Does Comcast Want To Put Bandwidth Hogs On A Diet? Sounds Good To Us
If true, it would mean that Comcast would be joining the ranks of Time Warner Cable (TWC), which is also considering charging its cable modem subscribers based on how much bandwidth they use.
We're assuming that this will outrage folks who like to get outraged by any kind of limit, or any kind of payment system. But we've done some back-of-the-envelope math, and we don't see how this cap limit would affect any but the most obscene bandwidth hogs.
In practical terms, 250 gigabytes is:
- A LOT of Web usage. Your typical daily Web/email/IM usage is probably somewhere between 10-50 megabytes -- maybe 100-200 if you're watching some low-quality YouTube, or 300-500 if you're watching a few hours of Hulu every day. So normal Web users won't have any problems. (1000 megabytes = roughly 1 gigabyte.)
- A LOT of World of Warcraft. Downloading game patches uses a bunch of bandwidth once in a while, but normal game play tops out around 30-60 kilobytes/second, or maybe a 100-200 megabytes an hour run rate, according to one blog. Another user says normal usage is closer to 1-5 megabytes per hour. Continue to play until your eyes bleed.
- 2500-4000 MP3 albums, or 50,000 3-minute songs. Depending on quality/length, an MP3 album is somewhere between 60 and 100 megabytes. Amazon says its 3-minute MP3s are about 5 megabytes. There are only 43,200 minutes in a 30-day month, or enough time to listen to 14,400 3-minute songs. So you'll be ok.
- 170-250 iTunes movie downloads. Digital movies in standard-def run between 1 and 1.5 gigabytes. "No Country For Old Men" is about 1.3 gigs, friend-o.
- 50-60 HD movie downloads. These run closer to 4-5 gigabytes each. So theoretically, this could be a problem, one day, for people who download more than 2 movies a day. Do you know any of those folks?
So: If you download one HD movie a week, six standard-def movies a week, 5 albums a week, play a ton of WoW, and surf a lot of YouTube and Hulu, you'll still struggle to use 100 gigabytes of bandwidth per month. We think you'll also struggle to listen to all that music and watch all those movies. Also, you should get out more. It's nice outside! Go for a walk.
Bottom line: 250 gigabytes is a fair cap for now. According to DSLReports' tipster, this would only impact about 14,000 subscribers out of 14 million -- or the top 0.1% of downloaders.
Once HD Web video is more widespread, more people might hit their caps. But for now, it's a very niche activity -- and won't be mainstream for a while.
See Also:
Time Warner Cable: Download Hogs Could Pay More
How TWC Can Make Pay-Per-Use Work Without Going To Hell
1) Just don't call it "Unlimited" unless it really is unlimited. No "Unlimited (certain terms and conditions apply, accounts may be suspended or terminated for usaged beyond normal activity, your milage may vary)"
2) Provide an easy way for users to know how much of their limit they have used. I was page with a gas gage type graphic, with numbers below it, would do the trick.
If both of these conditions are met, then its just part of the deal you sign up for.
... best to just say no now...
As higher speeds are possible, more and more information (downloads) are going to take more and more of that 250gb chunk.
See, firsts it's a 250GB cap, then that doesn't help because it wont actually decrease network congestions (its only effecting 1 percent of users after all). So they introduce the 50GB bandwidth cap for what you're paying now to get 250Gb.
The 250Gb plan will of course still be available, but at a cost of 5 times as much as the new 50Gb plan, which used to get you 250Gb of bandwidth.
Sounds like a good reason to switch to FIOS.
Simple - Pay the $20 to have a DVD set shipped via FedEx. That sounds easier.
In the absence of true competition (and there isn't any in the last mile), the "unlimited" promises have always been empty. Soon they will have to cease altogether--the "net neutrals" will see to it that the telecablecos no longer advertise it. And then we will have tiered pricing everywhere.
Only two models work: usage based (water, electricity) or municipal-owned (sewer, roads). With private ownership of the pipes, only the former will prevail.
Small (and large) business users who do nightly backups to such services, or make heavy use of SAS apps (Salesforce, Zoho, etc.) are screwed...
So -- what's up with Clearwire?
I'm looking foward to giving WiMax a shot.
I don't hit the proposed limit, personally, but I also realize that this is simply Part One, much like the first commenter.
- Family of 5 (3 kids)
- XBOX, PS3, Wii online play and downloads
- AppleTV (or other net-enabled TV box)
- 5 PCs/Macs
- iTunes
- Online Data backup
- ISO downloads (work/play)
- Torrents
- VPN to work
- NetFlix watch now
- Hulu
- and much more if the CE companies have their way.
This is a an example of a TYPICAL family today. It will only get worse.