[Merged] Comcast Implements 250GB Cable Internet Bandwidth Limit

Discussion in 'Apple, Inc and Tech Industry' started by rscott505, Aug 29, 2008.

  1. rscott505 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2008
    #1
    As an avid user and supporter of Apple TV, I am greatly concerned about Comcast's recently announced 250 GB/month bandwidth limit.

    I've heard that 250 GB/month is quite large. However, with 4 macs, two iPhones and one Apple TV, we are on the internet quite a bit, and download the overwhelming percentage of our content. As more and more media is delivered over the internet, and as HD content becomes more available, isn't it possible to get to this limit much quicker than Comcast asserts.

    Obviously, Comcast is concerned with Netflix, Apple, Amazon and other future on-line content providers impacting their on-demand service.

    Also, I contacted Comcast to determine if they would provide information about bandwidth usage, and the response was to download software on each computer. (No one could tell me if such a program was available for an unhacked Apple TV) Quite frankly, that is not sufficient. All cell phone companies let you see your minutes used, and with them, the punishment is a per minute charge, while in this instance Comcast will suspend your internet for a year. As such, it does not seem right that Comcast cannot provide bandwidth usage so we know where we stand.

    Curious as to others thoughts on this.
     
  2. CWallace macrumors 601

    CWallace

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2007
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    #2
    Well 250GB is a heck of a lot of bandwidth - especially compared to companies like Time Warner that are talking setting limits (some well) below 50GB. I mean unless you spend your entire time downloading TV series DVD sets via Bittorrent, you're unlikely to hit it. And since it is a hard cap, you don't need to worry about getting socked with huge overage fees if you do happen to spend your entire time downloading DVD sets from Bittorrent.

    FIOS is starting to deploy here in Western Washington, so it might be an option in your area. Or AT&T's UVerse. But chances are they too will enforce bandwidth caps down the road.
     
  3. JML42691 macrumors 68020

    JML42691

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2007
    #3
    I wouldn't be all that worried about it, unless if you are downloading a few movies a day, then you should be all set. If you are truly worried about it, then are there any more options to service (an unlimited service, or one with 500 GB maybe)? And is this change to all Comcast customers, or just customers creating new services? As Comcast is a HUGE internet provider in my area, and this is the first that I have heard of it.

    EDIT: Found this article written by the Associated Press that details what this cap suggests, it sounds like you have nothing to worry about from this article, as this was done more to set an exact amount for what Comcast thinks is excessive use, for which they have capped users before, but without a set amount. They are saying that the median usage amount for their customers is less than 5 GB/month, so you should be fine.

    Article Link
     
  4. MikieMikie macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2007
    Location:
    Newton, MA
    #4
    I appreciate the article link, btw. Interesting.

    As a Comcast subscriber, I think the 250GB number is pretty fair, considering what others have implemented.

    I just hope they don't creep that number down.
     
  5. alphaod macrumors Core

    alphaod

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2008
    Location:
    NYC
    #5
    As a FiOS customer, I pity y'all Comcast ppl. :D
     
  6. JML42691 macrumors 68020

    JML42691

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2007
    #6
    After seeing what other providers are giving as limits, Comcast is very generous in this situation. I too hope that they do not bring this number down at all. It seems like they are only implementing this because they have suspended some subscribers in the past for using an excessive amount of bandwidth, but they haven't had an actual set amount listed, which is why they have stated 250 GB.

    And that article states that you can download 4 standard definition movies a day for the whole month and still be in your allotted bandwidth.
     
  7. ColinEC macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2008
    #8
    I use Comcast, but I'm not worrying about the cap.

    I don't think I ever have downloaded over 250GB in one month before, the most was probably 25GB.
     
  8. Chip NoVaMac macrumors G3

    Chip NoVaMac

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    #9
    Even doing 4gb movies/dvd's a 250gb limit is like 60+ movies. But in some ways I wonder if this is a solution looking for a problem.... Meaning that in my neighborhood there are few that I can sense that are heavy users... So far on my basic internet service I am getting on average 8kbps even during the heavy night time hours...
     
  9. rscott505 thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2008
    #10
    Thanks so far the responses.

    I also share the concern that the limit will creep downward.

    I know I'm repeating myself, but Comcast is in the business of providing content. If you sign up for MLB's internet service, you can watch the games on your computer or iPhone. This is direct competition for Comcast's MLB package. If I rent an HD movie from ATV, it cuts directly into Comcast's profit since I didn't rent it from on-demand.

    As such, while Comcast can say it's new policy is in compliance with Net Neutrality, in the end it is an end run around the concept. By limiting bandwidth, and not limiting its own services (albeit through cable TV), it is favoring its own content. Also, if the data for cable and internet share the same line coming into my house, why should cable tv (on-demand) be favored over internet. Is the reason because when I pay $3.99 for a movie using on-demand, Comcast gets the money? That ultimately seems to me to favor Comcast to the detriment of Apple (or Netflix or Amazon or whoever else is out there providing content).

