5 ms·

Your electric utility service is capped, but they use a different method because electric utilities are metered. You have a fixed capacity feed to your house. F

Your electric utility service is capped, but they use a different method because electric utilities are metered. You have a fixed capacity feed to your house. For example, our home has 150 amp service. I cannot exceed that draw or the main feed breaker trips and everything goes dark. I can request installation of a larger feed, but I have to pay the build-out, and there are hard limits based on my local zoning. One thing is certain, in no way do I have "unlimited" electricity available at my home. Contrast this to your ISP. Say they deliver a 15/3 mbps (down/up) service to your home. The actual data transfer usage isn't metered (you pay a fixed price), but there is a cap for residential service. The reason for the cap is that Comcast has to make arrangements for transfer of that data to its destination, which will cross over in to other carrier's networks. Many of these agreements are made on trade between carriers, but if there is an imbalance, Comcast has to pay. The only alternative is metered transfer. If you had a commercial grade internet connection, you'd already pay based on two factors (sometimes more): * Available bandwidth * Data transfer * (Sometimes) Port capability For example, if you get metro ethernet service that is capable of 100 mbps, you might pay a 100 mbps port charge. You can order only a fraction of that bandwidth however; say, 20 mbps. Along with that, you'll pay a data transfer allowance; usually purchased in buckets. You can scale this to your need. Businesses make this decision based on a profile of their usage. Do they need to transfer lots of data at a relatively slow (but consistent) rate? Or do they need to transfer large chunks of data periodically, but very quickly? Maybe they need to transfer lots of data really fast? Residential customers don't want to think about this. They want to pay a fee and receive service. Comcast built a product around the profile of typical consumer usage. If you go outside that, you get business service, which means you pay for what you use. This whole notion that unlimited internet for $60/month is some kind of "right" is just preposterous.

