Slashdot Mirror


Comcast Planning Gigabit Cable For Entire US In 2-3 Years

An anonymous reader writes: Robert Howald, Comcast's VP of network architecture, said the company is hoping to upgrade its entire cable network within the next two years. The upgraded DOCSIS 3.1 network can support maximum speeds of 10 Gpbs. "Our intent is to scale it through our footprint through 2016," Howald said. "We want to get it across the footprint very quickly... We're shooting for two years."

32 of 253 comments (clear)

  1. I would laugh but that's too much effort by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...to blow on comcast.

    I predict this will be just like when Pac Bell said they were going to deploy DSL to all customers by 2000. Anyone else remember that shit? I'm in what used to be Pac Bell territory, and I still can't get DSL.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    1. Re:I would laugh but that's too much effort by MBGMorden · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The fastest DSL is slower than the worst cable connection Comcast or Charter can make

      DSL is also available in some areas that cable markets won't serve. My parents' house 10-12 miles outside of the area served by any cable company, but they get DSL just fine, and trust me 3Mbps may be slow by today's standards but it sure as heck beats dial-up.

      My brother lives just a little further out and even the DSL isn't available. His only options are dial-up (worthless these days), satellite and cellular. The latter two have bandwidth caps that make them very undesirable - particularly to his 7 year old who is used to streaming Netflix at her mom's house.

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    2. Re:I would laugh but that's too much effort by Jon_S · · Score: 2

      When I saw the headline saying "to the entire US" I was thinking that can't be right since they don't cover anywhere near the entire US right now. I'd love to have either DSL or cable at a not-so-remote area I own, but am out of luck with either.

      I have had verizon DSL at home for about 10-15 years now, but am thinking of getting cable (just for internet, I use the antenna for TV). Verizon I think actually *wants* people to drop DSL - they use to advertise 7 Mbps to me, and now they say the best they can do is 1.5 even though I pay for "up to" 3 Mbps, and I live two blocks from the CO (yes, I know it is line distance that counts, but I am close on that as well). They don't want to do copper wire anymore.

    3. Re:I would laugh but that's too much effort by Bengie · · Score: 2

      DOCSIS 3.1 requires node splits, because of its much reduced distance. It also requires new amps, filters, and cables. On top of all of that, it required redistributing frequency allocations because the block sizes have changed. It's about as simple as upgrading from 100Mb Copper Ethernet to 10Gb Copper Ethernet. They're both Ethernet. Drop in replacement, right?

  2. Entire US... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    except for cities where they don't want to compete with Time Warner cable.

    1. Re: Entire US... by jd2112 · · Score: 2

      I suspect they will roll out one installation in each state they do business in and declare the project complete.

      --
      Any insufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.
  3. Making promises for backdoor deals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The odds of this happening in 2-3 years are 0%. They have no real competition, why would they?

    1. Re:Making promises for backdoor deals by Frobnicator · · Score: 2

      The odds of this happening in 2-3 years are 0%. They have no real competition, why would they?

      They DO have competition... in some cities. They are pushing to make it a headline as an attempt to keep people from moving to the competition.

      Right now in my area Comcast has an ad campaign going. They take a sound bite of a competitor's ad offering 60Mbps with geographic restrictions, then say "With Comcast we don't have geographic restrictions, we guarantee 25Mbps everywhere in our network"... They make a big point of saying the speed is available to everyone on the network, never pointing out the speed is less than half of what is available elsewhere. Then I've got billboards for another service that is pushing out full gigabit to some residential areas and 100 gigabit for businesses in the city. They're growing slowly, but they seem to have faster adoption rates after every neighborhood they hit.

      Lately there have been huge armies of comcast workers going door to door offering a slightly higher speed than their previous standard offering -- bumping from 20Mbps to 25Mbps -- that comes with a two year contract.

      They keep coming by: "It is just a two year contract.", "If someone else comes along, you can sign up with them after two short years." "We're not asking you to stick around forever, we want to earn your business, this is just two short years."

      Every time I ask them if they can meet my current vDSL speed of 80Mbps, and they say no, but they do have a great deal on 25Mbps cable. Then I ask about some of the fiber options going in, and again "we're installing fiber some neighborhoods, when it comes to your neighboord you can be the first to upgrade!"

