Future of the interneT

[Private]

http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/97322

Personally i dont think capping users will work i think it will lead to a cheaper version of theyre internet and a premium unlimited version .

But now with Comcast and AT&T working with the riaa to potentially be content cops im thinking shits gunna get scary , with the three strikes rule passing over seas almost everywhere it seems like in a year from now i'll actually have to pay 9 bucks to see a movie and actually purchase a version of windows when i reformat .

whats happening where u live i know 3 strikes is in the uk and a few others but most people i talk to dont even know that comcast is doing this and comcast pretty much runs the state i live in whats happening where u live ?

[Cecilia]

http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/97322

Personally i dont think capping users will work i think it will lead to a cheaper version of theyre internet and a premium unlimited version .

But now with Comcast and AT&T working with the riaa to potentially be content cops im thinking shits gunna get scary , with the three strikes rule passing over seas almost everywhere it seems like in a year from now i'll actually have to pay 9 bucks to see a movie and actually purchase a version of windows when i reformat .

whats happening where u live i know 3 strikes is in the uk and a few others but most people i talk to dont even know that comcast is doing this and comcast pretty much runs the state i live in whats happening where u live ?[/b]

The concept is similar to the days when AOL ran the internet but charged hourly rates as opposed to a fixed monthly rate. Granted this is based on usage of data rather than charge per usage, I can imagine the outcome will be similar. Everyone migrated away from AOL even though the service may have been slightly better than their competitors at the time, people were unwilling to put up with the fact that they didn't have the ability to have unlimited usage without having to pay a hefty price. As a result AOL lost a very significant market share in their industry and really have never recovered as a result.

I think the mistake that these companies are making is that they're seeing other countries such as the UK and Aus. that use this type of internet system and seeing that it works farily well there. The large peice of the puzzle thats missing from this however is that the sheer amount of internet companies in the US far exceeds those of other countries. Also these companies don't have near the startup costs or maint. costs that the interent companies in other countries do.

In the end I think comcast is more likely to cripple themselves overtime with a policy like this. They may see some short run gains but those likely will turn to dust over time as smaller competitors will offer more attractive services to Comcast's potential and current customer base.

[camaz0tz]

everyone i know tries to stay away from comcast...frequent dc's, lag, etc...its overall a shitty company...there are companies here with twice the speeds of comcast for the same or lower prices and more reliable too

[evilwevel]

lol, they're talking about 250 GB a month.

we get capped at 35 GB a month (upload and download together) and we pay like €40-50 a month.

[Cecilia]

lol, they're talking about 250 GB a month.

we get capped at 35 GB a month (upload and download together) and we pay like €40-50 a month.[/b]

Yes but we Americans have no restraint, and we're gluttonous pigs. (Doesn't it say that somewhere in your EU doctrine) So we require more than you. Too bad that you get less but thats life. You guys are the ones who put up with it.

[mdeac48]

lol, they're talking about 250 GB a month.

we get capped at 35 GB a month (upload and download together) and we pay like €40-50 a month.[/b]

We take that 'land of the free' line pretty seriously though.

And comcast does suck gopher nuts. Terrible equipment, customer service, actual service, high prices, random modem resets. I have 2 choices in the matter, Comcast or nothing, and with BSG back on air, I am forced to pay them. My area (a large metro area) has very limited options for both cable and internet. If you face any direction but south, you can't get a satellite signal, so you only have Comcast as a provider for tv. And you can either get cable internet from Comcast or DSL from Verizon. That is a true wealth of competition.

I'd like to think that caps like this will expand the opportunities for competition, but the monopolistic nature of infrastructure lines makes competition difficult as Comcast can just price the service lines competitors would use so that the profit margin is too small to work.

[phantomlink]

we have a 100gb limit, once we pass that ( we do in the first week of every month ) We get charged $1/gb to a max of $25. Once we go past 125gb theres no limits to what we pay

[giga]

The concept is similar to the days when AOL ran the internet but charged hourly rates as opposed to a fixed monthly rate. Granted this is based on usage of data rather than charge per usage, I can imagine the outcome will be similar. Everyone migrated away from AOL even though the service may have been slightly better than their competitors at the time, people were unwilling to put up with the fact that they didn't have the ability to have unlimited usage without having to pay a hefty price. As a result AOL lost a very significant market share in their industry and really have never recovered as a result.

I think the mistake that these companies are making is that they're seeing other countries such as the UK and Aus. that use this type of internet system and seeing that it works farily well there. The large peice of the puzzle thats missing from this however is that the sheer amount of internet companies in the US far exceeds those of other countries. Also these companies don't have near the startup costs or maint. costs that the interent companies in other countries do.

