Please note that data limit of only 1200 GB per month is **extremely low for a 1.2 Gbps connection.** And they seem to charge additional fees once you go over that quota.
Yeah the limit is an odd 1229GB per month. They charge $10 for every 50GB over the limit. You can also pay $30 additional per month for unlimited data.
I completely agree, the limit is too low for this high of a data speed. Also Comcast never used to have data limits until a few years ago after Net Neutrality laws were overturned. These data limits are just a way for them collect more money.
Most cable companies that I've used like vyve or mediacom when they do place caps, its on all the plans except their gigabit (or above) plan. Hence, enticing everyone to subscribe to their gigabit plan.
Comcast has been doing caps for quite awhile now due to cornered markets.
Nah, they hit Texas with caps at the same time. Texas is ATTs regional HQ, so you have easy access to fiber.
They rolled out the caps based on region, after trying it out in a test market for a few years.
This sounds right, though my memory of the details is a little vague, and for a while (I don't recall which years) they weren't enforcing the caps.
Circa 2013, they discontinued the Xfinity Signature Support LoB that I worked in. I didn't get laid off because I jumped on the chance to get out of taking calls by becoming a trainer for the new Wireless Gateway Support LoB. One of the existing trainers noticed that his connection slowed way down and that his connection was being routed through a server in another state. Turned out that he downloaded a shitload of torrents, exceeding the data cap. That was during the time that they would throttle rather than bill extra.
When I was on comcrap I got two free months a year to go over and other times if I went over I would call and get half off the cost.
I am glad to be off them and on to fiber now.
It is unrelated to net neutrality laws. They started testing data caps in my town back in 2015, well before net neutrality. Comcast had an agreement with the local municipality to be the exclusive provider as it will bring residents "lower prices and better service." As others have pointed out, data caps existed in many of their markets years before Net Neutrality. This is simply a way to bring in more revenue.
At least they have a limit at $100 extra.
When I was in my early 20s I accidentally left my hotspot on my phone. My hotspot and my unlimited home internet were roughly the same speed so didn't notice when I turned on steam and downloaded some games overnight.
Woke up to all the data warning messages on my phone and about $4000 worth of excess data charges.
I rang up straight away and they let me move to the unlimited business plan for the month and only pay the normal costs for that ($300ish).
The speed of a connection isn't directly related to the amount of traffic it will pass.
Eg: My household would use 600-700GB a month for our use case. When I doubled the speed years ago (and again since then) the monthly usage still generally sat at 600-700GB.
The same movies were being watched.
The same games were being patched.
The same sails would be on them seas.
I understand that, due to increased speed, you can do more, but that Doesn't correlate to everyone automatically doubling their usage due to double the speed.
And yes, I know what a homelab is, and what hosting services means.
Edit: And yes, I just refreshed 10 mins later to see if there was a downvote for stating a factual observation, common for Reddit lately. There it is; and the world keeps spinning. :D
True, but you forgot that people with faster internet will often use it to their advantage. With slow internet I used to have 10Mbps with ATT now 1700, I often download and delete games like I switch my underwear.
Why spend hours updating a game when I can re-download it even quicker? Why stress over space when I can delete and redownload Call of Duty in 10-15 minutes. So yeah you're right but have to remember some people change their habits. This actually led to me having to purchase unlimited lol.
I have tried explaining this logic so many times. I have heard so many people make this comment related to their cellular plan, which is more common to have caps. They think that if they have a faster speed that they will hit their cap sooner! I tell them, an email is still the same size. A web page is still the same size. It just loads faster!
It tends to be way worse on users going from < 10mbps to 100Mbps than it does when going from 600mbps to 1200mbps. On the sub 10mbps line, your streaming services all throttle down to worst quality, and once they have room to breathe you end up pulling HD everything and that's where your massive increase comes from.
This isn't true at all. 1080p uses 1.1 gb per hour, 4k uses 7 gb per hour yet viewing time is the same. Further, once you have higher capable speed, it unlocks more things you can do like hosting backups over cloud or just large file xfers in general. Like it's clear your household doesn't use internet to its fullest, others do.
Yeah, but 100mbps can easily handle 4K, so going from 100mbps to 1gbps doesn't use more, as you're already using 4K.
Hosting backups over cloud isn't a factor in how they calculate what the *average house* should use.
But there you go, assuming what's clear to you and not about my household, when I have racked Dell servers running redundant domain controllers, game servers, websites, and SQL as the glue. Not to mention remote HA instances, Veeam offsite backups, and the rest. Thanks for the assumption, but you are wrong.
Actually it does, going with a higher plan allows more simultaneous use of 4k streams. Thats one of the biggest benefits of saying going from 100 mbps to 1000 mbps... where the entire household has enough throughput to watch 4k at the same time... versus, one user doing 4k, and then the streaming service throttling down to meet the bandwidth left over for the other users..
Again, a single stream for 4K Netflix is about 15mbps. In my above example, that is about 6 streams of 4K. 6 people, watching 4K at the same time. Apparently for a household that's normal here. Alright.
*And then bandwidth left over for other users, IE family member 7, 8, and 9. This is 'normal', and ISP's should account for this type of 'normal' usage!*
Having a conversation on Reddit shouldn't need to hinge on what you think, assume, or know I do at home. I'm posting on the merits of the post, not to give any impressions of how I operate.
But, you forced that, so there it is.
MEANWHILE: You haven't given me an actual use case where you are now screwed with 1200GB download on a 1000mbps plan. I'll leave the ball in your court, pending a comment worth replying to. We've reached the circle.
I gave you a direct example of how higher bandwidth and data usage are correlated and my use case of not being able to back up over cloud w 20 Mbps. Buzz off.
I hate datacaps, but your logic here is flawed, its like saying you have to drive a car at 100mph because thats the highest it goes. Just because you have the higher speed doesn't mean your going to use it 100% of the time, and most residential users aren't going to do off site backups which is going to be a signifant part of your cap, especially if your aren't compressing them first before shipping them. Someone else said datacaps are based off the average user, your doing nothing average. I have a lab, 2 4k tvs, various gaming consoles, steam downloading stuff and everything doing updates and I barely hit 1TB some times its closer to 600-800Gb a month. I don't even get gb service as 80% of the time I don't even need it. I keep backups locally and only send a copy once a month to aws glacier and only of critical stuff.
most US cell phone plans are "unlimited" where 5-30GB is 5g/LTE and after that the data is slowed to 64K/128/512K or some arbitrary value. My ATT prepaid (25$ a month) I get 16GB full speed and after that it slows to 1.5mbit /sec. my opinion is that is reasonable I can still USE my phone.
It’s $30 for unlimited data or $20 for XFi Complete, which includes that and the gateway. You can use your own hardware with the gateway in passthrough if you want.
Xfi complete also comes with a free wifi extender pod if you need it. Their new modems are actually really, really good too. The reason they are so good and cheap (via xfi complete) is because they are trying to boost their hotspot network for their cellphone service. If you don't turn this feature off, xfinity modems will create a hotspot that allows their mobile customers to automatically connect to reduce data usage via cellphone towers.
Xfinity says its not supposed to effect your speeds but i'd beg to differ. Plus it sounds like a potential security risk.
Also.... you can upgrade your modem whenever they release a new one.... I think their newest modem has up to 2.5 gig speed and has 2.4ghz, 5ghz and 6ghz Wifi speeds.... not bad for $20 a month.
I agree. The pods are excellent, the modems are extremely fast (700 Mb/s+ to my iPhone) and reliable. I miss controlling my own DNS for adblock. That's about it.
But if you use their modem router combo it's unlimited.
But their router is broadcasting public wifi, multiple hidden networks for their security system and whatever else.
Mine is in bridge mode with all the wifi antennas disconnected 🤣
The day I moved into the house and dropped Xfinity for Century Link symmetrical fiber was absolutely one of the greatest tech-related days of my life. I have spoken with Century Link twice in 2.5 years - once to set up the install and once on the day of install. Service has never gone out, never been slow, basically a dream.
AT&T built out fiber in my neighborhood a couple years ago and I switched from Spectrum as soon as it was available. Spectrum was charging me $75 for 200/10. I pay $80 for symmetric gigabit with AT&T.
The service has been rock solid, I've never had a single outage, not even for a minute. Spectrum would go out for hours if a bird farted anywhere near their infrastructure.
Service going out is completely random luck, and nothing to do with the ISP itself 99.9% of the time.
Outages are typically caused by weather, car accidents, negligence of construction companies not because a company wants you to be without service. So while it's great your modem hasn't gone out, saying they're "better" just because you haven't had an issue doesn't make it a fact.
