backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 90 comment(s) - last by aLiEnblEuE.. on Oct 28 at 12:02 PM
New tech allows for superfast internet speeds in U.S.

Comcast Corp announced that it is now rolling out DOCSIS 3.0 “wideband” internet service for its subscribers, which will increase maximum line speed to 50 Mbps.

The deployment starts with a handful of markets – New England, Philadelphia, and New Jersey – but should be available in the top 10 markets nationwide by the end of the year.

Wideband service will be available to subscribers under two different prices: $62.95 or $139.95 a month for residential customers, and $99.95 or $189.95 a month for businesses. The higher priced “Extreme 50” service offers speeds of up to 50 Mbps downstream/ 10 Mbps upstream, while “Ultra” service offers half the bandwidth for half the price.

Current DOCSIS 2.0 speeds top out at around 38 Mbps for downstream service, per channel. DOCSIS 3.0 allows ISPs to bond multiple channels into a single connection, allowing for up to an eight-fold increase in speed – up to 300 Mbps in the U.S. and 400 Mbps in Europe. Furthermore, the new specification adds full support for IPv6.

Future versions of DOCSIS could see downstream speeds crossing the 1 Gbit/s mark, as the maximum number of bonded channels is allowed to increase; DOCSIS 3.0 allows for no more than 10.

Existing customers will see benefits too, says Comcast Corporate Communications Senior Manager Lynsey Silvesti, and can expect the speed of their service to double.

With DOCSIS 3.0, Comcast’s offerings are nearly at parity with Verizon’s fiber-to-the-curb “FiOS” service, whose most expensive option offers 50 Mbps downstream/20 Mbps upstream. Unlike FiOS, however, DOCSIS 3.0 is compatible with existing infrastructure – meaning that cable operators do not have to install new lines.

Cable subscribers looking to take advantage of the new technology will need to upgrade their modem, as existing modems are not compatible with the new specification.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
is this "powerboost" speed or real people speed?
By tastyratz on 10/23/2008 10:12:27 AM , Rating: 5
Docsis capabilities - has comcast ever been known for coming close to saturating it?
Who wants to bet if docsis 4.0 comes out at 1GB/s Comcast would then offer 100 meg service?

When Verizon turns up the heat and threatens them again with another crazy ftth speed jump comcast will bump it again.

Lets look at a this as duty cycle. 50Mb/s and Comcast caps customers at 250GB month.

There are 2048000 megabits in 250 gigabytes.

Assuming a rate of 50Mb/s you are limited to 40960 seconds of bandwidth, or 682.67 minutes, or 11.38 full peak hours usage a month. 744 hours in 31 days means that's less than 0.18% duty cycle.

Does anyone else see the rip off happening here?




By FITCamaro on 10/23/2008 10:22:46 AM , Rating: 2
I'd love to have that kind of speed. But yeah they'll need to raise that cap to 500GB or more in the near future. Especially if HD video streaming really starts to take off. I'd love to know how much bandwidth is used by streaming an episode of say the new Terminator show to my laptop uses.


By GaryJohnson on 10/23/2008 3:58:09 PM , Rating: 3
Hulu says in their faq that they use 2500kbps streams for some 720p videos (mostly clips).


RE: is this "powerboost" speed or real people speed?
By fishbits on 10/23/08, Rating: -1
By tastyratz on 10/23/2008 11:30:01 AM , Rating: 5
Funny,
Comcast has the cap and Verizon residential does not. Would downloading from your provider really constitute ripping off your neighbors? 1 hd movie can be 20gb. That was simply an example of how you pay an overly high monthly fee for a high speed pipe - but your allowed to utilize it for just over a standard business days time spread out over a month.

Business class needs SLA's for speed and response time and THAT is what you should be paying for.

By posting that your spreading the same propaganda Comcast is. Did you see your cable internet monthly prices go down when they instituted the cap? Do you think you ever will?
The only thing a data cap will do is limit your service while you pay the same price.