In the end I think comcast is more likely to cripple themselves overtime with a policy like this. They may see some short run gains but those likely will turn to dust over time as smaller competitors will offer more attractive services to Comcast's potential and current customer base.[/b]

wow nice post :blink:

[aligator]

I wonder when SkyNet will be launched. Waiting for that day.

Ontopic: Never heard such a thing where I live but that is just bullshit. I fart 250gb..

Bring that up to a TB and we can start to talk.

[SaNCTe]

this is to stymie services like Hulu, NetFlix and Amazon On-Demand.

250 GB per month is an extremely large amount of data, much more than a typical residential customer uses on a monthly basis. Currently, the median monthly data usage by our residential customers is approximately 2 - 3 GB. (according to gigaom.com) To put 250 GB of monthly usage in perspective, a customer would have to do any one of the following:

* Send 50 million emails (at 0.05 KB/email)
* Download 62,500 songs (at 4 MB/song)
* Download 125 standard-definition movies (at 2 GB/movie)
* Upload 25,000 hi-resolution digital photos (at 10 MB/photo)

Now, if you put it in terms of HD video, 250 GB doesn’t really add up to much.

… we’re moving towards HD downloads. With HD, each roughly two-hour-long movie is going to consume about 8 GB, while live sports events, etc., when watched in higher quality can take up some 13 GB. Remember, we share our Internet connections with multiple people in a household. So, before you know it, that 250 GB isn’t enough.

Comcast is simply trying to find a way in the future to gain profits off the limitations and my advice would be; roll into Fios if you haven't already.

[Eric]

this is to stymie services like Hulu, NetFlix and Amazon On-Demand.

250 GB per month is an extremely large amount of data, much more than a typical residential customer uses on a monthly basis. Currently, the median monthly data usage by our residential customers is approximately 2 - 3 GB. (according to gigaom.com) To put 250 GB of monthly usage in perspective, a customer would have to do any one of the following:

* Send 50 million emails (at 0.05 KB/email)
* Download 62,500 songs (at 4 MB/song)
* Download 125 standard-definition movies (at 2 GB/movie)
* Upload 25,000 hi-resolution digital photos (at 10 MB/photo)

Now, if you put it in terms of HD video, 250 GB doesn’t really add up to much.

… we’re moving towards HD downloads. With HD, each roughly two-hour-long movie is going to consume about 8 GB, while live sports events, etc., when watched in higher quality can take up some 13 GB. Remember, we share our Internet connections with multiple people in a household. So, before you know it, that 250 GB isn’t enough.

Comcast is simply trying to find a way in the future to gain profits off the limitations and my advice would be; roll into Fios if you haven't already.[/b]

700 mb is the max for most dvd quality movies.

[aligator]

700 mb is the max for most dvd quality movies.[/b]

Yes, but once I downloaded Equilibrium, Bluray-rip > 2.3gb for 1 movie line, 1 language, 0 subtitles.

[Private]

everyone i know tries to stay away from comcast...frequent dc's, lag, etc...its overall a shitty company...there are companies here with twice the speeds of comcast for the same or lower prices and more reliable too[/b]

i've always heard horror stories about comcast but never from anyone in michigan they run a pretty tight ship here and for awhile they were way expensive but the prices have come way down because of competition

for the most part tho until very recently comcast has always been the fastest connection available to residential homes but now companies like wide open west offer 25 mb lines when comcast "power boost" hardly gets that

we have a 100gb limit, once we pass that ( we do in the first week of every month ) We get charged $1/gb to a max of $25. Once we go past 125gb theres no limits to what we pay[/b]

who is that ?

Comcast doesn't give a flying fuck about hulu or others they're only after p2p traffic as they are already throttling p2p they are planning to end it with a auto dc . Fighting the stream sites would really be pointless as its something they can actually control under law and make money off of at the same time . Its important to pay attention because the headlines may read "riaa stops all law suits on p2p users" , when it should actually read the riaa has never won a single lawsuit and the only one they were successful with is being over turned .

and ugh eric 700mb ? that would be a rip and a "quality" rip comes at 1.3 gbs a normal dvd in dvd format is 4gbs and a bluray format is 8gbs

[phantomlink]

I use Rogers ( the Canadian Comcast, our largest ISP/Media company in the country )

Also, Bluray would be larger then 8gb, i've downloaded DVD ISOs which were about 6 ( alot/most movies now are on DVD9 discs ) and Bluray can go up to 50, but the largest I think i've seen was 15gb

The only thing I would go against HD streaming from the companies is that, if your having a slow internet night... do you know how long it's gonna take to buffer and download the movie? eww

[schrotti]

I <3 my German lines. Uncapped 50mbit flatrate with fastpath, stand alone of course. Paying 30euro a month, get unlimited traffic on both, phone and internet.