digg

Join DiggAbout

Digg Townhall Tonight!
Tune into the live Digg townhall tonight at 5:00pm PST/8:00pm EST.

Comcast disconnects users for using too much bandwidth

consumeraffairs.com — But they refuse to tell anyone how much is too much. Just don't cross the invisible line, users told.

show profanity settings
expand all
  • KMye, on 10/10/2007, -3/+123This is a ***** policy by Comcast, but I'm betting 10-1 Frank Carreiro had an unsecured wireless network, and didn't know he was actually paying for half the neighborhood's internet access.
    • nixonrichard, on 10/10/2007, -5/+178Yes, I have a feeling "NETGEAR1004" in my apartment complex will meet a similar fate . . . he's been downloading 20gb HD movies lately . . . I'm guessing.
    • ISIfunded911, on 10/10/2007, -49/+8This is not *****. This is capitalism. Wall Street dictates the perpetual growth of the profits. If you are capitalist, maybe you should reconsider.
      There are millions of examples proving that capitalism is a pervert system. Just watch The Corporation!
      • SAOSiN, on 10/10/2007, -14/+3what does that have to do with comcast?
        • ISIfunded911, on 10/10/2007, -9/+4Miss South Carolina?
          OK, I explain to you because you are cute: Comcast wants to save bandwidth to cut costs to make more money to make Wall Street happy so that the CEO of Comcast can keep on making so much money up there at the top instead of being fired by Wall Street if Comcast's profits had remained flat if he had not changed anything and let people enjoy the internet at max speed and uncapped bandwidth.
          • potp, on 10/10/2007, -1/+12Then stop labeling your plans as unlimited. Just plain out say it.. X speed with a limit of Y GB. Otherwise they are cheating customer. When you go to an all you can eat buffet the owner cant throw you out for eating too much. This is complete BS on comcast part.
          • rarson, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5This is just a hidden effect of inflation. I could explain it with a lengthy response, but suffice to say that decreasing the amount of product that the same dollar gets you is a sneaky way that the massive inflation of our money gets hidden in order to keep the public clueless of the financial insanity of the Federal Reserve. This is what happens when the Fed does stupid things, like adding $300 billion of worthless printed paper to the economy in just two days. Comcast gives you less bandwidth, the size of cereal boxes is decreased, less food in the same packaging, all these things happen while prices stay the same to fool us into thinking our money is not being devalued.

            Read more, and a more thorough explanation, here: http://dailyreckoning.com/Writers/Mogambo/DREssays/MG081607.html
        • twomeyw23334, on 10/10/2007, -7/+4In capitalism, companies make money by providing a wanted or needed service. If they offer poor or unsatisfactory service, competition can come in and fill that gap. ISIfunded911 is a conspiracy theorist who thinks corporations main goal is not to make money, but screw people as much as possible. Unless we are talking about a prostitution business here, that is usually not the best way to make money, and therefore, make Wall Street happy.
        • achoo5000, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6@twomeyw23334

          Oh yeah, you know of another company offering cable internet in your/my area?
          • therightclique, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1there are several in my area, but they're all ***** too.
        • ISIfunded911, on 10/10/2007, -4/+2twomey...I believe you do not realize how much corrupt capitalism is. Ever heard of corrupt judges everywhere in the US? Of corrupt politicians everywhere even in Washington? And not a few: most of them! Ever heard of Enron? And what about the food industry that kills so many people each year? Capitalists at the top totally despise us, and they do kill us to make billions.
        • twomeyw23334, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0ISIfunded911: ". Ever heard of corrupt judges everywhere in the US? Of corrupt politicians everywhere even in Washington?" Yes, government is corrupt, that's why I want them out of business and why I support a free market. Keep arguing you just make me sound smarter.

          Enron, yeah, what happened to Enron again? Capitalism working as usual. A business that makes money by screwing people can not stay in business for long in a free market.
      • Xuvious, on 10/10/2007, -5/+11ISIfunded911.....Yes, Socialism and Marxism has proven to be better than capitalism. Unless, of course, you look into those countries that have those systems. But as long as you keep your head buried in the sand your train of non-thought won't make you have to think harder. I mean, capitalism made America the richest Country the world has ever seen. At least until your type of people started mucking it all up with your Socialism.
        • CatalystGhost, on 10/10/2007, -6/+2That's why communism was supposed to be a world revolution. Get rid of money, end of problem.
        • sjaaksken, on 10/10/2007, -5/+4I wonder who taught you history and politics? Apparently you have the idea that communism is the same as socialism, that there's nothing in between extreme capitalism and extreme communism? I mean WTF how ignorant can you be...

          "I mean, capitalism made America the richest Country the world has ever seen"
          Explain 'richest'. It's not the the most wealthy country, it's not the most healthy country (at all), it's not the safest, .... The 'richest' countries over the centuries where those with COLONIES. That means they send their troops to a foreign country, invaded it, explored their natural resources and sold it for high profits. Oh wait, IRAQ anyone?

          Capitalism is a system that can work as is communism- and by that I mean the communism you can find in the famous sociologist's books: Marx, Engel, Ricardo. The communism applied by Stalin, the USSR and Mao is ABSOLUTELY NOT the implication of communism senso stricto, but more that of dictators gone mad.... In the same way you could argue capitalism doesn't work (Pinochet, South Africa, ...) where same dictatorship and it's ridiculous rules reigned ...

          And FYI in a democracy there should be a fine balance between all the aspects of a society: corporations, social networks, health care, privacy, civil rights: you name it. It's foolish to think you can keep everything in balance with capitalism alone. Quite frankly the idea that everything can be regulated by the need for money comes close to absolutism, just like communism thinks that everything can be regulated by the government...
        • sctwp09, on 10/10/2007, -7/+1You are a complete *****. Communism != socialism. Socialism allows for partially free markets, communism, is meant for complete government control, therefore you suck.
        • DaffyDuck, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2sctwp09: "Socialism refers to a broad array of doctrines or political movements that envisage a socio-economic system in which property and the distribution of wealth are subject to control by the community[1] for the purposes of increasing social and economic equality and cooperation."
      • twomeyw23334, on 10/10/2007, -8/+4This is not capitalism. If you don't like the service, get FIOS. The problem is most places don't allow FIOS because Comcast has a local government granted monopoly. That is NOT FREE MARKETS. You have no idea what you are talking about. The Internet you love so much was created BECAUSE of capitalism. Corporations give you a product you love and then you think it is your right, and you should get that product for free, give me a break. Move to Cuba, I bet they have awesome Internet service and free health care!
      • ISIfunded911, on 10/10/2007, -8/+3It is funny how so many people cannot think outside of the tight boundaries wrapped around their minds by TV.
        Another choice besides capitalism, socialism, and communism, is...democracy! Corporations run democratically, by people elected by the employees (50%) and the citizens (50%). Now corporations are run by people elected by rich but still greedy people from Wall Street. Wouldn't you like to elect the CEO of Comcast and to vote for a policy that favors you and the people who actually use Comcast's services? Same for GM and Ford: you could vote for the electric car! Same for Microsoft: you could vote for open source and/or the GPL! Same for all polluting corporations: you could vote for cleaner production instead of more profits!
        • twomeyw23334, on 10/10/2007, -3/+7In capitalism you vote with your dollar. People and corporations who provide better service and products get more "votes."
        • ISIfunded911, on 10/10/2007, -6/+2twomeyw23334, you are very optimistic when you say you vote with your dollar.
          I gave examples of things that corporations do or don't do that you do not influence with you dollar. Voting with your dollar is mostly a myth. In great part because there is propaganda everywhere instead of information, to fool people, and that works! Read Edward Bernay's book called Propaganda if you do not believe me. And then there is a huge time gap between the time you think you vote with your dollar and the time some change happens...and what guarantees you it is the change you want?
          Voting ourselves for precise policies now would be so much more efficient!
          • Euler2718, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1So in your plan, rather than people being corrupted by propaganda and voting with their dollars, they are corrupted by propaganda and vote with actual votes. And pointing to a single books just proves how simple minded you are. "Look at this book, its the complete truth and it will enlighten you to the true path."
        • twomeyw23334, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7ok, so I worked my butt in life and started my own company from scratch. Now you want to be able to come in and vote me off my company? You are an elitist. I know your type, and you think people are all getting screwed because of "propaganda" and you are an enlightened one. You know better than the rest of us so therefore you should be able to control or mandate others' activities. Capitalism provides what people want. If people want to watch news about Paris Hilton, that's what they get, or they change the channel and the station suffers ratings until they give people what they want. You can argue all day that people are idiots and how "free" your mind is but I DONT CARE, that doesn't give you a right to dictate / mandate / etc. You sound just as greedy to me as the Wall Street types you love to crucify. If people were "voting" to run companies anyways, what makes you believe their votes wouldn't be based on propagand? (people are idiots remember). Your own logic defeats you.
        • ISIfunded911, on 10/10/2007, -4/+1You are a narcissistic capitalist. The people of your kind usually cannot admit that soon they will die, that this planet and humanity do not need them. You also cannot understand that you are only a ridiculously tiny part of society and of this planet. Without society you do not exist and your company does not exist. You owe a million times more to society and to this planet than they owe you. So you should abide by the interests of Earth and society through a democratic process. Can you become wise, or cannot you only see you and your company as the center of the World?
        • twomeyw23334, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3ISIfunded911, I know I will never be able to understand like you. You are truly an enlightened elitist. Hopefully I am smart enough to someday be able to try and dictate / mandate etc. other peoples lives and call it democracy. As I am obviously a dumb-ass, I will just live and let live and not try to control everyone else for now.

