Comcast launches bandwidth meter pilot

Comcast on Tuesday announced the launch of a pilot program for its Internet customers to keep track of how much bandwidth they're using. The company is finally introducing a Web-based metering program, which will let users check these numbers from any browser.

This comes a little more than a year after Comcast began enforcing a strict 250GB cap on download bandwidth, exiling those who went over twice for an entire year before being able to get Internet service again. In the interim the company had offered no official tool for customers to see how close they were getting to that limit, outside of a free McAfee Security software program that needed to be installed on each computer sharing that connection.

The new online meter is coming first to customers in Portland, Ore., as part of a pilot project, which could be expanded to other parts of the country beginning next year. Those in the pilot will be able to track all activity that goes through the cable modem they have rented from the company or purchased on their own. The meter shows the past three months of data use, though to begin with, users will only be able to see what they've used in December. It tracks each gigabyte used, which the company says is rounded down to the nearest gigabyte instead of rounding up. That data is refreshed every three hours.

Comcast says that this new metering system is quite accurate. To prove that, it hired consulting company NetForecast to do a comparative analysis which put Comcast's meter at within plus or minus 0.5 percent of its own internal testing (PDF).

Comcast's new bandwidth meter will only be available to those in Portland, Ore., before the company rolls it out to other markets.

(Credit: Comcast/CNET)

In an e-mail, Comcast spokesman Charlie Douglas wanted to reaffirm that most Comcast customers will never have a problem with going over. "The median customer consumes approximately 2 to 4GB of data in a month," he said. And even with the new bandwidth monitor, "almost 99 percent of our customers should not be concerned about their monthly data usage or even crossing our 250GB-per-month excessive-usage threshold."

Comcast says it needs to do more testing before branching off into the rest of the U.S. In the meantime, those Portland customers who have been chosen to be a part of it will find an invitation in their e-mail to test it out.

[EarthToApple]

I am happy to have no limit on my usage.

[Lerianis3]

I'm with Comcast, and I don't have any limit.... everytime they get on my case for my bandwidth usage, I count up how much money per year I am spending on them and how much friends and family are spending on it (who WOULD switch to something else if I told them to!), and they back off REAL quick and apologize!

[renGek]

Took them long enough. Too bad they ticked me off enough to switch over to Astound 6 months ago even though there was no price advantage in doing so. Just didn't want comcast to have my business anymore. Love astound. No "surprise" maintenance of network, they keep all of their tech support domestically and no throttling of transfer. My PC thanked me for the switch.

[Random_Walk]

I use Comcast, and I live near (not in) Portland, OR. I finally found the page (using the cues provided in the screen shot).<br /><br />Log into comcast.com, go to Users and Settings, then (not provided in the screenie but in the FAQs), click "details" in the My Devices section. <br /><br />From the FAQ: <br />"The meter is accessible by logging in to Customer Central and clicking on the Users and Settings tab. From there, click on View details in the My devices section."<br /><br />Thing is, it must be a really limited pilot (or rather, not quite installed just yet), because I don't have that option.

[Random_Walk]

...disappearing comment? :/

[cloudmatt]

Usage Caps it's Comcastic!

[zeroplane]

No you got it wrong, "Usage Caps it's Craptastic!" there fixed it for you.<br /><br />The 250gig cap I don't think will affect me if I don't:<br />1) Listen to streaming music<br />2) Watch streaming video<br />3) Pretty much do anything that streams anything, even data or XML<br />4) Use any file-sharing service what so ever.<br /><br />And am I the only one fricking pissed about Comcast buying a huge media company? If that isn't a conflict of interest I don't know what is. (http://news.cnet.com/8301-30686_3-10406762-266.html?tag=mncol)<br /><br />You know that wireless internet service I saw the booth for in the local mall is starting to look pretty attractive right now. (http://www.clearwirelessconnection.com/)

[Lerianis3]

Actually, streaming music doesn't use much bandwidth per hour.... maybe 40MB's per hour, and unless you are listening 24/7, you would be okay listen to it each month.<br />Streaming video? That takes up LOADS of bandwidth, up to 400MB's per show on Hulu in 480p.<br />Filesharing? Yep, takes up a LOT!<br /><br />Comcast is going to have to realize that bandwidth caps are NOT ACCEPTABLE to customers. We do not want to have to worry about 'counting our gigs' each month.... just allow everyone to use as much as they can 24/7, and focus on UPGRADING THE NETWORK AND LAYING FIBER.

