Time Warner Cable: Consumers Don't Want Gigabit Internet

103

Comments

+ Add a Comment
avatar

jonnyohio

Well if google were to bring it here, I'd be happy show them how much I'd like it at a reasonable price.

avatar

Blaze589

(cough)bull s^%t(cough)

avatar

coolbreeze27603

Considering the reasonably priced wide availability of 50mb service in Europe, I wonder what's been holding up the two largest cable providers (Comcast and Time Warner) from implementing higher speeds on their networks for the common folk. It is extremely interesting that time and time again these two corporations have been raking in incredible profits while making vacuous excuses for not being able to better service their customers by offering more reasonable prices for TV, Internet, and telephone service. When will people wake up to the fact that they are being bamboozled by these paragons of commercial broadcasting. Frankly, it makes me sick to continue reading their obvious to me drivel.

avatar

Vano

Three words:
Lack Of Competition.

These two companies divided country into zones, where they don't cross. Therefore they have no competition between each other.

avatar

coolbreeze27603

This is true; however, both companies exhibit a remarkable similarity in business models. To me, their inability to increase transmission capability is just another way for them to reap greater profits for less. Their loyal average subscribers are left with the breadcrumbs while their "premium" subscribers willing to pay more enjoy higher transmission speeds comparable to what is being offered to average subscribers in Europe and parts of Asia.

avatar

wolfing

I agree with them. Most people don't need it. The few people that do would have to pay $1000/month to justify the extra cost they would need to incur to offer it at customer level. I'd rather keep paying $35 for my 15Mb/s Comcast connection, which unless I'm downloading HD movies (instead of streaming), is more than enough for everything.

avatar

Zstreek

I think what she means people don't want that service for $300 a month. We all want it, it should be affordable. I can get 100mbps from Comcast where i live but it is $200 a month. Who has that kind of money? Not me yet anyway.

The possibilities of what could be done with super speeds are endless. One day we may have the technology available to us but I fear that day is going to be far far in the future. : (

avatar

Peanut Fox

Then I guess the obvious question becomes how does Google get away with offering high value services at a much lower cost? What set's Google's investment in fast fiber based options versus Time Warner.

avatar

livebriand

They make all their money off advertising, for one thing. (part of the cheap Nexus devices, for instance)

avatar

jaygregz

1 GB would be a dream. I can't complain though. I am fortunate to have the great service that I have in my area. I live in a rural small town of about 500 in population. Charter services this area and I'm thankful for that. Yes, they call all the time and want me to upgrade this or that.. but at least my speed and price are right. I pay $30 per month for 30 Mb down. Also, I almost always hover around 50 Mb down. Can't really complain about 20 extra Mb down. I do wish that they'd double my upload speed.. but that's another issue altogether and at the end of the day 4 Mb up isn't bad considering where I live.

avatar

Scatter

People are going to rage at my suggesting this but I honestly don't think that consumers really need Internet speeds that fast other than to pirate full movies, games and other huge files faster. I mean, we already have fast enough speeds to stream full movies via Netflix. Sure there are some legitimate reasons to have faster speeds at home but are people really going to spend $100+ a month just so they can download Steam games faster?

avatar

Renegade Knight

Nothing to rage at. However your logic also says that streaming HD movies and playing a game you just bought NOW instead of in 5 hours would be a boon. I'm probably going to have to pay 100 a month one I'm no longer grandfathered into my unlimited plan. The 50mbs plan has a data cap that I blow through every month.

That all said I don't see I need it that fast. What I'd rather have is unfettered internet service with an ISP that doesn't cotton to the MPAA and RIAA, block my email ports, bock my emails and otherwise make a nuisance of itself instead of just giving me access to the internet.

avatar

DeeJayKrens

Right now the non-technology ignorant and Enthusiasts(Power Users) would be the most likely to get it.

Netflix to my understanding can nab 5-8Mbps for SD and 8-12Mbps for HD. You have 2-3 Devices Streaming HD thats 36Mbps needed. Not to mention
Kids streaming things.

1Gbps? Even uncapped and Affordable speeds anywhere between 100Mbps->1000Gbps. Other countries (Most smaller, similar size Canada has way worse speed/rates and more insane data caps).

I believe it's the lack of competition that allows them to sit back and not offer it. Google expands country wide? Watch how many companies start offering 1Gbps Speeds for $40/month.

avatar

vrmlbasic

We need it to use multiple internet devices simultaneously. Right now, for example, there are 4 devices streaming (via multiple accounts) from Netflix on my internet connection. It seems to work, though not all streams are truly HD, but how long can my connection keep pace with the demand placed upon it?

I also do a lot of uploading with my internet connection, and download quite a few _legal_ large non-Steam files (in addition to my Steam game) on a regular basis. I'd appreciate doing that at up to 125 MB/sec.