fr0sty 15y ago
> If you go outside that, you get business service, Actually in this case you get banned for a year without recourse. It baffles me why they didn't just try to upsell the guy.
- CamperBob 15y ago
  Possibly because their business service has a lot more competition than their residential service, hence lower margins. Comcast business service is actually a bargain, at least around here. You pay maybe $15-$20/month more than you would for bare-bones residential service, you get to run servers if you want, suck down all the Netflix you can watch, and you get instant access to US-based tech support. Also, my understanding is that the various MAFIAA BitTorrent enforcers avoid targeting business-class IP ranges because unlike Grandma in her basement, businesses tend to put up a fight. I wouldn't even think about going back to a residential account at this point. Given my household's usage patterns, I can't imagine Comcast makes any more money off of me than they would if I had a residential account, so I wouldn't expect them to upsell me aggressively if they were otherwise trying to get rid of me.
astrodust 15y ago
If you have a 100 amp power feed, then you should be able to use up to 100 amps. If you have a 100Mbit feed, you should be able to use up to 100Mbits. The big difference between electricity and bandwidth is that electricity has to be produced and this involves considerable expense. Bandwidth is always there so long as the equipment is powered on, which ends up being a marginal cost in the scheme of things. Look at how power is priced: $/KWH. Bandwidth is priced at $/Gbit. Not Gbyte, but Gbit. You pay for capacity and usage comes along for free.
- cbr 15y ago
  I think you're confused about the difference between Gbit and Gbyte. One Gbyte is eight Gbits.
  - nitrogen 15y ago
    I think the confusion may actually stem from the fact that the OP intended Gbit to be Gbit/s (a rate, not a quantity).
- bradleyland 15y ago
  You're confusing the last mile transmission capability with the cost of transferring the data in and out of the network. Let's say you and I go in to business together and build a microwave wireless internet service. There is commodity equipment available that can push 100 mbps pretty easily. We buy a microwave transmission tower and central office from a company that is going out of business at a rate that cannot be beat. We price out our customer premises equipment so that we make half our money back on the setup fee, so setup costs are minimal. We're now ready for business. We can provide 100 mbps internet service to customers with minimal equipment cost. Sweet! Here's the rub. Unless our customers are content to transfer data only between themselves, we're going to need some outside connectivity. We need to peer with all the major networks. So we try to set up peering agreements with ATT, Level 3, and UUNet. The problem is, they have no need to transmit data over our networks, so we have a huge imbalance. We have to pay for every single bit our customers transmit. It's time to rethink our 100 mbps bandwidth policy, is it not? Just because we can transmit at 100 mbps to the customer, doesn't mean we can afford for them to use all that bandwidth all the time. There is a cost associated with transferring data over partner networks, and someone has to pay that cost. Comcast's residential pricing model does so in a way that is dead simple for consumers. If you don't fit that model, you should purchase business service.
masklinn 15y ago
> Your electric utility service is capped, but they use a different method because electric utilities are metered. You have a fixed capacity feed to your house. For example, our home has 150 amp service. I cannot exceed that draw or the main feed breaker trips and everything goes dark. I can request installation of a larger feed, but I have to pay the build-out, and there are hard limits based on my local zoning. > One thing is certain, in no way do I have "unlimited" electricity available at my home. By that metric, uncapped data is not unlimited, and thus does not need a cap. > This whole notion that unlimited internet for $60/month is some kind of "right" is just preposterous. It's not unlimited since it's (by your own account) 15/3. That's a limitation right there, identical to your 150 amp service. And you can not exceed that limit period (you won't even get close to it, really). No need for a breaker.
- bradleyland 15y ago
  > It's not unlimited since it's (by your own account) 15/3. That's a limitation right there, identical to your 150 amp service. And you can not exceed that limit period (you won't even get close to it, really). No need for a breaker. It is one form of limitation, but it is not the most relevant. The point is that Comcast has to pay for the transfer of data in and out of their network. So they have two choices: * Meter your data transfer and charge a base fee for available bandwidth (just like commercial usage) * Throttle your bandwidth so that you cannot exceed a set monthly transfer amount Do you really want either? I don't. Assuming you want the later option, here's the breakdown: 250 GB -> 2,000 Gb (gigabits) There are 2,678,400 seconds in a month. 2,000 Gb per 2,678,400 seconds Reduced is: 0.0007467145 Gb per 1 second Multiply by a factor of 1,048,576 (kilobits in a gigabit) and you get: 782.9868578256 kbps To cap you at 250 GB per month (which their model is built around), you'd end up with an internet connection that is roughly the speed of an entry-level DSL connection (768 kbps DSL). Does that make any sense to anyone? You can't simply wash away the cost of transferring the data in and out of their network with some government mandate. The other option is to pay for metered bandwidth. This means the additional overhead of metering each customer, as well as the additional billing infrastructure. Not an impossible problem, but it's a lot of data to track, and the overhead is undeniable, so you'll end up getting more for less. OR! We could all cooperate and agree that there is a "typical" consumer use case with a soft ceiling of 250 GB of transfer per month. If can't operate within that ceiling, you should look in to a business-class connection where the pricing models fit your needs better.
GrooveStomp 15y ago
> Your electric utility service is capped, but they use a different method because electric utilities are metered. You have a fixed capacity feed to your house. For example, our home has 150 amp service. I cannot exceed that draw or the main feed breaker trips and everything goes dark. I can request installation of a larger feed, but I have to pay the build-out, and there are hard limits based on my local zoning. It sounds like the analogy here would be having an internet connection that has a maximum throughput of X. If you want X+Y, where Y is larger than zero, then you would have to buy a larger throughput connection. Once that's done, you'd be free to use it as much as you want, provided you pay for that usage. That doesn't seem to be the case in the linked article here.
- bradleyland 15y ago
  You're correct in your representation of the differences in the model, but I'm not sure anyone really wants the utility model. They might think they do, but they haven't done the math. If Comcast has built a business around a 250 GB/month cap, they'd have to throttle your connection to 783 kbps to keep you under that cap (assuming you used your maximum connection all the time).
nitrogen 15y ago
Your electric utility service is capped, but they use a different method because electric utilities are metered. You have a fixed capacity feed to your house. For example, our home has 150 amp service. I cannot exceed that draw or the main feed breaker trips and everything goes dark. I can request installation of a larger feed, but I have to pay the build-out, and there are hard limits based on my local zoning. One thing is certain, in no way do I have "unlimited" electricity available at my home. That's not a cap, that's a throughput limitation, just like with an ISP. I'd be surprised if they stopped you from using your full 36kW 24/7 for a month as long as you were paying your $4k electric bill on time. The reason for the cap is that Comcast has to make arrangements for transfer of that data to its destination, which will cross over in to other carrier's networks. Many of these agreements are made on trade between carriers, but if there is an imbalance, Comcast has to pay. How does this square with Comcast charging Netflix for access to its customers? If Netflix is paying for the bandwidth, why do the customers have to pay as well? The only alternative is metered transfer. I think most people would be happy with metered transfer, but only if it is perfectly transparent and out of the control of the big media and pay TV companies. The metered price would have to reflect the decreasing costs of providing bandwidth, peering agreements would have to be open to public scrutiny, etc. The metered cost should start at something like $.10/GB and decrease over time, with a $5/mo connection fee to cover the amortized installation costs. There could be no allowance for ridiculous overage fees or total transfer caps.
CamperBob 15y ago
This whole notion that unlimited internet for $60/month is some kind of "right" is just preposterous. That call is not yours to make. It was Comcast's to make, before they advertised exactly that. In the US, the Federal Trade Commission frowns on false advertising.

