Comcast Launches Broadband Meter 199
nlawalker writes "Beginning on Tuesday, January 12, Comcast high-speed internet users in Washington state will have access to an online tool that displays their bandwidth usage for the most recent three calendar (not billing) months of usage, including the current month. Washington is the second market to receive access to the tool, following its introduction in Portland. 'For the fraction of less than 1 percent of our customers who are concerned about exceeding our excessive use threshold, we believe this meter will help them monitor and calibrate their usage,' said spokesman Steve Kipp. Perhaps those who aren't using 250GB a month should take it as a challenge."
Honey... (Score:2, Insightful)
> Perhaps those who aren't using 250GB a month should take it as a challenge.
"Honey, I have been to that new page on Comcast site and I realized that we are using only 0.5 GB of bandwidth a month while we are paying for 250 GB, we need to find a way to make this more profitable, download more recipe books and travel agency pamphlets, I don't know, but we have to find some way. Maybe we should just forward emails with silly jokes or hoaxes to more friends..."
"Let's phone that nerdy guy we know to ask him
Metering the "unlimited"? (Score:2)
"Honey, I have been to that new page on Comcast site and I realized that we are using only 0.5 GB of bandwidth a month while we are paying for 250 GB, we need to find a way to make this more profitable, download more recipe books and travel agency pamphlets, I don't know, but we have to find some way.
Or just watch a few HQ videos, participate in some [legit] torrents, etc. We easily go far past 250GB per month on our fiber connection (which is uncapped, unthrottled, etc.). Of course, a couple of kids help to push the usage up, but I do enough by myself: last November, I uploaded more than 250GB of Ubuntu torrent. Downloads of various kinds pushed our throughput to well over double that.
Does Comcast still advertise it as an "unlimited" service?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
No. I think they stopped calling it unlimited two or three years ago.
Re: (Score:2)
Hello AliasMarlowe, I was talking about yourself in my OP, I knew that you would come up with a solution very quickly, Many thanks !!! ;-))
> "Let's phone that nerdy guy we know to ask him what we can do about this..."
All You Can Eat (Score:3, Insightful)
Fine print is a common business practice, only because people are so unreasonable sometimes. I ran a restaurant where we had all you can eat specials, and we had to put a little fine print to say you couldn't stay longer than two hours, since the first weekend a couple of people stayed for nearly four hours, and then tried to refuse to leave.
Or just watch a few HQ videos, participate in some [legit] torrents, etc. We easily go far past 250GB per month on our fiber connection (which is uncapped, unthrottled, etc.)
250GB is more than eight days of Netflix movies streaming, or two months of non-stop standard def Youtube watching, or downloading 64,000 songs. If you're hitting the u
Re: (Score:2)
I agree that 250GB is a non-issue for most people. So why wasn't Comcast just upfront about the cap to begin with? I guess if they are advertising the cap now, it's better for everyone.
Re: (Score:2)
Comcast said:
copponex said:
Thank god someone is standing up for the poor, downtrodden multibillion dollar corporations.
Does anyone wonder why big business feels they can treat consumers like crap with impunity?
Re: (Score:2)
Thank god someone is standing up for the poor, downtrodden multibillion dollar corporations.
Does anyone wonder why big business feels they can treat consumers like crap with impunity?
Yes... major network providers allow the NSA to build NOCs inside their datacenters, but the problem is there may be an arbitrary cap for bandwidth usage.
The corporations are winning because you're more concerned about convenience than you are about your rights.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Did you wear a pirate's hat and orange vest and name tag?
I can understand that companies need to set reasonable limits on service. It's trying to hide it in fine print or misleading advertising that raises objections.
And ultimately, this is why we can never have such a thing as a "free market". Because we readily accept that it's OK for companies to not tell the truth in advertising or to try to keep consumers from actually learning the truth.