I spend about $100/month on internet already so yes, I would; ~20x the speed for the same price I'm already paying, I'd be a fool to say no!

avatar

Zstreek

First Netflix is 720 resolution, it could be much better. Youtube is another example, many film makers post there and could upload higher quality video but can't because of bandwidth restrictions. The most significant reason for low quality content is that nobody had the bandwidth for highdef content.

Saying there is no use for faster internet is like saying there is no use for a faster computer. There isn't one until there is. You have to build the hardware before there can be a use for that hardware. And as faster speeds become available prices will drop.

avatar

LavaIce

Okay, sure TWC can provide it but what do they charge for it? Google is only charging $70 a month. I bet if TWC offered the same more people would buy into it and want it.

avatar

MrGeek

I feel the need... the need for speed..

OH WAIT... we are geeks after all...

I feel the need... the need to breed...

But I digress!

Who died and made her God??!

FASTER!!! I want faster downloads, faster high def movies, faster mp3's, faster gaming response, faster viruses and malware... FAST FAST FAST!! And I want it 2 weeks ago!

avatar

Insurgence

If I had to guess, I would guess that they did a survey and found that there is a large number of customers out there that were ignorant about technology, and who's opinion was, "As long as it does what I need it to do". And having supported end users in a corporate environment, there are a lot of them. You say 1Gbps or 1 Gig and they are all baffled.

Now, Time Warner's problem is not what the customers want, but what is happening to the various companies on the internet. This will especially be noticable with Movies and TV transmitted over the internet. As their quality goes up, then so does the need for more bandwidth. And as the quality of those selections increases then so to will the number of people using them.

avatar

DoctorX

great... faster way to hit your cap... the real reason that customers dont want it. But they do, without caps and at a reasonable price. Need to look for a job in Kansas City.

avatar

DeltaFIVEengineer

Honestly, I think once we see a much larger percentage of the population moving away from physical media and information solutions in favor of streaming and cloud solutions, ISPs won't have a choice but to upgrade their services. Although it does seem that we're quickly approaching that point.

avatar

QuantumCD

Wow, 1 Gb/s... what would you use that for? I have 30 Mb/s from TWC and I get, on average, 15 Mb/s (25 most of the time). Unless you are buffering 4K video (which I can already do) and you never want to see a spinning icon.

The real question... what is the upload speed?? If it was 1 Gb/s upload... you might have my attention.

avatar

Peanut Fox

Streaming uncompressed 1080p requires just over 1Gbps. 4k pushes nearly 4Gbps. It gets worse as the numbers practicably double when you increase the color depth from 12 to 24.

We compress the heck out of the streams just to get them down to a reasonable bitrate. Being able to pull down 1Gb speeds would do a hell of a lot for audio and picture quality. Not to mention make cloud storage an ever more viable option. How about quality 3D streaming?

avatar

vrmlbasic

Faster downloads from Steam. I'm getting only 5 MB/sec from there, and I'd love to get up to 125 MB/sec. Who wouldn't?

There are also a LOT of internet-using devices at my household, and they are competing for the limited bandwidth that ~40 Mbit/sec downstream provides.

avatar

yu119995

Dear Mrs. Irene Esteves,

Here's the noose. Please kill yourself. Thank you.

Regards,

Humanity

avatar

Shadow Death

If TWC offered 1Gbps connections here I'd jump on that instantly. Hell, I got excited when they suddenly offered 50Mbps. :D

avatar

aarcane

I'd be happy if I could get 100mbit to the home.. Right next to a College.. In the middle of Orange County.. But alas, all the ISPs here suck. I chose the one whose tech support could answer a few basic questions.

avatar

ZombieKiller

Me want 1-10GBPS?!?!?!?? TOTALLY!!!!! I on average get 300KBS (KBS not MBS) off of wired and that's paying $150 a month getting the fastest business speed internet available where I live!

avatar

TMW

I want 1 Gbps service. The reason TW says no one wants it is that no one wants to pay what they want to charge. They already like other companies charge higher for the internet speed we get. They also prevent local municipalities from starting their own internet service in NC. With their monopolies, they like the control and charging more for internet. Just like cell phone companies.

avatar

pixelpopper

These ISPs are really out of control. I have Uverse and thus have a 250gb data cap imposed on my service.

avatar

Damnlogin

Comcast here charge $35 for 3Mbps internet. I find it scary that these ISPs can just walk around raping the pockets of the people on a daily basis. BS!

avatar

livebriand

Around here it's Comcast (PITA, but at least it's fast internet) or 1.5mbps AT&T DSL. (like that's really a competitive option - UVerse isn't available where I live, but it is a mile or two away in either direction - WTF?) I have 15mbps/3mbps right now ($20 for a little while - I forget if it's 6 months or a year, then $35 for the rest of the 2 year deal, then $60), and when the deal expires (soon), I'm planning to threaten to cancel and see if I get a discount. If only there was some actual competition around here...