          I DO provide service to society, by the way, otherwise people wouldn't pay me for my services would they? I realize I am just a tiny part of this planet. I am not the one trying to dictate everyone elses LIFE. I'm not the elitist here. If you want to change society why don't you actually do it instead of trying to force other people to do it?
      • teethman, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6If the common people knew how to run it, they would start their own. FIOS is now buying their way in some places, but law prohibits them from providing a service to where government have designated Comcast. This is a classic monopoly. This is not capitalism.
      • teethman, on 10/10/2007, -5/+1And this is referring to cable TV service. As far as internet goes, I haven't looked into that because I love Comcast. Excellent service. A+++ would do business with again.
        • AlienShe, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0My boyfriend and his roommate have been repeatedly ripped off and jerked around by Comcast.

          As far as I'm concerned they can go suck a fat one.
      • TenebrousX, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4it IS a ***** policy. The business's requirement to make profit doesn't mean whatever they do is ok with the consumer. In an ideal market, there would be competition among businesses, but the technical monopoly conditions in our system allow for a single ISP in most areas.
    • knowyourrights, on 10/10/2007, -6/+5I've heard that the cutoff is 100 GB per month. After that you get put on a blacklist and your network traffic starts getting monitored. With bittorrents sucking so much bandwidth, there's very high likelihood that they'll stop charging monthly rates and start putting caps, i.e. 100GB and less is still the normal rate, but after that it's extra.
      • combatchuck, on 10/10/2007, -0/+10The "invisible line" has been stated to be around 200 GB, posted on many articles right here on Digg.
    • Buckiller, on 10/10/2007, -8/+1mac filtering ftw
      • shakestheclown, on 10/10/2007, -2/+9MAC filtering is ineffective.

        It is about as useful as setting a Windows screensaver password.
        • microchp, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1WEP is also useless. WPA-II + MAC + radius + disable SSID + port knocking to a linux router is the way to go.
        • NinjaJoey, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Nice, but probably overkill in 99% of situations.
    • Calcularius, on 10/10/2007, -0/+10And if you call Comcast and ask them to help you secure your wireless network, they won't help you because they "don't support third party equipment."
      • ScionX, on 10/10/2007, -5/+5why should they set up your network for you? You bought the router, you set it up.
        • peestandingup, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Because you pay for the "installation" when the tech comes to your home. Meaning all they do is flip a damn switch outside & run a coaxial cable to your TV. Yeah, thats worth it. *rolls eyes*

          Everyone uses routers these days. They supply the modem & support other 3rd party modems, so they should AT LEAST TRY to help you when you have network trouble, instead of just saying "oh, we dont support routers. Sorry." Its THEIR service, no?? And they say that no matter what. So many times, the router isnt the problem.

          Besides, if they helped out, they would be a lot less instances of people running up their bandwidth because of an unsecured network.

          They suck.
        • JStory01, on 10/10/2007, -4/+0i never knew in 5 plus years of installation that there was a magical switch i was supposed to throw outside. how could you do a self installation if there was such a switch. even the power company doesn't throw a switch when they install service. and why on earth would any company setup a router for a customer when a home networking service is being sold by the same company. that's like bringing your own fries to McDonald's and asking to cook them for free since you bought a hamburger
    • Tempest811, on 10/10/2007, -2/+50[This comment has been removed by Comcast to preserve bandwidth]
      • damentz, on 10/10/2007, -4/+1[Irrelevant information by Comcast to make you feel guilty]
    • Bodhinature, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Maybe that's why they keep getting bought out by their competitor's. I had comcast for a while and their service was *****, their staff incompetent. When Time Warner took over the area I was automatically switched. After some fits and starts while they changed the infrastructure, I've had perfect service ever since.
      • microchp, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2The circle will never end. Comcast used to be excite @ home here... When it was, their billing dept sucked sweaty monkey balls, but their network engineering team rocked. Now that it is Comcast, their billing works just fine but the network has gone to hell. So the next guy will buy it and all my packets will be tagged as OSPF or something... who knows. :-D
    • shifty2, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4I hate to be the bunghole who ruins it for everyone, but I just read the Comcast service agreement from their website and they do note that excessive bandwidth usage means to "not restrict, inhibit, interfere with, disrupt, degrade, or impede "
      http://www.comcast.net/terms/use.jsp
      ctrl + f and type "bandwidth"
      i canceled my comcast internet when they sent me letters saying I was using too much bandwidth. I handle all the ISO images of Autodesk and Microstation products for my company and i have to make network images all the time for distribution to other sites across the country. easily 200+GB/month.

      I got FiOS and never looked back.
      • NgrHader, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1And you are supposed to be using your broadband connection for 'consumer' use by the way, you should have read the agreement. There is a business account that you can get that has a restriction on bandwidth
        • shifty2, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2i forgot to mention that this is from my home and thus I do not qualify for a "business" connection.
  • peterjmag, on 10/10/2007, -7/+31This guy'd better have a pretty damn healthy supply of porn with that kind of usage...
  • AndrewDB, on 01/10/2008, -6/+57So this is why my connection has been blipping off when I have LAN parties in my house.

    What the ***** comcast? I've got a business line cable modem and my modem can't even support four computers using the same amount of bandwidth at the same damn time?

    That's it, when I'm done moving to another ISP...

