Comcast Now Limiting My Bandwidth

[sapphirescales]

Man, this SUCKS! I'm already paying $70/month for nothing but internet, and now I just got a notice in the mail that they're limiting the bandwidth my in area to 1,000GB/month. According to Comcast, my average usage is 896GB/month.

If I want "unlimited" I now have to pay $130/month or I'm going to be hit with overage charges with a "maximum penalty of $200 per month." What BS is this? There's no practical reason to limit bandwidth over a fiber optic network. This is nothing but a cheap money grab by Comcast and a way for them to limit Netflix use.

I wish there was another option, but there isn't. My only other choice is CentruyLink, and they're running their business into the ground. They won't even come out to my client's houses! My clients that are stuck with CenturyLink have to pay ME to come out and install their new modems and such!

I remember once I used over 3,000GB of bandwidth....and that was back in 2009! God help me if that happen again.

 

[lan101]

Yeah both CenturyLink and Frontier are complete garbage. I see frontier in my neck of the woods but I never hear much good about centurylink.
Time Warner is the only good provider in this area so rates will probably jump soon I'm sure.

 

[JoeTech]

Not sure what CenturyLink is up to. Modem rentals are supposed to easy money for ISP's. We get several people coming in saying they were told they are better off buying there own modem because they don't want to bother with them. When have you ever heard of an ISP turning away money like that?

 

[johnrobert]

I remember paying just $25 a few years ago
Now it has gone up to $80 just for ADSL internet only. We have only to companies to choose from: Telus or Shaw basically they can charge what they want with their monopoly

 

[Digital Micro]

I pay $230 a month for phone, next to bottom tv plan and internet. I get 10 up and 200 down with 500GB a month. I wish I got 1000GB

 

[GTP]

I pay $60 p/m for (WiMax) internet (200GB) 11 Mbps down and 1.2Mbps up and voip phone (1 line) + call charges on voip.
Aren't you guys lucky with your 200+ down!

 

[Digital Micro]

I pay $60 p/m for (WiMax) internet (200GB) 11 Mbps down and 1.2Mbps up and voip phone (1 line) + call charges on voip.
Aren't you guys lucky with your 200+ down!

Until I go over my limit. Then I get bumped up a plan without being asked. I then have to go under my old cap for three months before I can go back down.

 

[trevm999]

I pay $60 p/m for (WiMax) internet (200GB) 11 Mbps down and 1.2Mbps up and voip phone (1 line) + call charges on voip.
Aren't you guys lucky with your 200+ down!

$70/month, 100GB cap, $3/GB over cap, internet only, 6 Mbps down 0.5 Mbps up

 

[fencepost]

I just got a notice in the mail that they're limiting the bandwidth my in area to 1,000GB/month. According to Comcast, my average usage is 896GB/month.

I assume this is on your home connection, not on a business one. My understanding has been that the business connections were going to remain unlimited, but if you're getting that notice on a business line let us all know.

The terabyte limit for residential is something they've gradually been rolling out across their entire service area by states, but yeah I got the same recently. Among other things, it's undoubtedly aimed at cord-cutters who are dropping cable TV subscriptions.

 

[GTP]

$70/month, 100GB cap, $3/GB over cap, internet only, 6 Mbps down 0.5 Mbps up

Sometimes it's hard to believe we live in "developed" countries!

 

[mr m]

This is nothing but a cheap money grab by Comcast and a way for them to limit Netflix use.

I'm also not happy with all these media companies. We are looking at ways to cut the cord but like you point out they are going to stick it to us one way or another. My tax dollars paid for the development of the Internet yet I'm forced to pay a private entity a recurring monthly fee to get me online. It is ironic using the words "private" and "Internet" in the same sentence but that's a whole nother rant.

We went from hundreds of media companies to a handful. Now AT&T wants to buy Time Warner. Notice how the lack of competition degrades your service? Yeah, me to. Does anyone have a freaking clue about the convoluted pricing structure of their monthly bill?