[baggyguy1218]

zeroplane, <br /> <br />Clearwire is partly owned by Comcast, Sprint, Timewarner, Google and Brighthouse. Also Clearwire also has a bandwidth cap but it does not say what that cap is or how much is too much. It will degrade bandwidth to excessive use customers. Check it out.

[tacit]

"You know that wireless internet service I saw the booth for in the local mall is starting to look pretty attractive right now. (http://www.clearwirelessconnection.com/)"<br /><br />That's what I thought when i moved to Portland, and I used them for six months. I'm on Comcast now, after serious billing issues (they overcharged us by a whopping $148 one month!), daily service outages lasting an average of 20 minutes, service speed that never rose above 1/3 the advertised speed (even when we upgraded to their highest tier of service), nonstop DNS problems that prevented Web surfing, and outrageously high packet loss problems despite the fact that we live less than 800 feet from one of their antenna masts.<br /><br />I will never, ever, ever use that service again. They are hands-down the worst ISP service I've ever experienced, and believe me, I've dealt with some real stinkers. Comcast is one of my least favorite companies, and I had to hold my nose when I turned to them, but they are still a huge improvement over Clear.

[renGek]

And don't forget all the stats listed here are for 1 person. In a household, you need to multiply those numbers.<br />I'm guessing right now, few households come close to 250gigs because most people don't do enough on the web to eat up the bandwidth. But once it happens people will be ticked off and you know it will take comcast 9 years before they raise the cap. Look how long it took them to have a frickin meter for you.

[zeroplane]

baggyguy1218 and tacit, <br /><br />Thank you for posting the information and your experience I would love to read more about this company. Actually because the company is owned by multiple corporations it is more attractive to me then a service owned by a single entity.<br /><br />As for the poor service I wonder if you have a lot of cellular towers around your location as that can severely affect wireless internet service. Or are they using Wimax which I believe runs on the same band range?

[wryland]

This is why people are leaving Comcast in droves. Quit thier internet 6 months ago, and now quitting their TV. No more copper at all to my house. All wireless now.

[QA_Tester]

Ugh copper?. You must be thinking of a phone company.

[bj1126]

Just when you thought Comcast couldn't suck any more!<br /><br />I wonder what the costs are in developing this system compared to expanding their network?

[Dalkorian]

Are you kidding? This system is nothing more than a website interface to a bit counter. Any CS101 student could have coughed this up in no time. By contrast, expanding the network would mean physical expenses, fiber isn't free you know! Why improve the service when you can just rape your customers and blame them for it, calling them "file sharing pirate scum" in the process?

[solitare_pax]

Unfortunately, the only option for me other than Comcast is even worse.

[lazycat202]

i'm with you :{ me 2

[dpower123]

Great idea and about time. Why should a carrier be forced to "expand their network" for a few. [CNET editors' note: Disruptive content deleted.]

[bj1126]

That's the problem though this won't alleviate their network congestion issues.

[Throgged]

Because more and more content on the web is HD. Netflix, hulu ring a bell? And of course all this new content is so small in size that you shouldn't need to worry about going over. Comcast is limiting progress. This is pure BS on Craptastic's side. Unfortunately they are the only game in town. Maybe once a couple of other services become available i'll give them the boot. And i'm sorry but if grandma down the block wants the internet for purely reading email and sending pictures of her grandchildren, it doesn't mean that i want to do the same. They (ISP) are the ones that started advertising "unlimited internet" then complain when the consumer uses it.

[electricbiker]

Because they agreed to do just that when they accepted millions of taxpayer dollars from the government.

[Lerianis3]

electricbiker has the better point. They promised when they took BILLIONS of dollars of government money to expand their network for high speed internet, video-on-demand, etc. If they haven't..... time for a federal lawsuit to get that money back!

[Vegaman_Dan]

@Lerianis3: <br /> <br />It's nice to think that you can get Comcast to give the money back they got from the government, but think about it really- wouldn't they just pass any fines they get from the government on to end users with higher rates? And those higher rates won't be just for the fines- they'll keep them high even after the fines are paid for which results in even higher profits for Comcast. <br /> <br />Comcast wins in either case.