    Christ, The only other option in town is SBC Yahoo... Crap. :/
    • loker269, on 10/10/2007, -0/+11If it is actually Comcast's business class service then you should not have to worry...
      • AndrewDB, on 01/10/2008, -1/+2It is, but my modem still blips off time and time again, for no reason at all.
        • loker269, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5I would get that looked at....because I am able to run 20+ computers for LAN parties on my residential modem....maybe a bad modem?
          • AndrewDB, on 01/10/2008, -2/+11Good idea. I think I'll call them later, and wait on hold for about 2 hours. :/
          • sLydE, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9Have you tried turning it off and on again?
          • AndrewDB, on 01/10/2008, -2/+1Yep, and I'm still having the same issues, that leads me to think it's this limitation *****.
      • microchp, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I have comcast business, 8/768, 5 static ips, reverse dns, and the last 2 weeks they have been screwing with my connection about 3 times an hour. Online gaming is almost impossible. I dont even download much.
    • knowyourrights, on 10/10/2007, -2/+28Patience, if Google wins the 700MHz band, there will be many changes.
    • MaxPayne3476, on 10/10/2007, -0/+35Well at your LAN parties, are you actually LAN'n or are you all just playing on the internet together. If you're actaully in a LAN, then there is nothing to do with Comcast. It's just your router.
      • AndrewDB, on 01/10/2008, -2/+2I have one Modem, hooked up to a switch, that breaks the internet into several different streams so that all my friends can access the net equally, and one of which leads up to a Wi-Fi port, that broadcasts out around my house for those who use laptops with wi-fi cards. :)
      • AndrewDB, on 01/10/2008, -2/+2This leads me to believe it's not the router..
        • spectre_25gt, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6The chances that you're able to get multiple DHCP leases from a residential ISP like Comcast are next to nill. They often charge 5 -10 dollars extra monthly for an extra IP and will often try to sell you another modem to accomplish it. You've got a router somewhere. Oh, and by the tone of the article, if Comcast was dropping your connection, you wouldn't get it back for a year.
        • CodeCobalt, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1yeah its definitely not comcast. You either have a crappy modem or your network just isn't meant for that kind of usage.... most likely your network. Not to mention that if you are "truely" having a LAN (LOCAL AREA NETWORK) comcast has absolutely nothing to di with it... its your network in the house.
    • nazadus, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4I use SBC's service and I've never really had a problem. Then again I have business class with 5 static IP's... I think I've uploaded a 600GB of pr0n, mostly because I just leave it running during the day. I let uTorrents scheduler handle everything. I've never even gotten a blip from SBC/ATT.
      • spectre_25gt, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1They're just as bad as Comcast when it comes to douchebag moves. ATT sold me a 3mb line when I'm too far from the switching station to qualify for anything higher than their 1.5 meg. It's led to dropped connections and general frustration throughout the house. Pings would be fine, but the connection was still *****, leading me to believe it was a problem with my router. 6 months later, I find out my lines are ***** and ATT ripped me off. I would have gone with another ISP had they been straight with me in the beginning.
    • JT114881, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3I have consumer Comcast because its the only choice in hicksville, MA. It sucks to be forced into something because it's the only choice you have. ***** going back to 56Gay
  • 10goto10, on 10/10/2007, -23/+239Inaccurate... I'm on Comcast and I'm leeching movies full time, and I'm not being discon
    • skidme, on 10/10/2007, -61/+3How fast is your speed?
    • SAOSiN, on 10/10/2007, -60/+2For all you know, he could be leeching almost a terabyte a month. i doubt you're doing that, and like someone said above, he might have a unsecured wireless network.
    • InWake, on 10/10/2007, -3/+126You two didn't understand the joke? Wow.
      • darksyde, on 10/10/2007, -0/+10It takes a better mind to understand subtle humor on the internet. :)
    • JacNet, on 10/10/2007, -19/+2You just did.
    • MtheoryX, on 10/10/2007, -17/+1hilarious!
    • knowyourrights, on 10/10/2007, -26/+0Where do you guys rip your movies? I like Axxo's movies, but he doesn't have everything, any other recommendations?
      • Modulo, on 10/10/2007, -0/+26After we tell you where we "rip" our movies, maybe we can also tell you the secret place where we take the pot, hep-cat. We can get all "stoned out" "man"
      • JoshuaH, on 10/10/2007, -1/+14From the store shelves. It helps if you run too.
        • loganisamonkey, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4You don't have to run faster than the cop chasing you, just faster than the guy stealing the same movie next to you.
      • spyd3rweb, on 10/10/2007, -5/+1yes, tell the secret cop where to dl all the movies.... great idea
        • MavRevMatt, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1He's not a secret cop if we know it.
      • pifko123, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8If you go to www.Google.com and press Alt+F4 it brings up a list of all the best sites for downloading movie rips.
    • chrisneed, on 10/10/2007, -9/+1just because it does not happen to you doesnt mean it isn't happening. I downloaded lots on comcast and had my service suspended. I called up to find out why I didn't have access anymore...1st rep didnt know why figured they were working on the link scheduled a dispatch to come out the next day...called again when the contractor didn't show and then was told my account had been suspened. sent to security and told i had exceeded their bandwidth allowed...asked how much was allow..wouldnt tell me a figure...told me to download my own program to monitor but what am i monitoring if i dont know what is TOO much..comcast is idiotic as well as most of their employees..god knows if i had another internet solution i would move in a minute!! complete idiots.
  • skidme, on 10/10/2007, -12/+4I think Comcast has already admitted that the line is 200 GB per month. Realistically, not many people would use all of that on just regular browsing and email. This is more aimed at pirates.The smart thing to do is to monitor your usage.
    • loker269, on 10/10/2007, -0/+10I think that was just some CSR who didn't know what they were doing.....Comcast's inviso cap varies for each and every node and area....so just because its 200GB's at this one does not mean it is 200GB's at this other one....could be 500 GB's....
      • jjesusfreak01, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2Remember that cable users do in fact share a line, as opposed to DSL users, who each have a dedicated connection. That means if a large number of people were using excessive amounts of bandwidth, it could slow the network down. Of course, with docsis 3 nearing release, the cable companies need to upgrade their equipment to handle the extra bandwidth, because very soon, 50mbit is going to be standard speed.
    • Herolint, on 10/10/2007, -4/+50If I'm paying $50.00 a month for unlimited usage, I should not have to monitor my usage. If companies are going to advertise unlimited usage for a certain price per month, then that is damn well what they should give you.
      • loker269, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9You aren't, Comcast does not advertise unlimited anymore and has not done so in years...
    • jokerthief, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3I pirate a ***** load and don't come close to 200 GB per month.
    • foxhoundadmin, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6why are y'all digging skidme's comment down!? HE'S RIGHT (according to digg (which might as well mean he's wrong, but so what)!!

      http://digg.com/tech_news/Comcast_admits_bandwidth_cap_200_GB_month_and_is_a_moving_target
      • datdamonfoo, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2You use parentheses like Bob Dole uses both arms.
      • macslut, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4He may be right in that Comcast caps at 200GB, but the Digg down may be the "the smart thing to do would be to monitor your usage". While that may even be good advice, the answer we were looking for was, "Comcast should advertise 'up to 200GB' a month' instead of 'unlimited' or actually give us unlimited downloading".
    • psykiv, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1There are months that I hit well over 500gb and I havn't been cut off yet. :crosses fingers:

      I have noticed that when I do download or upload a lot for a few days at a time (non-stop) my internet does get cut off for a few hours. Just this morning it was out for about 3 hours because I left it seeding uncapped all night long.
      • darksyde, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I didn't even have to use the internet for it to get cut off. The line into my place was in good condition, the modem was new, the router was top o' the line, and yet I'd be disconnected from Comcast servers for anywhere from 3 to 6 hours at a time. They said it was my hardware, but this same hardware works just fine with the competing ISP.
  • neiltc13, on 10/10/2007, -25/+4It's obviously excessive usage that leads to this and it will actually affect the quality of other customer's connections if you keep downloading CONSTANTLY.