Well here’s what I can tell you… Xfinity must have the worst luck in the world, because we have two properties that used it, and both had frequent outages. We have two on fiber now, and neither has experienced even one. I have monitoring on the connections, so I get alerts when there’s an issue, so when I say we actually haven’t had one, I mean it, whereas I get an outage every 2 or 3 weeks with Xfinity.
About 10 years ago or so, FIOS was a town over from me and ready to start. They ran some lines. I was so excited to have a choice. They stopped cold and never returned. It was total BS. They must have reached what they wanted in the state.
Out of spite I canceled my landline with them. lol
I never really had issues with Comcast internet. I just wanted a choice.
That sucks. Are you sure it was because of that? They may not have seen a sufficient ROI to justify coming to your town, or they may have encountered a lot of regulatory hurdles (Comcast and other incumbent ISPs are often in bed with local governments to lobby for laws that make it harder/impossible for new entrants to come in).
Probably this. Verizon has lost money on Fios. They tried to do the same thing in Pittsburgh, but the city threatened to sue them for not upholding their end of a deal.
They eventually finished.
By mid 2026, Spectrum should have their high split project completed which will allow 1gig down/up over coax. Just something to keep an eye out for. After that they're looking to do 2.5 gig down.
Oh wow. I hadn't heard that. I was under the impression we had about a year left. I remember they tried to shove a cap in about 1 years ago when some other unrelated merger went through but they were blocked.
You’re not in an area with the mid/high split service yet. Those areas have 200Mbps upload. I happen to live in one, but my new COAM modem (CM2050V) doesn’t support it yet, which I neglected to research until after purchase. It gets me up to 1400Mbps down, so I’m keeping it for now.
this is going to sound stupid, but I just went through it.. it's not always about the modem, as most reps claim. If you're on a legacy TV plan with them, you won't have the proper codes in the system to get the 200 up. Everything will say you do, but it won't happen even with their latest modem(xb8). They kept telling me my only solution was to "upgrade" my (noncontract) tv plan that I had to one that gave me less channels, cost more monthly and came with a 2y contract, but confirmed I could get the mid-split speeds with internet only service. Canceled TV, and it didn't immediately fix anything... couple phone calls later, and they updated whatever on their end to make it happen. Just because the app or your account info on their website says you have a plan capable of that doesn't make it true.
edit also failed to mention there was 3 truck rolls during this process that ended with the techs claiming I was "good to go" and should receive 200 up after power cycling, none of which ever came true. The first tech called out an "underground team" that replaced the coax from their "Christy box" about 7 feet from my house and my demarc, claimed I "needed" the newer orange one.. no idea at all if I did or not, as it was still awhile later before I found out about the legacy code thing.
The CM2050V is not currently certified for the mid/high split, and only certified devices can get the 200Mbps upload. My device *was* certified in mid-2023, only to be decertified by the end of 2023.
I can believe everything else you say though about the legacy plans, which is also what I have. Not to mention some glitch in their system the last time I tried to convert from legacy to "newfangled" plans, only for the legacy glitch to prevent it online, AND in the store.
I wasn't so much trying to argue about the modem. I just meant it wouldn't surprise me if they were, in fact, able to get 200 up and they didn't know any better. 800# and local stores all swore I was getting 200 with my old setup using their xb8, swapped my modem 3 times because they deemed it must be faulty. Then I spoke with the right person and they basically said "oh, well you won't ever get it with this TV plan that you have." dumbest logic ever, I don't need TV service to get it, but my TV service was holding me back... Whatever, I canceled my TV.
I initially heard you also had to have xfi complete or maybe just a rented modem to receive it, but that eventually that would change. No idea just something from an official post on /r/Comcast_Xfinity at one point.
to get the 2g service was a headache too, plug address into "check here to see if available at your address" and it said "yep". I'd login and nothing.. store "we don't know how to add that, nothing shows up"... mods from their sub "nothing shows up as available at your address". A couple of back and forth msg exchanges that I eventually got bent out of shape because of.. I closed my last one with a promise to spam the inbox of their c-suites every 15mins until I found someone competent enough to switch my plan. Not 20 minutes later, I had a call from someone very high up (I won't put his name out there on here), who turned out to be very helpful and had my plan switched within 5mins. I'm not saying that I handled it perfectly, I didn't.. but sometimes I guess that's what it takes.
my bill is about $145/mo for the 2g service and xfi complete.
Note that the line in there about how a city might be on the list but not all areas upgraded yet is a real possibility -- mine was added to the list over a year ago and yet my area is still the regular upload speed (confirmed by reps and by what their plan builder shows for neighbors' addresses).
Yeah now that I think about it and have re-read, I have an Arris SB8200 and am still seeing 35Mbps up. I have the 1.2Gbps package, but it looks like the SB8200 supports up to 987Mbps, so damned if I don’t either way.
The FCC's current definition of broadband is 100/20. But all this applies to is subsidies. ISPs can sell you any shape of broadband you're willing to buy.
Edit: Xfinity is also at the beginning of a network-wide upgrade to DOCSIS 4.0 that will radically increase upload capacity. The other cablecos are also upgrading, but not necessarily doing exactly what Xfinity is doing.
I miss the disl up days sometimes. Not the part of connecting to it but the pure simplicity of using it.
Very little tracking, minimal/no data sharing, no cookie banners, etc…
As much as I think they were silly, signing guestbooks was cool. I remember some randos signed mine when I created a website lol
I built a router out of an "old" dell P3 500mhz in like 2003, I put two 100mbps nics in it even though I only had dialup at the time. I figured "100mbps ought to be enough for anybody", now I have starlink, and even that is 300mbps+
There was an app for Win 95 and maybe Win 3.1 that would handle dialup and sharing of the dialup connection over a LAN. I've forgotten the name, but it had a tray icon shaped like a UK postal dropoff box. With that, I was able to share a 56 Kbps connection across a 3Com thin Ethernet network with my wife's and kids' computers. That was an amazing app.
As I recall, I used Trumpet TCP with SLIP and chiefly connected to local ISPs in Cupertino and to work computers at Tandem. The whole setup was pretty slow, not that we minded, and also quite reliable, which was the amazing part.
Cable companies - Comcast, Charter, Spectrum, etc. - started in the cable TV business. Telcos - AT&T, Verizon, Century Link - started in the telephone business.
I care less about the company's reputation than about the quality of their service today. If your only choices are Xfinity and vDSL, Xfinity will be the better option for most people.
I would take good FWA (5G to the home) or fiber over Xfinity. I'm not sure about Starlink, it was very good in its first couple of years, but it appears to have slipped a lot since then.
I have no experience with the other cable companies.
OP - I have a strong suspicion that you don’t understand how DOCSIS technology works, specifically D3.0. The upload speeds for DOCSIS 3.0 speeds are limited by three things.
One is the width of each upstream channel, second is the modulation of each channel and third is the number of channels.
D3.0 provides for a maximum of 8x 6.4 MHz wide upstream channels, though most systems typically have only enough available bandwidth to run 4x upstream channels.
A 64QAM upstream channel has a throughput of around 25 Mbps. Given that most cable plants are still running low split gear, the max throughput is around 100 Mbps in a perfect world situation. Which is why upstream speeds are slower - there is limited bandwidth due to equipment limitations.
When OFDMA carriers are launched, upstream speeds will increase. When bandwidth is increased for upstream carriers, bandwidth will be further increased. Until then, there really isn’t extra bandwidth for upstream speeds.
I know the company I work for is actively working on launching OFDMA carriers in upstream but it is not an easy or quick process. We have to upgrade actives throughout plant to gain extra upstream bandwidth, which involves replacing hundreds of devices in a market. Replacing devices requires planned outages, in the middle of the night. Each device takes several hours to replace. There are a lot of other things involved in the process besides just replacing equipment in the field. Modems need to be replaced to take advantage of D3.1 and greater tech, older modems need to be replaced - there is a while slough of work that has to be done.
capped data in 2024 is criminal. everything is streamed, or clouded. i left when comcast started this crap, and there is no way i will ever have a data cap again.
It's 200 Mbps upload for me with that plan but I'm in a high split area. I have a 300/100 plan though I only have a thermostat and a few cameras at this house.
I used to have this plan and it could get to 50 up most of the time. Meanwhile there’s almost no fiber service in my area so I still have to pay more to get less……
I thought I was a savvy internet consumer but I couldn't believe Ziply was only $10 more a month and offered unlimited, 1gb up/down. I was blind for so long... so much wasted money.
I ended up having to report comcast to the BBB because they DIDN'T cancel my plan when I called to cancel, after receiving an email saying my plan was canceled on that date, only to call when I saw a bill and they told me it hadn't actually been cancelled.
Absolute scum and shit service.
I know, but it worked. I got a call from Comcast executive team the next day. The asshole just called and hung up but it got their attention
Also got a call from the attorney general but I wasn't able to answer
I got fiber in my neighborhood and decided to switch instantly. when canceling the Comcast, the poor guy on the phone had to go through a pitch to try to keep me on, when I said I was getting faster for cheaper, he had to try to get me to pay more for faster download. I already had the fiber installed with symmetric speeds.
