Submitted via IRC for SoyCow4408
Comcast keeps losing TV subscribers, but it has a new way to fight cord cutting.
As streaming video continues to chip away at cable TV subscriber numbers, Comcast is making some of its Internet speed increases available only to customers that pay for both Internet and video service.
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.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 01 2018, @08:20PM (2 children)
Manipulating customers is not a good idea, but hey they're obviously getting desperate. As usual the dinosaurs would rather loudly stomp around than evolve with the times.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Snow on Tuesday May 01 2018, @08:33PM
Manipulating customers is essentially their business model. Well, that and defacto monopolies.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by bobthecimmerian on Wednesday May 02 2018, @11:28AM
You're overstating the problem. Comcast is in a tizzy because their obscene times 100 profits from their natural monopoly might become obscene times 97 profits and they're trying to get back to 100. They're a hell of a long way from being forced to evolve.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by arcz on Tuesday May 01 2018, @08:30PM (10 children)
(Score: 3, Informative) by takyon on Tuesday May 01 2018, @08:39PM (6 children)
What happens when people get all of their TV from a combination of free YouTube, Kodi, and torrents?
The value of "TV" drops right down to zero. The cost of Internet probably goes up, unless some competition takes place (I'll use the Musky Starlink when it becomes available).
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by Freeman on Tuesday May 01 2018, @09:32PM (3 children)
We get all our media from YouTube and Netflix. Plus over-the-air when the Olympics are on, for the wife. Not that I can get a wired solution better than dial-up where I'm located.
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 3, Insightful) by dwilson on Wednesday May 02 2018, @05:05AM (2 children)
I've always wondered how they categorize people like me.
I moved out of my parents basement when I graduated high school and went off to college, in early 2005. I'd never been a big TV watcher, and so never bothered to get a subscription with a cable or satellite service. I never even bothered with the rabbit-ears and farmer-vision I grew up with. I've also never had a netflix account, and use youtube mostly for the occasional music video or instructional program.
I'm not a 'cord cutter' in the strictest sense, because you can't cut what you never had.
- D
(Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 02 2018, @01:33PM (1 child)
> I'm not a 'cord cutter' in the strictest sense, because you can't cut what you never had.
The term that I've heard being used is a "cord never".
A lot of "millenials" are in that category, and the cable companies have been confidently asserting that those cord-nevers will all get cable once they have children. Of course, that confidence was shown to be completely unwarranted, and over the last two-three years it started dawning on the cable cos that people prefer less abusive sources of entertainment. Therefore, they started to improve their service, lower their pricing, and treat their customers better. *long pause* Just kidding. They doubled down with increasingly terrible service, more below-the-line fees, various forms of forced bundling and lock-ins, and anti-Net Neutrality lobbying.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Wednesday May 02 2018, @02:14PM
They doubled down with increasingly terrible service, more below-the-line fees, various forms of forced bundling and lock-ins, and anti-Net Neutrality lobbying.
The cablecos are doing the most sensible moves here. The people who don't care about TV (the "cord never" people you refer to) aren't going to be enticed into it just like I'm not likely to be enticed into watching Bollywood movies, so for them they can try forcing TV on them with things like this move to only give higher internet speed (something they probably *do* care about) if they also sign up for TV. And then, for all the people who love TV, you can make more profit by screwing them over more with lousier service (saves money), extra fees, nasty bundling deals (oh, you want this channel? You have to sign up for this special package that comes with all this other crap you don't want for $$$), and generally higher prices, plus of course anti-NN lobbying so they can use their ISP service to screw over customers who want use competing services like Netflix.
Luckily, the cablecos aren't really doing anything wrong here, and are just doing what we the people want. This is proven by the fact that we elected leaders who support this kind of corporate behavior, and who are completely opposed to Net Neutrality. If we didn't like this behavior, we'd vote for leaders who do something about it, but we didn't, so we're getting what we deserve.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Grishnakh on Wednesday May 02 2018, @02:01PM (1 child)
What happens when people get all of their TV from a combination of free YouTube, Kodi, and torrents?
They're already cracking down hard on Kodi, and YouTube is cracking down now on copyrighted stuff. For the others, they'll be sure to crack down one way or another: ban private VPNs, perhaps, or analyzing VPN traffic to see if it resembles bittorrent activity (should be easy to do; using your corporate VPN for reading email is not going to look like using a VPN through Netherlands to torrent a 4GB data file) and shutting it off, and for YouTube it's not going to be any different than renting streaming videos through Amazon.
