This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on September 15, 2008 1:19 PM.
The previous post in this blog was An ex-judge with no judgment.
The next post in this blog is A busy guy.
Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.
We appreciate your business and strive to provide you with the best online experience possible. One of the ways we do this is through our Acceptable Use Policy (AUP). The AUP outlines acceptable use of our service as well as steps we take to protect our customers from things that can negatively impact their experience online. This policy has been in place for many years and we update it periodically to keep it current with our customers' use of our service.
On October 1, 2008, we will post an updated AUP that will go into effect at that time.
In the updated AUP, we clarify that monthly data (or bandwidth) usage of more than 250 Gigabytes (GB) is the specific threshold that defines excessive use of our service. We have an excessive use policy because a fraction of one percent of our customers use such a disproportionate amount of bandwidth every month that they may degrade the online experience of other customers.
250 GB/month is an extremely large amount of bandwidth and it's very likely that your monthly data usage doesn't even come close to that amount. In fact, the threshold is approximately 100 times greater than the typical or median residential customer usage, which is 2 to 3 GB/month. To put it in perspective, to reach 250 GB of data usage in one month a customer would have to do any one of the following:
* Send more than 50 million plain text emails (at 5 KB/email);
* Download 62,500 songs (at 4 MB/song); or
* Download 125 standard definition movies (at 2 GB/movie).
And online gamers should know that even the heaviest multi- or single-player gaming activity would not typically come close to this threshold over the course of a month.
Thank you again for choosing Comcast as your high-speed Internet provider.
Comments (9)
How about the jokers at Comcast not ripping us off and actually using that money to improve the amount of bandwidth available?
They could do things like, you know adding more fiberoptic cable to replace the junk that many outside of the new developments have to live with? Or how about Comcast actually start properly filtering the script-kiddies who are spoofing packets as well as the rest of misconfigured machines that are spewing garbage onto the Comcast internet backbones.
Isn't it embarrasing to be advertising (with those slick but utterly silly commercials) how much faster Comcast is and how much faster they are becoming when we're lagging behind in average speeds compared to many places in the world?
Common folks, it is just the word limit that pisses you all off. This is really and indictment of our society. No one wants to be accountable, just do anything that feels good and screw anyone that gets in the way. You have to put this in perspective. I pay about 59 bucks plus taxes (you the city charges that were supposed to go for street infrastructure repair) and get 250 gig and get free McAfee for all my computers too (5). I also pay 59 bucks a month for my wireless broadband and get 5 gig. No, I am not a fan of Comcast and wish that there were competition with cable tv in my area. Hey, being connected is not a biological requirement like eating or having a place to sleep. Put it in perspective, it is really pretty cheap. Quit wining, go back to dial up.
Median would not be the typical or average (what they're implying) user--that would be the mean, or average.
Median would indicate that half the users are above the cited number, half below. Half above the number covers a lot of territory--and users, above their average. What, then is the average, or mean? Perhaps somewhat above the median, or not?
And with the mean, it might be useful to have the standard deviation to get an idea of the real range of usage? So we could tell where 67%, 95%, and 99% of their usage lies? It might be supportive of their contention, but the real numbers would be more convincing. What they're saying is that they have a certain number of users that are three standard deviations (less than 1%) above the mean usage.
And we could ask, then: How many actual users is that? I'm not denying that it's a problem, but I'm curious about how many users are causing the "problem" and if this is the best way to deal with them.
Not that Comcast would ever fiddle with the numbers...Have you ever tried to figure out why your bill keeps going up and up? But if the numbers are real, they can support their position.
TomR, not that I'm a comcast fan but they did figure out another way to deal with the abusers. They throttled down on the offenders connection. Comcast was taken to court over the issue and a judge told them to knock it off because they offered unlimited service and did not define a maximum useage. This is how comcast has responded to the judges decision.
Don't let Qwest scare you off of DSL, just go with a local ISP and pay your line charges to Qwest but don't use them for internet access. You can get it as cheap as $25/mo from locals like SpireTech (which I think is the only decent size locally-owned ISP left?).
