
Comcast announces placing data caps - beauzero
http://beauclaar.blogspot.com/2013/11/comcast-is-placing-data-caps.html
======
davidcollantes
"While we believe that 300 GB is more than enough to meet the Internet usage
needs of most customers, Comcast will automatically add blocks of 50 GB to
your account for an additional $10, should you exceed the 300 GB included in
your plan in a month."

That made my jaw drop. Netflix usage eats that in no time. Online gaming eats
that in no time. Actually, web browsing for a family of 4 (which includes
Youtube, etc.) eats that in no time. Today's "regular" Internet usage eats
that in no time.

Which dinosaur thought that 300 GB was "more than enough?"

~~~
wozniacki
I second this.

No Netflix , Amazon , Roku or any set top box based streaming of any other
kind either.

No gaming either.

This is my usage for the past three months:

[http://i.imgur.com/ZDNGYVI.jpg](http://i.imgur.com/ZDNGYVI.jpg)

~~~
untog
If you're not using any video streaming sites, what _are_ you using that uses
up to 250GB a month?

~~~
wozniacki
IP Telephony is the only one I can think of.

~~~
sp332
Maybe an obvious question, but is your wi-fi secured?

------
IgorPartola
For those who think this is a bad thing, consider that "unlimited" most often
means "limited in an opaque way you cannot control". This cap and pricing
structure adds some very nice clarity to exactly when you might exceed you
quota. Personally, I would rather pay for the extra GB's than get my
connection throttled at the end of the month.

Pricing May or may not be acceptable to some, but the model itself is better
than "we will limit you if we feel like it".

~~~
ghshephard
If Comcast simultaneously were to commit to a 100% neutrality policy regarding
the serving of that data, and would also commit to not traffic shaping - I.E.
For my $50 a month, I would get a non-screwed-around-with-by-their-traffic-
shapers 50 megabit/second stream - I might agree with you.

Unfortunately I suspect we will get both - a data cap, and Comcast will
continue to screw around with your traffic feed so they can profit off the
front end and the back end (charging for enhanced access to their customer) -
basically screwing the customer in both directions.

~~~
IgorPartola
Agreed. This is not the only required step. I am actually mostly concerned
with minimum guaranteed bandwidth and latency than anything else. Working from
home means that I need a reliable connection more than anything. However, from
what I have seen of all the different providers I had and researched,
"unlimited" traffic is usually a very bad thing when you least expect it.

~~~
ghshephard
As someone who has dealt with telecommunications providers (Sprint, AT&T,
Verizon) for the last 10 years on a professional basis, "Unlimited" is
_ALWAYS_ a code word for "There is a level that if you go over, bad things
will happen to you, from traffic shaping, to outright cancellation of your
account."

Honest to goodness conversation with Verizon I had in 2005 (we were purchasing
about 100 M2M (Machine to Machine) CDMA circuits) - it was Pythonesque in its
tortured logic.

    
    
      Me: So, I'm wondering how much traffic we can use?
      Sales Guy: They are totally unlimited
      Me: Great, so how much is "Totally Unlimited?"
      Sales Guy: Just what it sounds like - No Limit.
      Me: Right, but what is the actual Limit.
      Sales Guy: It's unlimited.
      Me: So, I can stream 100 kilobits/second continuously for 32 gigabytes/month/circuit:
      Sales Guy: No, that would fall under our unapproved usage clause.
      Me: Yes.  I understand.  So, I'm wondering how much traffic we can use?

------
hashtree
"Will I get more data included in my monthly data usage plan if I upgrade to a
higher Internet tier? While you may upgrade your Internet service at any time
to receive more speed and performance, all of our tiers of service include
data usage plans with 300 GB of data per month."

[http://customer.comcast.com/help-and-
support/internet/data-u...](http://customer.comcast.com/help-and-
support/internet/data-usage-plans-expansion-upgrade)

Sigh.

~~~
MAGZine
My hope is that they eventually conform all plans into one (at a locked
speed/price), and then offer plans in varying amounts of capacity at a certain
speed.

Much closer reflects a usage-based model, which makes sense for internet
billing, whether people like it or not.

~~~
guelo
That's an awful hope. My hope is that they are declared an illegal monopoly
and an environment is created where actual competition can occur so we end up
paying what bandwidth actually costs.