A bank
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In other words, a hidef movie almost every day. How many movies do you watch?
yes, I realize that its not just movies, but also TV, etc. But it is actually quite a lot for the average persons current useage
Re: (Score:2)
Here's the thing though. I don't subscribe to cable. I also don't live my life by when network tv decides to play the shows that I like to watch. Between catching up with shows (in HD) from the networks site or sites like Hulu AND streaming Netflix, I know I blow through bandwidth. Heck, if I'm at home and not watching streaming media, chances are I'm streaming music if not streaming music and playing online games. If I'm hitting the upper limit, that's fine, but I wouldn't spend the extra $30 on more
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Cute, but if you were to y'know... ACTUALLY CHECK WITH COMCAST, you'll find there is no such thing.
Comcast does offer a "no cap service". According to the Comcast business rep I talked with, Comcast business accounts are exempt from the bandwidth caps. And yes, if your willing to pay for it, they will gladly setup a business account at a residential address. For the 50mb/10mb service you can expect to pay $100+ more than the standard residential 50mb/10mb package.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I'm disappointed in all the geeks on this site misusing the term "bandwidth." Bandwidth is a measure of rate, not of volume.
I can understand a Comcast marketing droid calling it a "bandwidth meter" because it's a non-geek selling it to non-geeks. But we shouldn't use the word improperly just because some stupid people do.
Earning my karma today, that's for sure.
Someone's not doing their share! (Score:5, Insightful)
Perhaps those who aren't using 250GB a month should start sharing more porn! Darn leechers!
Re:Someone's not doing their share! (Score:5, Insightful)
Perhaps those who aren't using anywhere near 250GB a month should start paying less.
If the price is a flat $45 (or whatever) for unlimited use, that is fine. But if they can quantify usage and affix a more specific pricing scheme to it over and above 250GB of usage, then they can due the same but in reverse for usage under 250GB a month. But they won't. This isn't about fairness or network congestion, it is about making as much money as possible, nothing more.
Opinion of Comcast and Time Warner: "Some folks download a lot and will continue to do so, so let's wring every last penny from them!!! What are they gonna do, get some crappy DSL connection? Haha, let's see them get comparable download speeds. Some of them can't get DSL at all. Screw 'em, it isn't like we have competition. Oh, and we should probably raise TV rates again, just for the hell of it (but no reason to improve service). Thank you, local monopolies!"
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps those who aren't using anywhere near 250GB a month should start paying less.
It doesnt work that way. They are already paying for what the average person uses. Thats what the cost is based on.
Re: (Score:2)
It doesnt work that way. They are already paying for what the average person uses. Thats what the cost is based on.
You're implying that Comcast is only interested in recouping its own costs and expenses. That's just silly. Comcast is not some philanthropic do-gooder non-profit organization. It will charge whatever the market can bear (or whatever it can get away with).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
that's a great point, and actually something the FCC (FTC?) should take notice of. Competition would result in price reduction according to cost of service. If Comcast is now providing cost or usage data (which should be translatable to cost) and they don't provide reduced price options to customers, it's demonstrating the fact that the current price fixing structure is more than just a theory.
Re: (Score:2)
is isn't about fairness or network congestion, it is about making as much money as possible, nothing more.
I read somewhere that making as much money as possible is the whole point of capitalism. Perhaps I misunderstood.
The problem here is not their policy, but their dishonesty about it. It's as if a restaurant advertised an all-you-can-eat buffet, but gave you a hard time if you ate more than they liked.
Or maybe the problem is stupidity. The ISPs are stupid because they refuse to admit that not all customers use them in a way that's consistent with their business model. And many users are stupid because they th
Convenient (Score:2, Insightful)
"Here's a fake metric that has no meaningful relation to what we're going to bill you for."
On a side note pfsense keeps track of this for you, and I'm fairly certain the majority of those cheap shit Linksys or Dlink "routers" do as well. You can even match them to your billing cycle. Yay.
