses. That's why setting a download limit is ok for me.

Now if I was downloading legit stuff all day long and hit the cap, I'd be pissed. The only problem is that I've never run into anyone who has legitimatly hit the cap doing so. In fact, I've never run into anyone hitting the cap at all. But maybe that's because I don't know a lot of people who are heavy downloaders...

If you're going to place a cap on bandwidth, fine, but what about unsolicited traffic? All you have to do is look at a firewall log to see how many hack attempts and unsolicited hits the average broadband user gets. It may not be a whole lot per day, but I'll bet it adds up. Do I have to pay for other people trying to hack me?

@kyel57

lol (www.speedtest.net) proof or it didn't happen.

@weatherman: The problem with your assumption is that you think competition will prevent bandwidth caps. Cable companies are natural monopolies.

Comcast recently took over my service from Insight around January and not only have I noticed slower speeds and periods where it just doesn't work (which I NEVER had under Insight) but now this. I had Comcast once before and canceled because it was so bad.

I admit I'm a pretty heavy user, but that's why I pay so much for unlimited bandwidth. If they do limit it I'll be bailing for whatever else I can get.

I spend $52.95/month for an 8Mbps download connection, the Gold Tier, which gives me a theoretical 750Kbps upload speed. Although, it would be nice if it were 1.5Mbps.

Why you ask...Slingbox. I push about 57GB/month from my home when I travel, just from Slingbox viewing alone. I'd like more, so the picture would be better. If the connection was to sustain 1Mbps, I'd be happy.

@Simple_thinking: last I checked cox was 60gb

now I just need Cox

*snicker*

Man - that could suck.
I hate getting charged $15 extra for some text messages or something.
Getting charged an extra $15 because I watch netflix on demand too much would suck.

I get the feeling that bandwidth throttling is about one thing: keeping costs down in the face of increased downloading by the average user. With Youtube, the average user is downloading waaay more than they wore a few years ago. Slow them down, and they can't watch as many videos. If they watch less videos, less data transfer, lower costs.

The whole powerboost marketing campaign is really evil too because unless you're downloading something that is 10 MB or less, the speed goes back down and so there is little impact on the total download time. But those bandwidth tests will say you have a 12 Mb connection!

The public line, "Our network is being overwhelmed by heavy downloaders! The average user suffers because of the pirates!" is just their way of saving some face. They do use a lot of data transfer, but comcast has always had their own way of dealing with heavy users. Now they want to throttle the average user, because average now used to be considered heavy.

@apeguero: "What's Comcast's definition of too much bandwidth?"

Shrek divided by 2.

@Simple_thinking: Hey jackass. Microsoft is offering HD movie downloads for the 360 at about 5GB each. Apple TV, itunes and a host of others are or will be offering the same... You do the math. Not to mention the size of current games that can be purchased online and VOD. Get with the program.. 21st century don't you know? The files are only going to get exponentially bigger.

Depending upon how Comcast executes this, it could be a fair tool on their part. They need to be open an realistic about it. Setting a monthly transfer cap is not a fair way to approach the throttling. They also can't completely cripple people either. No one wants to break their limit two weeks into the month and then be crawling at dial up speeds for two weeks. That is not a good way to treat your customers.

An approach of like 5GB a day at full speed (8mbit/sec) and then they bump you down to 1-2 mbit/sec (10-20% speed of whatever you pay for) after you break your barrier should be a reasonable way to approach this. For the price we (I) pay monthly for Comcast's high speed (and the fact it is the only game in town for me) means I shouldn't be punished because I want to use the service I am paying good money for.

So Comcast is also announcing that from now on, they'll advertise their normal plan as bandwidth-starved? Limited broadband?
Or, "Your Internet (with our training wheels welded on)!"?

@Justin Nolan:
The thing is the cable and phone companies were given huge tax breaks during the 1990's to lay down fiber all across the United States. Instead of doing that they ran with the money and Congress never followed up to make them accountable. Now 10-15 years later they are crying foul because it is too expensive for them to upgrade their networks to handle the increased traffic that everyone except them saw coming.

@Cliff_Dangers: That's Comcast's not-so-secret intention. They want a piece of the coming onslaught of downloaded higher def content, essentially adding a content tax to everything from iTunes to Torrent. Since they won't get it from distribution sources that rely on their pipes under net neutrality, they'll get it from users. In other words, $10.99 is the new $9.99.

Pink Floyd! And the article title has a David Gilmour reference. Go Figure!

@Cliff_Dangers: And when those files do get bigger, you don't think these policies will change? I'm not sure you realize there is only a finite amount of bandwidth... How would you propose to address this?

@IphtashuFitz:

Are you being sarcastic? Have you ever listened to the Wish You Were Here album?

Yes Comcast will to publish the "limits" so all current customer can decide if they want to continue to subscribe to the service within the limits.

You hear that Comcast... PUBLISH THE LIMITS.