Cable/Pay TV started in the 70's and they sold it as a commercial free alternative to regular TV. How long did that nonsense last? I'm still paying for commercials 40 years later. About 1/3 of our content is commercials. Why aren't they paying us? At least we can DVR everything we watch and blow by the incessant barrage of ads. When you finally find a movie you haven't seen they call it pay-per-view and want more phucking money although I've never used that service on principle and never will.

A lot of folks don't realize that the cable companies don't broadcast all of the HD content in true 1080P. 11 years after I bought into the perfect world of hi def I still don't get true HDTV on all channels. Why do they bother producing 4K capable LCD panels when we still can't get 100% 1080P?

I'm so fed up I'm going to watch TV!

 

[YeOldeStonecat]

ISPs stay in business and keeps your rates somewhat affordable by "oversubscribing bandwidth". This is especially true for residential bundles, versus business bundles.

It's not quite as simple as giving everyone unlimited bandwidth and letting customers max out connections 24x7..even with fiber.
You still have the core locations, backbones, and primary gateways to manage.

Personally I think the ultimate answer is to have all ISPs change their business model over to "pay for what you use" models...similar to electricity or city way bills each month. Keeps it fair for everyone. Only people that would cry over that are the greedy abusers who feel they have the right to take more than others for the same price.

 

[sapphirescales]

I'm also not happy with all these media companies. We are looking at ways to cut the cord but like you point out they are going to stick it to us one way or another. My tax dollars paid for the development of the Internet yet I'm forced to pay a private entity a recurring monthly fee to get me online. It is ironic using the words "private" and "Internet" in the same sentence but that's a whole nother rant.

We went from hundreds of media companies to a handful. Now AT&T wants to buy Time Warner. Notice how the lack of competition degrades your service? Yeah, me to. Does anyone have a freaking clue about the convoluted pricing structure of their monthly bill?

Cable/Pay TV started in the 70's and they sold it as a commercial free alternative to regular TV. How long did that nonsense last? I'm still paying for commercials 40 years later. About 1/3 of our content is commercials. Why aren't they paying us? At least we can DVR everything we watch and blow by the incessant barrage of ads. When you finally find a movie you haven't seen they call it pay-per-view and want more phucking money although I've never used that service on principle and never will.

A lot of folks don't realize that the cable companies don't broadcast all of the HD content in true 1080P. 11 years after I bought into the perfect world of hi def I still don't get true HDTV on all channels. Why do they bother producing 4K capable LCD panels when we still can't get 100% 1080P?

I'm so fed up I'm going to watch TV!

LOL. I only paid for TV one time in my entire life. Before Netflix and such I would just buy movies from the thrift store and rent a newer movie if there was something I really wanted to see. I got TV because with my home internet it was just $10 more in 2007. Then after a year they told me they were going to start charging $59.99 for my package plus my $30 internet and I gave them the finger. Then I went back to thrift store movies and rentals. But then came Netflix and that's all I really use now seeing as Blockbuster went under and I refuse to go to Walmart to rent from the RedBox. I've also stopped buying movies from thrift stores because the prices have gone just stupid. My local Goodwill charges $5 to $7 for DVD's and $10+ for Blu-Rays. Back before 2008 I could pick up a DVD for $1 and a VHS for $0.25. When I hear what some of my clients are paying for TV service I can't believe it. Entertainment is pretty freaking expensive. Netflix is the only exception nowadays, but if they start putting ads in there or charging more money, I'm gone. I don't need it. I'm busy enough as it is and I've got tons of movies and such on my computer I can watch if I really need something.

 

[ComputerRepairTech]

Personally I think the ultimate answer is to have all ISPs change their business model over to "pay for what you use" models...similar to electricity or city way bills each month. Keeps it fair for everyone. Only people that would cry over that are the greedy abusers who feel they have the right to take more than others for the same price.

How would that work though? There would still have to be a decent minimum bill otherwise that would be a severe cut to their profits not to mention wifi hacking would become more popular.

