Internet Downloads at 50Mbps for $149.95 per month

[engine]

It seems Comcast is offering a 50Mbps service in Twin Cities area of Minneapolis-St. Paul.

Does that sound like a good deal?

For the average user, would they need such a speed?

[Key_Master]

Wish I could get that in my area. What's the upload speed? And is the speed guaranteed?

[engine]

I don't have any more on it than this [reuters.com]

It seems a pricey package.

[Key_Master]

A little bit of searching and I found the upload speed is 5mbps. Fast for home service! Definately suitable for home based servers (assuming the service is relatively stable). The best package I can get from Comcast in my area is 8mbps download/768kbps upload.

I don't know what the average internet user would benefit from this service unless they're video buffs or a family of gamers. But who knows, remember that famous quote- "640K ought to be enough for anybody." - Bill Gates

[BillyS]

Unless you're doing some very frequent heavy streaming, this bandwidth and at this price is overkill.

I've got Verizon FIOS and I get 20 Meg down and 5 up. I will tell you that I have yet to find a website that will allow you to download at those speeds. Sourceforge, big universities, Freshmeat, my host all top out in the 10 meg area. In fact, there is only one speed test that I can use to verify this speed.

I haven't tried downloading a Linux distro via BitTorrent so I can't say that will max out my FIOS, but that price is MUCH higher than what I paid (around $40 / month) for Verizon's offering.

So unless you're sharing bandwidth with a LOT of other folks, this is too much money for something you cannot even use.

[Key_Master]

Verizon FIOS does have excellent upload/download options but their TOS do not permit customers to host any type of server, personal or commercial. Which pretty much makes it a no-go for me. Their pricing is around 1/3 the price the service Comcast is offering.

Of course, this all boils down to how reliable the Comcast service is and how much of that bandwidth you really recieve. They're a wreck in my town. I think the city came close to filing suit against them a couple of years ago.

I've got ADSL through the phone company. Less download speed than DSL offers in my area but equal upload. Extremely reliable service at all times of the day. I pay around $50 a month for service with a static IP. I'd pay 3 times more for the same reliability & the extra bandwidth.

[Lord Majestic]

Comcast - YUCK! They cut off people for exceeding unpublished transfer limits that seem to differ - even on much slower connections you can easily hit that limit and lose your connection (I know people who had it happen to them), anyone who wishes to transfer a lot of data (at any speed) should stay away from Comcast - Verizon FIOS appears NOT to have any such limits, so if you got a choice between Comcast 10000 Mbits then still stay away from them.

[engine]

Times have changed, and most ISPs are going to have to change that rule about download limits. Now we can download TV shows, hence the demand for faster downloads, more folks are going to hit that problem, which probably didn't exist when the original contracts were established.

[Lord Majestic]

Times are changing, but unfortunately ISPs are resisting this change - there are more of them introducing these limits than before. Comcast is infamous for kicking people off their network completely (you can't even downgrade after that) after you reach unspecified (they won't tell you) transfer limit - it appears 300-400 GB might be enough for this limit to kick in, if you want 50 Mbits then you are likely to be downloading in many terabytes range, it is best to stay away from them.

[engine]

Mod Note: Let's not make this an attack on a specific company. ;)

The original point I was making was to do with value for money.

[Lord Majestic]

Yes sorry....

All I am saying is that if you are going to want high speed connection, then you need to take into account whether you can actually take advantage of it - if you get cut off quickly after using your connection in full, then it is hardly good value. Before taking a plunge, make sure you research what users of that company are experiencing when trying to use their connections - it will open your eyes.

[topr8]

>>The original point I was making was to do with value for money.

i agree it seems expensive by todays prices.

however when i first got broadband it cost me $100 a month and i was really happy at the saving i was making and the increased speed over pay as you go dial-up ... circa 2000

[BillyS]

My comment had to do with value. Comcast at $150 per month is not a good value when compared to FIOS. And unless this is some kind of business deal, Comcast will not allow you to host a website either.

[thecoalman]

Seriously, what would the average consumer need such speeds for at the moment?

Most of the sites I'm hitting and downloading a file from usually max out between 300K and 600K a second. Occasionally I might hit few that go over the 1000K threshold.

Lets put 50mbps into perspective, a typical Hollywood DVD is encoded at 6mbps using MPEG2. That can be cut down to at least 2mbps using WMV for the same quality.

The only practical thing for the consumer I could see this being useful for is original HD content which typically is encoded at 25mbps....

[lorax]

To be fair, the article did note that the target audience were "...businesses or very heavy residential users, such as video game players or movie download fans".

Interesting move. I can only imagine how much demand there might be for this level of bandwidth. I would buy it - in a heart beat. I live via the connection and cable is the only game in town up here in the northeastern US. DSL sucks pond scum and since my business life depends upon my connection well.... you get the picture. :)