Review by ten13 
Posted: 9.6 years ago
member for 9.6 years, 9 visits, last login: 6.9 years ago
 Closter,Bergen,NJ
 $50 per month
| Pre Sales information:
Install Co-ordination:
Connection reliability:
Tech Support:
Services:
Value for money:
(ratings below consensus)
|
From Bergen County, New Jersey:
In December of 1999, I sent a letter to the chairman of BELL ATLANTIC (BA) (1095 Ave. of the Americas, NY, NY) complaining about the DSL system, including the misrepresented speed.
I later received a phone call from a tech person in the "Presidential Appeals Unit" within the BA DSL Dept. Over the phone we conducted some tests (ping and tracert), and it was determined that I did, indeed, have a problem.
After a few more phone calls back and forth, it was decided that we would change my system over to the other GSP system (I was originally on Qwest), using the WinPoet log on system, and, by that, changing my system to a Dynamic IP. This was going to solve all my speed problems.
It didn't.
The tracert test still showed numbers on the first few lines in the 60ms area, and in the 100's further down. These numbers should be in the 30 to 40 area, from what I have been told. The speed was (and continues to be) so slow, that some of my bookmarked pages DO NOT EVEN LOAD up on a Netscape browser, and very slow in IE.
This problem was discussed back and forth for quite a while with no answers forthcoming. I eventually convinced BA Tech Support and BA Billing that I should not have to pay anything for such inferior service, as it was no better (if not worse) than a 56.6 modem. I did not have to pay for service for the months of December, 99, and January, 2000, plus they threw on an additional $20 reduction.
At some point, I received a call from a representative of an independent contractor hired by BA to research this problem (I don't have their card in front of me right now, but I will check). They came to my house and did extensive testing and research on my DSL system, and found that my line to the BA Central Office (which is directly across the street) to be one of the best and clearest line that they had ever seen. I told them that web sites were not loading up, and, at first, told me it was the web site's fault. But when I explained that many of my bookmarks have only recently not loaded up, they looked at the whole problem in a different light.
It was determined that the problem is NOT at my end, in my system or in my modem, but "DEEP IN THE (BA) NETWORK," according to the techs from this research group.
With nothing to be done at my end to correct this problem, I continued to use the DSL system primarily because I had set up my home office to be able to access the Internet and us the POTS at the same time.
I have just found out, however, that the BA promise that I would not have to pay for the service until it was repaired has been reneged on, and they now have resumed billing me for this inferior service. My original contact at the "Presidential Appeals Unit" has not reply to my email regarding the billing.
It appears that BA has bit off more than it can chew. It has a difficult system to setup that has big-time network problems. It also appears, by the fact that they have started re-billing me, that there is no simple or even forthcoming solution to this problem, and, in essence, we subscribers have been told to "live with it..."
It should be also know to some that any purchase of outside DSL system (in the NYC/NJ area, anyway) must come through this same troubled BA DSL network.
Since I have not heard from the "Prez' Appeals Unit," in quite awhile, it is hard to determine what, if anything, is being done about this. Yet, BA takes out full-page ads in the NY TIMES advertising a system that can't even handle its present load and is inheriently problematic.
Interestingly, the contractors that came to my house explained to me that BA was concerned about this problem, which was the reason they hired these people to research it (one of them was formerly a Lucent engineer), since they had been getting NUMEROUS complaints about it, and, fearing even more, the decided to attempt to find the problem before they took on more subscribers and, eventually, more complaints.
Yet, now, in March, the problems are still there, and system remains inferior.
Followup comments: | Forums » comments on review of Verizon Online DSL |
|
Verizon Online DSL
(139)