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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Television Businesses Communications Network The Almighty Buck The Internet United States

Comcast Won't Give New Speed Boost To Internet Users Who Don't Buy TV Service (arstechnica.com) 264

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: Last week, Comcast announced speed increases for customers in Houston and the Oregon/SW Washington areas. The announcement headlines were "Comcast increases Internet speeds for some video customers." Customers with 60Mbps Internet download speeds are being upped to 150Mbps; 150Mbps subscribers are going to 250Mbps; and 250Mbps subscribers are getting a raise to 400Mbps or 1Gbps. Comcast says speed increases will kick in automatically without raising the customers' monthly bills -- but only if they subscribe to certain bundles that include both Internet and TV service.

"Cord cutters are not invited to the [speed increase] party," the Houston Chronicle wrote. "Only those who bundle Internet with cable television and other services... will see their speeds go up at no extra charge." Presumably, Internet-only customers can get the new speeds by paying more or by bundling their Internet subscriptions with video.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Comcast Won't Give New Speed Boost To Internet Users Who Don't Buy TV Service

Comments Filter:
  • by Steve Jackson ( 4687763 ) on Monday April 30, 2018 @02:48PM (#56532003)
    Comcast A-Hole #1: "What should we do?" Comcast A-Hole#2: "Piss them off, that'll teach em!" :-D
    • It sorta could.

      Cord-cutters (generally) have no choice. Internet can travel over cable lines (fastish), voice lines (meh), or satellite (barf). This "choice" drives the innovation that leads to a-hole decisions like this. So you have a-holes with decent internet, a-holes with bad internet, and a-holes with terrible internet.

  • by The-Ixian ( 168184 ) on Monday April 30, 2018 @02:50PM (#56532013)

    Shouldn't be hard being that it's Comcast and all....

    Does it surprise anyone that if you pay more money you get better services and are part of the first wave rollouts for upgrades?

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 30, 2018 @02:51PM (#56532025)

    You have to buy broadband, but not the tv service. Seems like comcast needs to be split up so their tv offerings become competitivly priced and the local regions own the backbone of the internet.

    • But our regulatory bodies do the exact opposite of this kind of clear and rational thinking.

      "Sure, let's let Comcast and NBC merge. what could possible go wrong there?"

      The asshole(s) who thought this was in the best interest of anyone (outside of these two companies) needs a good swift punch to the throat.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward

        The asshole(s) who thought this was in the best interest of anyone (outside of these two companies) needs a good swift punch to the throat.

        Your mistake, of course, is in assuming someone thought that. You give too much credit to those who govern. They know it is against the best interests of the vast majority, but it brings them both money and power, so it happens.

        As long as Americans vote for rich, pathological liars (at all levels of government) who say what they want to hear at campaign time, the problem will continue to worsen.

    • by bws111 ( 1216812 )

      What are you talking about? It is nothing more than a free one tier upgrade for customers who buy two of their products.

    • by Solandri ( 704621 ) on Monday April 30, 2018 @04:26PM (#56532851)
      Comcast is, in areas where they have a monopoly, a government-granted monopoly. You don't have to split them up, which can take over a decade of court proceedings and rulings. All the local governments have to do is allow other cable companies to offer service in their areas. That can be done in a matter of days.
  • Oligopolies = forced bundling; same as it ever was.

    • Oligopolies = forced bundling; same as it ever was.

      FYI: Least popular verse from the Talking Heads' song "Once in a Lifetime"

    • by hjf ( 703092 )

      Sigh. The a la carte bullshit again.
      Newsflash: a la carte is a cable company's wildest dream. They will sell you packs of 10 channels to your liking and charge you extra for the other channels.

      And it's not the 90s anymore. We don't need a la carte cable. We have on-demand streaming. Grow up.

  • Ajit (Score:2, Flamebait)

    by labnet ( 457441 )

    Ajit must be loving his 10 pieces of silver. Hope it was worth it for the price of your soul.

    • Re:Ajit (Score:4, Insightful)

      by DaveyJJ ( 1198633 ) on Monday April 30, 2018 @03:01PM (#56532095) Homepage

      Ajit must be loving his 10 pieces of silver. Hope it was worth it for the price of your soul.

      You error in logic is to assume he actually has a soul.

      • No, your error in logic is to assume he didn't just steal yours instead and pawn it off without your consent.

    • Re:Ajit (Score:5, Funny)

      by jwhyche ( 6192 ) on Monday April 30, 2018 @03:05PM (#56532131) Homepage

      Ajit must be loving his 10 pieces of silver. Hope it was worth it for the price of your soul.

      I'm not sure if you are quoting scripture or not but Judis got 30 pieces of silver. But if the devil paid 10 pieces of silver for Ajit soul he got taken. I wouldn't have gone more than 2 pieces.