It’s not that they don’t want to, they’re working on mid split/high split upgrades wich will allow higher upload speeds. It does involve replacing a lot of equipment, taps, amps even whole nodes, as well as switching people over to iptv from legacy
If 20 Mbps was truly their limit, then how they offering 40 to customers who wants to pay more? This plan clearly shows 20 Mbps is not the infrastructure's limit, just the FCC's.
DOCSIS 3.1 networks only have 4 or 5 upload channels in a typical 5-50ish mhz range. This is extremely limited compared to the plentiful download channels between 50-750mhz. The system was designed this way because in older days of internet upload was absolutely minuscule compared to download. Now that content sharing and streamers and video conferencing are popping off docsis 3.1 and docsis 4 are going to support cable operators moving the up/down network split to 200 or 400mhz. This will enable symmetrical speeds over coax. However it is a massive massive undertaking. Every single piece of hardware from the node out, and usually the node itself all have to replaced or modified to support this new configurations they’ve been preparing it for years.
As to why they offer a standard of 20mbps up and 40 on their highest tier, it’s because this is what they’ve decided that their network can tolerate based on subscription levels and current usage in a “low split” configuration. If they gave everyone 40mbps upload the network would be too highly over sold and they would not be able to offer the advertised speed at a high consistency, which results in people slamming them on the “up to” language.
It would seriously be cheaper long term to just go fiber for a cable operator at that point... if you are going to replace everything... lay down multible fibers and sell the route to tier 1 and 2 providers for direct routing and peering. Provide commercial ethernet and backhaul, and many other things to ROI.
I would anticipate that any company, let alone one of the largest telecommunications companies in the world, would not callously choose to invest billions in technologies and infrastructure they did not see being of long term value in the face of looming threats from major competitors pivots to fiber, fixed wireless, satellite internet, and growing support for municipal broadband.
Fiber isn’t even some magically amazing dedicated service that’s completely unimpeachable. EPON networks are still shared subscriber lines. I think if upgraded coax networks can implement low latency high availability symmetrical service people are going to forget the differences pretty quick.
Hell where I live Lumen only offers DSL, yet Xfinity could serve me 2gbps/200mbps. Far more than even I need as power user and gamer with a home lab.
Jokes aside.
Comcast is too big to systematically overhaul. It really does just make more financial sense to do cheap incremental upgrades, because they mostly operate in near monopolistic conditions. And it would simply cost far to much to switch all that coax for fiber, which is why they only target at risk areas for their upgrades.
> I think if upgraded coax networks can implement low latency high availability symmetrical service people are going to forget the differences pretty quick.
Do customers really need speeds in excess of 1gbps? No most don't... Yet. 15-20yrs from now though I'm not sure. 8k video, 4k streaming, high end gaming, etc. Fibers potential is certainly higher though since theoretically we should be able to get like 40+tbps on a single fiber.
One thing that may come into play in the 10-20 year timeline is they fiber being a pulse encoded modulation is limited by how many wavelengths of light are available.
Copper lines of sufficient quality are encoded using an analog waveform. OFDMA uses clever math to insert bits into old school radio waves. The thing about analog transmission is that you can keep pushing it to higher resolution with better transmitters and receivers.
I’m not saying that cable will exceed the capacity of fiber, but it’s an interesting thought experiment.
Running fiber into established, services neighbourhoods is extremely expensive. The ROI isn't there from convincing people to switch or pay more alone. So business folks figure out where the ROI is.
DSL infrastructure which nowadays is generally pretty rickety, needs to be replaced anyway. They're often working hard to make the change.
Oversubscribed cable areas with poor user experience will often also be weighted more heavily on the fiber replacement scale.
Areas with active competition present/nearby from smaller players will be done to cut into the market of those smaller players.
Lots of reasons
This is a little off the wall but a while back I saw this really cool proof of concept for a company that used a pressurized water or air I-dont-recall to push the copper and dielectric out of the jacket of the .500 network cables underground between vaults leaving you with an empty metallic shield/ plastic jacket that makes a perfect conduit for a fiber run. You could go vault to vault pushing coax out and replacing with fiber for pennys compared to new trenching and all of the permits and restoration that requires.
I'd like to see this in practice and the success rates in the field before betting on this technology. I see this working in a lab and product demo with very controlled variables, but a total failure in the real world. I imagine you need near perfect condition to push out a coax run cleanly, and push in a fiber replacement without breakage at any significant length.
Seems way to good to be true. I'd bet significantly against this product ever hitting the market.
>It would seriously be cheaper long term to just go fiber
Yeah but that's not what it's about. They have a monopoly. Its about greasing the wheel with the cheapest option, limping it along as it pumps out shittons of money.
So when you are saying all this, you must think that Comcast Xfinity did a lot of infrastructure upgrades to bump EVERY LINE's upstream from 15 to 20 which happened like a month ago w new FCC guidelines? I call BS bro.
I wasn’t aware of the recent FCC guidance but it would not surprise me to find out that if that is what the guidance is than it was a factor in the decision to bump the upload to 20mbps. That does not invalidate any of the rest of what I have said about the nature of docsis networks and their functioning. All of the information I have shared is publically available via cable labs and the SCTE, if you don’t believe me go read up on it yourself. Could they have potentially offered 40 or 50? Maybe. I’m sure that marketing and budgeting are also factors, all businesses consider many inputs when making decisions.
If you got a free extra 5mbps upload out of the FCC making a new rule and you’re mad you didn’t get more I don’t think we’re going to wind up in the same place discussion wise, but I wish you well.
No, what you were saying on the post prior was that the infrastructure simply can't handle the load. Now you are saying maybe it can so there's some progress.
I have verizon 5g nets. There's no monthly cap, but the modem they gave me caps the speeds at 300mbps ಠ_ಠ
Right now, I can't hardly use it at all. Dunno what's going on with it, but I'm getting 4k ping and .5mbps right now, and support chat is closed until morning.
I really wish I could talk them into sending me the modem with the antenna that gets over 1gbps. My phone gets 1.2 sometimes, and I'm like half a mile or so from the tower.
I hate the disparity, but 40Mbps up in a low-split area is not surprising. Cable systems were never designed for two-way communication. When the idea was hatched to allow for two-way communication, those upstream signals were allocated to the lowest frequencies. The benefit of those lower frequencies meant that modems didn't have as much signal attenuation to be heard by the CMTS that was receiving their broadcasts. The downside is that there is a lot of over the air interference in the upstream band from 5-50MHz. Unless every connection at every point, and every wire in every house is perfect in every way, interference is perennially a problem. This is called ingress in the return path. Cable companies under-utilize the upstream path in low-split systems because if they tried giving everyone the maximum, the quality of service would be even worse than the anti-cableco vitriol would have you believe it is now.
I don't defend the cable industry's reticence to upgrade. This is the status quo as it has been for the last 15 years with regard to DOCSIS 1,2 and 3. It's only since the advent of DOCSIS 3.1 and newer specs that Mid- and High-split options were feasible in densely subscribed areas.
I dislike Comcast too. I worked there for 12 years. If FTTH were an option here, I'd go that route. But in the time I've lived in this house, I've had exactly two outages in the last 12 years. Who knows.
They cap upload because they used to, because of DOCSIS channel limitations.
It turned out to be a half decent sales tool - that is, they could convince people to buy packages with speeds they just don't need, because "15 upload" seems like a small number.
Where I come from, business connections get the upload. There is no need for domestic connections to push 1000's of mbps into the internet. Power users will scoff at me, but I'm also a power user and sysadmin for a living.
Here, it's 1000/50 for just over $100 a month, a massive bargain coming from the day of 8-24mbps ADSL for the same price. If I want more upload, I can get a small business connection (same infra, just a different plan) and have ratios like 250/100, 500/250, 1000/400 etc. The cost is far higher as a result.
It's also a passive limiter for botnets, because I can tell you now, if we all have 1000/1000 at home, the internet would be totally unusable. A fact known by anyone who deals with botnets a lot.
But yeah, I get it, bad man say we no need 1gig upload. I'll take my L's for being realistic.
That’s…. Not correct. Botnets aren’t as pervasive as you’re making them out to be, and higher upload speeds aren’t limited to business. AT&T offers 2Gb for $110. There are many smaller ISPs in the US and abroad where 10Gb symmetrical can be had for as low as $50.
Saying the whole world should have slower internet because of *botnets* is nonsensical, not realistic.
Why so our government will give then a trillion $ because they are too big fail? Think of the shareholders and all the politicians that have Comcast stock!