The Internet may be global, but private end-user access to the Internet in the US is controlled by a very small handful of companies. If they want to set up a "Great Firewall", they absolutely have the power to do it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 02 2018, @05:46PM
no, they think they have power. fuck with my internet enough and see how stupid i get.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 01 2018, @08:41PM
I'd have expected them to require "triple-pay", ie. add a landline spam wire, to get competitive data speeds.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by LoRdTAW on Wednesday May 02 2018, @02:12AM
The value of TV isn't dropping, the medium of cable delivery is.
(Score: 2) by ledow on Wednesday May 02 2018, @02:06PM
Who here doesn't own a TV?
I moved house recently, realised such things were pointless (in my country, there's free digital TV by aerial, cable or satellite, plus a bunch of subscription things that you can end up paying £100 a month for if you're not careful).
My TV viewing costs are:
- An old projector that someone threw out (120" HD screen anyone?)
- A TV licence (required whether or not you stream, record, or watch the "free" TV channels on any device)
- A £20/month internet-only connection (via 4G, with free Netflix, etc. data so you don't even use up your data allowance and it comes with a pretty generous allowance and never skips when it streams).
- A laptop I already had.
- (Optional) A subscription to Netflix / TVPlayer which both came with deals over Christmas. I paid £20 for a YEAR of TVPlayer. £5 a month for Netflix. Likely I will stop one or the other as I already have Amazon Prime anyway.
- All of the above are on "stop paying any time you like" contracts, not annual. I could get it a lot cheaper if I agreed to a whole year.
(TVPlayer is basically all the live TV that you'd normally get on free digital TV, streamed over the Internet legally, and a bunch of other channels, from any web browser or from an app, and things like a web-based PVR for your favourite series).
However, I was bombarded when moving in with things like Sky, Freeview, NowTV, etc. as well as telephony providers. When I looked into it, the installation charges alone were more than I'd pay in a year with the above. The ongoing monthly was twice as much as all the above (once you include the compulsory telephone line rental, etc.). The year after that, you could pretty much DOUBLE the cost because they have a captive audience on a contract. And I would have had to buy an actual TV and fit it.
I just looked at the numbers and shrugged and live off my 4G Wifi router instead. There are no messy cables. I didn't have to drill my walls (I could just paint one of them white...). I don't have to wire anything (but I can and have SteamLinked, ChromeCasted and even stuck a RetroPie on the projector and used the Wifi and wireless controllers). Hell, work threw out a SIP phone, so I even stuck that on as a "landline"... I've never used it but it has an 0845 number on a SIP account.
Hell, my "remote control" is an old Samsung phone I don't use anymore with an IR blaster function on it. It can control the projector, computers, an HDMI switch and has also done things like game consoles, DVD players, set-top-boxes etc. in the past all from one device.
To be honest, live TV is dead to me. TVPlayer will likely not be renewed. I'm not taken with Netflix but it's good for a short term to catch up with lots of things as-and-when I like. But I'm certainly not going to pay a fortune to get a huge TV, subscriptions, boxes, etc. to what is essentially an advert-funded service. It's not even worth buying an NVR or building a MythTV box etc. nowadays.
Oh, and every time I buy something on Amazon, I select the "No Rush" option, so after 4-5 deliveries that I don't need immediately, I basically get a free movie in my account.
Why anyone places any value in TVs as a technology, TV as a service, or as a normal household expense, I can't fathom. I did entirely without TV (of any kind) for several years, no problem.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by BK on Tuesday May 01 2018, @08:43PM
This is just the sort of anti-consumer behavior that might convince even Texas that they should aggressively regulate the likes of Comcast.
...but you HAVE heard of me.
(Score: 3, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 01 2018, @09:21PM (3 children)
Fine with me cuz I leech ur xfinitywifi for free and I have a fetish for low res porn so I only need like 640 kbits to get my rocks off.
(Score: 3, Funny) by MostCynical on Wednesday May 02 2018, @12:03AM (2 children)
We've found the guy who likes the pixellated Asian stuff
"I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 02 2018, @01:22AM
You should see what lies beyond the pixels.
(Score: 2) by LoRdTAW on Wednesday May 02 2018, @02:12AM
vcd's for life!
(Score: 4, Informative) by SomeGuy on Tuesday May 01 2018, @09:28PM (2 children)
This is why we need more (or in some cases, any) internet options other than those provided by a CABLE company.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 01 2018, @09:32PM (1 child)
Try SprinTyMobile. I hear its the fastiest.