~~~
MAGZine
They're not an illegal monopoly though. Paying for what bandwidth costs is the
crux of my argument. We're both arguing for what is essentially usage-based-
billing ;-)

------
aaronem
From [http://customer.comcast.com/help-and-
support/internet/data-u...](http://customer.comcast.com/help-and-
support/internet/data-usage-plans-expansion):

"These FAQs describe our new monthly data usage plan for XFINITY Internet
Service in the following areas: Huntsville and Mobile, AL; Atlanta; Augusta
and Savannah, GA; Central Kentucky; Maine; Jackson, MS; Knoxville and Memphis,
TN; and Charleston, SC."

~~~
vaporeyes
This explains why I thought this was old news. It has been in Nashville for a
long time now.

~~~
beauzero
How close do you get to monthly caps?

~~~
vaporeyes
Currently I average around 200GB per month. Some months are closer to 300GB
and 350GB and I pay the $10 overage fees. I only pay for Internet and only use
Hulu, Netflix and Amazon Prime and that pretty much is what my B/W is tied to.
If I could switch to something faster with greater B/W I would in a heartbeat
but I just have no motivation since its paid for through work-related usage.

------
randomfool
If they commit to providing suitable bandwidth for services such as Netflix
and YouTube, I'm not sure how opposed I am to paying for bandwidth.

Estimates are that Netflix movies are 1GB/hr- or $0.20/hr at the Comcast rate.
Not super cheap.

~~~
beauzero
We run into this a lot around the 8-9pm hour. Netflix on xbox seems to be the
exception though. Everything else slows down equally (Bluray, phones, ipad,
etc.)...not noticeable on anything other than the bluray player though but
network stats definitely show it.

~~~
vaporeyes
I notice this very same thing in my area. The mornings on workdays are
considerably faster than evenings on the same days. I notice this when
downloading ISOs for operating systems especially. I usually try and save my
downloading of these things for morning so that it completes in 10 minutes vs
50 minutes.

------
lost_my_pwd
> We will send you a courtesy "in-browser" notice and an email letting you
> know how much of the data included in your monthly plan you are using

That is the item that really bothers me. What Comcast is saying is that they
will alter/inject their own content into a customer's HTTP requests when they
deem it necessary.

~~~
th0br0
I was wondering about this too when I read that... Is this an indirect
admission that they actively use DPI?

------
gimliclc
This is actually a much better policy then the one in place 3-4 years ago when
I had comcast.

Back then I had a cap of 150-200 GB/Month and if you went over they would give
you a warning, but eventually boot you for repeated offenses. Now it looks
like they will just charge you a bit more instead of kicking you off
completely.

------
300bps
I have Verizon FIOS which has no data caps although there was a story recently
of a user that received a call when he went over 77 TB for the month:

[http://arstechnica.com/information-
technology/2013/05/fios-c...](http://arstechnica.com/information-
technology/2013/05/fios-customer-discovers-the-limits-of-unlimited-data-77-tb-
in-month/)

I really couldn't be happier with Verizon FIOS. For $74.95 per month I get 75
Mbps downstream / 35 Mbps upstream Internet, unlimited phone service and their
Premium TV channel lineup.

Comcast is an option where I live as well but I can't imagine many people
choose it. Twice now they've had a door-to-door salesman come around trying to
sell it. No thanks.

I'm fortunate to be in an area that has a lot of broadband competition
(including from wireless providers like Clear [now Sprint]).

~~~
mikestew
>> Twice now they've had a door-to-door salesman come around trying to sell
it.

Only twice? I've got Frontier FIOS (what used to be Verizon), and I'll bet
Comcast is at my door at least once a month. Add to that the flyers that
constantly come in the mail.

On a side note related to the mailings, I've opened a few to see if they have
a better deal than Frontier. Sure, it's almost free for six months, but good
luck finding out what the rate goes to after the first six months. Check the
fine print of the flyer, check the web site, damned if I can find it. Yeah, I
think I'll pass.

------
wozniacki
Broadband prices across the world: (45 Mbps or more)

[http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/70717000/gif/_70717869...](http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/70717000/gif/_70717869_countries_with_high_speed_broadband.gif)

 _This research echoes the findings of another report earlier in the summer by
the OECD, which compared countries in terms of their broadband-only prices.
Across all 10 download speeds and capacities, it consistently ranked the US
near the bottom.

For instance, at high speeds of 45 Mbps and over, the OECD report has the US
ranked 30th out of 33 countries, with an average price of $90 a month. With
phone and TV thrown in, plus some premium channels, these packages often cost
$200.

"Americans pay so much because they don't have a choice," says Susan Crawford,
a former special assistant to President Barack Obama on science, technology
and innovation policy.

Although there are several national companies, local markets tend to be
dominated by just one or two main providers.

"We deregulated high-speed internet access 10 years ago and since then we've
seen enormous consolidation and monopolies, so left to their own devices,
companies that supply internet access will charge high prices, because they
face neither competition nor oversight."

Two-thirds get their broadband via their television cables, she says, because
the DSL (digital subscriber line) service provided by phone companies over
copper lines can't compete with cable speeds, while wireless and satellite
services are subject to low usage caps._

[http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-24528383](http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-24528383)

------
ojbyrne
The headline seems incorrect. Comcast has had data caps for a while now. They
are increasing them from 250 gb to 300 gb.