    People who do this clearly don't deserve an internet connection at all. How can you possibly use 200GB in one month?
    • postal21, on 10/10/2007, -2/+14these days? easy as pie.

      comes down to dont advertise as "unlimited" if its "limited".
      • loker269, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Comcast has not advertised as unlimited in YEARS....
        • Herolint, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5When I bought my service YEARS ago, it was advertised as unlimited. That's what I expect.
        • loker269, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Even then it was advertised as unlimited access not unlimited use....there is a big difference....
          • jjesusfreak01, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1Whats the difference? Seems like if you get disconnected, your access is no longer unlimited. If I buy a 6mbit package, I should be able to download 6mbit, every second, every day, as long as I have the service.
    • aladin, on 10/10/2007, -1/+16use 200GB? You'd be surprised how easily I eat that.
    • bitemegates, on 10/10/2007, -1/+11You are an idiot. New to Internet? I'd recommend your parents hire a reading and comprehension tutor.
    • Krumm, on 10/10/2007, -0/+10Just because you don't use that much doesn't mean everyone who does is a terrorist - If you use something like Joost, and stream HD video (there are a lot more sites cropping up) then it soon mounts up.
      Add on a couple of users in one house and you can easily hit that.
    • patch6, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Have usenet access and a decent connection, and 200 GB will seem like too little.
      • pifko123, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0Keep in mind the 1st rule of Usenet my friend.
    • adooga, on 10/10/2007, -4/+2Pron, my friend - a whole lot of pron.
  • monkeyboy7706, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Had something similar with an isp in the UK. Was with Orange on an "unlimited plan" and got letters to inform me I had gone over 40gb in a month and threatening disconnection if I didn't reduce it.

    They have an elastic fair usage policy they can basically make whatever they want because they have only specified a FUP and not a set ammount.
    • drewpost, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Te thing with that is is that over here in the UK, bandwidth caps are in place on nearly all of the hi-speed providers. They like to advertise UNLIMITED* - Subject to fair use which I've seen as low as 40 GB a month (BT Broadband) There are a few providers, BE and Bulldog, that have VERY lenient policies but even they mention fair use...
    • chedabob, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Virgin Media provide a Usenet service, so capping usage would be pretty stupid.
  • BETA7, on 10/10/2007, -2/+11bandwidth caps are stupid but im glad im with rogers, i have their best package and its 50 bucks CAD a month and i get 10 mbit down 1mbit up along with a 100 gig bandwidth cap that isnt enforced unless u constantly go over it, but even then its like school where they give you warnings, then a slight suspension before fully restricting you haha.
    • rusty182004, on 10/10/2007, -0/+12ever tried using skype with Rogers? What good is a 100gig cap if they're constantly analyzing every packet you send or receive and arbitrarily blocking them?
      • JeremyBanks, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2As much as I hate Rogers, I've had no problems using Skype with them.
      • DeepBlade, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Rogers used to do the exact same thing. I had my cable internet disconnected for an entire week for using too much bandwidth. Their argument was that my "unlimited internet" plan was "unlimited, to the point where you don't disrupt the internet experience of others"....... So I just switched to Bell, and now after 2 year of Bell Sympatico, I'm with Teksavvy. Hopefully I will never have to go back to Rogers or Bell for anything.
        • Verdanic, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3I can't use Rogers because they threatened to take me to court over downloading pirated content. Well, that was the basis of it, anyways. I'm on Sympatico now on their $50-ish plan that does come with 'unlimited' bandwidth, but also comes slow as hell.

          What's your experience been like with Teksavvy?
    • JeremyBanks, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8Rogers is the only ISP in the world to throttle ALL ENCRYPTED TRAFFIC, not just BitTorrent. They also have some of the most appalling support of any company I've had the misfortune of dealing with. Also, what plan are you describing? Their largest consumer plan (at least here in Toronto) is 8.0 down/ 0.8 up (and you're lucky to get much more than half of that) for $56 (including modem rental).
      • smartssa, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3rogers now offers "Extreme Plus" for $99/mo -- 18 Mbps down (unknown up, i'd hope it's higher than 1Mbps tho).. i do agree tho, that there's no plan at 10 Mbps...
        • encrypter, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0its 18 down, 1 up...looked into it because I'm constantly running 4/5 voip lines along with 3 computers.
    • cquilliam, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7I have had numerous problems with Rogers...to name a few:

      1. Random disconnections. This has happened about 3 or 4 times, I get disconnected because they think no one lives here even though I pay my bills each month on time. THen when they hook me back up, they try and upsell a cable package to me.

      2. Packet analyzing. Makes skype useless, at least majority of decent bittorrent clients use encryption now, that helps.

      3. Selling my rogers email address. I went 9 months after my account was started before I knew my email address (i thought it was @rogers.com instead of @nl.rogers.com), and the first tiem i logged in, my inbox was filled wtih spam from the last 9 months. Not bad considering i never knew my real address, the only thing left is that they much have sold it to third parties. (its not an easy email address to guess).

      4. Disconnections due to "excessive downloading". They told me I had a virus and it was using up a lot of bandwidth. When in actual fact, it was me downloading torrents (not illegal i might add).

      All in all, it's been a horrible experience. But, it's still better than the alternative (Aliant).
      • spectre_25gt, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1OK, so Canada has ***** ISPs too. Can anyone from another country comment on their ISPs?
    • antifreeze11, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8rogers is comcast on steroids
    • Mankrik, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0Yeup, I'm on Rogers too, I've gotta pay about 50 bucks a month for it and I have alot of the problems the above mentioned, although Skype seems to work fine for me.
      My biggest beef is the whole throttling crap, my connection will cut out or lag horrendously if I'm downloading most anything from a torrent or other P2P service.
      As far as I know there's no alternative cable services in the Ottawa area.
  • loker269, on 10/10/2007, -2/+16This really bothers me that so many people want a set cap....right now you can download a ton through Comcast before you get kicked to the curb, but if they have to implement a stated cap they are going to low ball it and we will be stuck being able to download much less than what we could with the inviso cap. Also Comcast's inviso cap is more reactive than any other cap...with any other kind of cap it takes months or even years for it to adjust to the average users bandwidth needs, Comcast's inviso cap does it all on the fly so if the average download goes up so will the inviso cap....

    It is really an optimal solution at least in my eyes....
    • Netrilix, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5That's actually a great way of looking at it. I guess the problem comes in when people don't trust Comcast to stick to a fair amount, but then again, it's not like they want to lose the money you're paying them every month. It's gotta be a last resort for them if they're telling you to stop sending them a monthly payment.
    • GrooTheWanderer, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5That's exactly what happened with my first broadband ISP in Australia some years ago (Telstra Bigpond). We signed up for an unlimited service which merely said "reasonable usage" in the terms and conditions. Some idiots demanded an EXACT number, and so the ISP happily said "Okay fine then, 3GB per month is your new limit."
    • Nichiren, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3But to look at it from another point of view, Comcast might be refusing to state a set cap because then they would no longer be able to advertise as an "unlimited service". So if they do set a cap, it could pave the way for other competing ISP's to boast "unlimited service" thus forcing Comcast to revert back to a more truthful unlimited service stance.
      • loker269, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4they have not advertised unlimited in years....
    • u235sentinel, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0I'm the Frank from the story and felt I needed to respond to that statement. Many ISP's are already posting their limits. Cox Communications, Verizon, my current ISP xmission.com and so on. I have 100 Gigs bandwidth I can consume a month. 25 Gigs a week. I have YET to break 50 gigs in any month (and we've tried). So what's wrong with stating a limit? They should provide tiers like the above mentioned companies. If I wanted to download more, it's not cheap so I need to cough up more cash. Nothing wrong with that. If I use more water, electricity and so on then I get billed for it.