      • by labnet ( 457441 )

        :) I was implying Ajit was even cheaper than Judas! I'm always astounded how cheap senators can be bought for legislation that works against their constituents.

      • by ugen ( 93902 )

        And those 2 pieces would be of manure, not silver.

      • I'd double check the coins to see if they were just silver plated.

    • I have to say this is the first time I've ever anyone suggest that Net Neutrality would have forced an ISP to sell the same size pipe to all customers. Is your theory that people who want more bandwidth shouldn't be able to buy it, or that people who don't need bandwidth should be forced to pay for it?

      • The theory is that anytime anything happens that people don't like related to ISP, it is the fault of repealing net neutrality. The issue doesn't have to be related to anything actually covered by net neutrality, it just has to be related to something someone sees as unfair and the internet.

    • I'd wager he comes from a Hindu background, so instead of a Biblical reference maybe you should have gone with something like:

      "I hope you are reincarnated as a spider monkey"

  • by HornWumpus ( 783565 ) on Monday April 30, 2018 @02:57PM (#56532071)

    You can pay $10 for a one step speed bump from comcast or you can get it for only $100 and get useless cable TV you won't watch.

    • I wonder how much they would charge as an " installation fee " for you to bump that speed up by one tier.

      You would also probably have to fight them tooth and nail NOT to include one of their shitty router / modem combos so they can charge you an extra $10 / month for that POS.

      • by SuperKendall ( 25149 ) on Monday April 30, 2018 @03:37PM (#56532429)

        You would also probably have to fight them tooth and nail NOT to include one of their shitty router / modem combos so they can charge you an extra $10 / month for that POS.

        So I got Comcast Gigabit service, using my own router at first - the tech complained a little when he showed up, but it was on the approved list so he installed it.

        Fast forward about three months later, service goes out for days. Nothing I try (or Comcast tries) works, I determine router must be toast. I give up and go to Comcast store to get Comcast router cause I just want service back. I install it and speeds seem capped to 100Mb/s, vs 700+ I had been getting... why? Because the idiots at the store didn't have any gigabit equipment, so they gave me a normal cable modem that maxed out at a low speed.

        Well then I just run to Best Buy and bought a damn gigabit cable modem of my own, one call and it was working. So it was actually EASIER for me to use my own gear than Comcast's stuff because they couldn't even get me the right equipment.

      • As terrible as ComCast is they don't generally care about this so long as it's on their officially supported router list. You may have more jerks in your area than I do though.

      • You would also probably have to fight them tooth and nail NOT to include one of their shitty router / modem combos so they can charge you an extra $10 / month for that POS.

        I hate you for making me defend Comcast, but at least here in the Seattle area the routers with access points they use are very high quality. They're made by Technicolor and I think most are model TC8305C (IIRC). They're much more reliable and have a much longer range than the NetGear CM400 modem and Linksys E3000 router combo that we used to use. We pay for home Internet connections and equipment for employees, and I work for a very cheap company. We wouldn't spend the extra per month unless it was wor

  • by fahrbot-bot ( 874524 ) on Monday April 30, 2018 @02:59PM (#56532087)

    First Prize: One hour of Comcast Customer Support

    Second Prize: Two hours of Comcast Customer Support

  • Next thing you know, auto makers are going to refuse to give a navigation system to people who don't buy the premium package. Bastards.

    • by hjf ( 703092 )

      I was looking for this comment. Indeed.

      It's even worse down here on the third world. ABS and airbags weren't mandatory. You had to pay your way up to safety.

  • People, who watch regular TV, will not be using the increased bandwidth for as long every day to stream movies.

    I fail to see, what's so outrageous here...

    • Just because you're forced to buy the regular TV service does not mean that you want to nor will use it.

      • by mi ( 197448 )

        Just because you're forced to buy the regular TV service does not mean that you want to nor will use it.

        You — the individual — don't have to do it. Customers — the people — undoubtedly will.

        And even if none do (a giant if!), they will have all paid Comcast money anyway, so they win compared to offering the extra bandwidth to everyone. Like I said, makes perfect sense.

        It is neither illegal nor unethical for Comcast to do that... Nothing to see here.

      • by bws111 ( 1216812 )

        Nobody is 'forcing' you to do anything. IF you have the TV service you get a FREE one-tier upgrade on internet. If you don't have TV service, you can pay for the upgrade IF you want it. If you buy a TV subscription JUST to get the 'free' upgrade, you are an idiot.

        • Unless the pricing of the upgrade tier is so high for non-TV subscribers that you'd have to buy a TV subscription to get a reasonable rate. And it's not like cable companies have a price sheet you can reference. Just promo rates that expire.

