Slashdot Mirror
Comcast Users Must Now Pay $50 Per Month Extra To Avoid Caps (dslreports.com)
Karl Bode, reporting for DSLReports: In a letter being sent to Comcast customers in usage capped markets, the company says that with the recent announcement of usage caps being bumped to 1 terabyte, the company is also capping the amount of additional charges capped users can incur -- to $200 in a single month. As it stands, customers that cross the 1 terabyte limit face overage fees of $10 per each additional 50 GB consumed. But under the revised plans, customers have to pay $50 (up from $30 to $35) extra per month to avoid usage caps entirely. "Because you are an unlimited data customer, we will maintain your current rate of $35 until the end of 2016," the letter reads. Comcast's recent decision to bump their caps to 1 terabyte weren't driven by altruism. With the FCC preventing Charter from imposing caps for seven years as a merger condition, the agency has signaled that it may start getting more serious about cracking down on usage caps in the broadband market.
Today it's Comcast, tomorrow it might be AT&T, the next day it might be some long distance company ... the list goes on, and on
All squeezing the American customers
Where is the government when we truly needs them?
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
. . . pity we can't say, "Sorry, but when I signed, the terms were unlimited bandwidth for $X/month. I haven't signed any changes to the agreement, so deliver, bitches. . . "
But what can you say about an ISP whose Customer Service Policy is cribbed from "50 Shades of Grey" ???
... If only because it's documented and clear about pricing (at least at a glance from the summary).
I know this will be an unpopular opinion here but as an Australian that has lived under data caps since forever (the first broadband cap in Aus was 300mb, raised not long after to 3gb where it sat for a while), even considering how much time has elapsed 1TB is a staggering amount of data.
The biggest problem we had in Australia (... Outside of just generally ludicrously high costs for data) was pland being offered as "unlimited *", where the * basically meant go fuck yourself. This was, fortunately, clamped down on quickly and since then we've had crystal clear (if low) data limits.
I've been in the US for the last 2 years on some vaguely defined TWC plan. Despite having netflix running nearly all day every day (I've not been working for the last year so have had lots of spare time) I could barely manage more than 300gb a month, between me and my partner.
But even so I was constantly worried that eventually someone would be all like "you're using too much data!". Knowing there was a real limit would have been awesome, because I was used to thinking like that anyway and I'm tech savvy enough to deal with it.
I have no problems with data plans, as long as "unlimited" fucking well means what it says, even if you have to pay more for it. Having vague, opaque limits is harmful for everyone. Non-tech-savvy end users can just be filtered or rate capped, but for those of us that actually give a shit about service levels, it needs to be clear what we're paying for and what we're actually getting.
In Seattle I get 1 Gbps uncapped. Thanks to the progressive city council we have multiple providers to choose from.
Why are you saying "Fuck you" to the FCC? Do you understand that they're trying to get the Cable Company to REMOVE the caps?
With the FCC preventing Charter from imposing caps for seven years as a merger condition, the agency has signaled that it may start getting more serious about cracking down on usage caps in the broadband market.
I don't respond to AC's.
cable-cutters going to Netflix, Sling, etc scare the crap out of Comcast, especially as a network owner themselves. Throttling these content providers into Comcast userspace is a (vain) effort to discourage the flood of people fleeing the lousy service and exorbitant pricing offered by Comcast. Notice in the handful of towns deploying Google Fiber, the offers from Comcast suddenly become competitive (I'm in Jacksonville FL, a prospective GF site, and praying to Whatever Gods There Are it gets in here and my neighborhood has availability). I can live with torrenting my Walking Dead fix (Google TV service lacks AMC) for the chance to tell Comcast to take their pricey, lousy service and shove it.
You mean something like this.
I would actually buy your math if everything else were equal...
I do NOT get the same upload speed as an OC3
I do NOT get the savings passed onto me from Netflix/YouTube/etc paying my ISP for a better experience
I do NOT get anything except a crowded spectrum from my ISP sharing my wifi by default
On the backbone, assuming you buy at big ISP scale, 100Mbps dedicated and symmetric costs less than $50 per month. The last mile costs roughly the same whether you use it for 1Mbps or 100Mbps. Volume caps have no effect on congestion (because they reduce off-peak usage, not peak usage.) This is a shakedown, money-grab, market failure.
I'm totally in favor of metered service. Caps are a form of that that are convenient. Basically one can plan a budget of so much for month that's correct nearly all the time but if you want more than that then you can pay incrementally. It's a fine idea that ties charges to usage.
The problem with this model is if there are certain services that escape the cap. If T-mobile can let me binge-on Hulu or if Facebook will let me watch certain parts of the internet they get payola from for free then this is just bending net neutrality over and reaming it hard.
So metered service = good but it has this slippery slope to evil.
therefore I oppose caps until all ISPs divest of content services and are regulated by public utilities. The risk of losing net neutrality is too great. it's directly analogous to the free press.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
And this is why the fanatical push towards "cloud" storage of everything is insane nonsense. First it was cell phone data plans, now it's home internet as well.
The industry wants to have it both ways but it's not realistic. These two schools of thoughts are financially incompatible with each other.
While it sucks to live in an apt. complex...and have to get whatever one else does...
I would advise people renting or owning houses, to consider getting a business internet connection if you need unlimited broadband.
I have an older grandfathered lower limits one from Cox Cable..but I pay $69/mo...unlimited, no blocked ports (so yes, I can run servers)...and I even have a basic level SLA.
I once reported my service down about 11pm on a friday night....and by a bit after midnight they had someone on the pole fixing things.
You really don't have to show much proof of a "real business" either...I just had to give them a name, etc....
My plan isn't offered anymore, but for only a few dollars more, you get a bit faster up and down, and it is quite reasonable, I think maybe only $80/mo? I think they also have one cheaper than mine too....
But look for business ISP service to your home, often by the local cable company. Cox is a great one if you have them in your area.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Really, this is voted as +5 Informative here on *Slashdot*?! Comcast are not going to be laying OC3 lines all over the place. OC3 costs so much because it is strung directly to your office building or whereever. When you are talking about the cost of bandwidth to Comcast, it is the cost of IP transit. Right now you can get a 1Gbps (with a full cabinet for your equipment) for $400/month: https://he.net/special.pdf (I have nothing to do with them other than that I used to be happy customer for a long while). If you need just IP transit (no cabinet), it goes down to $0.32/Mbps per month. To transfer 1 Tb of data per month (i.e. their current cap), you need about 4 Mbps of bandwidth. So the data cost to Comcast is roughly $1.28 for each 1Tb. So please, let's stop with the bullshit indeed.
Oh sure, we win one World Series and now you're our friend again? Come for the Fiber, stay for the barbecue...