reply to discussion
Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 73
  1. #1
    SMS
    Guest
    <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-tech/post/fcc-chairman-supports-broadband-data-caps-amid-netflix-protests/2012/05/22/gIQAfdN9hU_blog.html>

    While I understand Netflix's desire to piggyback their streaming service
    over broadband unlimited data, Comcast's lowest tier is 300GB/month.
    This translates to about 150 hours of the highest quality video
    available from Netflix. Is anyone watching five hours of HD video per
    day, or doing anything else that would get them up to 300GB? I suppose
    you could have a household with a lot of people doing multiple streams
    at the same time that would get you there, and there are tiers to
    support that model.

    Still, it's not like what Pandora is running into with tiered pricing
    for wireless data. There you have users regularly running into their
    limit, whether it's 100MB, 200MB, 300MB, 1GB, or 2GB/month, and probably
    deciding to find another source for music to save their data for more
    important tasks. Storing audio files on an iPod or smart phone, rather
    than doing wireless streaming, is a bit more of a hassle but not an
    undue hardship.

    What Netflix is worried about is the misperception that cable
    subscribers may have about data usage, and that the users may decide to
    drop Netflix streaming as a result.

    You have to wonder about a business model that relies on another company
    continuing to provide an unlimited service.



    See More: FCC Sides with Cable Companies on Tiered Pricing--Netflix Objects




  2. #2
    Justin
    Guest

    Re: FCC Sides with Cable Companies on Tiered Pricing--NetflixObjects

    SMS wrote on [Tue, 22 May 2012 09:14:45 -0700]:
    > <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-tech/post/fcc-chairman-supports-broadband-data-caps-amid-netflix-protests/2012/05/22/gIQAfdN9hU_blog.html>
    >
    > While I understand Netflix's desire to piggyback their streaming service
    > over broadband unlimited data, Comcast's lowest tier is 300GB/month.
    > This translates to about 150 hours of the highest quality video
    > available from Netflix. Is anyone watching five hours of HD video per
    > day, or doing anything else that would get them up to 300GB? I suppose


    That's only 2.5 hours per day for Mom & Dad watching one thing and
    kids watching another. Or stay at home Mom watching 5 hours a day.


    That's assuming all you do is Netflix. There are many other uses for
    the internet like online backup, downloading games seems to be where the
    market is going for all gaming devices, concoles and PCs. One game is 4-20GB

    Let's not forget it's TOTAL usage they count, so you uploading photos
    to grandma also counts as well as downloading stuff.



    > What Netflix is worried about is the misperception that cable
    > subscribers may have about data usage, and that the users may decide to
    > drop Netflix streaming as a result.


    Then there's the prioritization of their own Xfinity packets above those
    of Netflix or Hulu

    > You have to wonder about a business model that relies on another company
    > continuing to provide an unlimited service.


    The limits are FALSE to begin with.



  3. #3
    John Higdon
    Guest

    Re: FCC Sides with Cable Companies on Tiered Pricing--Netflix Objects

    In article <[email protected]>, Justin <[email protected]>
    wrote:

    > SMS wrote on [Tue, 22 May 2012 09:14:45 -0700]:
    > > <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...an-supports-br
    > > oadband-data-caps-amid-netflix-protests/2012/05/22/gIQAfdN9hU_blog.html>
    > >
    > > You have to wonder about a business model that relies on another company
    > > continuing to provide an unlimited service.

    >
    > The limits are FALSE to begin with.


    The reason the limits are there (note that they don't apply to content
    purchased from the carrier) is to discourage customers going elsewhere
    for content. That is the ONLY reason the limits are there. There is no
    shortage of bits.

    Note that sonic.net has no limits. Why? Because they are not a content
    provider and don't really give a damn what the data is used for. It is
    also interesting to note that Comcast business service has no limits.

    Business customers can use as much as they like but home users have to
    be restricted? That should tell you right there that Comcast doesn't
    care about the data volume as much as they don't want home users
    watching movies from Netflix.

