[NPMUG] Comcast controls bandwidth starting October 1, 2008

Henderson/Van Cura relhmbvc at ctc.net
Sat Sep 27 15:52:09 MDT 2008


Charles (and all) -

I don't have Comcast internet service -- never did -- but I would bet  
that somewhere deep down in the not-so-fine print of the contract is a  
reservation of the right to change terms at any time. Can't say for  
sure, but I bet it's there.

Dick Henderson

On Sep 27, 2008, at 3:24 PM, Charles Firth wrote:

> It's not a constitutional right (don't be silly), but it is what was  
> promised by their advertising and the agreed contract between Comcast  
> and their customers. It's bad enough they (like all ISPs) offer speeds  
> "up tp" XMbps. But unlimited use was/is standard.
>
> In other words, I can't sell you a "complete vacation package deal  
> that covers flight, hotel, rental car, and food" and then tell you the  
> cost of the rental car and hotel isn't included. And worse, that  
> you're not permitted to rent the car or you'll risk losing the flight.
>
> When was the last time you saw any ISP commercial say there was a cap  
> on how much you can use it? We haven't seen such a thing since the old  
> AOL "750 free hours" nonsense.
>
> To be clear -this isn't about "bandwidth" at all - bandwidth is how  
> "fat" your pipe is - how much data you can pull/push at a time -  
> usually something like "8Mbps down, 2Mbps up" or similar. We've all  
> got bandwidth caps, due to both technical limitations and  
> corporate/financial ones. Unlimited bandwidth isn't possible thanks to  
> physics.
>
> Instead, this is about total use - if you purchase a cable modem  
> contract that allows 8Mbps download and you use it at full capacity  
> for 1 hour - that's 28800Mb, or 3600MB (there are 8 bits in one byte).
> So, approx 3.6GB downloaded in one hour. Or one DVD disk-image. Those  
> of us who download ISOs know this is about right. (And before you  
> accuse me of being a "pirate", understand that ISO downloading is  
> normal behavior for anyone who works closely with Microsoft's TechNet  
> site. this is not unreasonable use.)
>
> This means a cap of 250GB translates to about 70 hours of use at full  
> capacity.
> Funnily enough, I don't see Comcast's adverts saying you can have  
> 'blazing fast' internet but only for 70 hours a month. I thought we  
> ditched "metered internet" in the 80s.
>
> If Comcast's network can't handle the load of it's users actually  
> using the service at the level that Comcast is selling it, they should  
> stop selling it at that level. 
>
> It's like over-selling tickets to a Pirate game, then telling season  
> pass holders they can't come in because they've seen too many games  
> already, and they need to let other people in. "Sorry you purchased a  
> ticket, but we sold more tickets then the stadium can handle.. and you  
> got to see the last game, so your total use of the stadium is  
> preventing other, more casual, Pirate fans from enjoying the game. So  
> you can't come in. No refunds."
>
> Comcast has the right to cap total use, or even cap bandwidth (that  
> is, drop their connection speeds down to 3Mbps or whatever). In fact,  
> Comcast has the right to do whatever they want, even turn off the  
> "pipe" and get out of the ISP business all together. 
>
> But to pretend this isn't a big deal, and something that existing  
> Comcast customers shouldn't be upset about, is ridiculous. 
>
> If Comcast can't provide their customers the service promised, they  
> need to change the promise. Otherwise it's false advertising. 
>
> And to enter into an agreement with a customer, and then change the  
> "terms and conditions" to such an extent is irresponsible and  
> border-line criminal. You can't change the terms and conditions to say  
> "Well, I was paying you $50/month for unlimited internet access at a  
> top speed of 8Mbps, and I've decided to change that to $20/month for  
> unlimited access at 8Mbps. By opening this letter you've agreed to the  
> new terms of our contract." 
>
> Trade (you know, capitalism) is about "I'll give you X if you give me  
> Y" - you can't agree to this, and then change the deal. Comcast is  
> changing the deal, and hoping their customers will accept the "new  
> terms and conditions" without a fight. Just because Comcast is a big  
> corporation and not another human doesn't mean they have  
> an inherent right to adjust the deal. 
> Frankly, this is a class-action lawsuit begging to happen.
>
> And people wonder why the US is falling behind Europe and Asia when it  
> comes to Internet connectivity.
>
> Charles 
> (Living in a household of 2 people who *each* easily consume  
> 500GB/month in data)
>
>
> On Sep 27, 2008, at 2:40 PM, Greg Simkins biz wrote:
>
>> This new policy was also the subject of a recent Slashdot article.  
>>  It  
>> makes sense to me.  I don't know why people feel they have a  
>> constitutional right to unlimited bandwidth (as nice as that would  
>> be).
>>
>> Greg
>>
>>
>> +--------------------------------------------------------------------+