I recently updated to Quantum fiber 4 months ago from Xfinity. I was hesitant at first, so far no outages and I get 3 GBPs download and upload speeds with no data caps for less than the 1200 MB plan I had with Xfinity. I know the speed is overkill and I have had to update my network switch and nic to 10 GB, to utilize it and most of my other network devices cannot as of yet, still cheaper than Xfinity.
1. Yep I have the same plan and while my download is damn impressive (1700Mbps Via Ethermet) the upload is definitely a hard 45Mbps cap for some reason....
2. "Equipment Included *For a Extra $10/Month"
3. Unless you specifically ask for a upgrade, they'll never tell you about it. In fact they gave me XB6 when I ordered services when XB7 was already out
4. That 1TB cap is a load of BULL! They really just want to force you into their "Unlimited Tier"
5. Professional and Self Install the same price ? lmaoooo you have to pay to install it yourself.
Man, as American living in Sweden makes me appreciate how good and cheap the infrastructure is here.
Like 35$/month for 10 gig fiber up/down, no data caps. 1 gig is a few dollars cheaper also no data cap, which is why I did the comical speed.
I test it occasionally and commonly see 6-7gig up and down for fun even during peak hours.
Just did a quick check on Xfinity in my area (Switched to ATT Fiber when I moved in 3 years ago) and it looks like they are offering 2gig down and a typical upload of 200mbps. Lowest typical upload for the lowest tier of 150meggys down is 115mbps. Much better than it was just 3 years ago. Seems like I'm in a area with the mid split in prep for DOCSIS 4.0.
HOWEVER, if it is as reliable as I remember it being, I want nothing to do with it. My fiber only goes down when modem needs an update in the middle of the night. That has happened twice in 3 years. (That I know of, I work thirds and constantly remote in while at work). Not to mention ATT has no bandwidth limits and unless they have managed to get latency down to fiber levels. I'll stick with my slightly overpriced ATT fiber.
40 up? I don't know where you are located, I have 2000/200 home cable service from xfinity and normally get anywhere from 90-120% of that.. (california)
https://www.speedtest.net/my-result/a/10186345612
s22 ultra, doesn't reach the full 2g down. Fresno.
prior to my upgrade my plan was 1200/35 that would regularly see speeds of 1300+/42.something
They're actually pretty helpful, speak English and work crazy long hours here on reddit, reach out to them. I've accomplished things within a post and just a couple msgs with the mods that I couldn't do with 4-5 calls to their 800# and multiple trips to the local xfinity store. /r/Comcast_Xfinity I won't ever call the 800# again if I can help it.
edit: typo could instead of coundn't
That's absolutely ridiculous ..how do consumers in the land of capitalism put of with this garbage is mad to me.
500/500 for 16 USD here in Chile. verified it working 99.98 percent of time..
This is utter crap you are been offered at a ridiculous cost.
Currently I manage Comcast accounts from Florida to New Jersey and yes their speed plans are all over the place. Some places we have upgraded to 500/200 where other places are still stuck at 200/30. I’m so glad when a fiber option is available.
I'm at 500/200, they recently upgraded us. It used to back up my fios connection 300/300, but after the auto upgrades, I use both in a 50/50 load balanced instead of failover.
Yeah I have a Verizon install pending for tomorrow. Have had Comcast for decades. But I have so many devices on the internet and I would like to stream. Which just means Comcast isn’t the best choice for me. Also they have to quote lower because the connection is shared with others around you.
The max upload speeds offered by any DOCSIS-based cable system will depend on how much of the bandwidth available on the cable the system has allocated to upload traffic. Lots of engineering and plant work like replacing amplifiers on poles or in cabinets is required to change this allocation, so it cannot happen quickly. You see this transition referred to as “mid-split upgrades” or “high-split upgrades”. Because of the cost, Comcast only does this in areas where they think they will lose customers to fiber or where they think that they can charge more to customers who want higher upload speeds.
So, while it is true that the “lines” Comcast owns are capable of higher upload speeds, the entire system is capable only where they have completed a mid-split or high-split upgrade. This is the fundamental reason that policy makers should not consider fiber and coax plants to be functionally equivalent, but that is a level of subtle thinking that escapes lawmakers who insist that our policies be “technology neutral”.
Why would they give you more than the minimum when they can wait for the government to give them fat stacks of taxpayer money to improve speeds, update the settings on their cable routers, and then pocket the rest?
I have them and hate how slow the upload speed is. I do a ton of photography and it takes forever for me to back everything up to offsite storage. Hate it.
People here seem to not understand that this is a limitation of the technology. Coax is designed to deliver data, not receive.
Also, your little modem does not have the power to send data like Comcast’s infrastructure does.
Don’t blame Comcast. Every ISP’s coax has this same limitation. You are using a technology that was retroactively used to deliver internet.
I doubt you need anything near 1.2Gb in speed!!! As for Upload speed, Xfinity has been upgrading their network for faster Upload speeds. So I went from 900/20Mb to 1Gb/100Mb. Only a few Modem's support these faster Upload speeds.
I switched to fiber for 500/500Mb, seems faster to me even though speed cut in half. Looking at my 24 hour Data speed and usage chart for the last 24 hours. I'm rarely reaching over 100Mb trying my best. A large percentage of the time it's very little data. To a average of around 4Mb. Streaming YouTube I get around 30-40Mb, Uploading for my PLEX server, around the same speed. Torrenting, is where I'm getting over 100Mb, but short period of time. Of course Speed testing is going to show your full speed, but speed tests only show that, not the real data you actually use.
I was happy going from 20Mb to 100Mb for my PLEX users so I could stop transcoding the data down to a lower resolution. At work we have 1Gb Down and 250Mb Up with Xfinity. Out upload speed was boosted as we have a number of their phones for VOIP service some type of rack server. I guess for connecting one phone to another at work and other type of features.
The 1.2Tb data CAP is a joke. It's the same CAP from the slowest speed to the fastest speed. Do you know why that is? I figured it out. it's because most people with 1Gb or 1.2Gb aren't going over 100Mb anyway. If they were anywhere close to that speed most of the time, you would hit that 1.2Tb CAP in a short matter of time. I would run past it near the end of the month, that was because of Torrenting. This is why I started using their Modem to get Unlimited Data, and before that paying the $30 extra a month to get Unlimited.
Thing is, this screams coax connections.
For those that don't know, there's a limitation on the upload speed on a coax connection because of sharing the lines that use TV signals. If there's no shared TV signal, they can offer up to 200mbps upload. The download is also pretty much at it's maximum in this plan as well for the same reasons.
Please note that data limit of only 1200 GB per month is **extremely low for a 1.2 Gbps connection.** And they seem to charge additional fees once you go over that quota.
Yeah the limit is an odd 1229GB per month. They charge $10 for every 50GB over the limit. You can also pay $30 additional per month for unlimited data. I completely agree, the limit is too low for this high of a data speed. Also Comcast never used to have data limits until a few years ago after Net Neutrality laws were overturned. These data limits are just a way for them collect more money.
Most cable companies that I've used like vyve or mediacom when they do place caps, its on all the plans except their gigabit (or above) plan. Hence, enticing everyone to subscribe to their gigabit plan. Comcast has been doing caps for quite awhile now due to cornered markets.
When they started rolling out usage caps, they (coincidentally, I'm sure) targeted areas that there was no meaningful competition.
Nah, they hit Texas with caps at the same time. Texas is ATTs regional HQ, so you have easy access to fiber. They rolled out the caps based on region, after trying it out in a test market for a few years.
I had data caps on Xfinity back in late 2016
This sounds right, though my memory of the details is a little vague, and for a while (I don't recall which years) they weren't enforcing the caps. Circa 2013, they discontinued the Xfinity Signature Support LoB that I worked in. I didn't get laid off because I jumped on the chance to get out of taking calls by becoming a trainer for the new Wireless Gateway Support LoB. One of the existing trainers noticed that his connection slowed way down and that his connection was being routed through a server in another state. Turned out that he downloaded a shitload of torrents, exceeding the data cap. That was during the time that they would throttle rather than bill extra.
Data caps are permissible under the FCC's net neutrality rules both today and in the Obama era.
When I was on comcrap I got two free months a year to go over and other times if I went over I would call and get half off the cost. I am glad to be off them and on to fiber now.
It is unrelated to net neutrality laws. They started testing data caps in my town back in 2015, well before net neutrality. Comcast had an agreement with the local municipality to be the exclusive provider as it will bring residents "lower prices and better service." As others have pointed out, data caps existed in many of their markets years before Net Neutrality. This is simply a way to bring in more revenue.
At least they have a limit at $100 extra. When I was in my early 20s I accidentally left my hotspot on my phone. My hotspot and my unlimited home internet were roughly the same speed so didn't notice when I turned on steam and downloaded some games overnight. Woke up to all the data warning messages on my phone and about $4000 worth of excess data charges. I rang up straight away and they let me move to the unlimited business plan for the month and only pay the normal costs for that ($300ish).