Since 2001, web data traffic has grown 25-40% per user

I just went through the Comcast website as if I wanted to sign up for the residential internet service. Sure they sent out emails to existing customers... But there was No mention whatsoever even in the fine print when going through the checkout process that there would be a limit of 250 gigs. Funny how they neglect to tell anyone new signing up.

http://www.comcast.com/shop/buyflow/default.ashx?P...

Don't post like its ripping off Comcast by a figured .2% duty cycle. Comcast has a monopoly and squeezes the consumer into these positions.

How much do you want to bet 5 years later we would still be at 8 meg service if Fios and other competing services never surfaced?

you should check out stopthecap.com


By Grast on 10/23/2008 11:46:28 AM , Rating: 3
Tast,

You are correct regarding Comcast deseptive marketing practice. The 250GB limit should be posted. I have a feeling they are going to get sued again.

While I do agree that if you want unlimited access paying for a business account is the correct action. Comcast still has duty inform new customers of the limitating practice.

Later..


RE: is this "powerboost" speed or real people speed?
By FITCamaro on 10/23/08, Rating: -1
RE: is this "powerboost" speed or real people speed?
By wempa on 10/23/2008 12:57:42 PM , Rating: 5
Legal data or not, his argument is valid. Does ONLY pirated data count towards the 250GB cap ? NO. ALL data consumes the cap. Like other people have mentioned, there are legitimate ways to hit the 250GB cap. Whether the argument is 1 HD movie (illegal) or 5 full Linux distributions (legal), it's all the same.


RE: is this "powerboost" speed or real people speed?
By FITCamaro on 10/23/08, Rating: -1
RE: is this "powerboost" speed or real people speed?
By bigboxes on 10/23/2008 2:54:29 PM , Rating: 5
You've got it wrong FIT. The fact is the ISP shouldn't care what you are doing. They are just providing the highway. How you use that highway is another argument. The ISP should not be the enforcers of the law. They can institute a cap as long as they are up front about it if that's what they need to do to insure that all their customers have adequate performance. To throttle based on activity or to cap without being up front is wrong. Data is data. Providers should treat it as such. Either be up front with your business practices or improve your infrastructure. I hope they get sued again.


By wempa on 10/23/2008 3:54:22 PM , Rating: 3
Exactly. Comcast was already sued and found guilty of "selective" delivery when they were dropping P2P traffic. They said it was equivalent to the postal service opening up letters and determining that they didn't need to be delivered or could be delayed. What's in the data is not even part of this argument.


By FITCamaro on 10/23/2008 4:05:16 PM , Rating: 1
I agree with you. Some of them weren't phrasing their article as such though.

quote:
The ISP should not be the enforcers of the law.


This is also correct. The problem is that content providers are threatening to sue internet providers saying they are basically being an accessory to theft by not cracking down on illegal file sharing. So ISPs have to play the thin line they're given.

quote:
They can institute a cap as long as they are up front about it


How are they not being up front?


By Yames on 10/24/2008 5:24:34 PM , Rating: 2
You still have flawed logic FIT. Take the postal example. Are they an accessory when someone mails a pound of pot from Texas to Minnesota? Of course not. The ISP is not responsible for their users activities, and anyone suing is going to lose.

I can just see it now. Apartment complex gets sued for allowing drug dealer in complex because they did not go into the apartment and search for drugs.


By wempa on 10/23/2008 3:48:52 PM , Rating: 4
I didn't know that Torrents implied illegal. That's news to me.


By Oregonian2 on 10/23/2008 1:37:26 PM , Rating: 1
How big are they? DirecTV is setting up for VOD 1080p downloads via the internet to their DVR boxes. I have no idea how big it'll be (SW upgrades over the last couple days that locked people's HD-DVR boxes up (including all of our three) is part of that upgrade).


By tastyratz on 10/23/2008 1:51:15 PM , Rating: 1
Not sure as far as directTV goes. sat. providers are known to have some of the worst quality HD programming because they compress the signal to a far lower bit rate compared to fiber and cable providers. "HD" resolution movies could be as small as just a couple gb... But a full featured high quality hd blu-ray movie can take up the full 50 gigs of space.