fr0sty 15y ago

> If you go outside that, you get business service, Actually in this case you get banned for a year without recourse. It baffles me why they didn't just try to upsell the guy.

CamperBob 15y ago
Possibly because their business service has a lot more competition than their residential service, hence lower margins. Comcast business service is actually a bargain, at least around here. You pay maybe $15-$20/month more than you would for bare-bones residential service, you get to run servers if you want, suck down all the Netflix you can watch, and you get instant access to US-based tech support. Also, my understanding is that the various MAFIAA BitTorrent enforcers avoid targeting business-class IP ranges because unlike Grandma in her basement, businesses tend to put up a fight. I wouldn't even think about going back to a residential account at this point. Given my household's usage patterns, I can't imagine Comcast makes any more money off of me than they would if I had a residential account, so I wouldn't expect them to upsell me aggressively if they were otherwise trying to get rid of me.

astrodust 15y ago

If you have a 100 amp power feed, then you should be able to use up to 100 amps. If you have a 100Mbit feed, you should be able to use up to 100Mbits. The big difference between electricity and bandwidth is that electricity has to be produced and this involves considerable expense. Bandwidth is always there so long as the equipment is powered on, which ends up being a marginal cost in the scheme of things. Look at how power is priced: $/KWH. Bandwidth is priced at $/Gbit. Not Gbyte, but Gbit. You pay for capacity and usage comes along for free.

cbr 15y ago
I think you're confused about the difference between Gbit and Gbyte. One Gbyte is eight Gbits.
- nitrogen 15y ago
  I think the confusion may actually stem from the fact that the OP intended Gbit to be Gbit/s (a rate, not a quantity).
bradleyland 15y ago
You're confusing the last mile transmission capability with the cost of transferring the data in and out of the network. Let's say you and I go in to business together and build a microwave wireless internet service. There is commodity equipment available that can push 100 mbps pretty easily. We buy a microwave transmission tower and central office from a company that is going out of business at a rate that cannot be beat. We price out our customer premises equipment so that we make half our money back on the setup fee, so setup costs are minimal. We're now ready for business. We can provide 100 mbps internet service to customers with minimal equipment cost. Sweet! Here's the rub. Unless our customers are content to transfer data only between themselves, we're going to need some outside connectivity. We need to peer with all the major networks. So we try to set up peering agreements with ATT, Level 3, and UUNet. The problem is, they have no need to transmit data over our networks, so we have a huge imbalance. We have to pay for every single bit our customers transmit. It's time to rethink our 100 mbps bandwidth policy, is it not? Just because we can transmit at 100 mbps to the customer, doesn't mean we can afford for them to use all that bandwidth all the time. There is a cost associated with transferring data over partner networks, and someone has to pay that cost. Comcast's residential pricing model does so in a way that is dead simple for consumers. If you don't fit that model, you should purchase business service.

masklinn 15y ago

> Your electric utility service is capped, but they use a different method because electric utilities are metered. You have a fixed capacity feed to your house. For example, our home has 150 amp service. I cannot exceed that draw or the main feed breaker trips and everything goes dark. I can request installation of a larger feed, but I have to pay the build-out, and there are hard limits based on my local zoning. > One thing is certain, in no way do I have "unlimited" electricity available at my home. By that metric, uncapped data is not unlimited, and thus does not need a cap. > This whole notion that unlimited internet for $60/month is some kind of "right" is just preposterous. It's not unlimited since it's (by your own account) 15/3. That's a limitation right there, identical to your 150 amp service. And you can not exceed that limit period (you won't even get close to it, really). No need for a breaker.

