dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
    ISP Rolodex Intro Local ISPs Members U-Verse FiOS FiOS Soon
spc

spacer




how-to block ads



ACD.net page on DSLReports
Six Month Rating Unavailable
More reviews are required before ratings can be averaged

Reviews:
bullet 26 reviews (13 good) (6 bad)
bullet Submit a review by email click here
bullet login for new review notification feature

Review by (hidden by request)

  • Location: Lansing,Ingham,MI
  • Cost: $40 per month (24 month contract)
  • Telco party SBC
Good "Bit cheaper monthly cost than competition"
Bad "No service; company kept initial fees despite lack of DSL service."
Overall "ACD.net Complete fail in starting up DSL service; horrible tech and billing support."
Pre Sales information:
Install Co-ordination:
Connection reliability:
Tech Support:
Services:
Value for money:

Had residential DSL service from AT&T for over two years and was ready to
switch to a local MI company for better customer service when I had a
problem. Decided to switch to ACD.net for my DSL service.

Big mistake. Signed up for service in late November 2012. Never received
service through ACD.net. Called tech support numerous times trying to get
any kind of help. They were helpful on the phone, but simply never
followed up with actual service support. Never received a call back from
tech support despite continual promises to make progress toward hooking up
my service.

Tech comments went like this "Wow, this CO [branch office] is a real mess,
can't figure out where your card or port is", or "OK...I'm not sure what
the answer is on that, I will call you back" followed by no calls.

However, when I finally gave up in early February and told them I was
canceling, the billing department gave me my first call back from ACD.net,
accusing me of breaking my contract and demanding February's payment even
though the due date wasn't even close yet. Once they heard that I had
received no service yet, they became less aggressive and gave the
Accounting Department my case. The Accounting Department blamed me for the
lack of service for the first two months and kindly decided to keep the
first two months of payments that I had made as long as I returned their
modem.

Switched back to AT&T and was back online before the end of the day. I
don't really like my AT&T service that much; but ACD.net made them look
rather attractive and reliable. The customer service reps at AT&T might be
in some other country, but at least they are courteous and will follow up.


(review was emailed from domain gmail.com)
lodged 1.9 years ago

Comments:

Review by craigm53 See Profile

  • Location: East Lansing,Ingham,MI
  • Cost: $55 per month (6 month contract)
  • Install: about 7 days
Good "Only at the beginning was good"
Bad "Bandwith throttling, constantly interrupted services"
Overall "very bad ISP & bad courtesy"
Pre Sales information:
Install Co-ordination:
Connection reliability:
Tech Support:
Services:
Value for money:

Stay away from ACD !! I read this forum before subscribing ACD and the reviews are true. I thought that was old reviews and ACD has changed. IT IS NOT !

This company has a lot of problem and not professional. The reasons are:

(1) They build the system on a junk/cheap network interface. I got 3 Zhone modems and all bad and I replaced it with D-Link. Their system can't sustain 24-hours high data transfer rate for my research from MSU to home, almost everyday I call ACD to reset my connection to restore the speed. It means that the problem is not my modem. They have swap their modem twice and they acknowledge that they have bad interface.

(2) They often stop & go by blocking data flow. I have constant data backup for my research from MSU and my data is huge, 10GB per day and sometimes can reach 30 GB. With 6 mbps contract, I only got 4.8 - 5.2 mbps (600-700 KBytes/sec), it means 1 GB for 20-30 minutes. I don't use sharing network and this connection is strictly secured from 1 server at MSU to home (using SSH). I can see ACD blocking/throttling my transfer because I tested the server is not blocking/slowing when I accessed from other server. At the end, when I terminated my contract, I got only 0.8 Mbps (90 Kbytes/sec) ! This time was my angry time with ACD.

(3) Bad Courtesy. No grace period to clean my email accounts. I did not specified date to terminate but please give a week notice! Finally, after 6 months with them I terminated the contract and because bad service complaints they let me go without penalty. Actually, get rid this bandwidth hog !

(4) My employer is also using ACD and it is a nightmare ! Web service (server) they provided is a junk (no PHP/MySQL). Only for a moron using their service (our IT guy is not really IT, more like data management person). And also is robbing my employer (on invoice $150/month for dedicated server but actually it is not dedicated and web space limitted to 2GB !!). I have told them to quit ACD ! and now is in process transferring to a new server and new look for our web.

(5) Right now, my neighbor is very kind to let me use their Wi-Fi on Comcast, and I get 1.2 MBytes/sec (>10Mbps!) download speed. Next week, I will be on AT&T again ($35/month vs $70+ for Comcast), it is a slow speed deal, only 1.5 Mbps, it means for 24 hrs I will get 11 GB, and it is ok. If I really need data now, I can tap my neighbor or just transfer it while I'm on campus.