RE: is this "powerboost" speed or real people speed?
By Spuke on 10/23/2008 3:18:42 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
sat. providers are known to have some of the worst quality HD programming because they compress the signal to a far lower bit rate compared to fiber and cable providers.
You have that backwards dude. It's the cable providers that are compressing the signals not sat providers.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=10...


By Oregonian2 on 10/23/2008 6:09:10 PM , Rating: 3
And DirecTV is improving their HD by moving their first HD channels that were MPEG2 to MPEG4 (they may be done with that now). They're less space constrained now that they're incorporating their new mega satellite addition into the channel distribution (and have been adding HD channels).


By Oregonian2 on 10/23/2008 6:14:48 PM , Rating: 2
P.S. - This DirecTV VOD is NOT satellite delivered, it's INTERNET delivered, so regardless of what one might think of their satellite delivered quality, that may not matter for their 1080p internet delivered version of movies (may go in either direction, I know not their sizes -- AFAIK they don't actually do it yet, the HD-DVR software to support it was only rolled out a couple days ago).


By Spuke on 10/23/2008 6:49:21 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
that may not matter for their 1080p internet delivered version of movies
Gotcha. I imagine VOD would be compressed, but like you said we don't know yet.


By foolsgambit11 on 10/23/2008 6:24:14 PM , Rating: 2
Your supporting article shows that Comcast has some channels that are overcompressed. It shows that you can get better quality content on FiOS. It does not show that satellite providers have a higher quality picture.

Got any evidence to counter the general thrust of his argument that satellite providers have poor quality HD programming?


By Spuke on 10/23/2008 7:06:26 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Got any evidence to counter the general thrust of his argument that satellite providers have poor quality HD programming?
Yeah, read that link.


RE: is this "powerboost" speed or real people speed?
By Spuke on 10/23/2008 3:16:20 PM , Rating: 1
Mine updated just fine. Your installer probably misaligned your dish which caused intermittent connections.


By Oregonian2 on 10/23/2008 6:03:00 PM , Rating: 2
The three, after red-button reboots, all updated "properly" within a day after the manual reboots. Because DirecTV had locked up massive numbers of HR2x boxes (mine are HR21-700's) a few weeks ago followed by a "sorry about that" email a week or so later, I think it more likely their fault. Any download of updates should not be sensitive to data errors in the download path else everything would likely be toast -- even if errors get by any FEC it should at least be able to verify correctness of the new download image before trying to use it to update programming (after all it does have a third of a terabyte or so hard disk inside it's box that it could hold it before loading). :-) We don't have any noticeable problems with channel integrity when watching shows.


By FredEx on 10/24/2008 8:37:11 AM , Rating: 2
BD-Live via Sony just for one. More are coming.


By Spivonious on 10/23/2008 10:51:31 AM , Rating: 1
I can't imagine that the cap won't be changed for those customers paying for the higher speeds.

Although, it could turn out like the megapixel race, where Joe Plumber says "I've got 30Mbps and you only have 15. I'm better than you." even though he never uses more than .2% of it.


By Spivonious on 10/23/2008 11:08:28 AM , Rating: 3
Not sure what duty cycle means, but running full speed until you hit the cap would take you to 1.5% of the hours in a 31 day month.


By tastyratz on 10/23/2008 11:34:04 AM , Rating: 1
Duty cycle for usage is on off time.
To hit the bandwidth cap assigned by Comcast at 50 megabit speeds your internet would be on 0.18% of the time and off 99.82% of the time. 11 hours on 744 hours off. Know what I mean?


By Spivonious on 10/23/2008 12:50:48 PM , Rating: 2
Where do you get .18% from?

11/755 = 0.0146, or 1.46%.