      I've heard people say they don't want it stated. Well.. with the way the company is handling termination of customers, you could be next on their hit list and not even know it. Plus they promised unlimited use for a flat monthly fee. I realize nobody says that these days, so they should step up and tell us what is acceptable. Work with the customer. One phone call and your gone isn't going to bring customers in. How does anyone know they are violating acceptable use?

      It's either that or state a limit. Or is there a third alternative?

      Thanks

      Frank
  • aladin, on 10/10/2007, -2/+10This really worries me. But I think the bigger problem is this whole fascist regime Comcast has going. I mean they decide the limit whenever they want and in a lot of places they practically hold a monopoly. GG no RE
  • mkriss5681, on 10/10/2007, -4/+34I used to work for Comcast Internet a few years back. They wouldn't even tell me what the limit was so it was kinda frustrating to deal with these issues, but in the 2.5 years when I worked there I only came across 2 or 3 cases of getting the ban stick. Most of the people who I talked to who were using "too much bandwidth" got at least 3 warnings before being banned. In most cases the users were downloading so much stuff it was ridiculous. I asked one guy who got a warning letter what type of stuff he was doing and he said he was running an FTP site and uploaded to IRC and was using 100-200 GBs on a slow day and as much as a Terabyte when he had a "new release". Most of the people who did hit the limit were violating the terms of service by running a server of some sort (web, FTP, Game, ect).

    I asked one of the higher up system admins what the limit was. He said it wasn't a set number but it was a percentage of the bandwidth on your node. If you are using more than 10% of your node (which was usually 200 people or so) you are in the risk of getting a letter.

    Don't get me wrong I think Comcast's policy of limiting bandwidth is ***** but if you get these letters and then ignore them you but these people are using so much connection its slowing their neighbors down so it's kinda hard to feel sorry for them, especially when all they would have to do is pay an extra 10 bucks a month for the business service.
    • jeuhrn, on 10/10/2007, -1/+13Is that even true? To send a terabyte in 24 hours, you'd need something along the lines of a 100 Base-T line.
    • combatchuck, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5The business service tops out at $160 a month, and -- around here at least -- they won't install it if you're not zoned as a commercial property. The extra 10 bucks you're thinking of is the "higher" bandwidth package, that takes you from 6/384 to 8/768.
      • krnldmp, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1That's complete ***** that you couldn't get a business data connection unless zoned commercial, and it's just regular ***** that some ***** ISP would sell service to Anybody with the stipulation that they can't run a server. That's pretty damned close to saying, "Here, have some Internet, now just be the simple little sponge you were back in the TV days and we wont send Guido."
        • Rabid_Llama, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2It's their fiber, it's their servers, it's their service, of course they can tell you what you can and can't do. The problem is that there's no competition at all because of the enormous barrier of entry.
        • microchp, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Zoned commercial? I live in the woods and I have comcast business, 5 static ip's, 8/768 which is actually 8/900 until their rate limiting kicks in.

          Recently, they have implimented something though... even if my server pushes only 300kb/s up, then about 3 times an hour my latency goes through the roof. Voice traffic becomes impossible, gaming almost impossible... though I did manage to kill a horde 3 levels above me with 7800ms tcp ping time, so I guess it isn't all that bad. :-D Yes, 7800ms, 4 digits...
    • spyd3rweb, on 10/10/2007, -0/+12gee if its slowing down the neighbors, perhaps they shouldnt oversell the bandwith they have.
      • Tweekster, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0they can just kick others, its easier
    • psykiv, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Assuming he can max out his download and his upload for an entire 24 hours, he's no where near a terabyte.
      Let's assume he's on the 8mbit connection with 512k up.

      Thats 1MB down and 64kb up. 1MB down each and every single second of the day is 86.4GB. 64kb up every single second is 5.4GB. This is 91.8 GB a day. MAX. Very Far from the 1TB a day mentioned. Not to mention that when you're uploading at full speed, your download speed just DIES.

      Either way, thanks for the insight into comcast's policy. Luckily many people around here don't have comcast (just about everyone has BS dsl) so I can use a little bit more than I'm supposed to and nothing will probably really happen.
    • drakethegreat, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2So its ok because its 10% of the node but you have no idea what they number is because its based on the other people in the node? So I should just get together with 200 other nerds, move into a brand new track home neighborhood and then we are all ok to download 1 TB a day....

      Comcast has and always will be a joke when it comes to this sort of thing. Theres a reason I use DSL and thats because I get a DEDICATED line with NO DEDICATED BS. Same I'm done with the cable company I'm ditching the line and buying the dish. Going pure copper and saying no to the RF shared nonsense.
  • zeigual, on 10/10/2007, -2/+16Ive had this exact thing happen to me. I am web developer so i use alot of bandwidth i admit, but they wont tell me how much is too much. I was also told my bandwidth warning phone call was a "prank" call when i reffered to it later. Then it was disconnected for weeks. When i called to complain they said i had to call some random number to get it turned back on. When I called it, they just dropped me into a voicemail telling me to leave my info. I didnt get a return call for weeks. And when i called the company to complain about the lack of the return calls they said the only thing they can do is call that number. They basically dropped me into a blackhole without telling me why my service was shut off and i had no way of fixing it. Really pissed me off. Screw Comcast!

    I guess im part of that .001%
    • Error601, on 10/10/2007, -11/+5Yea, BS. There's nothing in web development that requires massive amounts of bandwidth. The only thing that does it is downloading movies.

      • ISIfunded911, on 10/10/2007, -4/+9You developed every web site on Earth?
      • netant, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Apparently someone who has never run a popular website. Or a popular digg/slashdot story.
        • psykiv, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Unless you're hosting a story at home yourself, you really shouldn't have this problem.
      • ypSami, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1eCommerce Sites selling e-good downloadables, or movies, or photos, or maybe a developer who runs an svn server off of his home network, or maybe a developer who's hosting a demo version of a site for a client, or maybe a developer who's re-formatted his hard drive, and needs to download 20GB of legitimate backed up software, or maybe a developer who's testing multiple linux distrobutions and needs to obtain many ISOs, or maybe you really have no ***** clue what you're talking about.
    • Rabid_Llama, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Unless you're running a server farm, you shouldn't ever break that bandwidth cap. That, or you should really stop using .bmps on your website.
  • Error601, on 10/10/2007, -13/+1Good...get rid of those no lifer movie downloaders from driving up cost and slowing down the network for the rest of us.
    • combatchuck, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7The high cost and slow speed of internet service in America is driven by corporate greed, not by kids downloading the Simpsons movie.
    • maz2331, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Better yet - tell Comcast to take $5 per month of the subscription fee and build their damn network out properly.
  • jimmyjones1000, on 10/10/2007, -12/+2While I agree that comcast should publish their bandwidth limits, I do empathise with them, especially when the average family manages to rack up 50Gig of download a month! Im in Australia, and we all have heavy bandwidth limits, an average one being about 2Gig per month, and a heavy account being something like 20Gig. Maybe instead of complaining about being cut off you should treat it as a sign that you should GO OUTSIDE.
    • Elamen, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4dude... your on digg... you know we dont like the sun
    • combatchuck, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Outside? I've heard about that. Something about a big blue room with green carpet. I don't believe it, though.
    • Bhima, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1What? Do you think that when I download every episode of "The Simpons" as a single 50Gig package that I sit and watch my client transfer each and every packet?

      I let my client run all the time and I leave the city for the weekend, go hiking or swimming.

