|
Author
|
Topic: Cable Modem - The Attack of the Cap
|
der.Todesvogel
Pilot
|
posted 12-23- 01:26 PM
   
Anyone converted their cable modem connection yet? Is there a new cap on your download speed? Comcast says I have to convert to the new sysetm by Jan 3... If the things take a step backward, it will be time to disconnect... IP: Logged |
Diego Lozano
Pilot
|
posted 12-23- 06:49 PM
Here is what I've heard at work. The industry is planning on getting away from the one speed service. Its going in the direction of tiered services, meaning that you pay a certain price for level of speed. Three tiers is what the rumor is. Be prepared for shelling out more $ for less! I'm anticipating massive disco's from our customers once this happens.IP: Logged |
der.Todesvogel
Pilot
|
posted 12-24- 05:02 PM
And these discos aren't seen as a problem?This doesn't sound like a winning business plan to me. Pushing away customers... This sounds like an oportunity for competitors to eat Cable Companies' lunch. I'm willing to vote with my dollar, it is the only vote left that matters... IP: Logged |
Diego Lozano
Pilot
|
posted 12-24- 06:24 PM
I'm on both sides of the fence here. I dont live in the system I work for so I'll eventually end up paying more for the service or maybe jump ship and get DSL.The industry as a whole will move in this direction. Most cable providers are cheap and always looking to squeeze every penny out of the EXISTING system. Since bandwidth is really what they're selling, they figure that they can get more cash for basically doing nothing. The disco's are only temporary anyway. Nobody wants to get locked into a contract with DSL. IP: Logged |
der.Todesvogel
Pilot
|
posted 12-25- 10:17 PM
Ah yes, exactly.You know, I've heard several times that there is excess bandwidth across the internet network, and yet somehow this oversupply becomes an overdemand among the suppliers? It seems like the Gas Crisis of 1973, there was plenty of production capacity, but that's not what we were told then. The Cable Business is amazing to me. I pay to watch TV shows with commercials, and I'm rewarded with repeat episodes 5+ times in one year (Histroy channel is the only cable channel I watch..).  Given that AFTRA & SAG performers receive less for commercials and shows that "air" on cable (my Girlfriend has the contracts memorized, so I need a refresh from her for details), it is unbelieveable that Cable companies aren't the richest businesses in America.... perhaps they are, but they hide it well. I have already fought back a little. I reduced my cable package to "Limited Basic" + "Value Pack". This gives me History, TVL, Golf, USA, AMC, ESPN2, MSNBC and C-Span, local on-air channels. For this I pay $14 a month. Cable is The Master of squeezing money out of the subscribers' pockets. I call on the world to fight back. If the world doesn't want to, I will. [This message has been edited by der.Todesvogel (edited 12-25-2001).] IP: Logged |
Razer
Pilot
|
posted 12-26- 12:55 AM
this new type of service is already being used by my ISP in the form of bronze, silver, and gold packages. Each has a different up and down speed. I have the gold package which is something like 1.5mps up and 725k down. I get around 230k/sec on most downloads but no more then 19K up.IP: Logged |
Nat
JAG
|
posted 12-26- 09:23 PM
This type of package is already in plae here in England, I don't see a bad side to it yet, I can have 3 levels of cable, from 128 to 512 connection, I took the 512kb ofcourse But what does annoy me is the fact that my outgoing speed is capped at 14kbs, making my FTP very slow for people to d/l from, still, this is also understandable the way Cable and ADSl were explained to me, the basics were this:Cable connections/servers get slower as more people log in and eat up the bandwidth, my g/f in Detroit uses @home and was capped last year to (I believe) 128kbs outgoing, with a 512kbs incomming, this is in an attempt to lower the amount of bandwidth she's using up. ADSL on the other hand is a little different, it doesn't matter how maney log in, it doesn't effect the bandwidth, so the connection doesn't get slower the more people log in. I miht be wrong, but this is basicaly how it was explained to me, so I can see why cable companys want to limit bandwidth where possible, but on the other hand, I don't meet many satisfied ADSL users, the service atleast in the UK is so buggy it's untrue, and very slow, I play UT online in the UK, on a UK server, with my Cable I ping at around 52 to the server, a friend of mine on the other side of manchester from me uses ADSL, he pings the same server at around 1400!! Still, back to the subject, if I didn't want/need a 512 connection, atleast I could save myself some cash and get just a 128 or 320 connection, I prefere more options not less, so I'm not against a tiered service. IP: Logged |
Diego Lozano
Pilot
|
posted 12-26- 10:35 PM