[Random_Walk]

"Why should a carrier be forced to "expand their network" for a few losers."<br /><br />A better question: Why does a carrier falsely advertise endless bandwidth, or at best stuffs the restrictions into a partial-second burst of 2pt fine print? <br /><br />If they have a cap, let them state it up front. <br /><br />As someone who used to have a 200 hour per month cap on his first non-uni (and non-.mil) account, I have no problems with knowing up-front that there's a cap, and can shop accordingly (e.g. giving my money to whomever provides the most bandwidth at the best per-gb/hr price, which is looking like *holds nose* Verizon at this point).

[jasonatcomcast]

I wasn't aware Comcast took any government money at all to build the network - all private capital. If that is not the case then post the reference here. Perhaps you are thinking of the ILECs?

[MrBoomshadow]

Well, when the "few losers" are advertisers and content providers, the answer is that they should be forced to expand to provide better service for both business-to-business (b2b) and business-to-consumer (b2c) models. How about you take a walk in the real world, sunshine?

[Chief.CrazyBear]

You sir, must be a Comcast employee.

[zincmann]

Would never ever give my business to an ISP that would put CAPS on internet, Time Warner tried that in Rochester NY and they were fought against and it went away. If the people in Oregon do not cry foul and show their outrage it will just go through. The fact of the matter that it was stated that the average user uses 2-4 GB a month is propaganda. An average song you download is almost 4MB an album 100MB a streamed movie a gig.....so i don't but that figure for a moment.

[Lerianis3]

Personally, I've gotten Comcast's 'nasty-grams' for using too much service........ I've ignored them, still used massive amount, and when I have gotten a phone call (it's been nearly a year and a half now) I tell them "Okay, cancel my families cable, internet, TV, etc.!" They are like "NOOOOOOOOO! Okay, we will leave you alone!" Fact is considering that I am paying them 50 dollars a month or more, and 500GB's of bandwidth per month from the people they buy their bandwidth from is 5 dollars per month.... they are making MORE than enough profit off me!

[Remo_Williams]

Yet another reason why the last mile to your home should not be in a private company's hands.

[clynx]

Everyone must except censorship as the norm. Thanks Bushies

[Dalkorian]

A swing and a miss.

[Ebraheem]

This really makes me jealous.. I wish I had a 250GB cap on my internet. Seriously.<br />Where I live (Bahrain), ALL ISPs have caps (soft caps, internet becomes 256kbps after you hit the cap). The caps are ridiculously small(my internet is 8GB), and internet prices are ridiculously high(over $200 a month for 10Mbps). Take a look at the ISPs' websites:<br />http://www.batelco.com/broadband/packages.asp<br />http://www.bh.zain.com/portal/page/portal/personal/fixedWireless<br />http://menatelecom.com/residential_menahomenet.asp<br />(BD 1 is approximately $2.60)<br /><br />I know I shouldn't whine about it here. But you should feel slightly better knowing there are people in the world with alot worse internet.

[Pride73170]

Third world? I don't think so Lerianis3. Yo Ebraheem...if your country isn't using any of that oil money to build decent internet infrastructure then I can't really feel sorry for you. I'll think about you the next time I fill up, or maybe the next time I stream a Netflix movie.

[Pride73170]

This isn't about bandwidth. The cable companies don't want us to figure out that we can quit their pay TV services and get much of what we want on demand, via broadband. We're starting to see people drop subscription TV service like they did with landlines in the late 90s. This is about revenue. And for the cable companies that do have bandwidth issues, shame on them for not upgrading their networks. Maybe the fed should implement a customer cap based upon bandwidth and deregulate territories in which the cable companies don't comply. In fact, I think this is the best idea I've ever had. Let's lobby our legislators to propose a bill for this. Let's cap the cable companies!

[Michichael]

Comcast - company suicide, the right way.

[Freiheit13]

At least Comcast tells you what the limit is. Where I live I have 3 internet choices - Verizon DSL (capped at 1.5Mbps due to distance from the CO), Charter cable (no official limit but they're the ones who proposed the 40GB per month limit in Texas so not too keen on that) and TimeWarner who only make a vague reference to "excessive use" but don't tell you what they consider to be excessive. Given the choice between a stated limit and a vague limit, I'd take the stated limit and hold them to it (ie. no downgrading my speed unless I go over). I'd much rather have no limit, since I'm already paying for a speed tier which effectively limits how much I can download. I don't feel like paying both for a speed tier AND a download limit.