    It's inevitable as more-and-more content becomes available on-line, that Comcast will reduce the bandwidth limit. Thus ensuring that more consumers use its content than that of competitors.
     
  10. iGary Guest

    iGary

    Joined:
    May 26, 2004
    Location:
    Randy's House
    #11
    There's no way I'd ever even come close ... and I live on the tubes.
     
  11. CWallace macrumors 601

    CWallace

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2007
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    #12
    Chances are very good eventually FIOS will institute a limit, as well.




    What is...amusing...is Comcast is rolling out their new 16mb/s download service. We just added it here in Seattle. So they have effectively doubled our speed and note that it will most benefit people who download large files or view online video content. :rolleyes:
     
  12. GSMiller macrumors 68000

    GSMiller

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2006
    Location:
    Kentucky
    #13
    Comcast doesn't offer their service in my area :rolleyes:
     
  13. trip1ex macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2008
    #14
    iTunes standard movies are ~1.5gb. 166 iTunes sd movies/month = 250gb/month.
     
  14. P-Worm macrumors 68020

    P-Worm

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Salt Lake City, UT
    #15
    I have Comcast and it sounds like they are going to handle the issue in a fair way. The article says that if one goes over the quota, they will receive a call from Comcast warning them of excessive use. Then if they do it another month in a 6 month period they could have their contract terminated.

    I much prefer the warning over unexpectedly being billed an extra amount.

    P-Worm
     
  15. scorpio333 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2008
    #16
    My thoughts and opinions, feel free to not agree. I'm no longer a Comcast customer for a few different reasons. If I would have tried to live out those reasons this would have definitely been a deal breaker. I doubt I consistently reach that amount per month, but there have been stretches where I went double that while doing projects. If it were full time work a dedicated business service would suit me better, but the work comes for a few months then dries up.

    For me this a matter of principle. Why isn't Comcast being proactive and improving their service to handle all these new services? Why put the cap on paying customers? Let's keep older technology around, tell everyone it's the best, then slap people with limits and tell them it's for their own good.

    Frankly it pisses me off everytime I see a comcastic commercial boasting superiority and then they pull a gimmick like this. It has been my experience that DSL and FIOS were far superior services than the comcast service I received in two separate locations.

    If the cap doesn't make you happy, let Comcast know. Also let them know they're not the only game in town and the cap could cost them your business (assuming you're willing cut ties with them). Yeah they won't listen, but it's fun to rub it in once they come begging for your money again after you've left them.
     
  16. soberbrain macrumors 65816

    soberbrain

    Joined:
    May 9, 2008
    #17
    I don't think the cap will affect me personally, 250 GB is a lot of data. I hope it helps to keep costs down and better the service.
     
  17. operator207 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    #18
    If this is something your worried about, I am sure there are some routers out there you could install that will tell you bandwidth usage. Like this one. Note: I am not recommending this device (I have never used it), just that a device like I am describing exists.

    Then you could monitor who does what without having to find software for all your devices.
     
  18. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #19
    250 GB/month is a ridiculous amount of bandwidth to use.

    Well right now it is...
     
  19. xlii macrumors 68000

    xlii

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2006
    Location:
    Millis, Massachusetts
    #20

    No one will ever need more than 640k bytes of memory (wasn't that bill gates who said that)
     
  20. CWallace macrumors 601

    CWallace

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2007
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    #21
    For a character-based, command-line OS, it likely was. ;)
     
  21. MikieMikie macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2007
    Location:
    Newton, MA
    #22
    Actually, Apple had a 64K limit, and came standard with 48K. Who would need more?
     
  22. rick6502 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2006
    #23
    Comcast is punishing the wrong people.

    In understand the IPs are worried about bandwidth issues, but punishing their customers is not the answer. 4% of all internet traffic is junk, but rather than figure reducing the amount of junk mail traffic they are limiting the amount of (in theory) legitimate traffic. So if the amount of junk increases and their bandwidth does not increase, is Comcast going to have to lower the cap? At what point does it stop? This is a case of f**k the users, they'll keep paying anyway. Would you let the highway department tell you the roads were too full of trucks so you can only drive so much?

    http://asert.arbornetworks.com/2008/03/2-of-internet-traffic-raw-sewage/
     
  23. dilailamams macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2008
    #24
    i've been using comcast for a little over 2 yrs. i had not any connection or speed problem yet. also i got lots of rebates and free modem..when i applied.
     
  24. killr_b macrumors 6502a

    killr_b

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2005
    Location:
    Suckerfornia
    #25
    The wording in the op is great!

    Once they get you used to the idea of "limiting internet service" that whole internet2 thing will sound less like a rumor…


    :eek::eek::eek:
     

Share This Page