Media Wonk




User Profile

Paul Sweeting

Paul Sweeting is the editor of ContentAgenda.com and a columnist for Video Business. He has covered the home entertainment industries since 1985 for Billboard, Variety, Publishers Weekly and other leading business publications. He is based in Washington, DC.


User Stats

  • Recent Posts: 18
  • Avg Posts Per Week: 4
  • Posts Written: 503

RSS Feed

  • Add this blog to your RSS newsreader!

Recent Comments

Most Commented On

Archives

By Hot Topic

Blog

Paul Sweeting

Paul Sweeting, Media Wonk
ContentAgenda

Link This | Email this | Comments (2)


Comcast to cap bandwidth (Updated) - August 28, 2008

Comcast is poised to roll out a plan to cap total monthly bandwidth use by its ISP customers, according to a report up today Wednesday from Karl Bode of Broadband Reports. The move has been widely anticipated in the wake of the FCC's ruling last month that Comcast's throttling of BitTorrent traffic to try to reduce congestion on its network violated the agency's network-neutrality rules. Comcast has said it is working on a "protocol-agnostic" plan for network management that is likely to include a "consumption-based" approach.

Citing "sources" and documentation, Bode reports the cap will be set at 250 Gigabytes per month, beginning in October, which, if true, is actually a whopping lot of bandwidth--far more generous, for instance, than the 5 to 40GB per month caps Time Warner Cable is currently testing in Texas.

Depending on the compression system used, for instance, high-def movies weigh in at anywhere from 5 or 6GB up to about 15GB (depending also on just how "high" the "def" really is). At the low end, that's 50-60 full-length HD movies per month; at the high-end it's about 15 or 16 per month. As for standard-def movies, anywhere from 50 to 150 could fit under the cap (again, depending on the compression and other technical factors). According to an "insider" quoted by Bode, upstream bandwidth will not be affected, at least initially.

So who's downloading that much? According to Bode's sources, the plan would affect only about 14,000 of Comcast's 14 million Internet users, or about 0.1% of users.

So the next question is, will imposing a cap on that very small slice of the user base relieve enough congestion on Comcast's network by itself that the company won't need to actively manage other subscribers' use?

Probably not. On a shared-pipe network such as Comcast's, congestion can be a very localized and time-dependant phenomenon that is not necessarily relieved by capping usage globally. If my neighbor is using Comcast to download Blu-ray rips all day, my Web surfing on the same Comast circuit is still going to be impacted, even if he stays under 250 GB per month.

But as a starting point, it could be a reasonable compromise.

UPDATE:
Comcast confirmed the story Thursday through an update posted to the Network Management Policy page of its Terms of Service:
It's no secret we've been evaluating a specific monthly data usage or bandwidth threshold for our Comcast High-Speed Internet residential customers for some time. Rumors circulated online last year and they popped up again in May.
[...]
Today, we're announcing that beginning on October 1, 2008, we will amend our Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) available at http://www.comcast.net/terms/use/ and establish a specific monthly data usage threshold of 250 GB/month per account for all residential customers.

250 GB/month is an extremely large amount of data, much more than a typical residential customer uses on a monthly basis. Currently, the median monthly data usage by our residential customers is approximately 2 - 3 GB. To put 250 GB of monthly usage in perspective, a customer would have to do any one of the following:
* Send 50 million emails (at 0.05 KB/email)
* Download 62,500 songs (at 4 MB/song)
* Download 125 standard-definition movies (at 2 GB/movie)
* Upload 25,000 hi-resolution digital photos (at 10 MB/photo)


[Consumer Trends]  [Content Protection & Management]  [Regulation & Legislation]  [Streams & Downloads]   LEAVE A COMMENT
POST A COMMENT
Display Name or Registered Bloggers Login Here.

Before submitting this form, please type the characters displayed above:


nkdzpa
August 30, 2008
Response to:
Comcast to cap bandwidth (Updated)

leldixcgbirjvbgxrqlrshlhmtjwtt




ChiefAlchemist
September 13, 2008
Response to:
Comcast to cap bandwidth (Updated)

1) Hey Paul, just wanted to say that you've always got good stuff. Kudos to you. 2) With regards to this issue (and sorry I'm late to comment) it really comes down to one thing - lack of competition (or they like playing chicken with the competition they do have). While Comcast has a point, as well as an order from the FCC, no company is going to offer less and expect their competition not to hang them with it. Sure, it's A LOT of bandwidth but your average consumer doesn't know that. Imagine for example Verizon saying, "We're unlimited. The other guys aren't." Bingo! Game over! The other possibility is Comcast is trying to invite their competition to join the throttle strategy. IMHO that's a dangerous route to take. Look at the airlines. No differentiation what so ever. It was bad enough a couple years ago and it's since gotten worst. The compete on price because that's all they have. Luckily some have figured that out and actually offer service, etc that help them stand out. Position yourself as a commodity and eventually that'll bite you in the ass :) That said, one of the worst customer service interactions in my life was with Comcast. I'd rather book a trip on the Titanic and take my chances than be a customer of Comcast. Yeah, that bad. 3) Btw, is there a reason why CA.com/Sweeting doesn't come right to the blog? Call me lazy and/or over worked but it took me a while to figure out I need to click again. Thanks again, Mark Simchock Alchemy United www.AlchemyUnited.com