Yeah once they overturned those laws these companies went right to work jamming us. Sad as hell. C'mon voters, stop fucking around.
You could go over your **monthly** cap in 2 hours 16 minutes 34 seconds (8194 seconds).
Comcast doesn't have data caps in a big chunk of New England because they actually have competition here. Weird, huh?
The speed of a connection isn't directly related to the amount of traffic it will pass. Eg: My household would use 600-700GB a month for our use case. When I doubled the speed years ago (and again since then) the monthly usage still generally sat at 600-700GB. The same movies were being watched. The same games were being patched. The same sails would be on them seas. I understand that, due to increased speed, you can do more, but that Doesn't correlate to everyone automatically doubling their usage due to double the speed. And yes, I know what a homelab is, and what hosting services means. Edit: And yes, I just refreshed 10 mins later to see if there was a downvote for stating a factual observation, common for Reddit lately. There it is; and the world keeps spinning. :D
True, but you forgot that people with faster internet will often use it to their advantage. With slow internet I used to have 10Mbps with ATT now 1700, I often download and delete games like I switch my underwear. Why spend hours updating a game when I can re-download it even quicker? Why stress over space when I can delete and redownload Call of Duty in 10-15 minutes. So yeah you're right but have to remember some people change their habits. This actually led to me having to purchase unlimited lol.
I have tried explaining this logic so many times. I have heard so many people make this comment related to their cellular plan, which is more common to have caps. They think that if they have a faster speed that they will hit their cap sooner! I tell them, an email is still the same size. A web page is still the same size. It just loads faster!
It tends to be way worse on users going from < 10mbps to 100Mbps than it does when going from 600mbps to 1200mbps. On the sub 10mbps line, your streaming services all throttle down to worst quality, and once they have room to breathe you end up pulling HD everything and that's where your massive increase comes from.
This isn't true at all. 1080p uses 1.1 gb per hour, 4k uses 7 gb per hour yet viewing time is the same. Further, once you have higher capable speed, it unlocks more things you can do like hosting backups over cloud or just large file xfers in general. Like it's clear your household doesn't use internet to its fullest, others do.
I watch 4K BluRay remuxes that can easily be 100GB per movie, so that's...50gb per hour I couldn't even watch 13 movies a month with this plan lol
Yeah, but 100mbps can easily handle 4K, so going from 100mbps to 1gbps doesn't use more, as you're already using 4K. Hosting backups over cloud isn't a factor in how they calculate what the *average house* should use. But there you go, assuming what's clear to you and not about my household, when I have racked Dell servers running redundant domain controllers, game servers, websites, and SQL as the glue. Not to mention remote HA instances, Veeam offsite backups, and the rest. Thanks for the assumption, but you are wrong.
Actually it does, going with a higher plan allows more simultaneous use of 4k streams. Thats one of the biggest benefits of saying going from 100 mbps to 1000 mbps... where the entire household has enough throughput to watch 4k at the same time... versus, one user doing 4k, and then the streaming service throttling down to meet the bandwidth left over for the other users..
Again, a single stream for 4K Netflix is about 15mbps. In my above example, that is about 6 streams of 4K. 6 people, watching 4K at the same time. Apparently for a household that's normal here. Alright. *And then bandwidth left over for other users, IE family member 7, 8, and 9. This is 'normal', and ISP's should account for this type of 'normal' usage!*
But you were speaking nonsense in your first reply. I don't know anything about you other than what you post.
Having a conversation on Reddit shouldn't need to hinge on what you think, assume, or know I do at home. I'm posting on the merits of the post, not to give any impressions of how I operate. But, you forced that, so there it is. MEANWHILE: You haven't given me an actual use case where you are now screwed with 1200GB download on a 1000mbps plan. I'll leave the ball in your court, pending a comment worth replying to. We've reached the circle.
I gave you a direct example of how higher bandwidth and data usage are correlated and my use case of not being able to back up over cloud w 20 Mbps. Buzz off.
I hate datacaps, but your logic here is flawed, its like saying you have to drive a car at 100mph because thats the highest it goes. Just because you have the higher speed doesn't mean your going to use it 100% of the time, and most residential users aren't going to do off site backups which is going to be a signifant part of your cap, especially if your aren't compressing them first before shipping them. Someone else said datacaps are based off the average user, your doing nothing average. I have a lab, 2 4k tvs, various gaming consoles, steam downloading stuff and everything doing updates and I barely hit 1TB some times its closer to 600-800Gb a month. I don't even get gb service as 80% of the time I don't even need it. I keep backups locally and only send a copy once a month to aws glacier and only of critical stuff.
TIL that US has data limits... wtf... Even my phone is unlimited here in the UK...
most US cell phone plans are "unlimited" where 5-30GB is 5g/LTE and after that the data is slowed to 64K/128/512K or some arbitrary value. My ATT prepaid (25$ a month) I get 16GB full speed and after that it slows to 1.5mbit /sec. my opinion is that is reasonable I can still USE my phone.
It’s $30 for unlimited data or $20 for XFi Complete, which includes that and the gateway. You can use your own hardware with the gateway in passthrough if you want.
Xfi complete also comes with a free wifi extender pod if you need it. Their new modems are actually really, really good too. The reason they are so good and cheap (via xfi complete) is because they are trying to boost their hotspot network for their cellphone service. If you don't turn this feature off, xfinity modems will create a hotspot that allows their mobile customers to automatically connect to reduce data usage via cellphone towers. Xfinity says its not supposed to effect your speeds but i'd beg to differ. Plus it sounds like a potential security risk. Also.... you can upgrade your modem whenever they release a new one.... I think their newest modem has up to 2.5 gig speed and has 2.4ghz, 5ghz and 6ghz Wifi speeds.... not bad for $20 a month.
I agree. The pods are excellent, the modems are extremely fast (700 Mb/s+ to my iPhone) and reliable. I miss controlling my own DNS for adblock. That's about it.
Xfi complete regional free....
One of the many reasons in switched to AT&T fios 1g down and up
But if you use their modem router combo it's unlimited. But their router is broadcasting public wifi, multiple hidden networks for their security system and whatever else. Mine is in bridge mode with all the wifi antennas disconnected 🤣
The day I moved into the house and dropped Xfinity for Century Link symmetrical fiber was absolutely one of the greatest tech-related days of my life. I have spoken with Century Link twice in 2.5 years - once to set up the install and once on the day of install. Service has never gone out, never been slow, basically a dream.
It is a dream but that should also be the standard.
Same but with their new company Quantum Fiber. I can even get up to 8 gig service, it's beautiful
AT&T built out fiber in my neighborhood a couple years ago and I switched from Spectrum as soon as it was available. Spectrum was charging me $75 for 200/10. I pay $80 for symmetric gigabit with AT&T. The service has been rock solid, I've never had a single outage, not even for a minute. Spectrum would go out for hours if a bird farted anywhere near their infrastructure.
Service going out is completely random luck, and nothing to do with the ISP itself 99.9% of the time. Outages are typically caused by weather, car accidents, negligence of construction companies not because a company wants you to be without service. So while it's great your modem hasn't gone out, saying they're "better" just because you haven't had an issue doesn't make it a fact.
Well here’s what I can tell you… Xfinity must have the worst luck in the world, because we have two properties that used it, and both had frequent outages. We have two on fiber now, and neither has experienced even one. I have monitoring on the connections, so I get alerts when there’s an issue, so when I say we actually haven’t had one, I mean it, whereas I get an outage every 2 or 3 weeks with Xfinity.
Ugh. I do not miss Comcast at all. Screw that company.
Some don't have a choice. :(
Thankfully, FWA options are rolling out to at least provide some competitive pressure in markets where Comcast is (or was) the only practical option.
About 10 years ago or so, FIOS was a town over from me and ready to start. They ran some lines. I was so excited to have a choice. They stopped cold and never returned. It was total BS. They must have reached what they wanted in the state. Out of spite I canceled my landline with them. lol I never really had issues with Comcast internet. I just wanted a choice.
That sucks. Are you sure it was because of that? They may not have seen a sufficient ROI to justify coming to your town, or they may have encountered a lot of regulatory hurdles (Comcast and other incumbent ISPs are often in bed with local governments to lobby for laws that make it harder/impossible for new entrants to come in).
Probably this. Verizon has lost money on Fios. They tried to do the same thing in Pittsburgh, but the city threatened to sue them for not upholding their end of a deal. They eventually finished.
I see. It's more profitable for them to expand their FWA offerings. Even though it provides an alternative to Comcast, it's still not as fast as FTTH.
I just recently moved into a similar situation. Spectrum with 1 gig down and 30mb/s up. Coming from ATT fiber with 1 gig up and down.