      My ISP just moved me from a fair use (with un-metered nighttimes) package to an unlimited package without even asking me... I'm not a fan of unlimited packages but that's what they foisted on me and that's what I'm using.
    • indicas, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3what does going outside have to do with bandwidth caps?
    • siszam, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Australians and Brits don't even realize what prisoners they are. You people are so use to being controlled and managed that you expect others to give up freedoms too. That is completely pathetic. Maybe you shouldn't worry about our time outside and worry about your own liberty.
  • Winston84, on 10/10/2007, -2/+12“levels of traffic sufficient to impede others' ability to send or retrieve information.”

    How can you do that ?
    you can because they have sold more bandwidth than they can deliver if all their customers used their full PAID-FOR connection.
    Thank God such a scam is illegal in my country ...
    • jjesusfreak01, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Cable connections share a local node, which usually serves an average of 200 people. It has a maximum bandwidth, which if everyone maintains an average amount of internet usage, and even if some use alot, it still isnt a problem. It when there are many people using a whole lot that the node begins to get overwhelmed. Anyways, they will upgrade the nodes sometime in the next few years, in preparation for Docsis 3 cable systems, and all this will go away, because they will have more bandwidth than they need.
      • renegadeafk, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1They probably won't upgrade it until it falls apart, lazy *****.
      • MaxPayne3476, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3lol more bandwidth then they need... reminds me of the days when a 128MB hard drive was more then you'll ever need. or the fun, "640k ought to be enough for anybody"
      • psykiv, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2You can NEVER have too much bandwidth.
      • microchp, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1docsis3 only deals with the node issue and not the peering issues. They rate limit because they don't want to spend big bucks on big pipes to their peering points.

        It will be great when d3 is everywhere, but it just means you will be able to share with your neighbors really fast, and since the floodgates are opened at that level, the bw bottlenecks will move to the peering points. That is when they will become most aggressive on bw hogs. My bet is they start charging a premium for x bw over a 95 percentile.
  • kickuindajunk, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6I heard the same thing from an Optimum rep. I was told that I can be disconnected for using too much bandwidth. And upon asking how much is "too much", the rep said they could not tell me. I thought this was really strange but what can we when the cable companies have us by the balls.

    Another interesting note is that they told me they guarantee me service as a customer but couldn't guarantee me an upload rate. I argued with the guy for ten minutes telling time that this doesn't make sense but I was told that this is Optimum's policy. I hate cable companies!
    • outlaw686, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2the csr doesn't make the polices, he just has to tell you what he is told. so there is no point in arguing with first level agents. And as someone who works as customer support please don't give them a hard time, there job sucks enough as it is. Instead ask to speak to a manager or supervisor who can give you an email or some address how to properly complain.
      • MaxPayne3476, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2yep, its called moving up the ladder until you as the customer are satisfied :)
      • microchp, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Ya, the only way to get their attention would be illegal, such as driving around and using a dart launcher to "pin the coax" in various neighborhoods which takes forever and a day to troubleshoot on a live network and costs crazy money replacing long stretches of coax. You can even tell them you are going to do this, and they will not send you to legal or escalate your call. They will just hang up.
    • mastercheif, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1Believe it or not, Optimum is the best Cable company in the US. They are evil, but less evil than the most.
    • BLKMGK, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Much the same here with Comcast - few choices. On the up side though Verizon just ran fiber down my street for FIOS - competition at last! I'm not sure either is less evil than the other but having an alternative ought to make them both behave a little better.
  • MrHappy123, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4The funny thing is that the advertising next to the article is for Comcast lol
    • gavin422, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2That's a screenshot of a Comcast advertisement that the article uses to show its "unlimited" promise. Try clicking on it.
  • gquaglia, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Verizon Wireless does the same thing with their data services. They advertise unlimited, but it really isn't. I guess truth in advertising isn't what it use to be.
    • ISIfunded911, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2Yeah, capitalism is getting worse. But saving on your bandwidth will help pay a new Ferrari to a guy from Wall Street. Don't you like Ferrari? Smile!
      • debah, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3With Verizion Wireless, if you buy a certain plan you have "unlimited" (or they say unlimited), text messages. But when I got the bill at the end of the month it was over $400!
  • legatus, on 10/10/2007, -0/+14Phone companies do the same thing. Get yourself a unlimited roaming plan and roam all the time, see how fast you get dropped.
    • eeyore57, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0I've been roaming for months now and Alltel won't drop me (I wish they would). I moved to a non-alltel area, they gave me an area code that is long distance for the area I live in, and I can't get my contract canceled without paying the stupid fee.
  • foxhoundadmin, on 10/10/2007, -5/+10O L D ! ! !

    http://digg.com/tech_news/Comcast_Unlimited_Service_not_so_Unlimited
  • muffz, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8It's Comcastic!
  • mralucas, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Try this one for size time Warner cable charges you per computer you have connected to the cable modem line if i remember correctly plus it has a cap as well which is hidden in there site vary well it took me 20 min to find all the underline stuff
    • sticksnstones, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Not true. I have 5 computers running off my router. My rate has never changed.
    • tech10171968, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2I agree with sticksnstones. How are you getting charged per computer? The only way that could happen is if you had a seperate cable connection for each computer.
    • linoth, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0I suppose this could be true if you're paying for their wireless service, but at something like $10-12 a month, you're better off buying a router straight out after six months. That being said, my WRT54GL ran out of ports a while ago, and I'm currently progressing on down an 8-port switch.
    • microchp, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Odd. I had a lan party once and everyone connected at my house to 3 48 port routers... there were probably 60+ people here and lots of spare ports to go. I do not see how they could detect Ihad more than one computer unless they did a tcp dump and watched the source port sequences to destination. Even then, I could say it was just a noisy computer with lots of apps running.
    • nukem996, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1When cable and even DSL ISPs started poping up their original policy was that you had to pay per computer and that each computer got its own modem. This has long since changed because there is no way they could efficiently detect who had a router and even if they could consumers would never put up with it.
  • debah, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0Our family has the comcast service, and I dont promote it. It is expensive, and the internet cutts off all the time as well as the television.
    • Okari, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2The internet rarely cuts off for me. It could just be your modem. I know when I used their modem I was always getting cut off, and when I bought my own it worked perfectly.
      • linoth, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Terayon. Ambit. RCA 315s. These are names to be afraid of. Motorola 4000 and 5000 series' I've never seen give people trouble. And working tech support, they were what we always suggested. Rock solid little modems.
  • rouslan, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1I've heard Comcast's limit is about 100GB/month.
    Not enough for me-I use 200-300GB monthly for a Tor server. Verizon DSL is actually unlimited.
    • archer75, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Considering I easily do 200gb - 300gb there limit is far more than 100gb.
  • realyst, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1If Comcast is advertising it as unlimited, then this is silly on their part. If not, then this is silly on the part of the subscriber. Uninterrupted connections are what leased lines are for.
  • bigkeeperrabbit, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Just be glad your only option isn't satellite broadband: I have a small business plan from Hughes and am capped at 500 MB per 24 hours before I get hit by a serious service degradation.
  • chicoer2001, on 10/10/2007, -2/+9Sounds like a class action lawsuit for false advertisment
  • Sogui, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0QQ, I get 10gb/week at my University unless I shell out more. Which isn't that bad compared to last year when I had 4gb/week. It took me 2 weeks to download Supreme Commander off Direct2Drive.
    • deptstoremook, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Digging this comment for WoW slang
  • Herkimer56, on 10/10/2007, -1/+11When I got my phone call last month from Comcast warning me that I was using too much bandwidth, I was told by the representative that I was in the upper one tenth of one percent of all Comcast subscribers for bandwidth usage. This is a totally arbitrary number which means that you're not judged by how much you use but by how much you use in comparison to other subscribers. I was told that the first time it happened you received a warning and the second time it happened they would suspend your account for twelve months. I explained to him patiently that this was complete and total ***** and the real problems was that they were overselling their network. He disagreed. I'm now looking at switching to a new provider.
    • krnldmp, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6It absolutely IS overselling their network if that .001% is actually causing them problems with reserve for the rest of the network. This could actually be why the limit is a secret, because it would move depending on other traffic, and they don't want to get honest and just SET a limit, because then they couldn't oversell their network.
      • krnldmp, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5You have to realize how powerful this plan is in terms of increased available revenue, to load average by silently dumping power users. Of course you have to just believe there's never any politics behind it either.
      • cvrti5, on 10/10/2007, -0/+21/10th of 1% is 0.1%, not 0.001%.
  • notoka, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7What's next, you're watching too much HDTV?
    • Okari, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6That won't be a problem with Comcast and all 12 of their HD channels.
  • efface, on 10/10/2007, -8/+3Seems like every couple of months a story about this pops up.

