Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:$.03/kWh? (Score 1) 173

That's a good point; I figured they would have rolled the expenses in to any markup.

My provider is non-profit; so I pay wholesale prices. They did just build a new bio-fuel plant; but they're burning the scrap left over from logging operations, so no fuel costs there. Hell, they had to get approval from the state to lower the cost after they revamped their purchasing and started saving a whole bunch; I'm still getting a refund every month for electricity I paid for 5 years ago.

Comment Re:My Internet is Fine (Score 1) 151

Are you kidding? England for the most part has vastly better internet than the US. You want an 80/20 connection? IT'll run you maybe $28/month. That's a VDSL2 connection to a fiber cabinet located somewhere near you.

The UK, with the exception of some rural areas, far surpasses us internet wise. It's cheaper, faster, and vastly more reliable. Granted, most of the infrastructure is owned by British Telecom and the ISP's merely lease from them; it's vastly different than the free-for-all ISP owned infrastructure we have here. Prices are actually a bit more regulated over there than over here.

Their TV is far superior to ours as well. More channels OTA, more channels for free, 75% fewer commercials and 100% less censorship after 2100GMT.

Comment Re:WHOA, You have a "server" attached . . . (Score 1) 151

Let's just put something in to example. While I'm using some old figures from memory and making some up; let's go with it.

Let's say there's 1000 people in your neighborhood; it's a bit of a remote area so you're happy to have cable. There's a node that sits just outside of your neighborhood that serves all 1000 people. LEt's be kind and say they have 8 channels of DOCSIS 3.0 available in the RF spectrum. Each DOCSIS 3 channel gives you about 38mbps of downstream; so that's 304mbps available.

Here's where the issue comes in; if the node only has one RF line serving everyone; then they've got 304mbps total for all 1000 people. If all 1000 people get on and hammer the connections, that's under a megabit per person. It's probably not that bad, so let's say they have 10 lines coming out. That's 304mbps per 100 people. If they had 100 coaxial lines coming out of the node serving 10 people each; that's still only 30.4mbps available per person if everyone is full on hammering connections.

But the ISP's work on the assumption that not everyone will be hammering at one point...and they hope the average person's usage will be such that they won't notice speed drop.

It's a shared resource; and cable does it as cheaply as they can. Overselling the network on the hopes your customers aren't going to make the same high demands is exactly how they operate. If they did it based on the lowest guarnteed speed; who know how low that would be and they would never be able to market it.

Comment Re:Promised throughput (Score 1) 151

This is a huge media conglomerate that has a legalized monopoly in 99% of the places it operates. You think they care? For many people, it's Comcast or nothing...and they know this. You can tell because you will see cheaper prices in areas with competition than you will in areas without competition.

When you're the only game in town, people will take what you give them regardless of what they demand because they have 0 alternatives.

Comment Re: Promised throughput (Score 1) 151

Typically they just keep selling the network; but will limit new subscribers to a slower speed.

It's like when I got FiOS; 5 years ago I could actually get the 500/300 package if I wanted to give them $325/month for it. But as more people in my neighborhood got connected to my node; the 500/500 option went away and the max I can get is now 300/300.

They may also reduce everyone's speeds across the board to make up for it. Nothing says "screw you" like getting a notice from the cable company saying your subscribed speeds have been downgraded by force.

Comment Re:Promised throughput (Score 1) 151

primetime TV went blocky and unwatchable.

Television "channels" are provided over RF. If they went blocky and unwatchable, that meant there was as serious connection issue somewhere. Just because 500 people come home and turn the TV on at the same time; it does not affect one-way RF transmissions. Even multi-cast IPTV shouldn't be affected.

Turning a device on does not draw any more "power" from the cable signal; the signal is lost once it's gone through the splitter.

Comment Re:Promised throughput (Score 1) 151

But that's how cable internet works. Rreserve maybe 24mhz of bandwidth for DOCSIS; share with a few hundred (or thousand) people. Call that your "best effort" since it's "too expensive" to build out more infrastructure.

There mere fact is, his trolling is doing nothing but wasting time. Does Comcast care? No. As long as he keeps paying for his 150mbps service, they don't care how much he complains about it.

Comment Re:Promised throughput (Score 1) 151

But they're not lying. They're selling you a service that is capable of that speed. Just becuase they've sold the same small sliver of bandwidth to 4000 people in your neighborhood doesn't mean it's not their "best effort".

"Best effort" is just a CYA term for "you'll get what we give you."

Comment Re:Complaing to Comcast... (Score 1) 151

It's not about how much bandwidth DOCSIS supports; but how many channels on the cable they devote to it. They would be lucky if they were getting 150mbps of bandwidth per node out.

Cable is a total waste of bandwidth. You're already cramming 4 or 5 HD channels in a 6MHZ QAM channel; every On-Demand stream eats up QAM...the more they crap they add, the smaller the pipe becomes.

If more people realized that; they'd stop buying Comcast's BS.

Slashdot Top Deals

Save a little money each month and at the end of the year you'll be surprised at how little you have. -- Ernest Haskins