bradleyland 15y ago
> It's not unlimited since it's (by your own account) 15/3. That's a limitation right there, identical to your 150 amp service. And you can not exceed that limit period (you won't even get close to it, really). No need for a breaker. It is one form of limitation, but it is not the most relevant. The point is that Comcast has to pay for the transfer of data in and out of their network. So they have two choices: * Meter your data transfer and charge a base fee for available bandwidth (just like commercial usage) * Throttle your bandwidth so that you cannot exceed a set monthly transfer amount Do you really want either? I don't. Assuming you want the later option, here's the breakdown: 250 GB -> 2,000 Gb (gigabits) There are 2,678,400 seconds in a month. 2,000 Gb per 2,678,400 seconds Reduced is: 0.0007467145 Gb per 1 second Multiply by a factor of 1,048,576 (kilobits in a gigabit) and you get: 782.9868578256 kbps To cap you at 250 GB per month (which their model is built around), you'd end up with an internet connection that is roughly the speed of an entry-level DSL connection (768 kbps DSL). Does that make any sense to anyone? You can't simply wash away the cost of transferring the data in and out of their network with some government mandate. The other option is to pay for metered bandwidth. This means the additional overhead of metering each customer, as well as the additional billing infrastructure. Not an impossible problem, but it's a lot of data to track, and the overhead is undeniable, so you'll end up getting more for less. OR! We could all cooperate and agree that there is a "typical" consumer use case with a soft ceiling of 250 GB of transfer per month. If can't operate within that ceiling, you should look in to a business-class connection where the pricing models fit your needs better.

GrooveStomp 15y ago

> Your electric utility service is capped, but they use a different method because electric utilities are metered. You have a fixed capacity feed to your house. For example, our home has 150 amp service. I cannot exceed that draw or the main feed breaker trips and everything goes dark. I can request installation of a larger feed, but I have to pay the build-out, and there are hard limits based on my local zoning. It sounds like the analogy here would be having an internet connection that has a maximum throughput of X. If you want X+Y, where Y is larger than zero, then you would have to buy a larger throughput connection. Once that's done, you'd be free to use it as much as you want, provided you pay for that usage. That doesn't seem to be the case in the linked article here.

bradleyland 15y ago
You're correct in your representation of the differences in the model, but I'm not sure anyone really wants the utility model. They might think they do, but they haven't done the math. If Comcast has built a business around a 250 GB/month cap, they'd have to throttle your connection to 783 kbps to keep you under that cap (assuming you used your maximum connection all the time).

nitrogen 15y ago

Your electric utility service is capped, but they use a different method because electric utilities are metered. You have a fixed capacity feed to your house. For example, our home has 150 amp service. I cannot exceed that draw or the main feed breaker trips and everything goes dark. I can request installation of a larger feed, but I have to pay the build-out, and there are hard limits based on my local zoning. One thing is certain, in no way do I have "unlimited" electricity available at my home. That's not a cap, that's a throughput limitation, just like with an ISP. I'd be surprised if they stopped you from using your full 36kW 24/7 for a month as long as you were paying your $4k electric bill on time. The reason for the cap is that Comcast has to make arrangements for transfer of that data to its destination, which will cross over in to other carrier's networks. Many of these agreements are made on trade between carriers, but if there is an imbalance, Comcast has to pay. How does this square with Comcast charging Netflix for access to its customers? If Netflix is paying for the bandwidth, why do the customers have to pay as well? The only alternative is metered transfer. I think most people would be happy with metered transfer, but only if it is perfectly transparent and out of the control of the big media and pay TV companies. The metered price would have to reflect the decreasing costs of providing bandwidth, peering agreements would have to be open to public scrutiny, etc. The metered cost should start at something like $.10/GB and decrease over time, with a $5/mo connection fee to cover the amortized installation costs. There could be no allowance for ridiculous overage fees or total transfer caps.

CamperBob 15y ago

This whole notion that unlimited internet for $60/month is some kind of "right" is just preposterous. That call is not yours to make. It was Comcast's to make, before they advertised exactly that. In the US, the Federal Trade Commission frowns on false advertising.