  • Typical Comcast (Score:5, Insightful)

    by nehumanuscrede ( 624750 ) on Monday April 30, 2018 @03:07PM (#56532147)

    Screwing over folks in any way they can.

    "Comcast Won't Give New Speed Boost To Internet Users Who Don't Buy TV Service "

    I bet if Google or AT&T or $competition showed up with Fiber, Comcast couldn't bump those speeds up fast enough.
    TV bundles wouldn't even be a consideration.

    It would be all about emergency customer retaining in the face of competition.

    • eh, I have one of their basic packages and it came with TV whether used or not, and no one is using it. so there's such a thing with comcast and no TV? all the package listings I see have it

    • by Straif ( 172656 )

      How is it screwing over customers to add a speed upgrade to their bundling offer? Non tv subscribers can still get the speed upgrade if they want, they just have to buy the next internet package up from their current one.

      For the tv subscribers they get a nice little speed boost.

      For non subscribers absolutely nothing changes.

  • This is the competitive internet that the FCC has 'fixed' for us. I've only got a single choice, Spectrum, and though they advertise service 'starting' at 60 mbps in our area they can only deliver 23-25 mbps and have no intention of upgrading the infrastructure to make good on their hollow promises.

    • That isn't the FCC's fault. Blame local city governments for granting monopolies like we have here in Seattle where the city council split the cable monopoly between Wave and Comcast without requiring them to offer service to their entire monopoly areas. They also don't punish Comcast for offering terrible service. In addition the socialist on our city council, Kshama Sawant, views not allowing Comcast to do repairs or upgrades as hurting corporations when in reality it just hurts consumers.

      • by hjf ( 703092 )

        The FCC can very, very easily write some ruling along the lines of "no service provider shall make exclusivity arrangements with local governments".

        There you go.

  • I hope the feds or states go after them for antitrust violations. They are leveraging their monopoly in high speed internet access to support their cable subscription business.

  • by odin24seven gaming ( 5147317 ) on Monday April 30, 2018 @03:14PM (#56532197)
    Google fiber is so shitty that they only give me 1gbps and if I want to cancel I can do it with out talking to anyone what kind of shit is that, and to top it off when my self installation didn't go like planed they gave me 50.00 off of my bill what the fuck. worst service ever. I think I should switch to comcast. LOL
  • Comcast Won't Give New Speed Boost To Internet Users Who Don't Buy TV Service

    No high speed internet without a cable TV bundle? Phew!!! ... Is that the stink of desperation I smell?

    • Wrong. It's no speed **increase* for free, w/o the bundle. That doesn't equate to "no high speed Internet". Just the upgrade isn't free without a TV bundle.
      Not the greatest PR move, but this is Comcast we're talking about after all. Yes, they're A-holes, but OTOH, this hardly a monstrous thing to do; the outrage is out of proportion.

      I smell such entitlement here in this thread, and the cries of "Corporate Shill! How much are they paying you" I'm seeing in other posts is hilarious. It's like Tumblr has

    • by Straif ( 172656 )

      The headline is misleading. It should say:

      Comcast Won't Give free Speed Boost To Internet Users Who Don't Buy TV Service

      This is a write up about a bundling deal Comcast is offering where tv subscribers get a free internet upgrade to the next package for free. Non subscribers are still free to pay the $10 or so to upgrade their speeds if they want to.

  • I live out of the USoA.

    All telecom providers which offer triple play, offer special perks, benefits and plans for users which use two or more services, as opposed to people which use just one.

    All banks give you special perks if you receive your monthly pay in their account via direct transfer. Also, they give you special perks and benefits if you pay your bills via automatic drect transfer from their account. (Domicialiacion, is called).

    Airlines give you special perks if you are a corporate subscriber.

    Is on

    • by hjf ( 703092 )

      My ISP bundles cable+tv with a 50% discount.

      It costs the same to get only cable, only tv, or both...

  • Verizon rolled out GB fiber in my area and their offer to me was that they would buy me out of my Comcast contract. Bottom line is that I will save about 30 bucks a month and be getting 1GB/880 service. I called Comcast while the guy from Verizon was in my house to see what they would do to keep me as a customer. They offered me 3 months free of HBO and told me if I left I would no longer be able to use the free Xfinity wifi. For those that don't know what that is, it is where Comcast uses a portion of

    • " free Xfinity wifi "

      What that really turns into is the over saturation / pollution of the available WI-FI spectrum. Trying to find an open channel while they keep installing their " hot spots " is nigh impossible. ( Nor do they understand that simply cranking the transmitter to maximum doth not make a better WI-FI experience )

      • cranking the transmitter to maximum doth not make a better WI-FI experienc

        It doesn't do that. It broadcasts their SSID across a larger area. They don't care if it works.