By tastyratz on 10/23/2008 1:37:09 PM , Rating: 2
24hrs x 31 days =744 hrs.
I stand corrected and it looks like were both wrong. 11.38/744= 0.0153 or 1.53%

That's like arguing over a stubbed toe from a carbomb shockwave or 75 cents when your friend owes you 50 dollars. 1.53% is still miniscule on comparison to the 98.47 "off" time of


By foolsgambit11 on 10/23/2008 6:33:30 PM , Rating: 3
Hey hey hey. Let's not be melodramatic. After all, in February on non-leap years, you'll get 1.69% on time. Huge difference.


By omnicronx on 10/23/2008 11:16:55 AM , Rating: 1
I don't think you see the greatness Comcast's system over Verizons, its going to take years for Verizon to install a fiber network to all existing locations that used to be DSL.
The fact that they can also bond channels now increasing the bandwidth for all existing customers is quite amazing, and yes I would not be surprised at all if Comcast was coming very close to saturation, why else would they be so concerned about curbing p2p use. Its seems pretty well known that Comcast squeezes as many customers it can per channel, this should help eliminate that problem. (for now)

Is the highest package a ripoff, probably, will this benefit all customers whether or not they choose to use this new service, yes it will. I would not be surprised to see the 250GB cap totally removed from the highest package, the article never mentions it the Cap at all, and for them to compete with Verizon, chances or they will have to remove are greatly raise the cap for certain packages.


By tastyratz on 10/23/2008 11:55:19 AM , Rating: 2
Cable definitely already has the highest market penetration compared to fiber... but so doesnt DSL. Market availability doesn't trump capability. If you have the option for fios its worth it. I guarantee that Fiber to the home trumps cable capabilities from here in.

Verizon already offers 100 meg service. The GPON limitations right now are 1.2gb/s a fiber (you get your own fiber to the node) That means if they decided to at any point right now they could freely open the network to 1.2gb/s for consumers. FTTH is so far advanced vs copper its laughable just how pedestrian the rates they sell it at now are. By the time comcast gets there fiber will be even faster.

Copper is old technology and this bandaid just keeps them competitive for a little bit longer in areas where ftth is available.

When I say saturation I mean Docsis standards. Docsis 3.0 allows 300Mb/s to the consumer. Docsis 2.0 allowed 38Mb/s to the modem. That is what the cable modem and infratructure is capable of if Comcast offered an updated backbone to support it.

Many people seem to ignore markets in almost every other country in the world than the usa. They operate with more data and more speed per month competitively. They are just trying to maximize profits while limiting costs. This is understandable from any business venture but it degrades the quality of the product. As a consumer we have to know when to step in and say when we wont accept something at the beginning of the trends.


By omnicronx on 10/23/2008 12:14:03 PM , Rating: 2
I never said Fiber does not trump cable, what I said is that even though the capabilities of cable are a tiny bit behind what Verizon already has with Fios, they already have the infrastructure in place.

http://www.fiberexperts.com/fios-availability.html

http://charter.breldyng.net/ -comcast

Now compare the availability of Fios with cable, which is already available in most urban areas.

Fiber will take YEARS to deploy its service to everyone, and chances are it will have even more limitations than DSL in terms of availability. Comcast on the other hand just has to update its hardware, and does not have to dig up their entire infrastructure.

In terms of a what is the best business choice, it seems that the solution the cable companies have come up with are much much more cost effective, which is always a good thing for the customer in terms of service.

Personally the difference between the two services is pretty negligible unless you plan on using the service for some kind of server and upstream makes a difference. Its going to come down to who has the best availability, and if all goes well, it seems like Comcast is going to get the nod in this respect. Then again, it is Comcast we are talking about here (some of the worst ISP horror stories I have ever heard), so only time will tell.


By Oregonian2 on 10/23/2008 1:50:57 PM , Rating: 2
Note too that "infrastructure" is more than just the links to the homes. The speeds we're talking about are the speeds from the home to the central office (or equivalent). Then there's the matter of the infrastructure in what happens to the data when it gets to that central office. How well are those offices connected to the backbones and/or is part of that in-house or not. How do the higher-level networks compare between the companies? Does it vary by location?


By theapparition on 10/23/2008 3:34:09 PM , Rating: 2
The future is fiber, as the OP pointed out. Delaying that will only hurt your long term business goals.