    --
    John Higdon
    +1 408 ANdrews 6-4400



  4. #4
    Bhairitu
    Guest

    Re: FCC Sides with Cable Companies on Tiered Pricing--Netflix Objects

    On 05/22/2012 09:14 AM, SMS wrote:
    > <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-tech/post/fcc-chairman-supports-broadband-data-caps-amid-netflix-protests/2012/05/22/gIQAfdN9hU_blog.html>
    >
    >
    > While I understand Netflix's desire to piggyback their streaming service
    > over broadband unlimited data, Comcast's lowest tier is 300GB/month.
    > This translates to about 150 hours of the highest quality video
    > available from Netflix. Is anyone watching five hours of HD video per
    > day, or doing anything else that would get them up to 300GB? I suppose
    > you could have a household with a lot of people doing multiple streams
    > at the same time that would get you there, and there are tiers to
    > support that model.
    >
    > Still, it's not like what Pandora is running into with tiered pricing
    > for wireless data. There you have users regularly running into their
    > limit, whether it's 100MB, 200MB, 300MB, 1GB, or 2GB/month, and probably
    > deciding to find another source for music to save their data for more
    > important tasks. Storing audio files on an iPod or smart phone, rather
    > than doing wireless streaming, is a bit more of a hassle but not an
    > undue hardship.
    >
    > What Netflix is worried about is the misperception that cable
    > subscribers may have about data usage, and that the users may decide to
    > drop Netflix streaming as a result.
    >
    > You have to wonder about a business model that relies on another company
    > continuing to provide an unlimited service.


    If things are going to move forward in this country then you can't have
    data caps. And you can't in a lot of areas have two companies with a
    monopoly over broadband. Fiber now needs to be in the commons not the
    cash cow for a bunch of fat investors. We are already behind many
    countries as far as broadband goes just to suit a bunch of US suits.

    They want things in "the cloud" but seem to be unwilling to make it
    happen or available 24/7 no data caps.




  5. #5
    D. Peter Maus
    Guest

    Re: FCC Sides with Cable Companies on Tiered Pricing--Netflix Objects

    On 5/22/12 11:52 , Justin wrote:
    > SMS wrote on [Tue, 22 May 2012 09:14:45 -0700]:
    >> <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-tech/post/fcc-chairman-supports-broadband-data-caps-amid-netflix-protests/2012/05/22/gIQAfdN9hU_blog.html>
    >>
    >> While I understand Netflix's desire to piggyback their streaming service
    >> over broadband unlimited data, Comcast's lowest tier is 300GB/month.
    >> This translates to about 150 hours of the highest quality video
    >> available from Netflix. Is anyone watching five hours of HD video per
    >> day, or doing anything else that would get them up to 300GB? I suppose

    >
    > That's only 2.5 hours per day for Mom & Dad watching one thing and
    > kids watching another. Or stay at home Mom watching 5 hours a day.
    >
    >
    > That's assuming all you do is Netflix. There are many other uses for
    > the internet like online backup, downloading games seems to be where the
    > market is going for all gaming devices, concoles and PCs. One game is 4-20GB
    >
    > Let's not forget it's TOTAL usage they count, so you uploading photos
    > to grandma also counts as well as downloading stuff.
    >
    >
    >
    >> What Netflix is worried about is the misperception that cable
    >> subscribers may have about data usage, and that the users may decide to
    >> drop Netflix streaming as a result.

    >
    > Then there's the prioritization of their own Xfinity packets above those
    > of Netflix or Hulu
    >
    >> You have to wonder about a business model that relies on another company
    >> continuing to provide an unlimited service.

    >
    > The limits are FALSE to begin with.
    >




    There was a story that came out some time ago, in which the
    Chairman of ATT was commenting on the proposed Net Neutrality rules
    being discussed in the blogosphere, at the time. He proposed the
    ending of all unlimited data plans, not only for wireless, but for
    wired carriers, as well, because he was unwilling to let someone
    else use his pipe to make money that he didn't get a cut. Tiered
    plans were his recommendations as the only 'fair' solution. After
    all, business phone system and line rates have been prorated and
    linked to gross annual revenue of the subscriber since AG Bell. Only
    residential phones were flat rate.

    Almost immediately, other carriers distanced themselves from this
    blunt commentary, but they didn't dispute his point. And considering
    that consumer level internet is used more often than not to connect
    to for-profit sources, the commercial phone model can easily be
    applied to internet usage.

    But the data limits as imposed are less intended to prevent
    freerides on someone else's service, as much as they are
    protectionist measures in favor of the carriers' own content
    services, which, often, do NOT contain what the viewer/user is
    interested in. In this way, the carrier profits from the use of
    someone else's services, when their own do not meet the consumer's
    needs.

    In other words, the moves are intended to induce consumer choice
    limits...which is kind of antithetical to the intent of the internet.