Re: (Score:2)
That won't help you all that much. Not all traffic contributes to your usage for the purposes of billing. For example, on Internode in Australia, downloading from Internode's software mirror archive or watching ABC streaming TV doesn't contribute to billed usage, so you'd need to do some funky configuration of your router to account for that.
or... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm sure you will be really successful arguing that you are at 249gb when they show you at 251.
Comcast has always been know for their level-headed, even-handed approach to customer service.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
It's all about timing (Score:5, Funny)
Re:It's all about timing (Score:4, Interesting)
Haha, I'm currently at Penn State. They just upped the bandwidth limit this year - we now get a whole 10GB :)
And yea, there are all kinds of ways to get around the system. I'm not sure about Comcast and how they're measuring it, but Penn State only measured bandwidth out of their network - and they also had a proxy run by 'Academic Services and Emerging Technology', so people always just use that. Since your traffic is only going to the proxy, which is on the PSU network, anything that goes through that proxy doesn't count against your limit. And then there's always the wireless network - they try to make it unavailable in the residence halls, but you can get it in a lot of them, and they don't count your bandwidth on the wireless network.
As a final thought: What I thought they meant when I read the article was that they were creating a physical broadband meter. That I would actually think would be a good idea. I mean if you're going to limit how much people can use, you should give them a simple way to measure it. And what's better than something similar to the water/gas/electric meter they're already used to? Of course it'd be inside near their computer, but if you're going to limit or charge for bandwidth, that's the only fair thing to do.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
10GB? I call that "Thursday afternoon with nothing to do."
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Haha, I know. But last year it was 4GB. Now _that_ was painful.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yea, I'm at UP. The literature says 4GB, but it's been increased, they just haven't updated that yet.
http://www.collegian.psu.edu/archive/2009/12/27/university_doubles_bandwidth_l.aspx [psu.edu]
Also go to the rescom 'bandwidth used' page - the scale now goes up to 10, rather than 4.
Re: (Score:2)
It would be much cooler if they turned the bandwidth up to 11.
Re: (Score:2)
I remember back when I was on another ADSL provider that had pretty strict limits (10 GB a month a few years ago), me and some friends that were on the same provider would push that limit as far as we could. They had a traffic meter that reset at midnight on the first of the month, and if you went over 10 GB (up+down) you were set back to below dialup speeds. The good part was they could only change your speed when you weren't connected, and you could stay online for 36 hours before your connection was brok
Re: (Score:2)
I would anticipate this will only encourage similar behavior.
I expect a similar ultimate result - more bandwidth usage - but for a different reason. People don't have to worry about going over the limit without realizing it - they no longer have to keep any sort of margin of error. They're free to use every last drop of service they're paying for without worry of accidentally going over and getting punished.
I've had, uhh, "husky" friends who went on diet and exercise regiments that worked quite well *before* they started counting calories and setting hard limits
Sounds about right. (Score:4, Informative)
Basically, they're saying for 5% of the price of a T1 you get 5% the capacity over a month.
So, continuing on about the tenth year in a row, I continue find it very hard to give a shit.
Re: (Score:2)
I also get 5% of the reliability of a T1 line I guess?
I wish...
Re: (Score:2)
Not to mention fishermen. They're getting the fish for free out of the sea. Why do they have to charge us for them?
Seriously, I'm in favor of asking probing question of companies like Com
Re: (Score:2)
Not to support Comcast, or anything, but the easy solution has always been: if you need business-connection quality, buy a business connection!
I have Charter. Some people have trouble with them. However, I never have. I've always had a business connection through them. I get 10Mbps up, 1Mbps down, with excellent customer support, and a static IP; I pay just under $100/month for this connection.
I'm sure you can get faster or cheaper connections elsewhere, but here's the kicker: they don't care if I satu
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
But your neighbor, with the same provider, might not be getting any faster service.
A couple years ago, I realized that my download speed was a lot crappier than the 10Mbps that TW had been advertising (this was after some rollouts to boost speeds in the area from earlier levels). I ran some speed tests and learned I wasn't even getting 1Mbps at times. WTF?