Charamba, Douro 2008
Horse Heaven Hills, Cabernet 2010
Lorelle, Horse Heaven Hills Pinot Grigio 2011
Avignonesi, Montepulciano 2004
Lorelle, Willamette Valley Pinot Noir 2011
Villa Antinori, Toscana 2007
Mercedes Eguren, Cabernet Sauvignon 2009
Lorelle, Columbia Valley Cabernet 2011
Purple Moon, Merlot 2011
Purple Moon, Chardonnnay 2011
Abacela, Vintner's Blend No. 12
Opula Red Blend 2010
Liberte, Pinot Noir 2010
Chateau Ste. Michelle, Indian Wells Red Blend 2010
Woodbridge, Chardonnay 2011
King Estate, Pinot Noir 2011
Famille Perrin, Cotes du Rhone Villages 2010
Columbia Crest, Les Chevaux Red 2010
14 Hands, Hot to Trot White Blend
Familia Bianchi, Malbec 2009
Terrapin Cellars, Pinot Gris 2011
Columbia Crest, Walter Clore Private Reserve 2009
Campo Viejo, Rioja, Termpranillo 2010
Ravenswood, Cabernet Sauvignon 2009
Quinta das Amoras, Vinho Tinto 2010
Waterbrook, Reserve Merlot 2009
Lorelle, Horse Heaven Hills, Pinot Grigio 2011
Tarantas, Rose
Chateau Lajarre, Bordeaux 2009
La Vielle Ferme, Rose 2011
Benvolio, Pinot Grigio 2011
Nobilo Icon, Pinot Noir 2009
Lello, Douro Tinto 2009
Quinson Fils, Cotes de Provence Rose 2011
Anindor, Pinot Gris 2010
Buenas Ondas, Syrah Rose 2010
Les Fiefs d'Anglars, Malbec 2009
14 Hands, Pinot Gris 2011
Conundrum 2012
Condes de Albarei, Albariño 2011
Columbia Crest, Walter Clore Private Reserve 2007
Penelope Sanchez, Garnacha Syrah 2010
Canoe Ridge, Merlot 2007
Atalaya do Mar, Godello 2010
Vega Montan, Mencia
Benvolio, Pinot Grigio
Nobilo Icon, Pinot Noir, Marlborough 2009
Portuga, Rose 2011
Revelation, Chardonnay, Pays d'Oc 2010
Beaulieu, Cabernet, Rutherford 2005
Monte Alto, Tinto Reserva 2005
Chateau Ste. Michelle, Cabernet, Indian Wells 2009
Espiral, Vinho Rose
Vin-Koru, Pinot Gris 2011
14 Hands, Hot to Trot Red 2009
Rodney Strong, Cabernet, Sonoma 2009
Abacela, Vintner's Blend #11
Portuga, White 2010
La Bourgeoisie, Red 2009
Januik, Red 2009
Three Rivers, River's Red 2008
Kirkland, Alexander Valley Merlot 2008
Muga, Rioja Rose 2010
Quinta das Amoras, Vinho Tinto 2009
Mauro Molino, Barbera d'Alba 2009
Garda Chiaretto Rose
Columbia Crest, Two Vines Vineyard 10 White
Chateau Ste. Michelle, Pinot Gris, Columbia Valley 2009
L'Hortus, Rose de Saignee 2010
Maculan, Pino & Toi 2008
McKinley Springs, Bombing Range Red 2008
Trader Joe's Pinot Gris 2009
Montes Alpha, Cabernet 2007
Gran Sasso, Sangiovese, Terre di Chieti 2009
Garda, Classico Chiaretto Rose
Beaulieu, Cabernet, Rutherford 1999
Picos del Montgo, Tempranillo 2008
Chateau de Montmirail, Vacqueyras 2008
La Granja 360, Syrah 2009
Montgras, Carmenere Reserva 2009
Lange, Pinot Gris 2009
Columbia Crest, Horse Heaven Hills Cabernet 2008
Kirkland, Pinot Grigio 2010
Trader Joe's Coastal Syrah 2009
Columbia Crest, Horse Heaven Hills Merlot 2008
Trader Joe's Coastal Chardonnay 2009
Vieux Papes Red
Domaine de l'Aujardiere, Chardonnay 2009
Santa Rita, Cabernet, Medalla Real 2007
Penfold's, Koonunga Hill Shiraz Cabernet 2008
Guild, Red, Lot #02 2008
Dievole, Dievolino Sangiovese 2008
Laforet, Burgogne Chardonnay 2009
Columbia Winery, Merlot 2007
Bonterra, Cabernet 2008
Elk Cove, Pinot Gris 2009
Maquis Lien 2006
Scott Paul, Pinot Noir, Le Paulee 2007
The Occasional Book
Neil Young - Waging Heavy Peace
Mark Bego - Aretha Franklin, the Queen of Soul (2012 ed.)