~~~
jolan
Enforcement has been suspended in the majority of markets for the last ~18
months or so.

------
th0br0
Telekom in Germany recently tried to introduce a similar data cap system on
their flatrates ([1], with severe throttling to 384kbps after reaching the
limit (between 75GB for their 16 MBit and 400GB for their 200MBit plans)).

Fortunately, a district court ruled that to be unlawful last month ([2],
German). I fear, however, that a similar development in the US is more than
unlikely.

[1]
[http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130425/02255122829/deutsc...](http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130425/02255122829/deutsche-
telekom-dumps-net-neutrality-will-limit-bandwidth-competing-video-voice-
products.shtml)

[2] [http://www.tagesschau.de/inland/gericht-telekom-
drosselung10...](http://www.tagesschau.de/inland/gericht-telekom-
drosselung100.html)

------
hippy11
In a world that is moving towards gigabit internet, which genius in Comcast
thought 300GB is enough for most people? The internet is far from its peak.
Already, we see more and more websites with background videos, beautiful
images, and all kinds of wonderful media. At the rate of advancement we will
consume even more amazing media on the internet (3D?) that will take up even
more bandwidth as time goes on. By introducing a bandwidth saving mindset and
forcing consumers to browse conservatively, Comcast is really going against
the evolution of the internet. Like most companies that is destined to fail,
Comcast makes decisions based on old and current data. They fail to take into
account rate of growth and make policies that benefits and embraces the
future.

------
wolframarnold
Switch to Sonic Fusion DSL if you're in their service area (Bay Area, perhaps
elsewhere?).

[http://sonic.net/solutions/home/internet/fusion/](http://sonic.net/solutions/home/internet/fusion/)

Far cheaper than Comcast and no gimmicks. The service runs about $50/month
with all the little FCC charges, taxes, etc tacked on and comes with an
unlimited nationwide phone line too. The speed is dependent on your distance
from the central switching station of the phone company. I've had it in two
locations with speeds ranging from 8 to 16MBit/s, on par with Comcast. Perfect
for streaming any TV show you want to watch.

~~~
jeady
Sonic.net is great but unfortunately DSL technology isn't. I've also had
sonic.net in two locations but my speeds ranged from 5-7Mbits. So it's worth a
shot but it's not perfect.

------
scrabble
This enables them to offer an upsale for an unlimited package in the future,
which is what ISPs here in Canada have begun doing.

I pay extra for unlimited, and I need to since my family uses HD Netflix to
watch TV, and I download a lot of entertainment content.

------
mortdeus
And this ladies and gentlemen is when healthy capitalism turns into corporate
greed. Internet needs to become faster with more bandwidth so engineers can
design products that utilizes it. I can think of several ideas that are
stifled because of America's draconian internet service providers. I'm not a
big fan of the government stepping in to fix things the free market wont, but
this is one of those things where companies should be forced to innovate
because they choose not to compete. Providing the internet is too profitable
for them to need to compete. There is something wrong with that in a
capitalist economy.

~~~
thatswrong0
I don't quite understand how you think that the current ISP situation is an
example of healthy capitalism or a free market. It is anything but. There is a
ton of government regulation related to ISPs. So I don't see how fighting
regulation with regulation is a good idea.

------
mkaziz
Freaking barbaric, is what this is.

~~~
myers
At least they are offering more bandwidth at a price. Before it was a hard cap
at 250GB with no way to buy more.

But still, it makes me want to up and move to Chattanooga.

[http://chattanoogagig.com/](http://chattanoogagig.com/)

~~~
irons
That's incorrect. The old comcast system took congestion into account. I
routinely ran 500-600GB/month offsite backups, but I scheduled them for the
middle of the night and midday, and I never got a nastygram for exceeding the
cap. The new system pretends that all bits are equally expensive, regardless
of whether the system is currently slammed or twiddling its thumbs, which is a
profit-maximizing lie.

~~~
myers
I suspect it was selectively enforced. I had a similar usage pattern and did
get a notice.

------
ericcumbee
My plan with Northland Cable is capped at 200GB. even with lots of Netflix
streaming I've never hit my cap. the only thing that irritates me is that I
have no way of knowing exactly how much data I use.

------
vaporeyes
I have dealt with the 250GB cap for nearly a year and half, they always add
the blocks on at 50GB for $10 per block. Luckily my internet is paid for
through work so its trivial at the moment.

------
superkuh
The cap is not the frightening bit of this announcement. That Comcast has
declared they will MITM and hack user connections to all websites not using
SSL is frightening.

------
shmerl
Data caps is a completely brain dead idea. If they have problems with network
congestion, they need to use bandwidth caps, not data caps. The later are just
a rip off.