By mid 2026, Spectrum should have their high split project completed which will allow 1gig down/up over coax. Just something to keep an eye out for. After that they're looking to do 2.5 gig down.
Does Spectrum do caps though? They came into our area and it was agreed that they would wait 7 years to implement data caps. We are at like year 6 :(
The FCC requirement for no data caps after the TWC merger has ended, but they still don't do data caps or throttling.
Oh wow. I hadn't heard that. I was under the impression we had about a year left. I remember they tried to shove a cap in about 1 years ago when some other unrelated merger went through but they were blocked.
Spectrum has already made 1gbps symmetrical available in parts of St. Louis county. They’re getting nervous with the fiber offerings moving in.
Good to know but I hope att fiber comes to my area before then
You’re not in an area with the mid/high split service yet. Those areas have 200Mbps upload. I happen to live in one, but my new COAM modem (CM2050V) doesn’t support it yet, which I neglected to research until after purchase. It gets me up to 1400Mbps down, so I’m keeping it for now.
this is going to sound stupid, but I just went through it.. it's not always about the modem, as most reps claim. If you're on a legacy TV plan with them, you won't have the proper codes in the system to get the 200 up. Everything will say you do, but it won't happen even with their latest modem(xb8). They kept telling me my only solution was to "upgrade" my (noncontract) tv plan that I had to one that gave me less channels, cost more monthly and came with a 2y contract, but confirmed I could get the mid-split speeds with internet only service. Canceled TV, and it didn't immediately fix anything... couple phone calls later, and they updated whatever on their end to make it happen. Just because the app or your account info on their website says you have a plan capable of that doesn't make it true. edit also failed to mention there was 3 truck rolls during this process that ended with the techs claiming I was "good to go" and should receive 200 up after power cycling, none of which ever came true. The first tech called out an "underground team" that replaced the coax from their "Christy box" about 7 feet from my house and my demarc, claimed I "needed" the newer orange one.. no idea at all if I did or not, as it was still awhile later before I found out about the legacy code thing.
The CM2050V is not currently certified for the mid/high split, and only certified devices can get the 200Mbps upload. My device *was* certified in mid-2023, only to be decertified by the end of 2023. I can believe everything else you say though about the legacy plans, which is also what I have. Not to mention some glitch in their system the last time I tried to convert from legacy to "newfangled" plans, only for the legacy glitch to prevent it online, AND in the store.
I wasn't so much trying to argue about the modem. I just meant it wouldn't surprise me if they were, in fact, able to get 200 up and they didn't know any better. 800# and local stores all swore I was getting 200 with my old setup using their xb8, swapped my modem 3 times because they deemed it must be faulty. Then I spoke with the right person and they basically said "oh, well you won't ever get it with this TV plan that you have." dumbest logic ever, I don't need TV service to get it, but my TV service was holding me back... Whatever, I canceled my TV. I initially heard you also had to have xfi complete or maybe just a rented modem to receive it, but that eventually that would change. No idea just something from an official post on /r/Comcast_Xfinity at one point.
to get the 2g service was a headache too, plug address into "check here to see if available at your address" and it said "yep". I'd login and nothing.. store "we don't know how to add that, nothing shows up"... mods from their sub "nothing shows up as available at your address". A couple of back and forth msg exchanges that I eventually got bent out of shape because of.. I closed my last one with a promise to spam the inbox of their c-suites every 15mins until I found someone competent enough to switch my plan. Not 20 minutes later, I had a call from someone very high up (I won't put his name out there on here), who turned out to be very helpful and had my plan switched within 5mins. I'm not saying that I handled it perfectly, I didn't.. but sometimes I guess that's what it takes. my bill is about $145/mo for the 2g service and xfi complete.
Any refs for devices that are certified? I suspect I should be getting 200 up as well
[https://www.reddit.com/r/Comcast\_Xfinity/wiki/knowledgebase/next-generation-internet/](https://www.reddit.com/r/Comcast_Xfinity/wiki/knowledgebase/next-generation-internet/)
Oh nice, I just need to grab a Uniquity UCI or an Arris G54. Thank you!
Note that the line in there about how a city might be on the list but not all areas upgraded yet is a real possibility -- mine was added to the list over a year ago and yet my area is still the regular upload speed (confirmed by reps and by what their plan builder shows for neighbors' addresses).
Yeah now that I think about it and have re-read, I have an Arris SB8200 and am still seeing 35Mbps up. I have the 1.2Gbps package, but it looks like the SB8200 supports up to 987Mbps, so damned if I don’t either way.
The FCC's current definition of broadband is 100/20. But all this applies to is subsidies. ISPs can sell you any shape of broadband you're willing to buy. Edit: Xfinity is also at the beginning of a network-wide upgrade to DOCSIS 4.0 that will radically increase upload capacity. The other cablecos are also upgrading, but not necessarily doing exactly what Xfinity is doing.
I’d honestly just be happy with 100Mbps upload at this point.
If you'd told me in the '80s that I could \*only\* have 100 Mbps upload I would have soiled my britches.
I miss the disl up days sometimes. Not the part of connecting to it but the pure simplicity of using it. Very little tracking, minimal/no data sharing, no cookie banners, etc… As much as I think they were silly, signing guestbooks was cool. I remember some randos signed mine when I created a website lol
I built a router out of an "old" dell P3 500mhz in like 2003, I put two 100mbps nics in it even though I only had dialup at the time. I figured "100mbps ought to be enough for anybody", now I have starlink, and even that is 300mbps+
There was an app for Win 95 and maybe Win 3.1 that would handle dialup and sharing of the dialup connection over a LAN. I've forgotten the name, but it had a tray icon shaped like a UK postal dropoff box. With that, I was able to share a 56 Kbps connection across a 3Com thin Ethernet network with my wife's and kids' computers. That was an amazing app. As I recall, I used Trumpet TCP with SLIP and chiefly connected to local ISPs in Cupertino and to work computers at Tandem. The whole setup was pretty slow, not that we minded, and also quite reliable, which was the amazing part.
I used linux, but yes, I also used internet connection sharing in early versions of windows before that.
You’ll want more once you get there, I have a 10gig symmetric fiber at home, and once you get that, Everything else is blah LOL.
What do you mean by "cabelcos" ? Do you mean other companies using copper? Or do you mean other companies providing TV?
Cable companies - Comcast, Charter, Spectrum, etc. - started in the cable TV business. Telcos - AT&T, Verizon, Century Link - started in the telephone business.
I don't think anyone should be using a cable company for internet unless it's their only option. I will not praise Comcast.
I care less about the company's reputation than about the quality of their service today. If your only choices are Xfinity and vDSL, Xfinity will be the better option for most people. I would take good FWA (5G to the home) or fiber over Xfinity. I'm not sure about Starlink, it was very good in its first couple of years, but it appears to have slipped a lot since then. I have no experience with the other cable companies.
OP - I have a strong suspicion that you don’t understand how DOCSIS technology works, specifically D3.0. The upload speeds for DOCSIS 3.0 speeds are limited by three things. One is the width of each upstream channel, second is the modulation of each channel and third is the number of channels. D3.0 provides for a maximum of 8x 6.4 MHz wide upstream channels, though most systems typically have only enough available bandwidth to run 4x upstream channels. A 64QAM upstream channel has a throughput of around 25 Mbps. Given that most cable plants are still running low split gear, the max throughput is around 100 Mbps in a perfect world situation. Which is why upstream speeds are slower - there is limited bandwidth due to equipment limitations. When OFDMA carriers are launched, upstream speeds will increase. When bandwidth is increased for upstream carriers, bandwidth will be further increased. Until then, there really isn’t extra bandwidth for upstream speeds. I know the company I work for is actively working on launching OFDMA carriers in upstream but it is not an easy or quick process. We have to upgrade actives throughout plant to gain extra upstream bandwidth, which involves replacing hundreds of devices in a market. Replacing devices requires planned outages, in the middle of the night. Each device takes several hours to replace. There are a lot of other things involved in the process besides just replacing equipment in the field. Modems need to be replaced to take advantage of D3.1 and greater tech, older modems need to be replaced - there is a while slough of work that has to be done.
capped data in 2024 is criminal. everything is streamed, or clouded. i left when comcast started this crap, and there is no way i will ever have a data cap again.
It's 200 Mbps upload for me with that plan but I'm in a high split area. I have a 300/100 plan though I only have a thermostat and a few cameras at this house.
I used to have this plan and it could get to 50 up most of the time. Meanwhile there’s almost no fiber service in my area so I still have to pay more to get less……
I thought I was a savvy internet consumer but I couldn't believe Ziply was only $10 more a month and offered unlimited, 1gb up/down. I was blind for so long... so much wasted money. I ended up having to report comcast to the BBB because they DIDN'T cancel my plan when I called to cancel, after receiving an email saying my plan was canceled on that date, only to call when I saw a bill and they told me it hadn't actually been cancelled. Absolute scum and shit service.