Long story short, the modem I had wasn't capable of the new DO
it's not enough (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
I agree, they should break it down into broad categories
Email
Instant Messaging clients
Linux ISOs
Pron
Lolcats
WoW
Other
Re: (Score:2)
If ISPs tried to "itemize" your bandwidth people would complain about privacy.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Except that it's not so easy to summarize like that.
Also, no one I know needs an eye-opener like that.
Sorry, Comcast, but it's not enough (Score:3, Insightful)
This is just Comcast trying to legitimize their practice cutting off users who exceed their data transfer cap.
I suppose it's better than not being told how close you are to having your service suspended for a year, but I'd prefer it if their service were clearly advertised as metered service and had reasonable fees for overages instead of suspending users' accounts.
What I've learned.. (Score:2, Interesting)
So what? (Score:3, Informative)
For all this handwringing, I've never seen this feature on my Comcast account. Yes, I live in Portland.
Maybe it's because I pay for the higher tier?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
For all this handwringing, I've never seen this feature on my Comcast account. Yes, I live in Portland.
Same here! I'm not sure why... I never bothered to call and find out. We (myself and two roommates) pay for high-speed internet, standard cable+HBO, 1 HD box and 2 SD boxes. I don't think we've ever gone over the limit, we've never been contacted about such a thing or had our connection throttled back.
Good for them, but... (Score:2)
Exactly. (Score:2)
I'm on Comcast. Tomato reports the following usage:
2009-12 105.87 GB
2009-11 546.60 GB
2009-10 299.63 GB
2009-09 248.94 GB
2009-08 222.14 GB
2009-07 76.76 GB
FWIW, I've yet to hear a peep from Comcast about the months that exceed 250 GB.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
They won't bother you unless they're having performance problems on that node, and even then they only bother the top n% (not sure what n is) which is not necessarily 250GB.
250GB is just the floor for "we won't bother anyone under this amount".
Trust me, Comcast doesn't WANT to lose customers, and won't get rid of you unless you're causing real, actual problems. They may be greedy at times but they're not entirely stupid. $40 a month is better than $0.
Not using all 250? (Score:3, Insightful)
Now users can band together and sell off their "quota credits" to each other the way corporations do with carbon credits.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
WOW... (Score:3, Insightful)
Less than 1% use that bandwidth and it affects their network, isn't that absurd? Isn't that an indication of a terrible network? I honestly don't know the answers to these questions, but if you can't support 1% of your users at that level then IMO you have a crap network.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I hope someone at Comcast finds your post and offers you a job, you sound like the network architect they've been waiting for!
Re: (Score:2)
lulz...yeah well I honestly don't know but it seems really bad to me.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I guess anything you personally can't do must be pretty easy, huh?
Emphasis on very few people (Score:2)
For the fraction of less than 1 percent of our customers who are concerned...
For the very extremely low and small fraction of far less than 1 percent, seriously there are like so few of you that I can't believe I'm issuing a press release, I mean I could just walk around to the insanely lonely few of you who are concerned about this thing... I'm sorry, I just want to emphasize how little this policy affects anyone besides like a small handfull of our customers. Because so few of you will be affected by this trivial little thing. Seriously, there aren't many of you. Lets not make
Freakonomics (Score:5, Interesting)
Perhaps those who aren't using 250GB a month should take it as a challenge.
You're not kidding. There's a story in Freakonomics about a daycare center that had problems with people not picking their kids up on time. So they figured they would charge a fee; penalize people for leaving their kids and they'll stop, right? Instead, more people started showing up late. Turns out that paying a fee assuaged peoples guilt for not showing up on time. Before they felt like jerks for being late, now they could just pay a fee and feel better. Moral of the story, incentives don't always work the way you think they will.
So when you give people this new information, what's going to happen? 90% of people are not using that much bandwidth already. Comcast is giving them a chart that says "look how little bandwidth you're using, you could use a lot more and not get in trouble". Some of those people are going to start using more bandwith, and I'll bet those people will more than offset the minority of heavy users who might curtail their usage.
