4 ms·

They've had a 1TB cap + pay per GB overages in basically everywhere they don't have competition already. For years. I've always hated looking at a several hundr

by ev1 6y ago

They've had a 1TB cap + pay per GB overages in basically everywhere they don't have competition already. For years. I've always hated looking at a several hundred dollar internet-only bill.

toomuchtodo 6y ago
Vote with your wallet, switch providers if you can. If you can’t, put the time into spinning up a coop or muni fiber ISP in your community (or a locally owned for profit ISP even). Failing all else, StarLink. https://muninetworks.org/content/muni-fiber-models-fact-sheet https://muninetworks.org/content/muni-fiber-models-fact-shee... https://startyourownisp.com/ https://startyourownisp.com/ https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24424910 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24424910
- ev1 6y ago
  I ran the second I could. Proper fiber is great. Sick of Comcast's 5 Mbps "up to" upload on their gigabit plan that they just use the word gigabit everywhere on but it takes 4 hours to upload a docker container.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - sitzkrieg 6y ago
    well if its cable provisioned gigabit (docsis3) has limits on upload of 35Mbit. but i hear you, i pay for gigabit and get an average of 600mbps down for many months now
- eyelidlessness 6y ago
  I live in a city which ostensibly has ISP competition, but it’s basically a fiction. Most of the city is in an enclave where one of the two major cable providers has exclusive rights. The parts of the city that require both providers to compete are dense, mostly apartments, and the providers get exclusive rights to each building. In most cases, the only other option is extremely slow DSL. I’ve researched my options at every place I’ve lived and I’ve consistently been stuck with Comcast. It’s really a shame.
- Beached 6y ago
  I wish I could get starlink. :( it will likely be 2+ years until it would be available to anyone
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- gruez 6y ago
  >Failing all else, StarLink. This doesn't make any sense. A Starlink satellite's bandwidth is shared with everyone under its radius, so any throttling/bandwidth caps is going to be even worse. A quick search says that each starlink satellite provides 20 Gbps each, which works out to 6.57PB per month, or around 5000 1.2TB/month users. This is the best case scenario, assuming that their usage is uniformly distributed per month. Most bandwidth use is bursty (think netflix in the evening), so in reality it's actually going to be much worse. Assuming a 4K stream at 25 Mb/s, one satellite would only service 800 users. Given comcasts' statistics (5% of users use more than 1.2TB/month), that would mean you need dozens of satellites to service all the heavy users in even a small town.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
junar 6y ago
I mean, I'm not a fan of the charge either, but proactively buying the unlimited data plan is only dozens of dollars more, not hundreds. https://www.xfinity.com/learn/internet-service/data https://www.xfinity.com/learn/internet-service/data
- ev1 6y ago
  This was actually not an option in the past. In one of those pre-existing markets you'd basically just purchase from Comcast Business instead for something like 100M down, same 2-5M up on coax for a few hundred a month w/o cap (and with mildly better support but still absolutely no help and will just hang up on you if you say you use Linux or your own router or modem). That page is new, and it is particularly obnoxious and sickening that the only way to get an unnecessary, arbitrary cap removed - the cheapest option is to use their hardware that you are not permitted to control, that emits Wifi hotspots that you cannot control, and remotely-controlled passwords. It's pretty much a Meraki rental that isn't yours. It's bordering on AT&T home internet's equivalence of "if you don't want us to sell all of your detailed DPI'd browsing history, add $50/m to your plan cost".

by ev1 6y ago

They've had a 1TB cap + pay per GB overages in basically everywhere they don't have competition already. For years. I've always hated looking at a several hundred dollar internet-only bill.

toomuchtodo 6y ago

Vote with your wallet, switch providers if you can. If you can’t, put the time into spinning up a coop or muni fiber ISP in your community (or a locally owned for profit ISP even). Failing all else, StarLink. https://muninetworks.org/content/muni-fiber-models-fact-sheet https://muninetworks.org/content/muni-fiber-models-fact-shee... https://startyourownisp.com/ https://startyourownisp.com/ https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24424910 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24424910

ev1 6y ago
I ran the second I could. Proper fiber is great. Sick of Comcast's 5 Mbps "up to" upload on their gigabit plan that they just use the word gigabit everywhere on but it takes 4 hours to upload a docker container.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- sitzkrieg 6y ago
  well if its cable provisioned gigabit (docsis3) has limits on upload of 35Mbit. but i hear you, i pay for gigabit and get an average of 600mbps down for many months now
eyelidlessness 6y ago
I live in a city which ostensibly has ISP competition, but it’s basically a fiction. Most of the city is in an enclave where one of the two major cable providers has exclusive rights. The parts of the city that require both providers to compete are dense, mostly apartments, and the providers get exclusive rights to each building. In most cases, the only other option is extremely slow DSL. I’ve researched my options at every place I’ve lived and I’ve consistently been stuck with Comcast. It’s really a shame.
Beached 6y ago
I wish I could get starlink. :( it will likely be 2+ years until it would be available to anyone
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
gruez 6y ago
>Failing all else, StarLink. This doesn't make any sense. A Starlink satellite's bandwidth is shared with everyone under its radius, so any throttling/bandwidth caps is going to be even worse. A quick search says that each starlink satellite provides 20 Gbps each, which works out to 6.57PB per month, or around 5000 1.2TB/month users. This is the best case scenario, assuming that their usage is uniformly distributed per month. Most bandwidth use is bursty (think netflix in the evening), so in reality it's actually going to be much worse. Assuming a 4K stream at 25 Mb/s, one satellite would only service 800 users. Given comcasts' statistics (5% of users use more than 1.2TB/month), that would mean you need dozens of satellites to service all the heavy users in even a small town.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]

junar 6y ago

I mean, I'm not a fan of the charge either, but proactively buying the unlimited data plan is only dozens of dollars more, not hundreds. https://www.xfinity.com/learn/internet-service/data https://www.xfinity.com/learn/internet-service/data

ev1 6y ago
This was actually not an option in the past. In one of those pre-existing markets you'd basically just purchase from Comcast Business instead for something like 100M down, same 2-5M up on coax for a few hundred a month w/o cap (and with mildly better support but still absolutely no help and will just hang up on you if you say you use Linux or your own router or modem). That page is new, and it is particularly obnoxious and sickening that the only way to get an unnecessary, arbitrary cap removed - the cheapest option is to use their hardware that you are not permitted to control, that emits Wifi hotspots that you cannot control, and remotely-controlled passwords. It's pretty much a Meraki rental that isn't yours. It's bordering on AT&T home internet's equivalence of "if you don't want us to sell all of your detailed DPI'd browsing history, add $50/m to your plan cost".