Will Comcast have larger penetration than FIOS. Yes. Will they make signifigant revenue on it....maybe. There are some who will upgrade, but most others won't for the cost increase.

All the while, Verizon will be rolling out it's more advanced Fiber network. At some point, Comcast will hit a wall and Verizon will be there to pick up the pieces.


By rudy on 10/23/2008 7:57:18 PM , Rating: 3
It does not matter because comcast will not roll out the capability to anyone except those in FIOS areas. That is how they work. One person said if it were not for FIOS we would still be at 8mb well guess what no fios in my area and I am stuck on crappy 6mb with comcast. To try to make me feel better they give me this terible power boost which lasts about 1 minute before running out.


By Oregonian2 on 10/23/2008 1:45:36 PM , Rating: 2
Actually G-PON is 2.4Gbps on the downlink.

Note too that the newly installed Fiber for Verizon allows them to compete with Comcast for TV delivery as well (on that same single fiber) and is reputed to be of much higher quality than Comcast as well. In this respect Verizon is "catching up".


IPv6
By vailr on 10/23/2008 9:54:21 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
Furthermore, the new specification adds full support for IPv6.

So now I'll need to be looking for a low cost IPv6 router. Preferably wired router, since I'm not using any wireless devices. Looking on Google search doesn't currently find any IPv6 wired home/SOHO routers.




RE: IPv6
By Lord 666 on 10/23/2008 9:59:51 AM , Rating: 2
Like a used 2801 found on ebay?


RE: IPv6
By borismkv on 10/23/2008 10:11:47 AM , Rating: 2
IPv6 is backwards compatible. There is also less of a requirement for home routers, since the full IPv6 protocol does away with NAT.


RE: IPv6
By borismkv on 10/23/2008 10:12:36 AM , Rating: 2
Oh...and the Cisco 800 series support IPv6. They do, however, cost 5 times as much as a typical home router.


RE: IPv6
By koenshaku on 10/23/2008 10:23:10 AM , Rating: 5
Oooooo all this speed with a 250gb monthly quota, no thanks I will stick with my DSL connection to avoid getting banned.


RE: IPv6
By JonnyBlaze on 10/23/2008 11:20:21 AM , Rating: 2
I download A LOT of ish. This is my stats at one site.
Uploaded 1.77 TB (2.18 GB/Day)
Downloaded 1.68 TB (2.07 GB/Day)

Even at this rate I wont hit the 250gb/ month quota.

When I get this speed boost, I don't see my self downloading more content, just the same stuff only faster.


RE: IPv6
By Souka on 10/23/2008 11:27:05 AM , Rating: 2
You're a slightly abouve a typical user...

But.... stream music 24/7 1GB/day

Watch a few movies during the week via netflix set-top box on HD setting...4-8GB per movie depending on compression level.

Run bittorrent to pull down music, videos, pr0n...Easily max bandwidth of 250GB.

With netflix, music, on-line backups, and torrents running at my home, I easily hit 25-30GB/day, sometimes more. Upgrading to DOCSIS will not fix that limitation. But... I looked at my useage... typical monthly avg varies..but mostly 100-300GB month, so I'll be ok.

To monitor useage I have a Linksys WRT54GL modem with Tomato firmware loaded...it has built in daily useage monitor...very nice.

My $.02


RE: IPv6
By Souka on 10/23/2008 11:31:04 AM , Rating: 2
Oh yeah... be glad you don't have cable down in Tucson AZ (friend lives there)...

If I remember right... he has Roadrunner cable... 40 or 50GB month cap... 30gb-down, 10gb-up or 40gb-down, 10-gb-up...can't remember which...

He laughed his *ss off when I told him about 250GB cap Comcast was imposing...


RE: IPv6
By FITCamaro on 10/23/08, Rating: -1
RE: IPv6
By DeuceHalo on 10/23/2008 12:20:58 PM , Rating: 1
Slightly above a typical user? I don't think the typical user is using anything close to a fraction of the 250GB/mo cap with email, surfing the web, IM, gaming, etc.

