Lessoned Learned:Comcast

[Lamar Bowman]

Originally Posted by CoreLysium

And, the nice thing about U-Verse, AT&T just made a deal with Netflix. Netflix will pay them more and AT&T will stop throttling them. A harsh blow against net neutrality, but my Netflix will be worth something again. I was about to cancel.

I am sure those costs will soon be passed from Netflix to you and me.

[weaverra]

Originally Posted by Lamar Bowman

I am sure those costs will soon be passed from Netflix to you and me.

You bet they will! In the end the customer will end up paying for it.

[CoreLysium]

Originally Posted by Lamar Bowman

I am sure those costs will soon be passed from Netflix to you and me.

Netflix promised no rate increase to current customers about a year ago when they started charging new customers 8.99 rather than 7.99. That promise ends May of 2016. I expect it to be $10 then.

Edited to add: In other news, Android devices are now considered computers by HULU, so you can stream to them once the app updates without paying for Plus.

[Lamar Bowman]

Originally Posted by CoreLysium

Netflix promised no rate increase to current customers about a year ago when they started charging new customers 8.99 rather than 7.99. That promise ends May of 2016. I expect it to be $10 then.

Edited to add: In other news, Android devices are now considered computers by HULU, so you can stream to them once the app updates without paying for Plus.

Hulu is the biggest ripoff. If the commercials didnt come with it, it would be decent. Luckily most any new show I watch, I just DVR.

[MisterEd51]

Originally Posted by CoreLysium

And, the nice thing about U-Verse, AT&T just made a deal with Netflix. Netflix will pay them more and AT&T will stop throttling them. A harsh blow against net neutrality, but my Netflix will be worth something again. I was about to cancel.

When Comcast was accused of throttling Netflix had a CDN between it and Comcast. When Netflix paid for a direct connection to Comcast the performance issues mostly went away. It is very possible that the CDN not Comcast was causing the performance problems people referred to as throttling.

I think that net neutrality is way overblown. It is not the same as equal access. The cable companies have never been accused of not allowing equal access. What people call net neutrality is really people wanting guaranteed performance. No cable company has ever guaranteed a certain level of performance. All they say is that you will get up to a certain speed. Since video content such as Netflix requires a guaranteed level of performance that is where the problem comes in. I think that there is nothing wrong with cable companies requiring video content providers such as Netflix to pay extra if they want a guaranteed level of performance. If that is passed on to Netflix users then that is ok too.

To look at it another way what if all video content providers wanted a guaranteed level of performance. Should the cable company and its customers bear all the costs to make this happen? I think it is up to each video content provider to make whatever deal is necessary with the cable companies to make sure that the customers have a good experience. It is only fair that each side pay their fair share in this.

[CoreLysium]

Originally Posted by MisterEd51

When Comcast was accused of throttling Netflix had a CDN between it and Comcast. When Netflix paid for a direct connection to Comcast the performance issues mostly went away. It is very possible that the CDN not Comcast was causing the performance problems people referred to as throttling.

I think that net neutrality is way overblown. It is not the same as equal access. The cable companies have never been accused of not allowing equal access. What people call net neutrality is really people wanting guaranteed performance. No cable company has ever guaranteed a certain level of performance. All they say is that you will get up to a certain speed. Since video content such as Netflix requires a guaranteed level of performance that is where the problem comes in. I think that there is nothing wrong with cable companies requiring video content providers such as Netflix to pay extra if they want a guaranteed level of performance. If that is passed on to Netflix users then that is ok too.

To look at it another way what if all video content providers wanted a guaranteed level of performance. Should the cable company and its customers bear all the costs to make this happen? I think it is up to each video content provider to make whatever deal is necessary with the cable companies to make sure that the customers have a good experience. It is only fair that each side pay their fair share in this.

I disagree wholeheartedly but don't feel like debating it.

However, it would be a great opportunity for me to use this image:

[NoleFanHSV]

My internet cable was cut again. This is the 5th time either the main TV cable was cut or the internet cable. When they patched it two weeks ago they left it laying across driveway. The house was pretty much complete but it appears that when they extended the patio, the cable was laying under a rock on the sidewalk and a cement truck ran over that rock and it crushed/cut the cable. It was scheduled to be buried. I told the idiot on the phone that they need to put a tap. Those foreign guys have no clue of what I'm talking about. I told them if its not back up and running in the next few days, I will be cancelling my services. Uverse is the only other viable option, and one neighbor is complaining he's only getting 10 up and 10 down on a 50mbps plan. At least his lines don't get cut.

[CoreLysium]

I have uverse and I can see my full 24 Mbps only when using speedtest.net. Any other downloading and it's always around three.

But that's looking at a single source. I've been downloading a game at 2.5, watching 1080p Netflix in two locations in the house (max Netflix is 3 Mbps per set)

The service is good, but the customer support runs off a script written by thieves and pirates. Bad company, good product. (Which is just par for the course these days (Amazon, Walmart, etc))

[NoleFanHSV]

Originally Posted by CoreLysium

I have uverse and I can see my full 24 Mbps only when using speedtest.net. Any other downloading and it's always around three.

But that's looking at a single source. I've been downloading a game at 2.5, watching 1080p Netflix in two locations in the house (max Netflix is 3 Mbps per set)

The service is good, but the customer support runs off a script written by thieves and pirates. Bad company, good product. (Which is just par for the course these days (Amazon, Walmart, etc))

18mbps is all that we can get in our neighborhood for Uverse.

[NoleFanHSV]

So Comcast, finally, after 5 months, put a tap across the street and hooked my cable up there. Why? Because my new neighbor wanted comcast interrnet and they kept complaining about the cable running across their driveway.

I talked to one of the subcontractors a few days ago, who was putting line up to their house, and said that those taps are pretty cheap and only take a few minutes to hook up. He said there was no work order for one to be put up there, even with the neighbor wanting cable. He put the work order in on Friday for that tap, and yesterday it was there. So it appears that it was a communication issue all along.