Cox follows Comcast down the data discrimination road

It's a sad day for Cox internet subscribers, 'cause if the FCC or some other almighty agency doesn't step in soon, your traffic could be slowed. The carrier has just announced a rather significant update to its data management policies, as it lays out plans to test a system next month that will "give priority to Internet traffic it judges to be time-sensitive, like web pages, streaming video and online games." We're also told that "file downloads, software updates and other non-time sensitive data may be slowed if there is congestion on the local network." Thankfully, "streaming video" was listed in the category that'll supposedly get first dibs on available bandwidth, but one always has to wonder what kind of juju is going on behind closed doors when a plan such as this is announced. If all goes well in the Kansas / Arkansas test markets, the system could be rolled out to all Cox internet customers (business users notwithstanding) by the year's end. Lovely.

[Via HotHardware]

[velvet396 Posted Jan 29th 2009 9:48AM]

Sure, traffic they deem important gets first dibs. Then, website & content providers that pay Cox money get first dibs.

We voted net neutrality into the Whitehouse, now's the time for them to start taking action.

[Jyncus Posted Jan 29th 2009 10:58AM]

Well said.

Policy like this opens the flood gates for ISPs to prioritize their bandwidth to select content providers. And by "select" I mean, "the ones who pay said ISP an incentive donation." Frankly, I think that kind of business should be illegal - right along with the lobbyists.
It's on the new administration's shoulders now.. Where's our net neutrality!?

[(Unverified) Posted Jan 29th 2009 2:18PM]

This is great. Now people who need bandwidth for time-sensitive activities like gaming (clutch) or streaming Netflix aren't completely impeded by neighbors downloading gigs and gigs of Windows 7 or pirated movies. If just adding more bandwidth is prohibitively expensive, this is the best solution. Everybody's worried about the day that Google pays Cox to slow down Yahoo - let's wait until that day arrives to start bitching about it.

[(Unverified) Posted Jan 29th 2009 10:14AM]

If you want people to stop clogging up your internet speed it up.
Why can't we be more like japan with internet price and speed?

[Fizzler Posted Jan 29th 2009 7:01PM]

Take a globe, cut out Japan lay it on top of the US... there is your reason why we do not have the bandwidth they do. That is a big reason. The other reason is we were early adopters of technologies that required a large investment in infrastructure changing that overnight to accommodate emerging technologies is not a cheap investment. We want ... need high speed internet and once we get into the Gig range we will not truly see innovative uses by the end user but we want these speeds cheap and now.

[andyg8180 Posted Jan 29th 2009 10:18AM]

You didnt know? Throttling is the COOLest...

You aint cool, unless you throttle your pants...

[Leicaman Posted Jan 29th 2009 11:08AM]

Last year stories were there was a massive build-up of bandwidth and way more than we could use.

Now, they come up with a business model that ignores reality.

Go figure.

Scumbags. For once I'm glad to be a Time-Warner user not in Texas.

[(Unverified) Posted Jan 29th 2009 11:31AM]

Luckily for my parents, they both dropped Cox Cable and went with AT&T's package for internet and cable. Nuts to Cox.

[(Unverified) Posted Jan 29th 2009 12:06PM]

I have cox for all of my services ,and even thought about switching to at&t, but after seeing the picture quality I had to pass. As far as internet goes I wouldn't trade if they paid me.

Then again I think that it depends on what area you're in too. My service is great, but that might have something to do with the fresh fiber they laid..

[skinney23 Posted Jan 29th 2009 12:10PM]

America has lame prices and lame speeds. I have FIOS 10mbps for over $50 p/month......WTF? Or I go with cable and get 1.5 or 6mbps?

LAME!

[(Unverified) Posted Jan 29th 2009 12:22PM]

I guess it all really depends on the carriers in your area. I have cox and my internet with a bundle of course isn't bad IMO. I pay around $40 for 20-25 down/ 4-5 up, and I also have speed boost too and that makes a huge difference for my netflix, xboxlive, and any streaming or DL service(hulu).

[ianzelman Posted Jan 29th 2009 2:25PM]

I think I would be for Cox's data management policies because I would like my youtube/video and PS3 games to work faster, while I don't mind that most website get a slight delay ( I hope its only ms). Assuming Cox will not play favorites with companies and not block apps like Comcast, then I support the use to speed up time sensitive applications. It would also be a plus if Cox fully explained what ports and apps are going to be affected for transparency.

I already use QoS in my company so important apps get pushed first and my response from people so far has been they really enjoy it. Video conferencing and gotomypc have been stabilized since we applied the new policy.

[(Unverified) Posted Jan 29th 2009 3:19PM]

Cox Suckers!!!!

[Kingpcgeek Posted Jan 29th 2009 5:43PM]

It really surprises me how little grief Cox gets by the public for their Internet polices. The country is in an uproar over Comcast's 250gb a month limit, but here are Cox's limits, which have been in effect for several years. They were taken right off of cox.com.

Premier:
Maximum monthly consumption cap 60 gigabytes downstream; 15 gigabytes upstream

Preferred:
Maximum monthly consumption cap 40 gigabytes downstream; 10 gigabytes upstream

Value Package:
Maximum monthly consumption cap 4 gigabytes downstream; 1gigabyte upstream

Economy Package:
Maximum monthly consumption cap 3 gigabytes downstream; 1gigabyte upstream

[(Unverified) Posted Jan 29th 2009 6:01PM]

I wonder how much my gaming uses up? I hate the notion of caps!!

[Fizzler Posted Jan 29th 2009 7:13PM]

The notion of QoS makes completely sense I think they are going about it all wrong and for the wrong reasons. Any leecher worth his weight can easily get around these limitations. Want to impose priority on torrent use port 80 which will be a higher priority.

Now the notion of caps does not make sense. This will only lessen the development or adoption of innovative content. I believe the idea of caps is in place more to protect the providers content rather than the limiting of their bandwidth. If you were Cox or Comcast with VOD services would you want your customer using Netflix? Youtube just added HD Video which is a great service providing the end user a better experience but the file sizes will be larger.. limiting downloads will only place limits on innovation.

[bystrika Posted Feb 1st 2009 1:10AM]

Cox isn't the only one's capping. Verizon wireless internet has capped my internet down to 200Kbps from 2.2Mbps !!!!
Verizon's limit is 5 gig's

They admit it too! and they even threatened me to kick me out from Verizon if I don't stop using so much bandwith.

What i'm doing.. I'm not gonna pay for 2 months which will ad up $120. I simply won't pay it.
They eventually gonna report it on my credit, but I can easily dispute it during holiday busy season and have it cleared. I WIN!! and Teach them a lesson!!!