Comcast Rolls Out $70-Per-Month Gigabit Internet Service In Chicago (pcmag.com) 93
An anonymous reader writes from a report via PC Magazine: Comcast is now offering Chicagoans gigabit internet speeds. PC Magazine reports: "Launched on Wednesday, the program uses DOCSIS 3.1 technology to deliver speeds up to 1Gbps over existing network infrastructure. DOCSIS 3.1 runs through standard cable connections already in place at your home or office. So Xfinity and Comcast Business Internet customers can simply sign up for a plan and plug in a new modem; no fiber installation required. The service, according to Comcast, allows you to download a 5GB HD movie in 40 seconds, a 60MB TV episode in four seconds, a 150MB music album in two seconds, or a 15GB video game in two minutes. Initial users have the choice of a promotional contract price of $70 per month for 36 months, or $139.95 per month (plus tax and fees) with no contract."
Re: (Score:3)
Says the cow!
So... this is just two dudes in a cow costume and one of them is Charlie Brown?
Re: (Score:3)
Even more importantly, if you haven't burned through your cap for the month first. I haven't heard much recently about it, but a bit ago Comcast was still planning on instituting a 300GB a month cap, despite selling the service as unlimited. Gigabit won't do you much good with a 300GB cap...
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
they went to 1tb
Re:"allows you to download a 5GB HD movie in 40 se (Score:5, Insightful)
Heck, for Gigabit, I think even a 1TB is low. I know it is for my family... there's 5 of us in the house, usually watching different things at the same time, and the only thing keeping us from watching multiple 4k streams at the same time is our bandwidth. Assuming each of us watched 2 hours a night and did nothing else, we would be through the cap in about half a month.
Re: (Score:2)
Is there really that much stuff in 4K to watch?
Re: (Score:2)
There's more every day. Netflix's library is actually halfway decent with new content already, relative to how new the standard is. And it's clear that content for 4k will be pushed out a lot harder than the HDTV content was when it first became available. So right now it may be a little sparse still, but in 6 months or a year or a year and a half? I'm quite sure we'll be swimming in it.
Re: (Score:2)
At my peak in bachelorhood I was having trouble reaching 250 GB/mo according to my DD-WRT router. I don't know how one family could burn through 5TB in one month.
Re: (Score:1)
I burned thru a terabyte and a half just by loading my steam games on my new PC.
I wouldn't mind the terabyte cap - as long as they capped their cable tv watchers (and surfers) on the same limit.
Unfortunately, con cast is looking to screw over the cord cutters and since it's either at$t or con cast in the metro area - there is no realistic budget plan that gets you a decent speed for less than 50 bucks.
Re: "allows you to download a 5GB HD movie in 40 s (Score:1)
Try Wide Open West. They cover much of Chicagoland, video is unencrypted QAM (so most people don't need a cable box) and their internet service doesn't have data caps.
Re: (Score:2)
That would be nice. I'm guessing they have no plans to include South Georgia in their coverage area in the near future though. I get internet from a local cable company and they're pretty good compared to what they have North of me in Macon. They've got Cox cable who are some seriously greedy bastards. My cable company is pretty limited by the fact they cover such a rural area. I'm paying 100 dollars a month for 75/5 speeds which is high but service is great.
Re: (Score:2)
The have very limited coverage [broadbandmap.gov] in the Chicago area, and are not an option for the vast majority.
Re: (Score:2)
Is there really that much stuff in 4K to watch?
4K is in the same state right now as the first days of stereo, when the only 'content' everyone had to show off was that vinyl demo record of the train running through the middle of the house.
Re: (Score:2)
I know that it was a long time after 1080p was introduced before there was much to watch. I finally upgraded to a 1080p TV when I noticed I couldn't see the score during live televised football games. Even then a lot of the shows I saw weren't 1080. I do love HD though and I know I'll be wanting a 4K system sooner or later. I just like to wait until it's economically reasonable. Right now I have a 500GB data cap and I think 4K would eat that up pretty quick.
Re: (Score:2)
There are five of us also - monthly we use around 900GB to 1.3TB. This is mainly Netflix, Skype and other streaming services. We don't watch any 4K. We don't torrent.
This is on an unlimited 80/20 VDSL service in the UK.
Jason.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
A monthly cap is very telling. It means that they don't have the capacity to deliver what they sold.
The idea with the cap is that the user will limit how much the use the bandwidth so that the average will be low enough for them to handle.
If everyone decides to use the bandwidth at the same time the company will not be able to deliver even if no-one is close to exceeding the cap.
If a monthly cap exists you should take it as a sign that you won't be able to get what you paid for.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
AC here.
I don't live in the US so when I pay $40 for 30/30Mbps I actually get it 24/7 without caps.
1Gbps symmetric would cost me $100/month no caps.
I can get it now without advances in backbone technology.
Should they run out of bandwidth they can increase the price until people no longer want it instead of lying about what they can deliver. That way you can make an informed choice about what you pay for.