      Comcast has competition in some markets, and customers are leaving in droves. This type of marketing is an attempt to stop hemorrhaging customers in these regions.

      --
      //TODO: Think of witty sig statement
  4. I smell bullshit! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Net neutrality was supposed to crush the entire industry! How can they possibly afford to upgrade their system when they are in such dire straits? Or was their claims to Congress just bullshit? They wouldn't lie would they? Corporations never lie! This entire story can't possibly be true. Who is fact checking this garbage? Editors? Hello?

  5. This is how it will go by dirk · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Assuming I believe them (which I do for places that have someone else offering gigabit but less so for other places), this is how it will go. If you are in a town with a competitor offering gigabit speeds, it will cost around $100 a month. If you are in a town without a competitor offering gigabit internet, they either will not offer gigabit speed (although they will probably add the infrastructure for when a competitor does) or they will charge $300 a month for it and it will have to be bundled with cable to get that price. Comcast has no real interest in offering better speeds and are being forced to because other companies are. That is the bottom line.

    --

    "Information wants to be expensive" - Stewart Brand, the same guy who said "Information wants to be free"
    1. Re:This is how it will go by CastrTroy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Price is always my main issue with these super fast lines. Google Fiber even has it's problems with pricing. You can either pay $70 a month for Gigabit speeds, or pay $300 to start plus $25 a year for 5 mbit speeds. Why not have an option in the middle somewhere. 1 Gbps is way more than I need, but 5 Mbps is on the cusp of being too slow for my tastes. Why not have a $30-$40 a month option for 100 Mbps? My guess is that nobody would really pay for gigabit if given another cheaper option with reasonable speeds. By making the only options $70 a month or slow internet, you can get a lot more money out of people.

      I get a lot of value out of my internet, but it seems that all the providers seem to gouge us by not offering pricing tiers that are beneficial to the end user, but offering the pricing tiers that will yield them the most money. Which is fine, I understand they are a businesses, and that's their duty, but I wish there was more competition, and less collusion among companies.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    2. Re:This is how it will go by Githaron · · Score: 2

      Compared to everyone else, $70 a month is an amazing price for Gigabit speeds. I am paying that much just for a 75Mbps download, 75Mbps upload connection. Google Fiber is literally over 13 times faster than my speed for the same price. Besides, you are forgetting why Google started Google Fiber: market disruption and to show everyone the power of Gigabit speeds. You can't do that if everyone only has 100Mbps internet.

  6. Re:Australia take note... by NotDrWho · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Comcast doesn't have any competition. They have monopolies in their cable internet markets. Verizon has basically stopped deploying FIOS. Google Fiber is deploying at such a glacial pace that it will be sometime next century before they pose any real threat. Municipal fiber is outlawed in most states. And AT&T's DSL service is weak tea even in comparison to Comcast's existing offerings.

    --
    SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
  7. Google fiber fears? by PPalmgren · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I live in Charlotte, and Google Fiber is on its way here as well as in nearby Raleigh. Lo and behold, I get a notice in the mail last month that TWC is increasing all our plans by 5x capacity, so I went from 20/1 to 100/5 at the same price.

    Well, that's great, but...you'll only increase capacity once there's a threat? And its so cheap to do that you'll not increase prices and finish the roll-out less than 6 months from Google's announcement? Really inspires tons of customer loyalty there, Time Warner. Jackasses.

    Which brings me to my point: If this rollout by Comcast is true, is someone finally getting out IN FRONT of Google Fiber, not just being a reactionary twit? Maybe, just maybe, someone is learning that customers are switching not only because of your product but because you treat your customers like crap?

    I think I'm too idealistic. That would make way too much sense for the telcos to think of it.

    1. Re:Google fiber fears? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      When google fiber came to my neighborhood i called TW to cancel.

      They promised 10X the speed at 1/2 the price.

      My response was "why didn't i already have that?? Go fuck yourself."

      Buncha Johnny-come-latelys.

    2. Re:Google fiber fears? by jittles · · Score: 2

      I live in Charlotte, and Google Fiber is on its way here as well as in nearby Raleigh. Lo and behold, I get a notice in the mail last month that TWC is increasing all our plans by 5x capacity, so I went from 20/1 to 100/5 at the same price.