    • if I left I would no longer be able to use the free Xfinity wifi.

      Well then it's not free, is it? It's more like the corporate advertising corruption of the word free. Like "Free 2-Day shipping with Amazon Prime"

  • When I upgraded to 300Mbit service here, it was only available if I also got cable TV along with it. It gets better. They wouldn't give it to me until I plugged in the set top box and went through its entire setup. Then, and only then, did I get 300Mbit service. I tried. I mean, the set top box sat in its box for a few days and I finally called and asked why my service wasn't upgraded. They made it clear that I'd have to plug that thing in.

    The good part is that at least their set top box now includes

    • AT&T is offering DSL out here, and calling it "fiber".

      They're doing that here too. Sending sales people around canvassing that don't know anything (plausible deniability if they "accidentally" lie). I asked how many pieces of equipment were involved in my house and how large the ONT is. They didn't know what that is. They said they could use my existing wiring. I said I don't have any existing wiring and that I thought the fiber was what's coming into the house. Oh, yes - it is, they say. Well then how are you going to use my existing wiring?

      They said t

      • And get this. I wanted to review the contract and they said that I could see it on the installation day, but they didn't have any way for me to see it before then. That would be after I drill my own hole in the house for the fiber (don't trust "professional" installation) and take time off to be at home.

      • They came to my door a couple of times trying to sell me a "fiber" connection. I told them that fiber isn't being run down my road at this time, so they couldn't offer such and certainly couldn't offer something to compete with my 300Mbit Comcast connection. When I looked they're selling DSL but claiming it's "fiber" since they're running fiber to the vault. Geeze. By that definition dialup is fiber. They also claimed that Comcast isn't offering gigabit speeds around Nashville.

        https://www.tennessean.co [tennessean.com]

  • I stopped using cable TV about 10 years ago now and there's no way I'm going back. I've got more on my DVR from free broadcast HDTV than I have time to watch. I don't even use the Internet enough to give a damn about any 'speed boost', even if I was watching 'streaming' anything (which I am not currently and are not likely to start). Screw you Comcast/Xfinity, time for you to change your business model, not use use the stick to try to drive people to your not-so-tasty carrot.
  • by IGnatius T Foobar ( 4328 ) on Monday April 30, 2018 @03:37PM (#56532441) Homepage Journal
    In other news, Tesla Motors has announced that they won't sell their best cars to anyone who doesn't also own a horse and buggy.
  • by DaMattster ( 977781 ) on Monday April 30, 2018 @03:41PM (#56532465)
    I have more than enough speed to be able to do what I need to do and then some. I don't need 100mbit or even gbit services.
  • Pay more, get more.

    Buy 3 tires and get one for free
    Buy 1 large pizza and a get a 2nd for half price

  • Already the case (Score:5, Insightful)

    by grasshoppa ( 657393 ) on Monday April 30, 2018 @04:05PM (#56532651) Homepage

    I'm a "cord cutter", in a sense, but I have video service through comcast as well. Why? Because it's cheaper; it's cheaper for me to sign up for the video/internet package than for straight internet ( by a couple bucks ).

    I've never plugged in the cable box; it still sits in the unopened box they shipped it to me in.

    Given their pricing schedules, I doubt I'm the only one with this arrangement.

  • Those with cable TV services are being screwed blind for the value of what they are getting. So perhaps getting more speed (which they won't use in general) is a good promo. If you are a cord cutter, you can still pay to get the speed increase. Either way, Comcast makes money.
  • if my current 100MB/s could support 2 5MB/s streams at a time without buffering.
  • Speeds in excess of a few dozen megabits are worthless to most users so provisioning more is essentially free.

    When customers call to cancel television service retention agent will say something like "Cost of Internet only at your current speed tier without TV is basically the same as what you have been paying for TV + Internet"

    This does two things:

    1. Makes customer re-consider ditching TV thinking they are already getting a "deal".

    2. Makes customer more likely to retain higher megabit service they don't nee

  • by Capt'n C. Runch ( 5389337 ) on Monday April 30, 2018 @06:07PM (#56533421)
    Sustained data transfer at 250 Mbps will deplete your monthly 1-TB data allotment is about 9 hours. All you need is about 3 Mbps to be able to use up the monthly data allotment. Anything over 3 Mbps on Comcast is just burst speed. Some burst speed is useful to satisfy bandwidth demands for video streaming or simultaneous users, but anything over 100 Mbps with a 1-TB cap is at best a gimmick and at worst a scheme for Comcast to increase accidental data overage fees.

Genius is ten percent inspiration and fifty percent capital gains.

Working...