Comments on: Will Incumbents Stifle Innovation?

By: Want a Lower Broadband Bill? Maybe You Should Move

Want a Lower Broadband Bill? Maybe You Should Move — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 16:46:31 +0000

[...] speeds and lower prices? Try to negotiate a rate cut for your services, and learn for yourself why a duopoly won’t cut it when it comes to improving our nation’s broadband access, especially when providers can also cherry-pick where they roll out [...]

By: Google Turns Its Back on Network Neutrality?

Google Turns Its Back on Network Neutrality? — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 03:47:40 +0000

[...] that we live in a world where access for broadband is provided by a duopoly that has thoroughly corrupted the FCC and legislative system. Who is going to monitor them the way the U.S. Postal Service is monitored? Where is the [...]

By: Hate Comcast, Get Faster DSL in San Francisco - GigaOM

Hate Comcast, Get Faster DSL in San Francisco - GigaOM — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 19:50:05 +0000

[...] 2008 | 3:43 PM PT | 9 comments As you all very well know, I have little patience for Comcast and its anti-innovation policy of metered broadband. If you are like me and are looking for an option, in San Francisco you [...]

By: Globally, Now 400M Broadband Subscribers - GigaOM

Globally, Now 400M Broadband Subscribers - GigaOM — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 00:52:33 +0000

[...] DSL is still the most widely used technology, but fiber is rapidly catching on. In 2002, there were 18,000 fiber broadband subscribers — now there are 45 million. Whichever way you look at it, this is a massive achievement and the numbers show that broadband is the platform. Had it not been for broadband, we wouldn’t have seen the emergence of Skype, YouTube, and countless other such innovations. But it’s all coming under threat, thanks to the backward-looking policies of companies like Time Warner Cable, Comcast and AT&T, all of which want to put a meter on bandwidth — and with it, innovation. [...]

By: Barlow Keener

Barlow Keener — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 16:29:07 +0000

Only Comcast knows why they put up the 250G cap. See http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Comcast-250GB-Cap-Goes-Live-October-1-97294 The reason Comcast puts forth is to solve traffic management. Considering the problems that P2P can deliver to a neighborhood of cable users all on a single older head end and associated router handling that traffic, Comcast needs to do something to keep its low usage customers happy about their Internet data rates. My guess is that if and when Comcast upgrades the head ends and last mile loops – to FTTH – like Verizon is doing with FiOS, most of the traffic shaping concepts will disappear as non-issues. So I tend to believe Comcast when it claims that traffic management, not protection of its VOD service, is the driving factor for the 250G cap. The 250G cap idea, planned for October 1, 2008, may disappear when the new network design described in Comcast’s Sept 19, 2008 FCC filing is implemented. Every parent of a teenager knows the P2P problem when the parent wonders why their Internet is slower that it should be and discovers (if the average parent understands P2P …) the teenager’s P2P is causing congestion at the home router. While I am a big believer in local loop competition and think this country is severely lagging in this area (maybe a new regulatory creation like LoopCo would solve the problem for all parties in particular the shareholders divesting themselves of the central offices and outside plant or loops), I have seen first hand what several P2P streams can do to a local neighborhood’s network speeds and sympathize for that reason with the Comcast engineers working to solve the problem. It seems that Comcast’s newly proposed network solution is more agnostic (or neutral) and may make the various constituencies satisfied (but not happy!).

By: Coming Soon: 1 GB Fiber Broadband. Just Not in the U.S. - GigaOM

Coming Soon: 1 GB Fiber Broadband. Just Not in the U.S. - GigaOM — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 22:02:25 +0000

[...] Such speeds are going to become a reality in places around the planet soon enough, especially in places where fiber broadband is being deployed. Here in the U.S., meanwhile, market leaders such as AT&T and Comcast are proposing the implementation of caps, a move that will only serve to cause problems for innovators. [...]

By: Holland takes a shot at Gigabit access while the US gets capped |

Holland takes a shot at Gigabit access while the US gets capped | — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 17:53:21 +0000

By: James Carlini

James Carlini — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 23:17:07 +0000

I think COMCAST might be looking at revenue streams by limiting downloads as a way to begin charging for overages.

Think of the business models of the phone companies and cell phone companies. You go over your “package”, you incur extra charges. Nothing diabolical, just a new way to create revenues from an incumbent user. Read my take -
http://carliniscomments.com/archives/182-COMCAST-LIMITS-MONTHLY-DOWNLOADS.html#extended
If this is successful, you’ll see others try to apply the old “message units” approach to increase monthly revenues based on “usage”. Instead of message units, it will be gigabytes.

By: DEC

DEC — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 16:05:27 +0000

Geez, you’d think a telecom analyst would know the proper acronym for the Data Over Cable Service Interface Specification (DOCSIS) ;-)

By: Michael

Michael — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 15:15:44 +0000

I always thought that monopoly is when you do stuff that intentionally damages your competitors ability to compete. Comcast is going to have a field day in court when someone points out the fact that their “Caps” (which really are not necessary) are nothing more than a ploy to restrict competition.