      Well, that's great, but...you'll only increase capacity once there's a threat? And its so cheap to do that you'll not increase prices and finish the roll-out less than 6 months from Google's announcement? Really inspires tons of customer loyalty there, Time Warner. Jackasses.

      Which brings me to my point: If this rollout by Comcast is true, is someone finally getting out IN FRONT of Google Fiber, not just being a reactionary twit? Maybe, just maybe, someone is learning that customers are switching not only because of your product but because you treat your customers like crap?

      I think I'm too idealistic. That would make way too much sense for the telcos to think of it.

      There is no threat of Google Fiber or any other fiber service. Comcast and ATT are the only games in town. Comcast has doubled my speed twice in the last year without increasing my cost. I think I am getting 100/20 now, but I can't remember exactly. While I have no doubt that this is due to Google Fiber threats in other markets, it appears that Comcast has decided to up its game a little bit. We will see if they really start offering gigabit service outside of Google Fiber markets. I'll be surprised. But i am not complaining at the moment.

    3. Re:Google fiber fears? by superdude72 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      PS, It has long been my opinion that Google wants its customers to have gigabit fiber, but they would rather some other company provide it. The purpose of Google Fiber is to goad Comcast and TWC into doing it. Like any for-profit enterprise, Google doesn't want to be in the business of providing universal access to high quality Internet. That's providing a commodity, and Google wants high profit margins.

      On the bright-side, they're well aware of TWC's and Comcast's vaporware ploys and are unlikely to be deterred by that.

  8. Re:300gig cap on fiber? by Fire_Wraith · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It makes it so much easier for customers to blow through their monthly cap, and rack up massive overage charges. A perfect situation... at least from Comcast's perspective. After all, one of their execs even admitted that the caps have nothing to do with network management, and are just about money.
    Citation: http://arstechnica.com/busines...

  9. Gigabit network with a 200GB cap by bigdady92 · · Score: 2

    is pointless. No wait, it's GENIUS!

    Customer: We want faster Internets!
    Comcast: Well we will give you the fastest Gigabits!
    Customer: MOAR NETFLIXZ! <downloads 4k movies>, XBOX LIVEZ! <plays games hosted at 1080p>, F-U LIVE TV! <steams HBO 1080p movies in 3 rooms>
    [end of the Month]
    Customer: $400 bill?!?!? WTF!!!!111!
    Comcast: Well now you see you had a 200GB limit on data and you went clear over it.
    Customer: But you said it was GIGABITS FAST!
    Comcast: Yes...yes it is...<Maniacal Cackling on a mountain of gold>

    --
    Wheel of Time: Book by Book and Sumview (summary review) Bigdady92 style: http://bigdady92.blogspot.com/
  10. Re:Yeah, nice, but by Overzeetop · · Score: 2

    The cap will grow when more people start hitting it. It may seem like a revenue center, but it's a management tool. They'll set the bar somewhere in the top 1-5% of customers usage to keep those with voracious appetites down. They know there would be backlash if all of a sudden many of their customers started getting overage charges. Now that may change if more and more people get used to such a thing, but I expect those caps will rise with the overall usage patterns - again, just to make sure that everybody on the network (who doesn't have to call CS*) stays happy with their speeds.

    I still haven't had a single note from Comcast, and last month I uploaded about 2TB of data (Crashplan decided to re-sync my entire server after a version upgrade, even though the server had just uploaded that same chunk 4 months ago).

    *There is no such thing as a happy customer that has to deal with Comcast CS, so the more people they can keep from calling, the better off they are.

    --
    Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
  11. Re:Australia take note... by Stewie241 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It is likely true that they don't currently have any competition. But Google Fiber is making some inroads, and perhaps they realize that if they don't make any improvements and don't do anything, they are making it easier for disruptive players to enter the market (in whatever form that may take).

    Additionally, with the increase of higher bandwidth usage like 4k Netflix as was mentioned or whatever it happens to be, they potentially realized that they were going to have to do something to increase capacity in their backend network if they want to maintain service. People live with traffic volume caps now but as demand for higher caps increases there are going to be more and more complaints, again, opening the field for disruption. Thus they have to beef up their backbone network (my terminology is probably weak as I don't have much knowledge of how ISP networks are constructed and how peering arrangements and such work). You can't really sell an improved backbone network to customers, but if you couple that with last mile upgrades, which are probably going to have to happen eventually anyway, you can drive interest as you prepare for the future.