[kieranmullen]

I guess they will not count on anyone watching anything anything online from NBC? Will that count towards the quota?

[Dalkorian]

I think we have someone here who brushed by the actual motive here. It's a ploy to pre-emptively get around net neutrality laws. Look, conjob can't tell you that you can use your internet connection however you like as long as you like conjobs website and offerings. They can't tell you not to use hulu. They can't tell you not to use youtube. But they CAN put up "bandwidth limits" and in all the fine print disclose that their services don't apply.<br /><br />Oops, they just told you how much youtube you can watch. They just told you how much hulu you are allowed to have. If you pay their bill, you're not only agreeing to this but showing support for it.<br /><br />Funny thing about consequences, they rarely get better over time. In other words, it's best to face the music now then to allow this to continue and see what you'll get next year.

[drbyte]

A year and a half ago Comcast called. Thumped their chest, offered no way to monitor usage and was very short and rude when questions were asked about it. I wasn't rude and said, OK. ATT rang the bell 2 days later. Canceled Comcast. Went to att uverse. Sunny days. 400GB down a month with no calls or hassles.<br /><br />Comcast is crazy the way they treat its customers like the aren't paying over $120 a month or more for their 'bait n switch' services. I know they don't need my money, but I wonder how many more have switched just because of the cloak and dagger way they handle quotas.

[Dalkorian]

Thank you. It's amazing how may sheep will just roll over, close their eyes and pretend the raping isn't happening. This encourages others to try it ...

[hdubya]

I filled a complaint with the FCC against Comcast last year because of deceptive advertising around this point. They advertised unlimited and then changed it. (which of course their contract fine print allows them to do, but I was still angry enough to file the complaint anyways) <br /> <br />I got a letter for the FCC about 6 months later saying the matter was resolved because Comcast tried to contact me. Maybe Comcast sent me a letter, but I never saw it.

[Dalkorian]

More likely they sent an email to your conjob email account. Yes, technically reading that email counted against your quota.<br />;^)

[QA_Tester]

There goes web neutrality. Why don't they just charge the people who go over cap?

[drbyte]

This topic does burn me up.<br /><br />My thing why is there a cap for any of these internet providers? I thnk its TV vs internet with them. TV providers shouldn't be providing broadband internet anyway. Look how high they have jacked up the prices. <br /><br />They can pipe HDTV at 1080 down the pipe to 5 different boxes (I've seen it). Even compressed HDTV that's a lot of Data they don't seem to mind you grabbing. <br /><br /> With Comcast you could have as many as 5 boxes all viewing HD with no problem since it's true broadband and not a telephone jack hack like ATT uses. No usage caps on the HDTV usage with Comcast. Add a 6th TV and box, they wouldn't care as long as your paying and watching HDTV with their service. <br /><br />Seems it depends on what content they are providing. There's no such thing as a bandwidth abuser. No one should be charged for a made up cap limit. It's something they have made up and seems to stick with obedient 'don't ask questions' customers. They advertise in a way where they encourage you to order the fastest 20 mps speed they offer and imply you'll have comcastic unlimited downloading fun. In reality they just want you to check email and skim thru yahoo's main page and get off. Very deceptive, and I think in the long run it will cost them as more companies are getting into the providing game. Have fun with their new usage meter with a home network with kids :-).

[StayingTrue]

Just received my comcast 1st warning, I personal think it's Bull----. I pay over 50.00 for their internet service and that dose not include thier cable ser vive. Solet me get this righ I can pay for their top teir service but I am supposed to be handicapped when it comes to my other activties on the net. Not Good!!!!! Researching new inter providers hope everone else who thinks comcast has lost their da-- minds will do so too.

[StayingTrue]

Just received my comcast 1st warning, I personal think it's Bull. I pay over 50.00 for their internet service and that dose not include thier cable service. So let me get this righ I can pay for their top teir service but I am supposed to be handicapped when it comes to my other activties on the net. Not Good!!!!! Researching new inter providers hope everone else who thinks comcast has lost their thier minds will do so too.