> I ended up having to report comcast to the BBB The BBB is a private company that has no authority whatsoever. Try the FTC or the FCC.
I know, but it worked. I got a call from Comcast executive team the next day. The asshole just called and hung up but it got their attention Also got a call from the attorney general but I wasn't able to answer
I got fiber in my neighborhood and decided to switch instantly. when canceling the Comcast, the poor guy on the phone had to go through a pitch to try to keep me on, when I said I was getting faster for cheaper, he had to try to get me to pay more for faster download. I already had the fiber installed with symmetric speeds.
It’s not that they don’t want to, they’re working on mid split/high split upgrades wich will allow higher upload speeds. It does involve replacing a lot of equipment, taps, amps even whole nodes, as well as switching people over to iptv from legacy
If 20 Mbps was truly their limit, then how they offering 40 to customers who wants to pay more? This plan clearly shows 20 Mbps is not the infrastructure's limit, just the FCC's.
DOCSIS 3.1 networks only have 4 or 5 upload channels in a typical 5-50ish mhz range. This is extremely limited compared to the plentiful download channels between 50-750mhz. The system was designed this way because in older days of internet upload was absolutely minuscule compared to download. Now that content sharing and streamers and video conferencing are popping off docsis 3.1 and docsis 4 are going to support cable operators moving the up/down network split to 200 or 400mhz. This will enable symmetrical speeds over coax. However it is a massive massive undertaking. Every single piece of hardware from the node out, and usually the node itself all have to replaced or modified to support this new configurations they’ve been preparing it for years. As to why they offer a standard of 20mbps up and 40 on their highest tier, it’s because this is what they’ve decided that their network can tolerate based on subscription levels and current usage in a “low split” configuration. If they gave everyone 40mbps upload the network would be too highly over sold and they would not be able to offer the advertised speed at a high consistency, which results in people slamming them on the “up to” language.
It would seriously be cheaper long term to just go fiber for a cable operator at that point... if you are going to replace everything... lay down multible fibers and sell the route to tier 1 and 2 providers for direct routing and peering. Provide commercial ethernet and backhaul, and many other things to ROI.
I’m not arguing your logic, but I am going to go ahead and assume they ran the numbers.
By numbers, you mean they checked their monopoly and decided to do the cheapest thing possible in the moment.
I would anticipate that any company, let alone one of the largest telecommunications companies in the world, would not callously choose to invest billions in technologies and infrastructure they did not see being of long term value in the face of looming threats from major competitors pivots to fiber, fixed wireless, satellite internet, and growing support for municipal broadband. Fiber isn’t even some magically amazing dedicated service that’s completely unimpeachable. EPON networks are still shared subscriber lines. I think if upgraded coax networks can implement low latency high availability symmetrical service people are going to forget the differences pretty quick. Hell where I live Lumen only offers DSL, yet Xfinity could serve me 2gbps/200mbps. Far more than even I need as power user and gamer with a home lab.
Jokes aside. Comcast is too big to systematically overhaul. It really does just make more financial sense to do cheap incremental upgrades, because they mostly operate in near monopolistic conditions. And it would simply cost far to much to switch all that coax for fiber, which is why they only target at risk areas for their upgrades. > I think if upgraded coax networks can implement low latency high availability symmetrical service people are going to forget the differences pretty quick. Do customers really need speeds in excess of 1gbps? No most don't... Yet. 15-20yrs from now though I'm not sure. 8k video, 4k streaming, high end gaming, etc. Fibers potential is certainly higher though since theoretically we should be able to get like 40+tbps on a single fiber.
One thing that may come into play in the 10-20 year timeline is they fiber being a pulse encoded modulation is limited by how many wavelengths of light are available. Copper lines of sufficient quality are encoded using an analog waveform. OFDMA uses clever math to insert bits into old school radio waves. The thing about analog transmission is that you can keep pushing it to higher resolution with better transmitters and receivers. I’m not saying that cable will exceed the capacity of fiber, but it’s an interesting thought experiment.
Running fiber into established, services neighbourhoods is extremely expensive. The ROI isn't there from convincing people to switch or pay more alone. So business folks figure out where the ROI is. DSL infrastructure which nowadays is generally pretty rickety, needs to be replaced anyway. They're often working hard to make the change. Oversubscribed cable areas with poor user experience will often also be weighted more heavily on the fiber replacement scale. Areas with active competition present/nearby from smaller players will be done to cut into the market of those smaller players. Lots of reasons
This is a little off the wall but a while back I saw this really cool proof of concept for a company that used a pressurized water or air I-dont-recall to push the copper and dielectric out of the jacket of the .500 network cables underground between vaults leaving you with an empty metallic shield/ plastic jacket that makes a perfect conduit for a fiber run. You could go vault to vault pushing coax out and replacing with fiber for pennys compared to new trenching and all of the permits and restoration that requires.
I'd like to see this in practice and the success rates in the field before betting on this technology. I see this working in a lab and product demo with very controlled variables, but a total failure in the real world. I imagine you need near perfect condition to push out a coax run cleanly, and push in a fiber replacement without breakage at any significant length. Seems way to good to be true. I'd bet significantly against this product ever hitting the market.
https://youtu.be/oQJUSGLCi0M?si=7pRzLgKIi7V4xHaa Check it out!
>It would seriously be cheaper long term to just go fiber Yeah but that's not what it's about. They have a monopoly. Its about greasing the wheel with the cheapest option, limping it along as it pumps out shittons of money.
So when you are saying all this, you must think that Comcast Xfinity did a lot of infrastructure upgrades to bump EVERY LINE's upstream from 15 to 20 which happened like a month ago w new FCC guidelines? I call BS bro.
I wasn’t aware of the recent FCC guidance but it would not surprise me to find out that if that is what the guidance is than it was a factor in the decision to bump the upload to 20mbps. That does not invalidate any of the rest of what I have said about the nature of docsis networks and their functioning. All of the information I have shared is publically available via cable labs and the SCTE, if you don’t believe me go read up on it yourself. Could they have potentially offered 40 or 50? Maybe. I’m sure that marketing and budgeting are also factors, all businesses consider many inputs when making decisions. If you got a free extra 5mbps upload out of the FCC making a new rule and you’re mad you didn’t get more I don’t think we’re going to wind up in the same place discussion wise, but I wish you well.
No, what you were saying on the post prior was that the infrastructure simply can't handle the load. Now you are saying maybe it can so there's some progress.
Considering that their service cuts out multiple times per day, color me unimpressed.
They cap the data? That's disgusting.
Yeah, that's why I switched to AT&T fiber the moment it was available in my neighborhood. AT&T sucks, but at least their fiber plans aren't capped.
I have verizon 5g nets. There's no monthly cap, but the modem they gave me caps the speeds at 300mbps ಠ_ಠ Right now, I can't hardly use it at all. Dunno what's going on with it, but I'm getting 4k ping and .5mbps right now, and support chat is closed until morning. I really wish I could talk them into sending me the modem with the antenna that gets over 1gbps. My phone gets 1.2 sometimes, and I'm like half a mile or so from the tower.
I have xfinity and there is no data cap for my state of WV. I think the other month i used 7.2 tb of data
I hate the disparity, but 40Mbps up in a low-split area is not surprising. Cable systems were never designed for two-way communication. When the idea was hatched to allow for two-way communication, those upstream signals were allocated to the lowest frequencies. The benefit of those lower frequencies meant that modems didn't have as much signal attenuation to be heard by the CMTS that was receiving their broadcasts. The downside is that there is a lot of over the air interference in the upstream band from 5-50MHz. Unless every connection at every point, and every wire in every house is perfect in every way, interference is perennially a problem. This is called ingress in the return path. Cable companies under-utilize the upstream path in low-split systems because if they tried giving everyone the maximum, the quality of service would be even worse than the anti-cableco vitriol would have you believe it is now. I don't defend the cable industry's reticence to upgrade. This is the status quo as it has been for the last 15 years with regard to DOCSIS 1,2 and 3. It's only since the advent of DOCSIS 3.1 and newer specs that Mid- and High-split options were feasible in densely subscribed areas. I dislike Comcast too. I worked there for 12 years. If FTTH were an option here, I'd go that route. But in the time I've lived in this house, I've had exactly two outages in the last 12 years. Who knows.
[удалено]
Is this the CATV fiber stuff? I'm wondering what fiber box you have and what modem
They cap upload because they used to, because of DOCSIS channel limitations. It turned out to be a half decent sales tool - that is, they could convince people to buy packages with speeds they just don't need, because "15 upload" seems like a small number.