Also, why do you need to stream music and videos if you're pulling them in via torrents?


RE: IPv6
By Oregonian2 on 10/23/2008 1:24:29 PM , Rating: 2
If one were to backup all of one's disks once a week to a web storage site (who are pushing such things) how long would it take to use up 250Gb? Maybe half of one backup?

DirecTV is now setting up for internet delivery of VOD in 1080p format. Wonder how much 1080p video it takes to get to 250 Gb.

Internet delivery of video directly to one's TV (Netflix, etc) seems to be the new rage. Wonder how much traffic that provides?

Mind you, I think it's probably nearly impossible for the backbone infrastructure to handle it all if everybody were doing that simultaneously -- so there seems to be a clash between business plans. But maybe they've solutions in mind or Cisco is going to continue being very prosperous.


RE: IPv6
By Lord 666 on 10/23/2008 10:33:30 AM , Rating: 2
But with a 2801 you can have backup EVDO connection with the WWAN HWIC-EVDO and keep a DMVPN connection back to the office.


RE: IPv6
By Yames on 10/24/2008 5:37:16 PM , Rating: 2
He has a WWAN? I want one.


RE: IPv6
By DerekMorr on 10/23/2008 10:49:33 AM , Rating: 2
IPv6 is not backwards-compatible with IPv4. And it does require support from routers, in order to handle prefix delegation, router advertisements, etc.


RE: IPv6
By heffeque on 10/23/2008 4:49:16 PM , Rating: 1
Any DD-WRT router handles IPv6, but routers are kind of... not necessary when using IPv6, is it ;-) Switches will have to be used and they're cheap.


RE: IPv6
By drebo on 10/23/2008 8:30:35 PM , Rating: 2
Despite the fact that there are a trillion trillion trillion IPv6 addresses, NAT is still an integral part of network security and will never go away. NAT routers will always be here.


RE: IPv6
By DerekMorr on 10/23/2008 9:54:06 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, NAT has nothing at all to do with network security.

You still need routers with IPv6, though.


RE: IPv6
By Yames on 10/24/2008 5:38:47 PM , Rating: 2
IPv6 still requires routers.


RE: IPv6
By DerekMorr on 10/23/2008 10:48:38 AM , Rating: 2
There aren't a lot of SOHO routers that support v6, but there are a few:

D-link has several: DIR-615, DI-524, DI-784, DI-624, WBR-1310, WBR-2310.

So does linksys: RVS4000, WRVS4400N


RE: IPv6
By TomCorelis (blog) on 10/23/2008 11:52:12 AM , Rating: 2
What about a modded WRT54G? DD-WRT supports it, I think.


RE: IPv6
By DeuceHalo on 10/23/2008 12:03:38 PM , Rating: 2
I'd avoid the Dlink routers like the plague. The DI-624 I had was complete trash. It would reboot itself about every hour and their support was no help either. I finally got fed up, chucked it in the trash and picked up a Buffalo. Great little router, but probably doesn't have v6 support. I figure more will come out as v6 starts to become more prominent.


RE: IPv6
By Oregonian2 on 10/23/2008 1:29:05 PM , Rating: 2
The DIR-655 is very good. It's of a new-gen design that seems to be a lot better than older ones (in the forums). It's one of the best draft-N ones (and is available at Costco for easy return if one is having problems with it). I use it with FiOS.


RE: IPv6
By vailr on 10/23/2008 12:24:43 PM , Rating: 2
Apple's Airport Extreme also includes IPv6 support. But like I said before: I don't need, or want to pay ~$100 for a wireless router.
Just a decent quality wired ~$30 to ~$40 IPv6 router. And: new, not used.


RE: IPv6
By Chaser on 10/23/2008 11:23:52 AM , Rating: 2
Adds.

Why would you need IPv6 for a home or small office?


RE: IPv6
By Etsp on 10/23/2008 12:22:57 PM , Rating: 4
"Ok, we got your new internet connection all set up, but there's a catch... you don't have an IP address, we kinda ran out of them..."


