Very interesting that they are enforcing this.
300GB = 1Mb/s continuous per month so that's actually fairly significant even with the cap for most users.
FLIR Security | 11/07/15 06:15pm
Though water and electricity - and most utilities - charge by usage... they have always done so.
This is not the case for internet, which traditionally has been a flat charge.
By adding a 'cap' (which is a misnomer anyway; it is not a cap, but instead, an arbitrary usage threshold. i.e. you can use more than 300GB if you want to) Comcast is changing the rules.
This is nothing more than a bean-counter move, imo.
IPVMU Certified | 11/07/15 07:02pm
I don't like it, I use about 500gb per month! But I understand it, many cable companies are losing revenue to Internet TV. This is simply a way for them to make up that lost revenue. As internet TV becomes more popular I wouldn't be surprised if those rates go higher. Like I said I don't like it but who am I.
My family of 5 streaming Netflix and Youtube puts us between 600-700GB per month (lots of kids/teen content). We're not in a market Comcast has piloted the caps in yet, but I'm paying them $150/mo for 110Mbps and a premium channel lineup (Redzone ect), no VOIP.
Its always been a pretty fluid pricing model with my account and I expect this will be no different. I'll call back every 6 months and probably end up paying them on average another $10-$15/mo for the unlimited package by jockeying around options across TV and internet promos.
Lightning Strikes The Home: Comcast Rolling Out 2 Gbps Fiber To The Door
I think you might blow thru your cap in about half an hour.
I am generally a proponent of pay as you go plans. I even favor toll roads.
I do have at least one issue with this. Using John's analogy above:
Marty watches Cool Hand Luke all day and uses 3000GB. John studies and writes post all day.
I agree that Marty is obviously using more, but Marty is using more what exactly? Bandwidth or data? Comcast is not saying Marty is causing congestion, they are just saying Marty uses more data and that is not fair to John. Fair according to whom?
I would contend that in general, if Marty is watching Cool Hand all day every day, he likely is paying for more bandwidth. He has more pipe because he doesn't want to put up with interruptions and buffering while Newman eats the boiled eggs.
John is probably paying for a smaller pipe. His screen stays pretty static from minute to minute.
Isn't Marty already paying for the privilege of consuming more data by the fact that he has purchased a bigger pipe plan?
So now Comcast and others want Marty to pay for a larger pipe and charge him for "excess data" (they freely admit it is an amount they get to decide, arbitrarily). The content he consumes isn't costing Comcast anything. They didn't create it.
If this truly were a public electric utility situation, I pay an electrician (a one time charge) to install a wall socket every 6 feet, throughout my home. Some rooms have 220vac; my garage might even have 440vac. I can use all I want. As long as it is up to code, the utility does not care how I wire my home. I pay them for the flow of electrons monthly.
Comcast is charging monthly for both bandwidth (the size of the pipe) and the data that comes out of the pipe. Seems like a nice plan if you can get it.
Similar here with AT&T, previous unlimited dataplan modified to 130GB cap which at first seemed OK. $10 per 10GB per month, as needed, automatically added to billing period. But bandwidth usage is well above that and growing with google cloud print, iPhone cloud backups, file storage, and services, AT&T dsl internet router/wifi connectivity for cellphones, netbooks, laptops, and streaming services such as NetFlix, and news.
The idea of cloud computing, storage, soon to come Windows cloud OS, and media having moved to streaming seems to be at odds with the carriers.
Can't have it both ways.