(Score: 3, Informative) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Tuesday May 01 2018, @10:44PM
I was somehow convinced to sign up for T-Mobile's business phone service. This sets me back $70/month; was I swindled by the conniving T-Mobile store salesmen?
I have unlimited 4G; they claim there's no data cap. I wouldn't really know because I've never bumped up into a data cap.
Mostly I use my 4G for gmail, web, facebook - which includes videos, facebook messenger and videos from websites of ill repute.
Facebook Messenger supports voice and video calls. My lady and I mostly use voice but we've had a few video calls; they always worked well.
If I bring my Acer with me during my day's travels I enabled my iPhone's Personal HotSpot in the iOS Settings App.
The HotSpot works really well but will turn itself off if my Internet traffic is idle for five minutes or so. All I have to do switch the HotSpot back on is to visit the Personal HotSpot page in the Settings app. I don't need to actually _do_ anything in Settings, I just visit that page.
There's more I was going to post but I totally spaced it. Maybe I'm having another migraine.
Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
(Score: 3, Insightful) by darkfeline on Tuesday May 01 2018, @09:50PM (1 child)
I'll admit that I didn't think of this possibility. I thought ISPs were going to take advantage of the repeal of net neutrality to prioritize their own streaming services to make up for the decline of TV subscriptions.
But this is cutting the Gordian knot. Are TV subscriptions dropping because users are moving to Internet video streaming services? How will we maintain our TV subscription profits? Why not just throttle Internet service so video streaming is impossible unless users pay for the TV subscription? Fucking genius.
Join the SDF Public Access UNIX System today!
(Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 01 2018, @11:06PM
They can't do that yet, as the Net Neutrality is still in effect: [techdirt.com]
Basically, the "official date" of April 23 has passed, but the FCC has to do some more paperwork before the repeal actually takes effect -- and they're dragging their feet to give the lobbyists time to bribe their way out of the current pro-NN movement.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 01 2018, @09:51PM (10 children)
I currently get 150Mbps from them for $34.99/month. I am not going to sweat them giving someone with TV a bump to 250
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 01 2018, @09:59PM
*if* you have a nice router they top out at about 300mb per second wireless. Past 300 you are probably wasting money if you use wifi.
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Tuesday May 01 2018, @11:22PM
Pretty much this.
People who pay the most get free upgrade from their provider. News at 11.
I'm glad it's raining right now on my cheap Nissan, since I don't get free car wash from the Audi dealer.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 02 2018, @01:41AM (1 child)
$35 a month? I've got the slowest speed available and the cheapest package that Comcast will give me is like $77 a month. I would have ditched them by now, but I live in a building that only has Comcast service.
What we really need is some laws that guarantee that everybody has access to more providers.
Also, Comcast remains capped, so the extra speed doesn't really do people any good as it just means they hit the cap sooner.
(Score: 2) by Apparition on Wednesday May 02 2018, @03:08AM
I know, I'm jealous. The cheapest Comcast offers here is $52 per month, just for 15 Mbps. Next up is $70 per month for 60 Mbps.
(Score: 2) by captain normal on Wednesday May 02 2018, @06:10AM (5 children)
I think you mean 150 mbps for 40 bucks. That's the going rate for Comcast. Don't feel bad, most people misunderstand megabits and Megabytes. The internet providers count on it to hype their product.
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts"- --Daniel Patrick Moynihan--
(Score: 2) by TheRaven on Wednesday May 02 2018, @10:00AM (4 children)
I'm pretty sure that he didn't mean 1.5 bits per second. That's slow even by Comcast standards!
sudo mod me up
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 02 2018, @10:33AM
If you are going to be pedantic, you need to be correct.
150 mbps is 0.15 bits per second.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 02 2018, @04:34PM (2 children)
Comcast provides me 30mbps down and 10mbps up for $39 a month.
Nothing anywhere near the numbers mentioned.
Not megabytes per second -- 30 megabits, so perhaps 3.6Megabytes per second if nothing is happening between me and the data, the weather is perfect, kids are at school and there is no one in the neighborhood staying home from work.
Typically I see 3 Megabytes per second at night as a peak rate. Sometimes 3.1 megabytes per second.
(Score: 2) by TheRaven on Thursday May 03 2018, @12:22PM (1 child)
sudo mod me up
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 04 2018, @10:47AM
And once again you fuck it up.
30 mbps is 0.03 bits per second. The GP was wrong by a capitalisation of the letter m, and everyone knew what he intended anyway.