Jenny Lawson - Let's Pretend This Never Happened
J.D. Salinger - Franny and Zooey
Charles Dickens - A Christmas Carol
Timothy Egan - The Big Burn
Deborah Eisenberg - Transactions in a Foreign Currency
Kurt Vonnegut Jr. - Slaughterhouse Five
Kathryn Lance - Pandora's Genes
Cheryl Strayed - Wild
Fyodor Dostoyevsky - The Brothers Karamazov
Jack London - The House of Pride, and Other Tales of Hawaii
Jack Walker - The Extraordinary Rendition of Vincent Dellamaria
Colum McCann - Let the Great World Spin
Niccolò Machiavelli - The Prince
Harper Lee - To Kill a Mockingbird
Emma McLaughlin & Nicola Kraus - The Nanny Diaries
Brian Selznick - The Invention of Hugo Cabret
Sharon Creech - Walk Two Moons
Keith Richards - Life
F. Sionil Jose - Dusk
Natalie Babbitt - Tuck Everlasting
Justin Halpern - S#*t My Dad Says
Mark Herrmann - The Curmudgeon's Guide to Practicing Law
Barry Glassner - The Gospel of Food
Phil Stanford - The Peyton-Allan Files
Jesse Katz - The Opposite Field
Evelyn Waugh - Brideshead Revisited
J.K. Rowling - Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone
David Sedaris - Holidays on Ice
Donald Miller - A Million Miles in a Thousand Years
Mitch Albom - Have a Little Faith
C.S. Lewis - The Magician's Nephew
F. Scott Fitzgerald - The Great Gatsby
William Shakespeare - A Midsummer Night's Dream
Ivan Doig - Bucking the Sun
Penda Diakité - I Lost My Tooth in Africa
Grace Lin - The Year of the Rat
Oscar Hijuelos - Mr. Ives' Christmas
Madeline L'Engle - A Wrinkle in Time
Steven Hart - The Last Three Miles
David Sedaris - Me Talk Pretty One Day
Karen Armstrong - The Spiral Staircase
Charles Larson - The Portland Murders
Adrian Wojnarowski - The Miracle of St. Anthony
William H. Colby - Long Goodbye
Steven D. Stark - Meet the Beatles
Phil Stanford - Portland Confidential
Rick Moody - Garden State
Jonathan Schwartz - All in Good Time
David Sedaris - Dress Your Family in Corduroy and Denim
Anthony Holden - Big Deal
Robert J. Spitzer - The Spirit of Leadership
James McManus - Positively Fifth Street
Jeff Noon - Vurt
Road Work
Miles run year to date: 21
At this date last year: 52
Total run in 2012: 129
In 2011: 113
In 2010: 125
In 2009: 67
In 2008: 28
In 2007: 113
In 2006: 100
In 2005: 149
In 2004: 204
In 2003: 269
Comments (9)
How about the jokers at Comcast not ripping us off and actually using that money to improve the amount of bandwidth available?