Well Nat, how are you buddy Like I said before. I see this from both sides. One side as a customer and the other as a service provider. I worry more about the provider side since its my livelyhood. The main problem I see will be that customers will now start calling me demanding to know why there 320 connection is running below what it should be. Nevermind the fact that they had their nephew go over to the Home Depot and pick up a roll of the cheapest cable he could find and install a few illegal video outlets which is now killing the return signal. Would you complain when its running a bit slow? Maybe you or most of the world wouldnt but these *#ckin' people over in my system start to cry if there is a slight bit of graininess in an old movie. I say let it run "wide open" like they advertised it and upgrade the system from OUR end.IP: Logged |
der.Todesvogel
Pilot
|
posted 12-26- 11:18 PM
Exactly.Hey, most of the time I'm just reading text online. So my usage is low. For this, the advantage of cable/dsl is that I don't get dropped offline by an ISP just for being idle. But right now I'm downloading the C. Wolfstein demo from a server in Sweden. While I don't download often, when I do, I *need* it to be quick. I gotta go to work tomorrow, and I can't stay up all night waiting for some download to complete. This is also a reason to have Cable. If 5-10% of users are using too much bandwidth, then cap at 3 standard deviations of mean useage. But the real issue is mo-money. So I will lose my >500 kilo bytes per second (5 mega bits per second) download speed. My pings to Cali-12 are|were 114 ms from New Jersey /cable. IP: Logged |
Nat
JAG
|
posted 12-27- 01:10 PM
maybe I didnt explain very well, or I didn't understand very well  but on my capped 512kbs connection I almost always get above that when downloading from a fast server, my Incomming connection isn't capped, it's my Outgoing connection. If I download from a server I get great speed, but if you were to download from me you would get low speed. The idea is to kill off those of us running FTP's and webservers from our cable connections, not to slow down our "personal" use. If I ran a big FTP that was very popular then having hundreds of people loging in would kill my ISPs bandwidth, and thats what they are trying to stop here and on @Home.So again, my download speed is uncapped, my upload speed is. We have 3 levels of connections, 128/320/512kbs incomming, but the outgoing speed is capped at 14kbs. My 512 connection costs me £25/month, if I took a slower service I'd save money, but thats no fun is it lolPurely looking at it from an internet service and not a TV service I don't see that having a tiered service is such a bad thing aslong as the price for the highest level of service costs no more than people are paying already, then the lower services cost less and would possibly bring in new customers that didn't want to shell out before, but can save money and still have a much faster service than from a modem. IP: Logged |
Diego Lozano
Pilot
|
posted 12-27- 02:33 PM
I'm starting to agree with you Nat. I now understand what you meant. If the customer wont have to pay any more than he is now for max service and the lower tier of service is cheaper...well, what can I say More bandwidth for everyone in the end. The biggest prob we have in our system isnt FTPs or home buisnesses. Its people running their own network system out of apartments. You see, they hook up legally and once we beat feet to the van they break out the router and run lines to everyone who wants to pay for it. Damn people are making more than enough money to pay for the video, data and few nights on the town! IP: Logged |
der.Todesvogel
Pilot
|
posted 12-27- 04:10 PM
Some guy on the newsgroups said that current residential service will be Silver... here, look:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=comcast+silver&hl=en&rnum=1&selm=%23mRAde iiBHA.1812%40tkmsftngp07 If my download rate isn't capped, and if my pings aren't increased, and if I'm not charged more than $40 per month (the cost of a new game every month), then I'm fine with these "restrictions". Today I have 128Kbps up; that's all I need. Second question: What is the new software that Comcast is deploying? The current Comcast software is only running on one of my computers (the Apple Power Mac 7300). Will Comcast force the use of internet crippleware like Netzero? [This message has been edited by der.Todesvogel (edited 12-27-2001).] IP: Logged |
Snickers
Pilot
|
posted 12-27- 04:39 PM
I cant bitch about this... They dont have cable modems (or DSL) available where I live . THAT I complain about....IP: Logged |
Nat
JAG
|
posted 12-27- 08:58 PM
good point Diego, if I had a couple of PC's I'd link them upto the net via this one to share the cable connection, and obviously if I wanted to I could wire in the neighbours aswell, I never even thought of people doing that!Snick, you make a good point there wether you meant to or not I remember what it's like using a modem, and am grateful for my cable connection IP: Logged | |
FSIC Messageboard
UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! 