~~~
mortdeus
Its not a brain dead idea from a corporate policy to maximize profits.
Datacaps allow them to not expand infrasture to accommodate growth.

Imagine if Google adopted a policy where each user was only allowed 300
queries a month. That means Google wouldn't have to expand their
infrastructure to satisfy a growing demand for information. The only reason
they don't do this is because Google profits from each query.

ISPs don't profit from their consumers downloading more data, it only costs
them building more infrasture and employing network admins to maintain them.
Its just internet providers generate a ridiculous return in profit for the
amount of money they actually invest to provide internet. ISPs don't need to
compete with other ISPs because how profitable internet is for them. They need
incentive to provide better service and until something like Google Fiber
forces disruption in the market; engineers will have an artificial roadblock
preventing them from innovating.

For example a cloud based OS where users can access their PCs at home in
realtime from terminals abroad will never be a reality until America is
upgraded to fiber optic bandwidth. It causes to much latency to download and
mount your filesystem onto a local machine. Anybody with experience using Plan
9 remotely understands this problem and knows I'm right.

As we become more dependent on the cloud to sync data between our mobile
devices and PCs, datacaps will stifle innovative growth. Its something we need
to vehemently battle to shift the market in our favor.

~~~
shmerl
This "maximizing profit" is an effective rip off fueled by pure greed and not
any real need. They can perfectly build up their infrastructure without
introducing these rip offs.

And I'm not sure how they can accommodate usage growth without building up the
infrastructure. Data caps aren't going to help that, they'll just make bad
service cost more, nothing else.

------
beauzero
Crap I just looked at my usage. Basically looks like I will be paying $10-$20
a month more. Not much money but that really irritates me.

------
sprite
Fuck Comcast. I use around 500gb/month. So I'm looking an extra $40 onto of
the $80 I'm already paying for Internet only.

------
Fuxy
US you're ISP's suck please wake up and do something about it!

Now I'm not in a lot better position ISP's in London are not that much of an
improvement.

However if i say Romania what pops into your mind? I my case internet speeds
starting from 50Mb/s in every major city at a price equivalent to £6/month.

[http://www.rcs-rds.ro/internet-digi-
net/fiberlink?t=internet...](http://www.rcs-rds.ro/internet-digi-
net/fiberlink?t=internet-fix&pachet=digi_net_fiberlink_50)

~~~
dale386
Do what exactly? Most areas in the US are served either by one provider that
does whatever the hell it wants or multiple providers that offer the same
awful service at the same terrible prices (ish). We can't vote with our money
and we can't vote with our votes since our politicians (1) are clueless about
all things technology (2) get the little knowledge they have from lobbyists
and (3) won't do anything about internet problems unless they hear about it
from a lot of voters, most of whom are also clueless about all things
technology.

~~~
jorgem
I assume Romanians are somewhat (equally) clueless about technology on
average. What's the difference, then? What are they doing right?

~~~
Fuxy
Actually worse. Most people still have a hard time just doing basic things on
a laptop.

The difference is teenagers are teaching their parents how to use laptops or
other new electronics so they are improving slowly.

~~~
jorgem
Is £6/month a lot in Romania? Does it buy less than the $70 I spend for 50mbs?

~~~
Fuxy
Prices for most things in Romania are the same as in London but the income is
a lot less that's what puts most Romanians in a nasty situation.

Imagine you living on (average us income)/6 while everything else around you
has the same price it has now. That will give you a good idea.

Most people have a monthly income of about £250 if you were to convert it. Now
that should cover all the bills and food, most Romanians own their houses so
they don't have to pay rent which is good but that is still a bad situation
regardless.

------
Sephiroth87
Am I missing something? How exactly is this increasing "the amount of data
included in your XFINITY Internet Service"?

~~~
ojbyrne
When I had Comcast, they had a data cap of 250 GB. The HN headline is
misleading.

~~~
beauzero
Last month I ran 345GB. Didn't pay extra. This month I will due to
notification. counter claim: not misleading.

------
wnevets
I hate comcast so much, they compress the shit out of their television content

------
jcomis
With 4K streaming and displays coming soon, what are they thinking?

------
richardv
It's about 1Mbit a month... (1Mbit = 328.5 GB).