RE: IPv6
By darkfoon on 10/23/2008 1:36:13 PM , Rating: 1
Why buy one? Build your own!

Old computer + 2 NICs + pfSense = Sweet router!!!

pfSense is my preferred choice. Easy to use. Tons of features. And you can brag to your friends about how you built your own router.
Plus, add in a wireless NIC, and you have a wireless router!

Give it a shot: pfsense.com


RE: IPv6
By foolsgambit11 on 10/23/2008 6:38:00 PM , Rating: 2
Massive overkill on hardware? Waste of electricity? Still need to have all the hardware sitting around?


Great, so now....
By dustya340 on 10/23/2008 9:48:54 AM , Rating: 5
We can hit the cap twice as fast and be throttled back down.... With all the talk of HD Movie streaming being the eventual replacement for physical media Comcast is gonna have to rethink there plans at some point.




RE: Great, so now....
By vapore0n on 10/23/2008 9:54:56 AM , Rating: 2
Comcast will also implement a throttling system starting Nov 08.
Im a Comcast subscriber and got that email from them. At leas they came out clean and told everyone, rather than just do it and then deny it.

Another thing. They only offer these services IF you pay for their cable or phone services, which sucks.
I pay full price for internet and get half the service!

Comcast has a grip on the high speed internet monopoly in my town. Only they provide it.
Man I wish FIOS was available in my town.


RE: Great, so now....
By FITCamaro on 10/23/2008 4:12:14 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Man I wish FIOS was available in my town.


You and me both.

I would kill for it. Don't even have to give me the Klondike bar.


RE: Great, so now....
By AMDZen on 10/23/2008 10:23:01 AM , Rating: 2
My thoughts exactly


RE: Great, so now....
By kattanna on 10/23/2008 11:11:07 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
With all the talk of HD Movie streaming being the eventual replacement for physical media Comcast is gonna have to rethink there plans at some point


not true.. why would they want to cannibalize their own cable TV services for which they get even more money?


RE: Great, so now....
By dustya340 on 10/23/2008 11:21:53 AM , Rating: 2
I'm not saying Comcast is pushing for it. They have their own Digital Cable On-Demand service. But there seems to be a move in general towards streaming/downloaded media. (ie. Itunes, Amazon Unbox, Hulu, etc...)


RE: Great, so now....
By kattanna on 10/23/2008 12:38:51 PM , Rating: 2
i agree since i am a netflix set top box user, which works a treat.. if there is something you want to watch on it.

im just hoping TW cable which i use for internet and phone doesnt impose a usage cap on us.


RE: Great, so now....
By omnicronx on 10/23/2008 12:34:50 PM , Rating: 2
Damned if they do, damned if they don't..

If increasing the available bandwidth to an area 10 fold regardless if you use their new high speed services is not rethinking, I don't know what is.


Almost the speed of the rest of the world
By Occid on 10/23/2008 10:15:20 AM , Rating: 4
at 3 times the price. Seriously, I was in Romania and they get speeds of 20-30mbps for 15$ a month. Greece? Same deal. The United States? That will be 80$ plus 30$ unwanted cable service. GO COMCAST!




By TomZ on 10/23/2008 10:45:11 AM , Rating: 2
In most areas of the US, Comcast enjoys a government-provided monopoly. I'm sure that only contributes to the cost problem. Same for other utilities. Government-created monopolies suck.


By Oregonian2 on 10/23/2008 1:56:56 PM , Rating: 2
Perhaps true, but you have to keep in mind that to folk living in Romania, 15$ is a lot more money than it is to an American. I've been there too.

My 20/5 Mbps service (in the US) is 53$ / month with Verizon (no video).


Servers?
By Spivonious on 10/23/2008 11:10:41 AM , Rating: 2
Can most web servers even deliver this speed?

Let's say they have 1000Mbps upload and 100 people connected. That's only 10Mbps/person.

Can someone with more knowledge about this chime in?