You are wrong by a numeric factor of ten you pedantic dipshit.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Tuesday May 01 2018, @10:58PM (9 children)
... Comcast pries my four hundred music CDs from my cold dead hands.
Presently all but a few are ripped to 192 bps MP3, but a few years ago I realized I could tell the difference between 192 and FLAC or the original CD. The reason I can tell is quite strange: listening to 192 for a few hours makes me very, very weary. That doesn't happen with lossless media.
So I am going to re-rip every last one of my CDs then convert to both FLAC and 320 MP3. I am as yet unable to discern the difference between 320 and FLAC. I'm hoping that I can cobble together some manner of assembly line with abcde [einval.com].
I also listen to Radio Paradise [radioparadise.com]. RP the only Internet Radio station you will ever need - they even offer a FLAC stream now; how times have changed.
Each day when I commute to and from work I ask the RP iOS app to Cache Ahead 2 Hours so I will enjoy my listening pleasure as I pass through a long light rail tunnel. 2 hours of high-bitrate music downloads in ten minutes or so.
Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 02 2018, @03:27AM (1 child)
You found a job? Awesome dude
(Score: 2) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Wednesday May 02 2018, @03:42AM
I changed the focus of my search from mobile apps to drivers and embedded systems
Once my clients' sales people sign off on my last build I'll get a mongo paycheck for writing an OSX driver for a USB to VGA adapter
I'm going to buy a used MacBook Pro. I have a Mac mini but you need two Macs to use the kernel debugger
I've already signed my next client
Portland Custom Software Development [soggywizards.com]
Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
(Score: 3, Interesting) by dwilson on Wednesday May 02 2018, @05:11AM
I can only tell the difference between loseless and lossy codecs on very high quality gear. I guess I don't have very good ears. I can still hear the hum from a CRT when it's on but displaying nothing, so I guess I have that going for me.
But once I realized I could hear the difference under the right circumstances, I re-ripped my entire collection to FLAC, just to avoid ever having to rip it again (It still gets down-converted depending on what I'm loading it on to, back then it was to 128kps mp3 for my player, now it's generally ogg vorbis for my lineageOS phone). This was years ago, mind you. I can't help but chuckle when I buy a new album and rip it today, using abcde. I can remember when ripping the tracks to wav was the quick part, and encoding to flac took ages and ages, and ages. Now, the flac encoding goes faster than the rip itself. Technology is awesome.
- D
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Wednesday May 02 2018, @02:03PM (5 children)
Your problem is that you used MP3; it's a shitty codec. Try ripping some stuff to 192kbps Ogg Vorbis or Opus and see if that makes you weary. Ripping stuff to FLAC is fine for archival, but it's a big waste of space in applications where space is limited (like on mobile devices).
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 02 2018, @04:37PM (1 child)
i really have been happy with mp3 vbrs at 320kbps; it goes down to nothing in silence and whatever works in between for anything else. with sennheiser 650HD headphones, I have not found anyone that can notice the difference between a CD itself and the audio file when ripped this way.
I never got into ogg because I have a few older mp3 players that could not handle the computational complexity of ogg files, although the file size is superior and would be great to add more music to the same space -- old mp3 players... are too old.
(Flac is just like monster cables for audio from what I can tell. you know the difference only if you expect there to be one)
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Thursday May 03 2018, @01:03PM
I had an iRiver music player years ago, and it played Oggs just fine.
The key is to do some research before you buy something, and make sure it supports open standards.
(Score: 2) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Thursday May 03 2018, @02:48AM (2 children)
I expect M4A is a better codec than is MP3 but I wanted tracks with the widest portability.
There are some FLAC players for iOS but they all get really poor reviews at the App Store.
Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Thursday May 03 2018, @12:55PM (1 child)
I've had no trouble with portability with Oggs (Vorbis). They work just great on my computer (Linux), phone (Android), and car (Mazda - runs a Linux-based infotainment system).
If you care about portability and freedom of choice, then you don't use Apple iDevices. If you're going to use iDevices, then you need to do everything the way they want you to, which means buying stuff on the iTunes store exclusively, and only using a Mac.
(Score: 2) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Friday May 04 2018, @03:15AM
I own a windows and a Linux box but use my Mac most of the time because using Linux or windows is like pounding nails with my fists
I have about 50 CDs that I ripped to FLAC. I play them with VLC Media Player for macOS
Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 02 2018, @01:12AM
Rightards love it up the ass.