Stay away from ACD.net !

ps. Fortunately, I was on customer account web at the time they erased my secondary emails account, right before closing main account I sent FVCK YOU to all ACD support team on my longest complaint (120 threads that subscribed by all). Maybe next mission is to put bumper sticker on my car "FVCK ACD !"

member for 4.8 years, 0 visits, last login: 4.8 years ago
updated 4.8 years ago

Comments:

Review by sloughwi See Profile

  • Location: Lansing,Ingham,MI
  • Cost: $55 per month (12 month contract)
  • Install: about 10 days
  • Telco party Ameritech
Good "Fast speeds"
Bad "Unreliable speeds, poor routing and unpredictable service, long contracts with expensive cancellation fees"
Overall "Fast speeds if your lucky, if your not your stuck paying for sub-par service."
Pre Sales information:
Install Co-ordination:
Connection reliability:
Tech Support:
Services:
Value for money:

I've been an ACD customer for around 3 years. I've reviewed them every so often since then, but I'll just summarize my experiences up to this point. 3 years ago ACD was the only broadband provider that could reach my apartment in Haslett. I signed the 2 year contract to get the setup and modem for free. A year later I purchased a home in Lansing and I had my ACD service transferred there. Up to this point I had no problems, with the exception of a short dispute over whether I should pay $50/month for 512 while new customers paid the same for 960. ACD finally allowed existing customers to get the going rate and so I was overall happy with the service.

The fall of 2001 I signed a new 2 year contract for 2MB up/down service through MSU. After a week of downtime my new line was installed, but when I tested my speeds I realized I was only getting 800/512. ACD sent out techs who reported my attenuation at around 40 up and down. They had no explanation for the below normal speeds and said there was nothing they could do about it. I was disappointed, but settled for having my contract price adjusted down to 960/960.

The winter of 2002 the real trouble started. First of all MSU had serious trouble controlling the virus population on its campus (which was in no way ACD's fault). However, ACD began having serious hardware problems at the CO. I would loose my line light on a Saturday night (after tech support closed) and would be stranded without internet the rest of the weekend. The line light would randomly go off every few days until someone reset the port. This lasted for around 2 months until ACD finally fixed the problem. I was frustrated, but ACD was nice enough to switch me onto their network so that I wouldn't have to deal with the virus issues at MSU on top of everything else.

Another year and a half passed and I was beginning to feel alright with ACD again. Comcast came out with their 3MB service. SBC began offering 1.5 (w/ up to 4MB if you are close enough to the CO). Then ACD came out with their 10MB up/down plan through MSU.

Originally I was skeptical. I talked to a person at ACD, who was really nice and showed me the rates other people were getting. Most were at 6-8MB and seemed to be pretty happy. I asked him if running a new loop would solve my strange "mystery cap" on my speeds. He said it might, but there were no guarantees. He also placed me at 15,000', which meant I should get around 5-6MB. I knew it was risky. I should have known better given my poor luck with ACD in the past. But the temptation of a 10MB connection was just too much. I signed for another 2 years. I thought: "What's the worst that could happen? 3000/3000? that's still better then I would get at Comcast, plus I will be helping a local company."

A week later, my new loop was installed. I plugged in my modem to find I was getting 720/256. I called ACD and they sent out a tech to look at the line. He reported 63 attenuation up and down. He was a nice guy and got SBC to come out, who said there was a bridge tap causing the high attenuation. He told me that SBC had no legal obligation to remove the tap, so instead ACD was going to order me a second loop. While I was waiting for this second loop, I realized all was not right with this new modem.

The activity light ran constantly, even without the network cable plugged in and after multiple power cycles. I reported the problem and tried changing modems, but ACD shrugged the problem off at first. I then began watching the firmware on my modem screen and realized that the modem was actually receiving packets. A protocol analyzer showed that all the traffic on the same ACD router as me was being sent to everyone else on the router. In addition, my modem firmware screen was displaying other customer's modem stats. I immediately reported this high security threat.

The next week my second loop was installed. 2MB down 1MB up. Still 63 attenuation up and down. I resisted my urge to bail at this point and decided to let ACD fix the obvious hardware problems to see if it made any difference.

I sent my protocol analyzer logs to ACD. I was shocked to then get an email from ACD accusing me of causing the problem. They claimed my linux machine was infected with the Millennium virus and "hammering some poor soul on the comcast network". Of course, I don't have a linux box. In addition, the logs I sent clearly showed the activity was from some sort of P2P application someone else on the network was running, transferring a file from someone with a comcast connection. After another email (to which got no immediate reply) ACD began updating the firmware on their hardware at the Lansing CO.