    People are generally willing to pay a little bit more for a service that just works most of the time and is as fast as the other guy. Upgrading their network means that disruptive players have to prove themselves based on something other than speed.

  12. NOT the "Entire US" by sribe · · Score: 2

    Their entire network is not the same thing.

  13. They are even taking installation appointment by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 5, Funny

    Just called them when it would be available. They said the cable man would show up sometime between May 2017 and Sep 2020. Asked me to stay at home. They said they could not narrow down the window more.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  14. Re:Comcast Planning Gigabit Cable For Entire US In by Adriax · · Score: 2

    Plus with service that fast you'll blow through your bandwidth cap in 40 seconds.

    --
    I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it!
  15. how about reliability first? by flappinbooger · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Why don't they focus on the reliability of their service first?

    Why not focus on customer support, as a whole, first? They have a well deserved reputation for being one of the worst companies to work with.

    Comcast is not any where near 100% reliable, I'd say more like 90%.

    They have (or had, for a long time) crap modems that were only part of the problem.

    People, businesses and government offices are putting all their eggs in this basket with internet, phone and TV, all coming in on one fat pipe.

    When it goes down, they are massively screwed.

    And it happens all too often, far more often than DSL. DSL might be slow and crappy but it is more reliable than cable.

    Don't get me wrong - Comcast know what they are doing when it comes to slinging massive amounts of data great distances at high speed. They really do, and their internet is amazingly fast.

    But why try to go faster when there are too many times it's going nowhere?

    This, not to mention their hidden data cap. If they offer this massive bandwidth do they leave the data cap where it is? HMMM???

    --
    Flappinbooger isn't my real name
  16. Re:Australia take note... by 45mm · · Score: 2

    They may not have any competition within their municipally-granted franchise authority - but I can virtually guarantee that their monopolies are in jeopardy when the neighboring cities get gigabit from Google, Cox, Verizon, CenturyLink, et.al. Local franchise authorities are well aware of the technology that's available, and are applying pressure to get it. They're also aware that their cities grow when the infrastructure is there.

    And if you're a household in one of those communities, I suggest you contact the local franchise authority and complain. Squeaky wheels get the grease.

    Comcast is slow and shitty and definitely won't hit their "goal" - but they're not completely stupid either. They're just following trends.

  17. Re:2 years? by Jayfar · · Score: 3, Insightful

    They certainly don't work for the government!

    In Soviet Philadelphia, the government works for Comcast. Seriously. That's how we avoided having that pesky RCN build a competing system here.

  18. 40 minutes by tepples · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Plus with service that fast you'll blow through your bandwidth cap in 40 seconds.

    I did the math, and it was 40 minutes, not 40 seconds. 300 GB/mo is 2400 gigabits per month, and 2400 gigabits per month divided by 1 gigabit per second is 2400 seconds per month, or 40 minutes per month.

    1. Re:40 minutes by tepples · · Score: 2

      They did away with the 25% overhead of 8N1 framing when they switched to ATM framing, but some ISPs still count ATM framing, IP header, TCP header, and TCP retransmits against the user's cap.

    2. Re:40 minutes by strikethree · · Score: 2

      I did the math, and it was 40 minutes, not 40 seconds.

      It is bad when dramatic hyperbole is only one order of magnitude (seconds to minutes) away from reality. *sigh*

      --
      "Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
  19. Re:2 years? by Monoman · · Score: 2

    And I took your comment as sarcasm because Comcast is probably just reacting to cities like Chattanooga implementing their own gigabit ISP.

    http://chattanoogagig.com/

    --
    Keep the Classic Slashdot.
  20. Project Pronto by TheHawke · · Score: 2

    Yeah, they were pumping like 25 million to place DSLAMS at every SLC, enabling everyone to connect and surf at the (then) astounding 1Mbps.

    Sadly they realized their infrastructure was not up to snuff to handle the increased traffic.

    Soo, they tried to wrangle permits and easements to get the new wiring or fiber laid. Sadly, the NIMBY's and politicals pretty much screwed things over for them so most of the money got sank into permits and (maybe) bribes just to get to 15% of the roll out goals.

    Soo, the project got flipped to lightspeed, which was fiber to pole, then U-Verse.

    --
    First rule of holes; When in one, stop digging.