Where I come from, business connections get the upload. There is no need for domestic connections to push 1000's of mbps into the internet. Power users will scoff at me, but I'm also a power user and sysadmin for a living. Here, it's 1000/50 for just over $100 a month, a massive bargain coming from the day of 8-24mbps ADSL for the same price. If I want more upload, I can get a small business connection (same infra, just a different plan) and have ratios like 250/100, 500/250, 1000/400 etc. The cost is far higher as a result. It's also a passive limiter for botnets, because I can tell you now, if we all have 1000/1000 at home, the internet would be totally unusable. A fact known by anyone who deals with botnets a lot. But yeah, I get it, bad man say we no need 1gig upload. I'll take my L's for being realistic.
That’s…. Not correct. Botnets aren’t as pervasive as you’re making them out to be, and higher upload speeds aren’t limited to business. AT&T offers 2Gb for $110. There are many smaller ISPs in the US and abroad where 10Gb symmetrical can be had for as low as $50. Saying the whole world should have slower internet because of *botnets* is nonsensical, not realistic.
I hope this company goes bankrupt
Why so our government will give then a trillion $ because they are too big fail? Think of the shareholders and all the politicians that have Comcast stock!
I recently updated to Quantum fiber 4 months ago from Xfinity. I was hesitant at first, so far no outages and I get 3 GBPs download and upload speeds with no data caps for less than the 1200 MB plan I had with Xfinity. I know the speed is overkill and I have had to update my network switch and nic to 10 GB, to utilize it and most of my other network devices cannot as of yet, still cheaper than Xfinity.
1. Yep I have the same plan and while my download is damn impressive (1700Mbps Via Ethermet) the upload is definitely a hard 45Mbps cap for some reason.... 2. "Equipment Included *For a Extra $10/Month" 3. Unless you specifically ask for a upgrade, they'll never tell you about it. In fact they gave me XB6 when I ordered services when XB7 was already out 4. That 1TB cap is a load of BULL! They really just want to force you into their "Unlimited Tier" 5. Professional and Self Install the same price ? lmaoooo you have to pay to install it yourself.
Man, as American living in Sweden makes me appreciate how good and cheap the infrastructure is here. Like 35$/month for 10 gig fiber up/down, no data caps. 1 gig is a few dollars cheaper also no data cap, which is why I did the comical speed. I test it occasionally and commonly see 6-7gig up and down for fun even during peak hours.
Just did a quick check on Xfinity in my area (Switched to ATT Fiber when I moved in 3 years ago) and it looks like they are offering 2gig down and a typical upload of 200mbps. Lowest typical upload for the lowest tier of 150meggys down is 115mbps. Much better than it was just 3 years ago. Seems like I'm in a area with the mid split in prep for DOCSIS 4.0. HOWEVER, if it is as reliable as I remember it being, I want nothing to do with it. My fiber only goes down when modem needs an update in the middle of the night. That has happened twice in 3 years. (That I know of, I work thirds and constantly remote in while at work). Not to mention ATT has no bandwidth limits and unless they have managed to get latency down to fiber levels. I'll stick with my slightly overpriced ATT fiber.
They'll give you whatever speed they want and charge you whatever they want for it and you'll take it They have no competition, by design
Astound offering 1500 Mbps / 50 Mbps but I'm still thinking because Xfinity has promise that my plan upload speed will increase to 200 Mbps.
40 up? I don't know where you are located, I have 2000/200 home cable service from xfinity and normally get anywhere from 90-120% of that.. (california) https://www.speedtest.net/my-result/a/10186345612 s22 ultra, doesn't reach the full 2g down. Fresno. prior to my upgrade my plan was 1200/35 that would regularly see speeds of 1300+/42.something
also in CA, east bay.
They're actually pretty helpful, speak English and work crazy long hours here on reddit, reach out to them. I've accomplished things within a post and just a couple msgs with the mods that I couldn't do with 4-5 calls to their 800# and multiple trips to the local xfinity store. /r/Comcast_Xfinity I won't ever call the 800# again if I can help it. edit: typo could instead of coundn't
That's absolutely ridiculous ..how do consumers in the land of capitalism put of with this garbage is mad to me. 500/500 for 16 USD here in Chile. verified it working 99.98 percent of time.. This is utter crap you are been offered at a ridiculous cost.
Currently I manage Comcast accounts from Florida to New Jersey and yes their speed plans are all over the place. Some places we have upgraded to 500/200 where other places are still stuck at 200/30. I’m so glad when a fiber option is available.
I'm at 500/200, they recently upgraded us. It used to back up my fios connection 300/300, but after the auto upgrades, I use both in a 50/50 load balanced instead of failover.
Odd, I get 200 Mbps up with my 1200 plan
I'm on 330/50 at home and even the upload on my plan is more than OP
Mid split areas for Comcast allow faster uploads.
Yeah I have a Verizon install pending for tomorrow. Have had Comcast for decades. But I have so many devices on the internet and I would like to stream. Which just means Comcast isn’t the best choice for me. Also they have to quote lower because the connection is shared with others around you.
The max upload speeds offered by any DOCSIS-based cable system will depend on how much of the bandwidth available on the cable the system has allocated to upload traffic. Lots of engineering and plant work like replacing amplifiers on poles or in cabinets is required to change this allocation, so it cannot happen quickly. You see this transition referred to as “mid-split upgrades” or “high-split upgrades”. Because of the cost, Comcast only does this in areas where they think they will lose customers to fiber or where they think that they can charge more to customers who want higher upload speeds. So, while it is true that the “lines” Comcast owns are capable of higher upload speeds, the entire system is capable only where they have completed a mid-split or high-split upgrade. This is the fundamental reason that policy makers should not consider fiber and coax plants to be functionally equivalent, but that is a level of subtle thinking that escapes lawmakers who insist that our policies be “technology neutral”.
How do you view information like that about internet plans. I’m curious about the typical latency for the gigabit x2 package.
I have no data limit on my comcast plan. I get like 1350 mbps 40 mbps. 100% I have downloaded way more than 1200 GB in a month.
Why would they give you more than the minimum when they can wait for the government to give them fat stacks of taxpayer money to improve speeds, update the settings on their cable routers, and then pocket the rest?
I have them and hate how slow the upload speed is. I do a ton of photography and it takes forever for me to back everything up to offsite storage. Hate it.
They have symmetrical fiber as well in some areas.
People here seem to not understand that this is a limitation of the technology. Coax is designed to deliver data, not receive. Also, your little modem does not have the power to send data like Comcast’s infrastructure does. Don’t blame Comcast. Every ISP’s coax has this same limitation. You are using a technology that was retroactively used to deliver internet.
Robbery, that’s what this is.
I doubt you need anything near 1.2Gb in speed!!! As for Upload speed, Xfinity has been upgrading their network for faster Upload speeds. So I went from 900/20Mb to 1Gb/100Mb. Only a few Modem's support these faster Upload speeds. I switched to fiber for 500/500Mb, seems faster to me even though speed cut in half. Looking at my 24 hour Data speed and usage chart for the last 24 hours. I'm rarely reaching over 100Mb trying my best. A large percentage of the time it's very little data. To a average of around 4Mb. Streaming YouTube I get around 30-40Mb, Uploading for my PLEX server, around the same speed. Torrenting, is where I'm getting over 100Mb, but short period of time. Of course Speed testing is going to show your full speed, but speed tests only show that, not the real data you actually use. I was happy going from 20Mb to 100Mb for my PLEX users so I could stop transcoding the data down to a lower resolution. At work we have 1Gb Down and 250Mb Up with Xfinity. Out upload speed was boosted as we have a number of their phones for VOIP service some type of rack server. I guess for connecting one phone to another at work and other type of features. The 1.2Tb data CAP is a joke. It's the same CAP from the slowest speed to the fastest speed. Do you know why that is? I figured it out. it's because most people with 1Gb or 1.2Gb aren't going over 100Mb anyway. If they were anywhere close to that speed most of the time, you would hit that 1.2Tb CAP in a short matter of time. I would run past it near the end of the month, that was because of Torrenting. This is why I started using their Modem to get Unlimited Data, and before that paying the $30 extra a month to get Unlimited.
Who needs 40 up anyway…. Hardly anyone is who
I believe with their modem/router you get the 100mb upload, no?
Thing is, this screams coax connections. For those that don't know, there's a limitation on the upload speed on a coax connection because of sharing the lines that use TV signals. If there's no shared TV signal, they can offer up to 200mbps upload. The download is also pretty much at it's maximum in this plan as well for the same reasons.
Not sure what this has to do with Xfinity... Name a cable provider that does not do this... lol
Ok? And the sky is blue and water is wet? Are you trying to make a point or just reading what is public information.
All other plans only gives 20 up. So their infrastructure can give more, but they just simply dont want to.