The problem that exists in the US is that the market is locked up by a few greedy companies that rather u
Re: (Score:1)
it would be pretty much impossible without some serious advances in backbone technology
The backbone is about 70% idle and 90% of the fiber is dark. We're not even using the latest tech. Current tech in use is good for 100Gb per fiber, but the latest tech from the last 8 years is good for about 32Tb/s. Supply is way outpacing demand. I'm paying $50/m for a dedicated 150/150 fiber connection.
An uncapped fiber ISP selling 1gb/1gb with no congestion issues said 1.5% of their revenue goes to infrastructure and even less to bandwidth. Nearly all of their cost is customer support, sales, and adve
Re: (Score:2)
You can still buy a movie on iTunes and legally download it to your computer.
Don't know how many people still do this; it usually doesn't cost less than the Bluray so if I'm going to outright buy a movie I'd rather just get the physical disc, which almost always includes a download code anyway these days.
Re: (Score:2)
Probably because it's Fri night, and the woman wants to watch a chick flick, and instead of driving to the store you buy it on iTunes.
But why not stream it instead for a fraction of the price? Or do you actually watch the same chick flick more than once?
I haven't bought a movie since my daughter turned six. At five or younger they really like to watch the same movie over and over. I guess they feel secure already knowing exactly what is going to happen next. She must have watched "Barbie Rapunzel" at least a hundred times.
Re: (Score:2)
My granddaughters do that. They'll watch a show then rewind it and watch it again. Sometimes 3 or 4 times. I bet they've watched Tangled at least 200 times.
Re: (Score:2)
Same as my kid :( so much time wasted.
Re: (Score:2)
The bigger question is, where the hell are you allowed to download a 5GB movie? It sounds to me like the Comcast arm is catering to torrenters while the Universal arm is busy preparing to sue anyone who uses it.
Comcast's own mobile apps allow subscribers to download movies from their On Demand service for offline viewing. You can't export or copy it, but it does actually download the whole thing.
New math? Or net neutrality? (Score:5, Insightful)
*60MB in four seconds, a 150MB in two seconds*
Re: (Score:2)
*60MB in four seconds, a 150MB in two seconds*
Problem is they really use 60mb for a TV show.
Re: (Score:2)
My guess is that they slipped a digit, it was likely supposed to be 600MB. I can't imagine any tv show fitting in 60MB
60 MB T.V. Encoding? (Score:5, Funny)
I don't think I'd want to watch a video with such atrocious bitrates, even if it was SD.
Re: (Score:1)
I don't think I'd want to watch a video with such atrocious bitrates, even if it was SD.
Luckily, video streams generally use H.264 compression so your bandwidth usage is substantially lower than the bitrate going to your display.
Re: (Score:3)
I wasn't talking about the video signal bitrate to the display, I was talking about the encoded stream average bitrate if a whole half-hour of video is that small (not to mention the audio portion is included in that figure). 60 MB is not a large enough file to deliver a quality picture, even with HEVC.
Only in Google Fiber Cities + Chicago (Score:5, Insightful)
The summary should note that the $70 deal is only good in cities where there is Google Fiber. http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/08/comcasts-70-gigabit-offer-is-only-good-in-cities-with-google-fiber/
Re:Only in Google Fiber Cities + Chicago (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, for now it is only in those few places. But DOCSIS 3.1 does offer the potential to easily upgrade almost any cable customer, eventually. Minor head-end changes and new customer modems are all it needs, so at some point probably almost any Comcast customer will be able to get it.
And "at some point" is going to be soon, as this is rolling out everywhere in the next 18 months. The fact that they can do this without digging one shovel of dirt is pretty neat. It is a solid solution. It's too bad i
Really? (Score:2)
Fuck you Comcast!
Comcast and the rest of the cable companies are the modern day digital equivalent versions of the highwayman robbery!
Re:Really? (Score:5, Insightful)
Fuck you Comcast! Comcast and the rest of the cable companies are the modern day digital equivalent versions of the highwayman robbery!
I don't live in the US anymore, but from the comments I read here, I get the feeling that folks in the US have absolutely no trust in their ISPs. And this lack of trust is duly deserved, as the ISPs develop dubious offers full of gotchas and catches:
"It's totally unlimited at speed X! Except when it's not unlimited and speed X is the theoretical maximum."
A good business relationship requires trust between buyer and seller. If the buyer does not trust the seller, he will go elsewhere. The trouble with ISPs in the US, it seems that the choice is extremely limited. And they are all bad as the rest. It's like a "bazaar of crooks".
So how to fix this? I would nice to see bunch of smaller ISPs, who really cared about their customers. As opposed to a few gargantuan ISPs who obviously don't need to care about their customers.
Conspicuous Silence (Score:4, Insightful)
Uh-huh. I notice they're being conspicuously silent on upload speeds. "Gee, how nice I can download a movie in a couple minutes, but how long will I have to wait to upload the video of my daughter's ${WINTER_HOLIDAY} pageant?"