They could do things like, you know adding more fiberoptic cable to replace the junk that many outside of the new developments have to live with? Or how about Comcast actually start properly filtering the script-kiddies who are spoofing packets as well as the rest of misconfigured machines that are spewing garbage onto the Comcast internet backbones.
Isn't it embarrasing to be advertising (with those slick but utterly silly commercials) how much faster Comcast is and how much faster they are becoming when we're lagging behind in average speeds compared to many places in the world?
Posted by Swede | September 15, 2008 1:57 PM
There's not enough competition in the broadband industry. Most people have a choice between cable and DSL and that's it.
I hope they aren't advertising their service as unlimited. Even if 250 gigabytes is a high limit, it's still a limit.
Posted by Rulial | September 15, 2008 2:05 PM
Common folks, it is just the word limit that pisses you all off. This is really and indictment of our society. No one wants to be accountable, just do anything that feels good and screw anyone that gets in the way. You have to put this in perspective. I pay about 59 bucks plus taxes (you the city charges that were supposed to go for street infrastructure repair) and get 250 gig and get free McAfee for all my computers too (5). I also pay 59 bucks a month for my wireless broadband and get 5 gig. No, I am not a fan of Comcast and wish that there were competition with cable tv in my area. Hey, being connected is not a biological requirement like eating or having a place to sleep. Put it in perspective, it is really pretty cheap. Quit wining, go back to dial up.
Posted by John Benton | September 15, 2008 3:25 PM
Sorry about all the grammatical mistakes in the previous posts, lost my glasses.
Posted by John Benton | September 15, 2008 3:33 PM
Switch to Verizon's FiOS ... Oh, wait, in the crazy world of regulated telecoms, you can blame Qwest for that one:
"As The Oregonian's Mike Rogoway recently wrote: Multnomah County is Qwest territory, Verizon is not about to mix it up in Qwest-dominated land, and Qwest is basically broke. So, we have no competition, and no hope for Qwest to offer hot new services. Our local non-cable choice? Qwest or nothin'. I mean, even death row prisoners get to choose a last meal, which, really, is a totally irrelevant comparison."
Posted by Garage Wine | September 15, 2008 3:58 PM
"Switch to Verizon's FiOS"
I am. They are coming to hook me up on Saturday. For once I live in the right neighborhood.
Posted by Dave | September 15, 2008 8:46 PM
Median would not be the typical or average (what they're implying) user--that would be the mean, or average.
Median would indicate that half the users are above the cited number, half below. Half above the number covers a lot of territory--and users, above their average. What, then is the average, or mean? Perhaps somewhat above the median, or not?
And with the mean, it might be useful to have the standard deviation to get an idea of the real range of usage? So we could tell where 67%, 95%, and 99% of their usage lies? It might be supportive of their contention, but the real numbers would be more convincing. What they're saying is that they have a certain number of users that are three standard deviations (less than 1%) above the mean usage.
And we could ask, then: How many actual users is that? I'm not denying that it's a problem, but I'm curious about how many users are causing the "problem" and if this is the best way to deal with them.
Not that Comcast would ever fiddle with the numbers...Have you ever tried to figure out why your bill keeps going up and up? But if the numbers are real, they can support their position.
TomR
Posted by TomR | September 16, 2008 12:29 AM
TomR, not that I'm a comcast fan but they did figure out another way to deal with the abusers. They throttled down on the offenders connection. Comcast was taken to court over the issue and a judge told them to knock it off because they offered unlimited service and did not define a maximum useage. This is how comcast has responded to the judges decision.
Posted by Darrin | September 16, 2008 8:00 AM
Don't let Qwest scare you off of DSL, just go with a local ISP and pay your line charges to Qwest but don't use them for internet access. You can get it as cheap as $25/mo from locals like SpireTech (which I think is the only decent size locally-owned ISP left?).
Posted by Gene | September 17, 2008 9:39 AM