avatar

srmak

1 Gb/sec? I WISH! My ISP (a monopoly in my area) offers only 1Mb/sec at my location for $70/month. But in reality I get only around 320 Kb/sec, sometimes as low as 150 Kb/sec. And on top of that, they limit my e-mail inbox to 10 MB, and there's been no change to that since I got the account in 1992. I recently asked them if I could get 100 MB of storage for my e-mail account, and they said "Sure, we can give you an additional 90 MB of space. The charge will be an additional $90 per month on top of your normal $70 per month fee." WHAT?!! $90 PER MONTH for 90 MB of e-mail storage? Outrageous. But since these guys have the monopoly in my area, they have absolutely no incentive to bring their Internet services out of the dark ages.

avatar

Digital-Storm

1Mb/sec (Megabit is what ISPs use to define data rates, often confused with MB, Megabyte) is about 128 Kilobytes per second. 320 kilobytes per second is about 2.5 Megabytes per second. This would actually equate to about a 3Mb/sec connection. There is overhead on DSL lines.

avatar

savage4naves

Is this an ISP in a third world country?

avatar

srmak

Nope - right here in the good 'ole USA - Alaska.

avatar

chart2006

You do realize you have alternatives right? WildBlue, HughesNet, Exede, & others I'm sure. Granted they are all satellite based but by the way it sounds you would be better off with one of them anyway and they have 15mbps service. As with most ISPs these days they have data caps unfortunately.

avatar

LatiosXT

When Timer Warner finds out its consumers don't want it, will Timer Warner implode?

avatar

Eoraptor

what everyone else said. I'm not paying for it at telecom prices when they charge me $65 a month for 256k and won't build out the infrastructure without city tax incentives. frell you too big telco!

avatar

vgrig

LOL - bunch of BS

TW Cable and TW Telecom are 2 completely different providers: history is different, tech is different, competency level, etc.

TW Cable CAN'T provide 1Gbs - they can even do proper HD: it's so over-compressed you can see pixelation and ghosting in what is supposed to be 720p broadcast. Switching to FIOS really showed that HD is actually makes sense.
All last mile wiring is Coax - pushing Gig through it takes real skills, which TW cable doesn't have.

TW Telecom on the other hand provide fiber-to-coper ethernet nah-offs to businesses - completely different tech.

This moron PR person should've taken a non-liberal arts class or two in college. :-P

avatar

Neufeldt2002

In other words TWC is saying: We can't rip people off the way we usually do for Internet speed because nobody would pay our price, so therefor nobody wants it.

avatar

sttrumpet

Bingo!

avatar

Dark Blade

This

avatar

tony2tonez

How about TWC starts providing the DL for what they charge. I am suppose to have their 10-15mb w/e their low service is. Im lucky if i get 1.5mbs. I know there are other factors. But never would I pay more for crap from TWC.

I told their reps that I would gladly triple for Verzion Fios to NEVER EVER have TW in my house. It sucks to live in the NYC metro because I cant fully get it.

If google and/or verzion could really penetrate into customers of major cities, watch how fast people jump ship to them. And the cable companies cry.

avatar

savage4naves

You're getting 15% of your promised download speeds? Did you ever schedule their techs to check out the cable/modem/router? When I had the same trouble they replaced the modem and I got my promised speeds.

avatar

germanogre

Another telecom company stifling innovation to line their pockets with even more money. Someone has to take that big first step to make things better for everyone.
Instead of offering gigabit service to a few thousand customers, though, how about offering 50 mbps service to millions.

I'm limited at my house to 6 mbps for $50/month. I can get up to 20 mbps if I go the cable route, and pay approx. $100/month.
So, even though Time Warner charges $5 more for 20-times slower access (50 mbps) than Google, I would buy that service in a heartbeat.

avatar

jgottberg

Sure, I WANT 1gps but I wouldn't want to pay what they would want for the service. I get 30mps now which is perfectly fine for me.

I see the 1gps option as a way of extending the office to telecommuters though. It would be nice to sit at home and have close-to LAN speeds.

avatar

Nixon

I wished they supported my area with whatever they have. 0.05Mbps is always lots of fun when playing games...
1Gbps is a castle in the sky for me.

avatar

anc51699

TWC is probably aware that while everyone wants 1Gbps speeds, they all won't be able to pay the big bucks for it. They gotta make money like everyone else.

avatar

RtDK

LOOOOOOOOOUD NOISES! >:(

avatar

Nyarlathotep

I love lamp.

Log in to MaximumPC directly or log in using Facebook

Forgot your username or password?
Click here for help.

Login with Facebook
Log in using Facebook to share comments and articles easily with your Facebook feed.