RE: Servers?
By Beno on 10/23/2008 11:22:34 AM , Rating: 2
You can boast of theoretical speeds, but once you connect to "real" internet, especially using foreign lines, you get back to being stuck in the narrow lines or in the internet traffic. But hey, you get your bragging rights!


RE: Servers?
By Oregonian2 on 10/23/2008 1:59:15 PM , Rating: 2
If it's streaming video all going simultaneously to multiple folk, they can use multicasting methods which reduces the network bandwidth used.


By Roy2001 on 10/23/2008 11:19:32 AM , Rating: 2
20 minutes a day at full speed. That's what you paid for.




By vapore0n on 10/23/2008 12:55:25 PM , Rating: 3
All I need is 5

:D


So does this mean...
By DanoruX on 10/23/2008 10:39:00 AM , Rating: 2
...us FiOS customers will see some free upgrades soon? :)




RE: So does this mean...
By Oregonian2 on 10/23/2008 2:01:14 PM , Rating: 2
Never know. My 15Mbps got upgraded for free to 20Mbps earlier this year (when others had their 5 Mpbs upgraded to 10 Mbps). To get it, most had to call and ask though.


Fiber is the future
By Beno on 10/23/2008 11:09:34 AM , Rating: 2
they fail to get the idea that fiber is the future.
who are we kidding?

fiber will always rule. fiber companies offer symmetric speeds like 100/100 if Verizon wanted.




Buy a new modem?
By Zorlac on 10/23/2008 5:01:45 PM , Rating: 2
I have had many Linksys cable modems going back 8 yrs or so and they have all advertised that they were upgradeable via firmware to DOCSIS 3.0. I seem to recall being told that the ISP has to supply the firmware upgrade.

Anyone know more about this?




Well it is an improvement
By catalysts17az on 10/23/2008 5:37:19 PM , Rating: 2
i have had my share of problems with my ISP.....to the point that i had to write them up the BBB. in the end the BBB cant do JACK! anyhow, i pay about 75 bones for 10 down and 768 up. i would welcome the 25 down for less than i pay, but just because you have the speed at your end does not always mean the other end is up to par with you. i just wish we had more choices for isp. were one of the wealthiest countries in the world with speeds that suck monkey balls. what ever happened with the space that was being auctioned off by the FCC? any free internet coming our way? well that my .02 cents




Comcast sucks.
By MagicSquid on 10/23/2008 6:16:54 PM , Rating: 2
They can increase the speed all they want and I still wouldn't use Comcast. As long as they have any bandwidth usage cap in place, I'd go to a different ISP. God forbid people actually use the internet for the intended purpose of sharing information!




behind...a little?
By excrucio on 10/26/2008 12:50:08 AM , Rating: 2
Cablevision puts out 33mbs down...its been liek that for 2 yrs already...

Theya re in beta for 50mbs...

but then again...once verizon bumps to 50+ cable will lose...the copper won't handle it. hence why asian countries and some eurpean countries roll on FiOS 100Mbs/100Mbs no prob.




digital voice modems modems?
By lazylazyjoe on 10/26/2008 7:51:30 PM , Rating: 2
Does anyone know if the current digital voice modems (emt's) will support docsis 3.0 (firmware upgrade, I guess) or if they will have new ones for 3.0. I have their digital voice and want a docsis 3 modem. Currently, the digital voice box and modem are the same.
Also,for everyone else's sake, I'm pretty sure if you sign up as commercial account, they remove the 250 cap.




Comcast cap
By aLiEnblEuE on 10/28/2008 12:02:57 PM , Rating: 2
C'mon guys....Comcast needs to cap your downloads to make sure there's plenty of BW for their fone service. Interesting how Comcast is working on turning the Internet into their own private fone company.




"Game reviewers fought each other to write the most glowing coverage possible for the powerhouse Sony, MS systems. Reviewers flipped coins to see who would review the Nintendo Wii. The losers got stuck with the job." -- Andy Marken

DailyTech Poll
Which web browser do you use on your primary personal machine? 






44 Comments







botimage
Copyright 2009 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki