Comcast to cap monthly consumer broadband

Starting October 1 customers of Comcast's residential data services will have an invisible barrier on their monthly data usage. Under the new guidelines of Comcast's Acceptable Use Policy announced Thursday, that cap will be set at 250 gigabytes per month, per account.

Users who go over the limit will get a courtesy call from Comcast's customer service for the first instance. However, under the new policy a second-time offense means the service is immediately suspended for an entire calendar year.

Surprisingly the company is not providing any tools to help users monitor their current usage. An FAQ on Comcast's support site simply suggests that customers do a "Web search" for bandwidth metering software that will track this amount for them. Going forward there may be plans to set up alerts over certain thresholds, or bundle some official tool as part of the company's starter software.

Comcast notes that the median usage for most residential customers falls somewhere between 2GB and 3GB, a number that is regularly broken within a matter of hours and sometimes minutes by customers taking advantage of streaming HD video and online backup services. The company breaks down basic usage numbers similar to what's seen on the marketing materials on a consumer hard drive:

* Send 50 million e-mails (at 0.05KB/e-mail)
* Download 62,500 songs (at 4MB/song)
* Download 125 standard-definition movies (at 2GB/movie)
* Upload 25,000 high-resolution digital photos (at 10MB/photo)

A far greater problem may be the slighting of cloud storage services that offer file transfer and backup. Services like Carbonite and Mozy let you back up and transfer the entirety of your computer's storage several times per month, which on many standard consumer machines can be in the hundreds of gigabytes.

Apple, too, is just at the beginning stages of MobileMe, a service that offers sync and file backup to multiple devices. Additionally, the rumored all-you-can-eat iTunes could drastically change how much downloading users are doing on a monthly basis.

So what do you think about this new limit? Let us know in the comments and the poll below.

[Thomas, David]

Acceptable use?! Just how did they come up with their idea of acceptable use?! The cable companies, and yes, the phone companies were late-comers into the internet era. Now look at them. This is starting to suck.

[Lerianis]

You have it exactly right. Frankly, 250GB is not a lot of bandwidth if you are using bandwidth intensive applications like online backup services, p2p, etc. - it is a marginal or SMALL amount of bandwidth.

[zeroplane]

Here it is Dec 2009 and I happen upon this article about bandwidth caps at Comcast. I am a custom of Comcast (for now) and I was never told about this cap. No email or leaflet in the mail, no notice on their corporate website.<br /><br />NOTHING..<br /><br />So far I haven't been given the boot.. but isn't it nice that almost a year later.. now they have a little tool to tell me if I am going to get booted..<br /><br />But of course it isn't something I can get directly too from my management portal.<br /><br />http://news.cnet.com/8301-27076_3-10406865-248.html?tag=mncol

[andrewrm]

The problem is that the raw speed of Comcast makes it very desirable compared to the crap DSL speeds I used to have. So when I chat on Vonage for more than a couple minutes or do any of the things that are made possible by this speed I'm to be penalized? I've got to look into RCN.

[mgarc1125]

that is absolutely unacceptable.<br /><br />First off, i bet they wont do a good job of notifying all their customers of the limit. Second, 250gb is unreasonably low. A family of 5 can easily surpass that in no time by streaming and downloading music, videos, and games, online gaming and game downloads, VOIP, and other web usage. Comcast can go to hell!

[DrtyDogg]

I'm glad I switched to FIOS as soon as it was available in my neighborhood. Not that the two companies are very different in there policies.

[mgarc1125]

that is absolutely unacceptable.<br /><br />First off, i bet they wont do a good job of notifying all their customers of the limit. Second, 250gb is unreasonably low. A family of 5 can easily surpass that in no time by streaming and downloading music, videos, and games, online gaming and game downloads, VOIP, and other web usage. Screw comcast.

[sparrowhyperion]

This is probably one of the stupidest bonehead ideas that Comcast has ever come up with. I used to do tech support for them through an outsourcing company and I am not entirely surprised. They always reinforced that customer care was secondary to the bottom line. At a time when Telcos are rolling out more and more FIOS services, Comcast has probably picked the worst possible time to start this idiotic policy. I hope they get everything they deserve. Personally, this doesn't affect me since I don't have Comcast as my cable provider, but I feel sorry for all of those folks that this is going to hurt. Where is the FCC when you need them? And I wonder how long it is before they get sued for false advertising.

[pnaustx]

While I completely agree that this is a bad business decision by Comcast, we definitely don't need the FCC or any government agency to fix it...... we've got way too much government already.....the marketplace will take care of it as consumers find alternative ISP providers that don't have such stupid ideas....

[pnaustx]

While I completely agree that this is a bad business decision by Comcast, we definitely don't need the FCC or any government agency to fix it...... we've got way too much government already.....the marketplace will take care of it as consumers find alternative ISP providers that don't have such stupid ideas....

[Thomas, David]

I contrast to pnaustx idea, that we don't need regulatory restrictions, I for one firmly believe the actions of Comcast, and several corporations have been a direct result of the previous elimination of those regulations, and the "blind-eye" the current administration has demonstrated.<br><br>It is completely naive, for anyone to believe that these large corporations would remain ethical without regulations.

[ppartekim]

So I can sign up for Comcast's very high bandwidth then get shutdown for using it to watch the new WB.com streaming shows each night.. Kinda like getting a ferrari and getting the length of my block to use it before it is taken away for a year. <br /><br />Might as well stick with slow DSL at least it would seem like my moneys worth.

[gerrrg]

It'll only become an issue when streaming HD goes mainstream. So, probably next Fall? By then, Fios will have greater penetration and WiMax will be in many cities, and Comcast will have probably upgraded infrastructure. Pricing pressure will hopefully grow.

[gadget_dude]

One word: FIOS. <br /><br />I actually liked Comcast, but I LOVE FIOS

[kodybryson]

I don't see how they can do this, and not provide reporting. "You have this limit, we will not tell what your current usage is, if you pass the limit more than once we cancel your service." Um, someone's not too smart.<br /><br />Also, what's the point in cancelling the service? Why not just suspend service for the rest of the current month?<br /><br />My guess as to what's going on: They set this limit, but they don't really have any accurate way to measure it themselves. But they will target people who have obviously used at least this much bandwidth in a legally provable manner.

[starrpoint]

Oh, I am sure they will find a way to turn this into money, say a surcharge to get your service back? Or a way to up your fees, like, well you go over your limit each month (no more unlimited access) so we are going to charge you x amount of dollars for going over, (like an over draft at a bank)?

[Tiger1964]

"Surprisingly the company is not providing any tools to help users monitor their current usage."<br /><br /><br />???? Where is the surprise? This is Comcast we are talking about......

[Josh.Lowensohn]

Well, I'm surprised--there was a ton of bundled software with my new cable modem from them a few months back.

[jruiz581]

So now that companies like Netflix or Blockbuster are starting to make it even easier to rent movies by streaming them, just when internet radio is really taking off, just when more people are leaving the landline in favor of VOIP, Comcast comes and screws it all up. Comcast service is not cheap, their customer service stinks and now, the only thing that really keeps people as customer is being thrown in the trash! And notification? What notification? A friend of mine's internet access was down all of a sudden quite recently. Thinking it was a technical issue, he called me first (to see if my service was down), then Comcast, at which point he was told to call their "Internet Abuse Department", or something like that. Adavanced Warning: Zero. I am not saying they were not justified, because he even confided that recently his internet useage had gone up almost twofold.But still.

[dude7895]

I used to like comcast, but if you have a problem they don't care. I hope they loose a lot of business to Verizon because of this.

[Bill_I]

Amen

[turbo_jewk]

well considering that I have 5 different devices that see regular internet use between games, email, etc I guess it is time to start looking for a new carrier. Wait, they are the only carrier that has high speed internet in my area because we have no DSL service at my specific location.

[turbo_jewk]

well considering that I have 5 different devices that see regular internet use between games, email, etc I guess it is time to start looking for a new carrier. Wait, they are the only carrier that has high speed internet in my area because we have no DSL service at my specific location.

[Jrsydvl]

How many users do you think they'll kick off before they realize they only throwing customeres to their competition?

[pmpsta1]

Instead of suspending someone's account why can't they just charge them for additional bandwidth. Don't alienate your customers Comcast.

[starrpoint]

Want to bet this is the real object of this? <br /><br />A way to change the way they charge, like a running meter.

[bournex]

I have Comcast and I don't think I should pay extra. Their services are already expensive enough. Unlimited bandwidth should be expected.<br />But obviously we all know where this is going... Any bandwidth taken from existing customers will probably be resold to new customers or existing customers as "upgrade" packages... lame!

[BobBrins]

The account we signed up for says UNLIMITED INTERNET. Why should we then have to pay for additional usage? And if they suspend my account for a year there will be a lawsuit. Hopefully I'll be able to gather enough people to join in.

[gregorytga]

Wonderful, is this just combined traffic up+down or just downstream? If they're allotting 250 up/down combined, that'll punish families or roommates who enjoy online gaming and a few media services.

[nutjob]

If you are using 250GB a month to play games online. You really need to see a psych. That is 8GB a day of data. Which means 6-10 hours of game playing everyday.

[4schler]

Wow... just my luck.<br /><br />I signed up for comcast internet at my new apartment literally yesterday, and now they pull this. Not only did their 'analysts' try to convince me in an unavoidable (and terribly low-quality) java chat room that my monthly rate should be $15 higher than it was advertised on their site (while I was in the checkout process, even), but now they're going to cap my bandwidth even though e-mail and online communications are now (and have been for several years) the official method of communication for my university?<br /><br />This is ludicrous; This has to be illegal somehow. This news is going to scare away enough customers to where they'll have to begin repealing it, or at least raising the cap. I'm already considering cancelling the installation and switching to AT&#38;T DSL.

[Tinman52]

Yeah, I'd consider switching to Quest DSL. It sounds like Comcast setting a bad standard to repeal a few users that exceed a reasonable amount of bandwidth per month.

[ptrhansen]

250 gb is a whole lot for a month - Rogers in Canada only gives 60 GB a month and my family rarely goes over 20 gb (upstream and down). At least Rogers gives us a bandwith monitor on their website.

[Lerianis]

That is for you and YOUR family. Most other people with 4 or 5 people in the home use a good bit of bandwidth. Heck, even just WEB SURFING each month, I use 100GB's. Add in my Bittorrenting, and it goes up to 350 easily.

[k2dave]

Isn't Rogers a cellular company? Verizon wireless has a cap of 5 GB/month, after which the service either slows down to about 144kb/s, or for later signups charge $0.10/Mb. Cellular internet is a bit different then hard wired in capacity.

[sinsio]

I think it's very smart on Comcast's part. Very few people complain about the initial cap of 250 GB. Once people get used to the idea, they'll steadily decrease the cap to maximize profits. While they are within their rights to do so, I fear this is a step backwards in terms of the development of the internet. This will significantly hamper web 2.0 applications in the future. Who's going to want to use Netflix and iTunes HD movie downloads, remote desktops, and higher quality video calls with caps in place?

[BobBrins]

The article stated that Comcast's median family usage is between 200 and 300 gb a month. So the average family can look forward to being cutoff for a year.

[sportbikerr1]

LOL 20 Gb is a joke. Come on man I use that in a 2 days. Which yes pushes me over they're limit and I would switch if FIOS would start wiring appartments. I have numberous internet services going. One of them of coarse being HP upline backup service. A raw 1 hour of mini dv footage can be 20gb. Of coarse I have xbox live and play that considerably at night which is a bandwidth hog. I do alot of remote work to and from the office with transfering large files etc. I have Vonage which of coarse i'm sure counts towards comcast caps. Of coarse all the other small services I use like online radio etc eats away at this. All in all this cap is way to low, and can be very easily exceeded. I'm not surprised that it would be a way to weed out the higher usage customers since this number is artificially low you can very easily exceed it. Expecially those users of usenet. <br /><br />The thing thats gonna suck is that I'll have to go around to every program and configure it to drop its bandwidth because the automatic network usage throttling won't work since it will no longer be representative of what you're real bandwidth is. Over all this sucks from a software design and usage in a modern day and age.