>> | Comcast Outlines New Broadband Policy                              |
>> |   from the knowledge-is-power dept.                                |
>> |   posted by timothy on Wednesday September 24, @16:49 (The Internet|
>> |   http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/09/24/1941221         |
>> +--------------------------------------------------------------------+
>>
>> Slatterz writes "US cable provider Comcast has presented its [0]long-
>> term
>> solution for managing broadband traffic. The new system is set at  
>> putting
>> to bed a minor scandal that erupted around the company when it was  
>> found
>> that Comcast [1]deliberately limited traffic for certain applications.
>> The company said that under its new system, traffic will be analyzed
>> every fifteen minutes. Users who are found to be occupying large  
>> amounts
>> of bandwidth will be placed at a lower priority for network access  
>> behind
>> users with less bandwidth-intensive traffic. The new system will not
>> replace or be related to the company's earlier installment of  
>> bandwidth
>> caps, which [2]limited a user's data intake to 250GB per month."
>>
>> Discuss this story at:
>>     http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=08/09/24/1941221
>>
>> Links:
>>     0.  
>> http://www.pcauthority.com.au/News/123579,comcast-outlines-new- 
>> broadband-policy.aspx
>>     1.  
>> http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/09/20/0255217&tid=230
>>     2. http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/05/08/1410231&tid=95
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sep 27, 2008, at 11:51 PM, Dave Sevick wrote:
>>
>>> This was passed on to me from a fellow Apple user ....
>>>> Dear Comcast High-Speed Internet Customer,
>>>> We appreciate your business and strive to provide you with the best
>>>> online experience possible. One of the ways we do this is through
>>>> our Acceptable Use Policy (AUP). The AUP outlines acceptable use of
>>>> our service as well as steps we take to protect our customers from
>>>> things that can negatively impact their experience online. This
>>>> policy has been in place for many years and we update it
>>>> periodically to keep it current with our customers' use of our
>>>> service.
>>>> On October 1, 2008, we will post an updated AUP that will go into
>>>> effect at that time.
>>>> In the updated AUP, we clarify that monthly data (or bandwidth)
>>>> usage of more than 250 Gigabytes (GB) is the specific threshold that
>>>> defines excessive use of our service. We have an excessive use
>>>> policy because a fraction of one percent of our customers use such a
>>>> disproportionate amount of bandwidth every month that they may
>>>> degrade the online experience of other customers.
>>>> 250 GB/month is an extremely large amount of bandwidth and it's very
>>>> likely that your monthly data usage doesn't even come close to that
>>>> amount. In fact, the threshold is approximately 100 times greater
>>>> than the typical or median residential customer usage, which is 2 to
>>>> 3 GB/month. To put it in perspective, to reach 250 GB of data usage
>>>> in one month a customer would have to do any one of the following:
>>>> * Send more than 50 million plain text emails (at 5 KB/email);
>>>> * Download 62,500 songs (at 4 MB/song); or
>>>> * Download 125 standard definition movies (at 2 GB/movie).
>>>> And online gamers should know that even the heaviest multi- or
>>>> single-player gaming activity would not typically come close to this
>>>> threshold over the course of a month.
>>>> In addition to modifying the excessive use policy, the updated AUP
>>>> contains other clarifications of terms concerning reporting
>>>> violations, newsgroups, and network management. To read some helpful
>>>> FAQs, please visit  
>>>> http://help.comcast.net/content/faq/Frequently-Asked-Questions- 
>>>> about-Excessive-Use
>>>> .
>>>> Thank you again for choosing Comcast as your high-speed Internet
>>>> provider.
>>> ````````````````````````````
>>> Dave Sevick Consulting
>>> Apple Certified Support Professional 10.5
>>> Apple User Group Ambassador
>>> Apple Recycling in Pittsburgh
>>> Helping people use technology in Pittsburgh
>>> Western PA, WV, OH, MD ... Since 1988
>>> 724.779.0099 mobile/office
>>> dave at davesevick.com
>>> http://www.davesevick.com
>>> ````````````````````````````
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> NPMUG mailing list
>>> NPMUG at davesevick.com
>>> http://davesevick.com/mailman/listinfo/npmug
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NPMUG mailing list
>> NPMUG at davesevick.com
>> http://davesevick.com/mailman/listinfo/npmug
> _______________________________________________
> NPMUG mailing list
> NPMUG at davesevick.com
> http://davesevick.com/mailman/listinfo/npmug
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/enriched
Size: 9709 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://davesevick.com/pipermail/npmug/attachments/20080927/11471a70/attachment.bin 


More information about the NPMUG mailing list