Meanwhile, Google Fiber is 1Gb/sec symmetric.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
Of course they don't need it. They don't need cell phones either. With 1Gb symmetric I would buy an awesome desktop, then always remote into it from portable, dumber computers. We'd swing back towards distributed systems. Meaning everyone will begin hosting their own videos, pictures, blogs, etc... from their personal connections. Online video and image quality would increase. Cable TV would die. New 3D transit maps could be downloaded and sent to your car every night. AR and VR websites would final
Re: (Score:2)
Which is why ewhac is pointing out the lack of upload speed listed. Likely the upload is pathetically slow. 30 mbit would be impressive for Comcast.
http://www.xfinity.com/interne... [xfinity.com]
You will notice, nowhere on that page do they list the upload speeds, that is because it is slower than 1/10th the speed of the download.
Re: (Score:2)
Which is why ewhac is pointing out the lack of upload speed listed. Likely the upload is pathetically slow. 30 mbit would be impressive for Comcast.
http://www.xfinity.com/interne... [xfinity.com]
You will notice, nowhere on that page do they list the upload speeds, that is because it is slower than 1/10th the speed of the download.
I have Comcast cable internet in the Chicago area. The speed whenever I test it is 105Mb down, 25 up.
Re: (Score:1)
It's a pathetic 35 magabits per second.
Re: (Score:2)
Unfortunately you're not going to get much better on cable, even with DOCSIS 3.1. Upstream requires valuable low-frequency spectrum, which there's only a limited amount of and there's contention with other services (cable boxes, VoIP, etc). Meanwhile it's a nosier shared environment, so you also can't use as high of a bitrate as you can on the downstream.
Fiber is clearly better in this respect. But it's the tradeoff of using the copper already in the ground as opposed
Re: (Score:2)
Second, only morons worse than the original AOL ones will take an Internet connection from an ad seller which lobbies against your privacy in Washington.
As opposed to any of the other ISPs that don't give a shit about the customers?
*up to* 1Gps (Score:3, Insightful)
Good luck with that. I predict you will get much less than 1Gbps, especially at busy times of the day when lots of your neighbors are also getting "up to" 1Gbps and watching tv, and you will be locked into a 3-year contract or paying twice as much for non-contract service. I used to be a comcast customer. We had to reboot their router about once or twice per day. We regularly lost internet connectivity. In fact we regularly lost the cable TV signal and some of the channels never did come through clearly. Then they scrambled the signal that we were already paying for and replaced it with a message that they had done it "for [our] convenience." We couldn't watch the channels we were paying for unless we went and got one of their descramblers. We could get a descrambler for one TV for free for a limited time, or something like that (I believe we had to pay for a second one to descramble for the second tv in a different room).
We've had google fiber for a couple of years now and I've only had to reboot the router one or two times that entire time. Every speedtest is over 900Mbps (both up and down). I hope I never have to go back to comcast.
Yay for FTTH (Score:2)
Bell Canada "Gigabit Fibe" FTTH up here in Canuckistan. $150 CAD for full unlimited 940 Mbps up / 100 Mbps down. I pull down 3-4 TB a month.
Competition... (Score:2)
It's comcraptastic! (Score:2)
So now you can reach your data cap in 40 seconds! WOW!
AT&T is giving me Gig for $90/mo unlimited (Score:2)
I think they are spying on me for that price so I have pornhub playing 24/7 on a spare PC.
Meanwhile, I have 6 Mbps (Score:2)
I can get 6 Mbps at 300GB/mo or 10 Mbps at 250GB/mo but either way we paid the telcos to expand broadband to everyone and they didn't. Fuck this third world country.
Not 70 (Score:2)
>"Comcast Rolls Out $70-Per-Month Gigabit Internet Service In Chicago "
>"Initial users have the choice of a promotional contract price of $70 per month for 36 months, or $139.95 per month (plus tax and fees) with no contract."
So it is *NOT* $70/mo, which is only for new customers, only for a short time, and only with a contract. It is probably more like $150 to $160 per month after additional money for hidden fees and then more for taxes.
I am extremely sick and tired of these misleading and dishonest
Sounds like 70 to me (Score:2)
Nobody loves a contract but they are pretty standard in the ISP business where there is hardware involved. For a typical WISP it's somewhere two to four hundred bucks installation plus a year's contract. Presumably they will require a spendy new modem. Having a $70/mo rate locked in for three years is fantastic if you're not planning to move.
Re: (Score:1)
yea but if your an existing customer magically that number wont exist, they will offer you something similar for the same price, or charge you more for the service, as a thank you for choosing comcast
I moved from an apartment to a rental to buying a house in a year, I know how this works
Re: (Score:1)
its more like 170 something, typically your XX$ a month service gets aout 25% added on in taxes fees and charges, oh and dont forget the 50$ professional install charge cause they insisted on sending you a box with 3 new coax cords in it