  6. #6
    David Kaye
    Guest

    Re: FCC Sides with Cable Companies on Tiered Pricing--Netflix Objects

    "Bhairitu" <[email protected]> wrote

    > If things are going to move forward in this country then you can't have
    > data caps. And you can't in a lot of areas have two companies with a
    > monopoly over broadband.


    This is why we need government regulation. This scenario is exactly why the
    Libertarian philosophy doesn't work. In an unregulated field there is
    little/no room for small entrepreneurs. The big guys gobble up all the
    worthwhile competitors and the little guys get squashed. I'm still amazed
    it hasn't happened to Sonic.net yet, though I'm sure AT&T and Comcast are
    looking for ways to do it before they get too big.






  7. #7
    David Kaye
    Guest

    Re: FCC Sides with Cable Companies on Tiered Pricing--Netflix Objects

    "D. Peter Maus" <[email protected]> wrote

    > But the data limits as imposed are less intended to prevent freerides on
    > someone else's service, as much as they are protectionist measures in
    > favor of the carriers' own content services [....]


    Prior to the Reagan era there used to be anti-trust laws which told
    companies that not only could they not buy up all the competition, but they
    also could not "vertically integrate", that is, control all levels of
    service such as production, distribution, and end-user retailing.

    In the 1950s this led to the breakup of the movie studios. No longer could
    they provide content AND run movie theaters. They had to do one or the
    other. This saved the small mom'n'pop movie theaters from extinction
    because they were able to bid on first-run movies on a level playing field.

    Since the studios were allowed to get back into the theater business a few
    years ago, movies have been distributed mostly to owned chains and the
    little mom'n'pop theaters are dropping out of business like flies. In SF,
    the Metro, Roxie, and Balboa have gone non-profit, the Castro is dark 1 or 2
    nights a week, and thousands of theaters have closed across America.

    And yet, the movie theater model is not dead. China's theaters are growing
    by leaps and bounds and they've just announced the purchase of AMC Theaters
    here. In order to secure product for their theaters, the new Wanda/AMC will
    co-produce movies with Disney. And when the movies are released they will
    likely appear first at AMC and then maybe by the 4th month at indie
    theaters, if anybody wants to see them by then.

    Well, so too, the problem with Comcast (now majority co-owner of NBC, don't
    forget). I can see a time when Comcast will give preference to NBC-related
    programming (CNBC, MSNBC, Syfy, Telmundo, G4, Hulu, etc) such as maybe
    making it all basic tier, while competing programming (CNN, Discovery,
    History, Biography, Univision, etc) are relegated to higher-priced tiers.

    Anti-trust regulation is the only way out of this mess.






  8. #8
    AJL
    Guest

    Re: FCC Sides with Cable Companies on Tiered Pricing--Netflix Objects

    On Tue, 22 May 2012 11:21:47 -0700, John Higdon <[email protected]>
    wrote:

    >Business customers can use as much as they like but home users have to
    >be restricted?


    Business and residential users generally get different rates. If I
    used my (unlimited) home phone for a business I expect Cox would be
    inviting me to change to a business plan. Why would an ISP be
    different?



  9. #9
    D. Peter Maus
    Guest

    Re: FCC Sides with Cable Companies on Tiered Pricing--Netflix Objects

    On 5/22/12 14:52 , David Kaye wrote:
    > I can see a time when Comcast will give preference to NBC-related
    > programming (CNBC, MSNBC, Syfy, Telmundo, G4, Hulu, etc) such as maybe
    > making it all basic tier, while competing programming (CNN, Discovery,
    > History, Biography, Univision, etc) are relegated to higher-priced tiers.



    They already do.



  10. #10
    AJL
    Guest

    Re: FCC Sides with Cable Companies on Tiered Pricing--Netflix Objects

    On Tue, 22 May 2012 13:55:38 -0600, Todd Allcock
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    >The sole purpose of an ISP is to connect us to
    >the internet to use the variety of services available,


    The ISP is a business, not a charity. The *sole purpose* is to make
    shareholders happy (if a public company).

    >otherwise we could
    >go back to the walled gardens of circa-1985 AOL and Compuserve.


    Really? You could go back? Do the walled gardens still exist?

    >In my own case, I was perfectly happy with my provider's 1Mb/s
    >(eventually 3Mb/s) budget tier of service, but I upgraded to 7Mb/s for
    >$10/month more solely for Netflix's $8/month streaming package to work
    >acceptably. They're making more from my Netflix usage than Netflix is!