The real solution to this problem is for Comcast, and every other ISP to invest more into infrastructure.
Step 2 solved at last! (Score:2)
2. Charge parents a late fee. Even more parents arrive late.
3. PROFIT!!!!!!!!!!
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
So they figured they would charge a fee; penalize people for leaving their kids and they'll stop, right? Instead, more people started showing up late. Turns out that paying a fee assuaged peoples guilt for not showing up on time. Before they felt like jerks for being late, now they could just pay a fee and feel better. Moral of the story, incentives don't always work the way you think they will.
I'm not sure I agree with the moral of that story (as it is presented in your comment) - the real problem (from a business perspective) is that parents picking up kids late means lost revenue in terms of having to keep a proportional number of employees (possibly paying OT) to the number of kids that haven't been picked up yet. So by charging a fee, I can at least cover my costs of retaining my employees, if not charge a little extra to make a bigger margin on the truant parents.
Similarly, Comcast could us
Re: (Score:2)
Similarly, Comcast could use the behavior everyone is hypothesizing to show that they need more bailout money because, "Gosh, Mr./Mrs. Congress Critter - We've been trying to implement better connectivity, but usage keeps going way, way up! We need more money to increase infrastructure!" At which point they pocket 99% of any corporate welfare money they get, and use the remaining 1% to increase the cap by 25GB/month.
That's exactly what they are doing. The taxpayer paid the industry 200 Billion [pbs.org] for 45 mega
Re: (Score:2)
That 200 billion is composed of higher rates and tax credits, which means they weren't paid by the taxpayer at all.
Nonsense. The higher telecom rates were paid by every taxpayer who uses telecom services, which is pretty much everyone. As for the tax credits, every tax credit is paid for by present and/or future taxpayers unless it comes with a corresponding cut in spending (which never happens).
Re: (Score:2)
>The real solution to this problem is for Comcast, and every other ISP to invest more into infrastructure.
Comcast's residential pricing in Chicago is 59 dollars plus a 5 dollar modem rental (this is accurate as of today, as I just called and ordered). This is 64 dollars a month and because its residential its capped at 250gigs. Comcast's 6mbps (w 12mbps burst) Business class service is 59.99, with no cap, and includes the modem rental. The only difference is that they make you sign a 12month contract.
So
Re: (Score:2)
How would you handle one guy using 99% of it?
Re: (Score:2)
I think you missed the entire story there.
They found that if the fee was too low then parents felt fine showing up late and paying the fee. However, if you raise the fee high enough then they don't show up late anymore. Hence the $2 per minute your late fees at daycare centers that are standard around here.
Don't think Comcast didn't figure out the second part of that one.
The solution to parents showing up late (Score:2)
There's a story in Freakonomics about a daycare center that had problems with people not picking their kids up on time.
If you offer care from 9 to 5, at 5 o' clock, take the kids that haven't been picked up, walk them out to the curb, tell them to stand there until their parents pick them up, lock up the place and go home.
No kid would want that to happen again, so they'd beg their parents to be there on time. And no parent would want this to happen again either.
Maybe it's reckless endangerment of children. Maybe it's just a plain old dick move. But I think it'd work.
The general point: if you make someone else's behaviour
With mac os updates pushing 1gb and windows ones b (Score:2)
With mac os updates pushing 1gb and windows ones being big as well. People with more then one system are more likey to be download a lot. also game and other app updates are not as small as they used be.
Then you have a lot of flash loaded web sites and more.
also they seem to count arp traffic as part of the cap as well.
What is the cap on a business cable internet plan?
So much for that (Score:2)
So much for being able to stump their overuse calls by saying "oh sure, so how do I check my usage?" I'll need a new excuse for ignoring their cap.
I was wondering... (Score:2)
I don't download pirated movies or music - but I do stream a fair number of TV shows and movies (Netflix), and occasionally have to pull down pretty large files on those days I work from home. So I've legitimately wondered where on the continuum we fell, and have been waiting for this since they announced it over a year ago.