Watching the AIM packets hitting my modem, I was able to find a person I knew and contacted them. Same speeds as me, same attenuations. I contacted a few other people I didn't know (but saw their AIM packets). Same problems: 63 attenuation and slow speeds. Some were even losing their connection for days at a time.

Two weeks pass. During this time I realized that I wasn't just able to see other modem screens...I could actually control other modems. I immediately called ACD to report this. I also reported that they could temporarily fix the problem by assigning each modem a unique local LAN IP (they all share 192.168.1.1 by default). I called the Friday before Labor Day weekend at around 2:30pm. No upper management who could deal with the problem was there. Apparently they had gone home early for the holiday. I also learned that the line to MSU's network from the Lansing main wasn't even installed yet and that my slow speed ticket had been closed because my loop is REALLY at 18,000' (not 15,000, like when I first signed up).

I did not sign up so I could beta test ACD's new connection for $55/month. The hardware problem had been going on for over three weeks with minimal communcation and no apparent progress. No one seems to be taking the security threats seriously. My speeds were far below my expectations. Thus, I canceled my contract for $150 and cut my losses.

That same day I went to Best Buy and got a D-Link cable modem. Go here for my review of Comcast: »Review of Comcast Formerly ATT Broadband by sloughwi

member for 13.3 years, 133 visits, last login: 3.1 years ago
updated 10.3 years ago

Comments:

Review by NickFridd See Profile

  • Location: Spring Arbor,Jackson,MI
  • Cost: $70 per month
Overall "STAY AWAY FROM THESE INCOMPETENT IDIOTS"
Pre Sales information:
Install Co-ordination:
Connection reliability:
Tech Support:
Services:
Value for money:

"ACD.net utilizes connections to multiple backbones to ensure that data reaches the end-user in the fastest, most efficient manner possible. We also have peering agreements with local ISPs to allow fast delivery of packets when possible."

I'll do a little tracert on a HIGH QUALITY Game Server used for Counter-Strike that is in Dallas. **Note: Friends with cable less than a mile away ping 50's with Comcast cable. You be the judge...

1 14 ms 15 ms 12 ms 207.179.96.129
2 16 ms 16 ms 16 ms 207.179.78.17
3 18 ms 20 ms 17 ms 207.179.64.117
4 51 ms 50 ms 49 ms d3-0-0-7.a02.chcgil01.us.ra.verio.net [129.250.2
23.145]

5 50 ms 50 ms 49 ms ge-1-0-0-4.r02.chcgil01.us.bb.verio.net [129.250
.27.113]

6 49 ms 49 ms 49 ms p16-3-0-0.r00.chcgil06.us.bb.verio.net [129.250.
5.114]

7 79 ms 77 ms 79 ms sl-st21-chi-6-3.sprintlink.net [144.232.9.21]
8 79 ms 79 ms 81 ms sl-bb20-chi-11-3.sprintlink.net [144.232.20.79]

9 76 ms 77 ms 79 ms sl-bb21-fw-10-1.sprintlink.net [144.232.18.58]
10 78 ms 83 ms 79 ms sl-bb24-fw-11-0.sprintlink.net [144.232.11.22]
11 80 ms 80 ms 80 ms sl-bb27-fw-14-0.sprintlink.net [144.232.11.74]
12 78 ms 78 ms 78 ms sl-st20-dal-1-0.sprintlink.net [144.232.9.136]
13 78 ms 78 ms 80 ms sl-internap-105-0.sprintlink.net [144.228.250.90
]
14 99 ms 79 ms 79 ms border1.ge4-1-bbnet2.ext1a.dal.pnap.net [216.52.
191.84]

15 79 ms 77 ms 79 ms prohosting-11.border1.ext1a.dal.pnap.net [216.52
.189.42]

16 82 ms 80 ms 79 ms soul-69-12-9-126.tx.us.gamedaemons.net [69.12.9.
126]

50 ping to chicago makes me laugh. So there you have it, 80 ping to texas, in which when your in the game, you have to use rate settings, which makes you ping 90 in the game. 90 ping is unacceptable, and even 50-70 ping to chicago.. If you live in Jackson - FIND SOMTHING ELSE ...

**Oh and I called them numerous times asking to please fix it, do somthing? And there comment time and time again, "Pign is low priority to us and we dont deal with ping complaints sorry"

"ACD.net utilizes connections to multiple backbones to ensure that data reaches the end-user in the fastest, most efficient manner possible. We also have peering agreements with local ISPs to allow fast delivery of packets when possible."
PLEASE - Your the slowest thing Ive ever seen... and especially for 70$ a month. I hope this turns many people away from getting your service.