    Simple. If you're displeased vote with your wallet. Or else do like
    everyone else here. Pay the price and ***** about it...



  11. #11
    John Higdon
    Guest

    Re: FCC Sides with Cable Companies on Tiered Pricing--Netflix Objects

    In article <[email protected]>,
    "D. Peter Maus" <[email protected]> wrote:

    > In other words, the moves are intended to induce consumer choice
    > limits...which is kind of antithetical to the intent of the internet.


    Which is why content providers should not be data carriers and visa
    versa. Note the sonic.net has comparable rates to Comcastf, but does not
    impose limits.

    Sonic.net is not a content provider. Funny thing, that.

    --
    John Higdon
    +1 408 ANdrews 6-4400



  12. #12
    David Kaye
    Guest

    Re: FCC Sides with Cable Companies on Tiered Pricing--Netflix Objects

    "D. Peter Maus" <[email protected]> wrote

    >
    > They already do.


    I'm on Comcast and they don't give preference to NBC programming. Discovery
    is on channel 15, which is basic cable. Faux News, CNN, MSNBC, et al are
    all gathered together on basic and look comparable to the customer.
    Likewise, Comcast also offers History, Biography, and similar channels on
    basic.

    What I'm saying is that there'll come a time when Comcast offers a "basic
    basic" service very cheaply which will consist largely of their own channels
    and local brodcasters. I'd bet that you won't be seeing Biography, History,
    Discovery, CNN, or Weather on that service.








  13. #13
    Neil
    Guest

    Re: FCC Sides with Cable Companies on Tiered Pricing--Netflix Objects

    On 5/22/12 2:29 PM, David Kaye wrote:
    > "D. Peter Maus"<[email protected]> wrote
    >
    >>
    >> They already do.

    >
    > I'm on Comcast and they don't give preference to NBC programming. Discovery
    > is on channel 15, which is basic cable. Faux News, CNN, MSNBC, et al are
    > all gathered together on basic and look comparable to the customer.
    > Likewise, Comcast also offers History, Biography, and similar channels on
    > basic.
    >
    > What I'm saying is that there'll come a time when Comcast offers a "basic
    > basic" service very cheaply which will consist largely of their own channels
    > and local brodcasters. I'd bet that you won't be seeing Biography, History,
    > Discovery, CNN, or Weather on that service.
    >

    If by "Weather" you mean "The Weather Channel", that's another
    "property" in the Comcast/NBC-Universal stable. (You can trace the start
    of TWC's decline to the day NBC got its paws on it.)




  14. #14
    Neil
    Guest

    Re: FCC Sides with Cable Companies on Tiered Pricing--Netflix Objects

    On 5/22/12 2:23 PM, John Higdon wrote:
    > In article<[email protected]>,
    > "D. Peter Maus"<[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >> In other words, the moves are intended to induce consumer choice
    >> limits...which is kind of antithetical to the intent of the internet.

    >
    > Which is why content providers should not be data carriers and visa
    > versa. Note the sonic.net has comparable rates to Comcastf, but does not
    > impose limits.
    >
    > Sonic.net is not a content provider. Funny thing, that.
    >

    Sonic is also superbly responsive to subscribers, something neither
    Comcast nor AT&T can say with a straight face.




  15. #15
    D. Peter Maus
    Guest

    Re: FCC Sides with Cable Companies on Tiered Pricing--Netflix Objects

    On 5/22/12 16:29 , David Kaye wrote:
    > "D. Peter Maus" <[email protected]> wrote
    >
    >>
    >> They already do.

    >
    > I'm on Comcast and they don't give preference to NBC programming. Discovery
    > is on channel 15, which is basic cable. Faux News, CNN, MSNBC, et al are
    > all gathered together on basic and look comparable to the customer.
    > Likewise, Comcast also offers History, Biography, and similar channels on
    > basic.
    >
    > What I'm saying is that there'll come a time when Comcast offers a "basic
    > basic" service very cheaply which will consist largely of their own channels
    > and local brodcasters. I'd bet that you won't be seeing Biography, History,
    > Discovery, CNN, or Weather on that service.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >

    When I looked at Comcast for my television, they were doing it
    already, here.






  • Similar Threads







  • Quick Reply Quick Reply

    If you are already a member, please login above.