But heck, all that wondering and our household's only been using about 50 gigs a month, according to the meter.
So now I guess I'll start leaving that Tor relay on all the time, and maybe
Re: (Score:2)
I was wondering the same...exactly how much WAS I using (I'm on Cox cable with a similar 250gb cap). Turns out about my max use is about 25G per week (reported via the untangle firewall box). Several Netflix movies, multiple pcs worth of updates, lots of YouTube, torrents, etc.
To more than double our monthly usage would be rather hard. I'd have to make a dedicated effort to exceed 250Gb in a 30 d
Already implemented by Telus in Canada (Score:2)
A Little Late for Me, But... (Score:2)
I've been waiting for this forever because I always assumed I was right up against the limit and it really kept me from downloading as much as I would have liked for years. But I recently added a Tomato flashed router and I now realize I can download 3 or even 4 times what I've been grabbing. So my downloads have gone up a bit since then, but only by a little. The real limiting factor for me now is drive space. That includes the primary and two or more backups. I'm swimming in ram, haven't needed to update
250 what? (Score:2, Interesting)
Dear US, (Score:3, Insightful)
If the metre is half way decent this will be a valuable tool in tracking and assessing your own download habits, but given the level of competence displayed by US telco's something tells me this wont be the case.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Not to burst the bashing bubble, but this is more like falling behind, not catching up. We're getting knocked down to your level is all.
Re: (Score:2)
Giant "Whoosh" for missing the joke.
Print the usage on the fucking bill? (Score:2)
I still opt to get paper statements from Comcast because I love killing trees and it takes them longer to get my money. But print or online, if they are going to cap usage and nag users about their useage, why not print the bar graph on the top of Page 1 on the PDF version and the print version of the bill?
My electric company does it. My gas company does it. My water utility does it. Comcast is just another utility bill really. Print the stupid usage on the bill and call it a day.
Why do I need to
I want a meter that shows my connection quality (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Whenever I go to view mine it always comes up to 0.
Which either means that the system doesn't work, or my computer can majestically use the internet without any bandwidth cost at all.
Either way - if they complain that I go over, I'll just take my printscreen and be like "NO I'M NOT. LOOK!"
Re: (Score:2)
Which either means that the system doesn't work, or my computer can majestically use the internet without any bandwidth cost at all.
Probably the latter, because come on.
Re:Old... (Score:4, Interesting)
Transpacific bandwidth (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Monopoly rents (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
i dont see why Comcast has taken so long to give its users access to a monitoring tool.
Because they didn't have a cap before. With no limit, knowing how much you've used has limited utility.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
The last gasp of a big rustbelt bell's and other telcos.
Start your own community efforts and by pass the evil telco with their living in "Australia" packet profits.
If your state has a ban, unban it
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/01/municipal-fiber-needs-more-fdr-localism-fewer-state-bans.ars [arstechnica.com]
Run for any local office, then move up your state political ladder, exposing the lock in and lock out of telco op
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
On the Technical side, this isn't any major feat. You're correct.
However, this is a tool that they'll start using to socially condition people into tiered plans. Imagine an ad from comcast in the near future, "Be Green! Lower your monthly usage! To find out how, check our Tips and Tricks section, and track your online usage using our 'IntelliGreen Online Usage Tracker'*"
*use of the IntelliGreen Online Usage Tracker will count toward your monthly usage cap at 1/2 the byte rate because it's Green!
Re: (Score:2)
Back to T1s, DS1s, and unbridled fun.
Maybe NBC downloads are exempt.
Re: (Score:2)
that's my personal favorite these sights not only use tons of ads, javascript, and images so they come in at a couple of megabytes to down load, they are often on the companies servers in a mass pool in another state.
the next thing they like to say is that emails are small. I guess they don't get spam which contains images (which if you download to your local email program gets charged to your account. I guess they don't get up mouse over ads that are a half a meg in size.
the web of 1999 is what comcast i
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)