    Comcast NEVER stated that you have an unlimited data connection. Look it up if you don't believe me. So people should stop spreading that rubbish.

    I work for Comcast and I went to the headend and asked about this policy and it mainly only affects major abusers. People CONSTANTLY using the connection at high levels may it be uploading or downloading and passing that untold number. If you want an unlimited account buy a business internet connection which you can run servers from and do whatever you like.

    Technically P2P is server technology.
    • manageMyRights, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Technically submitting a comment to digg is server technology.
      • Tweekster, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0wow, you couldn't have failed more on that one.
    • MrESaulved, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6"Comcast NEVER stated that you have an unlimited data connection."

      Yes they did and yes they do. In their promotional materials that I get in the mail nearly daily, after being a three way subscriber for years and years...never once was the word "unlimited" limited in any way in the fine print. In fact, in the current High-Speed Access User Agreement I'm reading right now..you know the tissue paper thin fold out inserts you get with your bill from time to time? No where in there, in this one or any one before it is there any notification of download limit or throttling, or smoothing. Nothing.

      However, being the good customer oriented employee that you are, you will reply to this with a link specifically showing me Comcast's written policy regarding hard-limits that will result in termination of service. Comcast's belligerent manner in this subject also lends weight to the conventional wisdom that the policy is arbitrary and ill-enforced, rather than an intellectually complete plan. Prove us all wrong.
  • civikminded, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3FYI - I hate Comcast as much as the next guy, however.... Consumeraffairs.com is just as much a scam. Its run by trial lawyers trolling for class action lawsuits. The sites motives are VERY suspect.
  • manageMyRights, on 10/10/2007, -1/+51. COMPLAIN to the Better Business Bureau. They will send a letter to comcast and they will be forced to respond. Comcast agreed to credit me for the last month when they cut off my service for a few hours for "overusage".

    2. Switch to Verizon or AT&T if available. Verizon isn't available for me but AT&T never complained about usage even at 200+ GB a month. They never tried to throttle bittorrent traffic or send me any ***** letters either.

    AT&T DSL gave me about 10% faster latency which is important for online games, terminal typing, etc.
    • moocow1452, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Love the BBB, saved me from so much s#/t with companies.
    • Ravatar, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Insight Broadbad, an ISP comcast recently bought (they've already sent me the UR USIN TOO MUCH BANDWIDTH warning letter), delivers me caps of 15mbit/1.5mbit for $69.99 a month. AT&T/Verizon don't even offer a package that 1/3rd that speed. Verizon FIOS isn't even a twinkle in my town's eye.
    • deptstoremook, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0The issue with switching to DSL is that it (often) -is- a performance hit, which is why so many people are unwilling to do just that.
      • manageMyRights, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Performance can be measured many ways. Latency is usually faster on DSL which can be more important than overall speed for online gaming, videoconferencing, even typing on the terminal. Here the max speed for DSL vs Cable is 6Mb vs 8Mb, but it is very seldom that u can actually get 6+Mb from Comcast. On the other hand, DSL always hits the 6Mb cap with faster latency.
    • manageMyRights, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1You can send 1000 Terabyte hard-drives in the real mail and it will get anywhere in the U.S. in a few days. That's high bandwith with high latency. That is much higher speed than any broadband provider, but clearly a ridiculous choice for general internet access.

      Comcast is 10% slower than DSL on every web page you request, every move you make in an online game, or every character you type in an SSH terminal connection.
      Don't just look at bandwidth per second: look at the total bandwidth per month (which Comcast won't define) and the average latency.
  • alphaterminus, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7If these people are straining the networks so much, why doesn't Comcast let them pay extra per 100 GB bandwidth and actually invest in their infrastructure.
    • krnldmp, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Because to make money that way compared to how they're making it now they'd have to charge 100X for anything over 100G, Nobody would buy it. people would realize how badly they're taking the shaft, and things would wind up getting a Lot more honest for the NPs.
  • gkiltz, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2This sounds so much like what the old DirecPC did under it's "FAIR(?????) ACCESS POLICY that it gives you the creeps! DirecPC had to be sued to get them to admit that they had such a policy. Then sued again to be forced to spell out what that policy was!! is Comtrash falling into the same trap? This from a company that has a policy of raising their rates once a year whether they need to or not!
  • djdole, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7Not a surprise. Comcast also pulls some other ***** in terms of traffic shaping.
    They'll restrict bandwidth on Bittorrent ports or block them altogether, which is ***** because if as customers are paying extra for a certain bandwidth, then they are not holding up their side of the user contract by shaping/blocking the traffic.
    I've worked in IT for many years, and so understand the reasoning behind traffic shaping. But it should ONLY be used when a TIERED payment scale isn't being used. Meaning, if they are offering higher speeds to customers who are willing to pay more per month, then they shouldn't be throttling anyone at all since they wouldn't be allowing customers to receive what they are paying for. It'd be like WallMart selling you a 12-pack of soda, and saying you can't have it all at once, but get it one tablespoon at a time...and if you do succeed in consuming a full can in a day then they won't let you have the remaining cans (that you've already paid for).
    Traffic shaping should only be used in the case when every customer pays the same rate, and the provider never advertises connection speeds to customers (such as how many universities handle their dorm networks).

    But since Comcast uses the speed of their connections as a MAIN selling point (i hate those commercials...it's NOT "Comcastic"!) then if Comcast is having trouble providing the service that they are advertising, then it should be THEIR responsibility to update/upgrade their hardware to provide the extra bandwidth needed, not throttle back on the bandwidth.
    So I say, if you experience anything similar, report them to the BBB, and switch to a competitor (preferably a local competitor).
    • microchp, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1To that end, I do traffic shaping on my server at home (comcast business) and have kept it far below their upload cap. Everything had been fine for almost 2 years now. I could play WoW at the same time as people connect to my teamspeak server... no issues... until 2 weeks ago.

      Now... if I let my server push more than about 5% of the upload cap, they will increase my latency/tcp wait time to anywhere from 5000. to 8000ms. That is inmature, since I am never really downloading much of anything and my neighbors dont really use upstream on my laser group. When it was excite @ home a friend was in network engineering there and always had my modem uncapped. I could push 5Mb/s up all day, no problem. It was never an issue. Now that it is comcast, they cant even seem to handle 300Kb/s up, even though I pay for 768Kb/s up and have always rate limited my own server well below that. I am allowed to run a server btw, says so in my contract. They even do reverse DNS for my mail server.

      So why am I paying 169/mo? I dont know. If it were not so damned expensive to get a fractional DS3 up here I would do it, but since none of the neighbors have one, I would have to pay digging costs to get the fiber across the street from the CO and then more costs to get it up my road.... My only other alternative is to go colo, but then I have to deal with that nonsense of 95th percentile and having to prove how much I do or do not use.

