Review by jimboe 
UPDATED: 1 year ago
member for 9.2 years, 2791 visits, last login: 1 days ago
 New York
 $49 per month
 "None left anymore UPDATE 12-2007: Expected speeds OFFPEAK only"
 "Useless: Speeds, Email system, News Server UPDATE 12-2007: As Above only; all else same 10-2008: Still Awful down 6p-12am"
 "Really valueless for the $$-- EVEN for internet novices UPDATE 12-2007: Novices fine. Saavy users move on iff FIOS avail"
| Pre Sales information:
Install Co-ordination:
Connection Reliability:
Tech Support:
Services:
Value for money:
(ratings below consensus)
|
I've had Cablevisions Optimum Online for a few years now.
To put it simply, I got it mainly for the BEST RAW Speeds, both up and down. 10Mbps down and 1Mbps up.
At one time, before 12/2002, the service was very good, as far as raw speeds go. Umatched in nearly all North America if I'm not mistaken, but since that time, things have slipped away, and I feel this is a good way for me to make an impact on this greedy company, and hope other potential customers will take heed and steer clear.
Around December 2002, under pressure to upgrade their network infrastructure to handle a greater load of new users who were becoming more and more computer/internet savvy and thirsting for more and more badnwidth, this draconian company fired the first salvo in a long war of oppression against its Internet customer base by implementing Upload caps.
If a paying customer should happen to cross some invisible threshold of upload bandwidth usage, that Customers' modem would be configured to upload at only 150Kbps, permanently, unless they called in to Customer Support with the problem. Compounding the disgracefulness of the issue is that Cablevision reps do not even bother to call to alert the customer that this action has been taken against them, or what steps they might follow to avoid it re-occurring in the future. Cablevision is happy to have as many people "Capped" as possible, yet still paying the full 49.95 monthly for a significantly reduced service.
I inisisted back then, as I still do, that these steps were taken to "make room" for their new (at the time) roll-out of iO digital TV. Rather than upgrade their infrastructure, they greedily squirreled away as much money they can (for who knows what) and kept "jamming" more subscribers in to a over-saturated network.
They wanted the benefit of adding new customers, but not the responsibilty of upgrading their infrastructure to handle them.
Since then, News (which was fair at best, never up to par with a ISP like Verizon, or even Speakeasy) has gone straight into the toilet, with less than 2 measly days of binary retention, 2 connect, each with no more than 500kbps bandwidth. That's non-existent in my book, necessatating the customer to purchase an outside supplier.
The email system has had so many failures, delays, downtimes, and useless restrictions put on it (such as port blockages etc), to make it completely useless as well.
So what was left? Only RAW download ability-- and at that, I was still able to find enough value to stay with them for $49.95/month.
Now the final blow has just been fired, in that ALL download usage that runs for more than 5-10 minutes, is *throttled down* to 2.7Mbps. That's right, a palrty 2.7Mbps-- more than 65% of how it typically runs. Prior to this "company-imposed problem", I never got less than 8Mbps down at any time.
This is all being done in typical, unethical, abhorred Cablevision fashion, without informing the customer, and even denying/LYING to customers when they call to inquire/complain.
That really is disgusting, and the complete bottom of the barrel.
So, what is left?
You can't upload.
You can't download.
E-Mail is very poor (at best).
News service is basically non-existent.
For $50/month, look for another service if there is one available in your area.
There's no value for the average home user who just wants to surf/check email, since DSL is more than 40% less, with nearly zero of the "headaches" I described above, and now about the same speeds too, taking into account all the nonsense of Caps and throttles, and there's no value left in it for me-- who only wanted a "pipe".
The bottom line is if you really want broadband so that you can increase you web surfing/email sending experience, this service will work fine, but for $50 per month, it certainly is not worth it. If you really want to burn up $50/month to get treated like total crap go ahead, but there's a ton more value to be found out there in DSL for $29.95/month if you can get it, and it will perform exactly the same-- plus more.
If you're like me and you just want a raw "pipe", sorry to say you missed out here. Those days are over. Don't waste your time.
UPDATE 3/22:Enough time has passed since the DOWNLOAD CAP has been lifted that I am willing to be cautiosly optomistic and say the service is good for what I need it for, and that is RAW downstream speed.
All other aspects remain the same.
I'll be watching closely....
UPDATE 4/21: Same "half-speed" (~5000/900 @10:30PM) issue that seemingly appeared "overnight" a few weeks ago, as did with so many others in so many areas....
Is it another bandwidth "experiment"? OR is something really foo-bar'd in their network AND will they ever fix it? Does anyone @CV care?
Who knows..
Who ever knows...
UPDATE 5/12: 'Close' to normal (~8800 as opposed to 9300) speeds returned about a week or so ago although sustained it's a little inconsistent but acceptable. I felt comfortable updating after some time passed first..
Very quick 12-20-2007 UPDATE:
When speeds 1st increased to 15/2, my d/l's flew, at most hours.
Today, Peak-time bandwidth sucks (noon-midnight?).
I utilize usenet (premium services), and off-peak I get ~1700KBs down.
Peak lately (last few weeks?? Im not sure how long since service has degraded), I get between 200KBs (no kidding) for long periods of time (yesterday that was consistent from 6PM till around 9 or 10PM when I got back to 600KBs).
It appears that unless you pay the extortioners $15 extra per month for Boost "premium" service, you get treated as a second-class user. Clearly the node is over-saturated, and it's unlikely they'll do anything to rectify it on their own, but on Boost (a separate channel which is NOT over-saturated), users report mostly consistent d/l speeds.
At least they've stopped capping uploaders-- for the time being. Upstream bandwidth is fairly consistent most of the time. That' a plus..
Pray for FIOS. Alas, in this part of Brooklyn, that's probably ages away. Too bad really.
10-2008:
Still sitting on a congested node, if you can believe it. One might ask, is the network monitoring group asleep at the wheel?
Well, not for this long. They simply haven't gotten a flood of complaints yet, nor has FiOS been made widely available around here, therefore, they won't spend the money to split the damn node. Funny how they're more than happy to accept full payment for service that yields a consistent 1.2mbps down (out of 15!!) during much of the primtime hours.
It's not until 4am that speeds come close to provisioned levels. And, there's no point in boost either, as now those channels are "full" as well as evidenced by the same types of complaints from boost users in this area.
It makes me want to throw a brick at the TV every time I see that idiot with the black blazer bragging about how optimum speeds are 5 times faster than phone company internet.
Followup comments: | Forums » comments on review of Optimum Online |
|
Optimum Online
(42)
(78)