 

[Diggs]

A terabyte a month for $70 and you're not happy? It's the top 10% of the users that raise the bill for the others. Unfortunately I'm not sympathetic. If you are going to use that much bandwidth, be happy you can get it and pay for it.

 

[trevm999]

Sometimes it's hard to believe we live in "developed" countries!

Dial-up is still advertised, starting at $40/month

 

[gadgetfixup]

I guess I should be asking for quite a discount on my Comcast bill. I just checked mine for October and I'm at 47GB for the month.

 

[ComputerRepairTech]

A terabyte a month for $70 and you're not happy? It's the top 10% of the users that raise the bill for the others. Unfortunately I'm not sympathetic. If you are going to use that much bandwidth, be happy you can get it and pay for it.

that raise the bill for others? you speak like the isp is really being impacted to cover the data usage. 1TB is not that difficult to hit, i can hit that solo through a lot of video streaming...just barely though. If I can do that, a family of power users should be able to pull that off. I think its just a grab for money, i can believe 10% of users may hit 1TB but take it up to 2TB and suddenly its hardly any users.

 

[sapphirescales]

that raise the bill for others? you speak like the isp is really being impacted to cover the data usage. 1TB is not that difficult to hit, i can hit that solo through a lot of video streaming...just barely though. If I can do that, a family of power users should be able to pull that off. I think its just a grab for money, i can believe 10% of users may hit 1TB but take it up to 2TB and suddenly its hardly any users.

EXACTLY. My household only has 2 people streaming Netflix. I personally own about 7 computers that are running, and that takes up some bandwidth for Windows updates and such. I can't imagine what a family of 4 with Xbox's, Netflix, YouTube streaming, etc. would use. 2TB would be pretty easy to hit for a family like that.

If I was out in the middle of nowhere I wouldn't complain. But I'm right in the middle of a major city with a population of over 100,000 people and I'm less than 10 miles away from a city with nearly 1,000,000 people. There's no reason to have such expensive and limited internet when you're right in the middle of the city like that.

A terabyte a month for $70 and you're not happy? It's the top 10% of the users that raise the bill for the others. Unfortunately I'm not sympathetic. If you are going to use that much bandwidth, be happy you can get it and pay for it.

Get off your high horse. It doesn't cost Comcast anything more for more bandwidth. It's not wireless internet where there's a physical limitation and bandwidth is extremely limited. Comcast was unlimited for a long time and they're starting to roll this BS out to see if they can get away with it.

Personally I think the ultimate answer is to have all ISPs change their business model over to "pay for what you use" models...similar to electricity or city way bills each month. Keeps it fair for everyone. Only people that would cry over that are the greedy abusers who feel they have the right to take more than others for the same price.

Nope. Terrible idea. Do you really think they would charge me $70/month and charge $1/month for granny that uses 10GB/month in bandwidth? No. They would take granny and charge her $50/month, and then charge me like $350/month. All it would do is increase their profits and it wouldn't save ANYONE even $1.

My friend has a second property that he only uses part of the year, so he shuts his water off when he's not using it so it doesn't freeze. Imagine his surprise when even though he's using NO WATER, they still charge him $100/month "connection fee." They charge him just because he's connected to city water, then he's charged on top of that for whatever water he uses. I imagine Comcast would love to do something similar if they could get away with it.

 

[JoeTech]

You see companies like Comcast say it's a bandwidth issue and then Google Fiber announces they plan on coming to that city and suddenly Comcast comes out with cheaper, faster, and bigger data plans, but only in that area. It's amazing they can do it if there network supposedly can't handle it. You would think they would build a better network if it can't handle the traffic, but why should they if you don't have any other options?

My conspiracy theory is that they put all these plans in place before 4k streaming becomes standard. They will still be able to make a lot of money now, but once everything becomes 4k they will be making an absolute killing with data overages and the average person won't have a clue how little 1 TB is once they are using 4k.