      I really hope Verizon FIOS makes it here soon...
  • ChessJP, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1Just like my university internet.

    Wait until they start to cap the speeds. (they capped us at 16kb/s)

    Not that comcast could still exist if they did it like that.
    • awhiteflame, on 10/10/2007, -0/+716 kbit/s or 16 kbyte/s ?

      16 kbit/s is a little harsh..
  • joe573, on 10/10/2007, -2/+8Why is everyone ok with having bandwidth limits? Comcast should upgrade their network or not put so many people on the same "pipe", not make people limit their bandwidth. If I had Comcast, I'd be cancelling my account right now. This is unacceptable. If I'm not mistaken, a company is created to serve the needs of it's customers. You guys are paying them for a service. Would it be acceptable for restaurants to set limits on how much food you can eat from there a month? What about a department store limiting how many clothing items you can buy? "Sorry sir, you have reached your limit on shirts for this month. It is making it difficult for other people to get them." "***** you, order more shirts."
    • Enuratique, on 10/10/2007, -4/+1The fallacy with your logic is that goods are finite and tangible whereas services tend to be unlimited [in this case virtually unlimited]. If you don't restrict access to a near limitless pool, it will get used up by the greedy. Read up on the tragedy of the commons.
      • microchp, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Incorrect. If customers want to pay for more bw, then they need to peer with bigger partners, get bigger peering points, fix their old-ass infrastructure. I am sitting next to one of the people that built comcasts network when it was excite... their crap is way out of date and they don't want to fix it. That costs money and affects the quarterly numbers to the investors.
    • psykiv, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4The guy at the china buffet told me once "You go now. You too fat. You eat too much. No mo happy wong tong soup for you"
      (Say it with a chinese accent)
      • carbonfree314, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Interesting. I ran into a similar incident not long ago. A man was taking advantage of the all-you-can-eat buffet by staying for several hours, when the owner comes out from the kitchen and yells, "You eat like killer whale! You scare my wife! You been here for four hour, go now!"
    • ScionX, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1They are upgrading their network, waiting to roll out with Docsis 3
    • microchp, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Yup. Time to bite the bullet and upgrade the WAY outdated infrastructure. Start with docsis3 once analogue TV is gone (soon) and get better peering arrangements. If people want more bandwidth, then let them pay for it. Their should be more QoS package options. If I want 20Mb/s down and 5Mb/s up, then I should be able to get it, even if it costs me a little more. Most important, they should let me use 20/5 if that is what I am paying for and should not shape my traffic in any way. Period.
  • rswitzer, on 10/10/2007, -3/+4Avoid Comcast. I had absolutely the worst experience ever with them. They are absolutely the worst, in almost every way, from cutting off the beginnings and ends of pay-per-view movies, to offering Internet service they can't provide, complete with ambiguous nonsense policies, and then screwing up the billing irreparably for months. Seriously, don't bother. Comcast has no concept of customer service and probably never will. They are arrogant, clueless, and incompetent. Far better to get DSL, if no other broadband options are available, and satellite TV in lieu of cable.
    • kuzotz, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1comcast doesn't exist in Oklahoma.

      We have.

      SBC, Roadrunner, and Cox Cable. For our broadband connections.

  • MrESaulved, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7Q: "But what does net neutrality mean to me?"
    A: Allowing other ISPs to compete in the telecomm business for your money when you find that your current ISP is slowly putting water in your gas, and advertising it as Premium.
    • Rabid_Llama, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Uh, not really. I don't see how tiered or non-tiered service has anything to do with competition? It's the same highly limited resource already owned by the existing telecomms: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality

      I hate how "net neutrality" is thrown around these days. It IS an issue, but it's not EVERY issue.
    • microchp, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Fine. And if I am paying for a premium, such as an advertised 8/768, then I should be able to utilize that. If they don't want me to use that, then they should not offer it. I AM paying the premium and they are NOT providing the service I am paying for. That is called fraud.
      • Ravatar, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Try paying for the 15mbit/1.5mbit package and getting a warning letter because your bittorrent has been seeding at 49kB (well under 50% of my "cap") on and off for a few days.
  • xunit, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3this is actually very true, I was lucky enough to have been one of the canceled. however I used approximately 860GB of bandwidth in 1 month. don't ask. they claimed it was 300 times the national average. prior to that I used between 200-300GB/month without a problem, so I guess they just get pissed when it's something really ridiculous. back to DSL for me :(
  • thomasb227, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Comcast has done the same thing to me and I left and went back to DSL. That's probably the best solution because comcast is just unfair. It's really annoying.
  • Phoenixdown3, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0it sounds like my college...
  • xunit, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5yea but the down side is I went from downloading at 1200kb/s to 250kb/s for the same cost per month. Comcast never warned me, they just disconnected me. They called my house, but no one was home, the number they left went straight to voice mail, I probably left 5-6 voice mails over a 3 week period before I got a single call back. In addition, when I tried to contact customer service with the issue they knew nothing about it and couldn't help me. talk about a huge pain and probably the worst customer service I've ever experienced. I'd been a happy customer of comcast for about 5 years when this happened (since the @HOME days). but after being internetless for 3 weeks with no call back, I switched providers. when they did finally call me back they said I could have my service back if I didn't cross the line, which of course they refused to specify. but there was no way that after they terminated my service mid month, leaving a voice mail with a number that went straight to voice mail and didn't get a call back for 3 weeks, there is no way any more of my money is going to comcast.
    • xunit, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2Also, not a single byte of traffic I used was on torrents or any other P2P network. the traffic was all legitimate for my work and side development that I have been doing, I could have easily cut back had I known it was a problem.
  • archer75, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6I have been downloading torrents and newsgroups, solid, for 2 months. I have downloaded and uploaded well more than 200gb and comcast has never said a word. They haven't blocked or limited my torrents, haven't sent out any angry letters. Nothing.
  • Enisity, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1rofl....dammm he must download alot....prolly he got wifi....and he got some smart neighbors :) haha
  • VANOS, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5Article is wrong. Comcast business standard is about $95 a month, not $1,500.
    • madh4tter, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2No you are. After they cutt of your service, Comcast suggests that you purchase a dedicated buisness line for $1500, monthly. There have a been a few cases of this.
    • Rabid_Llama, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Yeah, I'm sure a *dedicated* cable line would be $1,500. Business-class service probably just gives you access to the same line as everybody else, but with a higher cap.
    • microchp, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Comcast business is $160/mo. If you get the (experimental) 5 static IP's, that is an extra $9/mo. Reverse DNS is free. That is for the "enhanced workplace" package.

      If you go with a dedicated circuit, that is a great deal more and if they screw with your traffic on a dedicated circuit, that means your service is free. Otherwise, you didn't closely review your SLA.
    • xelloss, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1The $1,500 a month connection is a 100mbps to 1 Gbps connection, Charter does the same thing as comcast with big business that need that bandwidth.
  • BleedingHollow, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1good thing i have optimum online.
  • randal2k, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1OMG, this is such old news!!
    What is there cap, how come they will not say... etc etc...

    The fact is that comcast is a USA Corp, they will eat there own children to make a profit and do. They do not care about you or your downloading/uploading needs UNLESS it makes them more money. Welcome to capitalism... now sit back and enjoy your Ubuntu download, for tomorrow .. like you.. it maybe gone.
  • zhou9999, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0I have comcast and this happens to me alot when downloading in the day time, but I only get disconnected if I download from like 12:00 am to 7:00pm the most likely time when people go on the internet. I will only get disconnected for a few hours or a day depending
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 88 of 88 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.