-Nick

member for 11.7 years, 5 visits, last login: 10.9 years ago
lodged 10.9 years ago

Comments:

Review by joel07022002 See Profile

  • Location: Lansing,Ingham,MI
  • Cost: $45 per month (12 month contract)
  • Install: about 14 days
  • Telco party Ameritech
  • CLEC party: Ameritech
Good "Paradyne DSL technology provides for greater distances for service"
Bad "Internal Routing makes for high pings"
Overall "Great Value for the money for surfing, Not great for gamers"
Pre Sales information:
Install Co-ordination:
Connection reliability:
Tech Support:
Services:
Value for money:

UPDATE (BIG BOLD PRINT): Went into ACD.Net's office the other day to cancel my service, i had already vacated my old house and moved into the new one. Come to find out, i HAVE to pay for another months of service, because as i quote them "It was in your contract that you have to give a 30 days notice of disconnection", which is utter bullshit. I have read the contract i signed 2 years ago, and it does not ever state anywhere that i owe them 30 days notice of disconnection.

STAY AWAY FROM ACD.NET!! STAY FAR AWAY!!!!! please read the rest of my review for the saga that was my customer experience of acd.net:

After ordering a T1 line from a local company (Control Room Technologies) on april 26th, and waiting 3 months without service, 4 attempts to locate my location, 4 lost orders, and then hearing that Ameritech had to rewire the entire city practicaly to deliver my T1, i canceled that order. After dealing with them, anything could be better.

Order was placed on July 3rd, one day before the 4th. So i gave them over the weekend to get the order in place. I called them July 7th to check on the order, and i was transfered to a mailbox for the DSL Order Coordinator. I left a message and did not recieve a call back until 4 days later. My Firm Order Confirmation date (FOC) was July 17th. I bought my modem on the 15th, after the line was installed by SBC. Brought it home and hooked it up, and got no activity. One call to tech support, 15 minutes later i was on the web.

Speed wise, i have my gripes, but this is not ACD's fault, this is my apartment complex's problem. Their in-building wiring was installed in 1947, and is not a multi-stranded coper wire. It is Single Stand 18gua wire. I have had techs come out and check my connection, and at the DMARC for my building, they get full speed, however my speeds are about 487Kbps down and 226Kbps up. My service level is 960K/256k.

The great thing about ACD is they have worked with me on my speed. My order was for 768K SDSL, and after i ordered they changed their offerings to make my line 960K SDSL. They also now offer ADSL, with upstreams of 256K. As i realized my speed was never going to amount to 960K Both ways, they allowed me to change my line speed to thier lowest speed offering, 960K/256K ADSL. Get that from the Larger guys!

Overall, my contract is up. I contiune my ACD service for as long as i remain in my apartment, because other providers cannot deliver to me.

My only gripe with them is that i use my connection for mostly online gaming. Game servers that are even 5 hops away in chicago are 50ms pings. The best ping i can get anywhere is 50ms. my first hop is always 20ms away, second hop is 20ms, third hop is 20ms. All of the backbone providers that they use are always 40ms pings to the routers themselves. This is unaceptable for gamers, as seeing that 40ms is all it takes to make the difference in your game. all these problems i have are due to their internal network routing, and it is nothing i can see being fixed without major expense from them. However, ACD is a **MAJOR** step from cable in the lansing area.

If you want a RELIABLE connection with great web browsing speed that will rival cable modems, look no further than ACD. I seriousy recommend you give them a call and see what they can do for you. Their sales staff is wonderful, and has put up with me for a year.

Another thing to not recently about acd.net (as of 9/12/03) is they are experiencing packet loss in a major way. They have an ability for users to monitor the network from your conenction, so you can tell they only have 1 connection the the internet themselves. They have peering arangments with 4 others, but packets wil not route through them unless you go to the website they host directly. So theier MAIN internet conncetion is a lonley DS-3, which is almost COMMPLEY maxed out, even on off peak times, you can expect to see this kind of packet loss:

Pinging 129.250.223.145 with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=46ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=49ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=46ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=48ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=49ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=50ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=47ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=58ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=53ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=50ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=55ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=46ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=49ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=46ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=45ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=48ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=47ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=46ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=45ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=48ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=51ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=48ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=48ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=49ms TTL=253
Request timed out.
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=51ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=47ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=47ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=48ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=51ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=46ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=52ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=53ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=46ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=47ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=48ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=48ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=46ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=47ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=56ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=52ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=49ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=50ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=47ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=46ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=46ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=49ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=48ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=48ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=45ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=54ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=46ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=49ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=50ms TTL=253
Request timed out.
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=52ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=49ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=49ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=48ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=46ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=47ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=48ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=47ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=49ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=48ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=49ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=54ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=49ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=50ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=49ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=47ms TTL=253
Request timed out.
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=46ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=47ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=48ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=49ms TTL=253
Request timed out.
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=47ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=52ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=46ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=49ms TTL=253
Request timed out.
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=49ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=48ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=49ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=56ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=49ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=48ms TTL=253
Request timed out.
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=46ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=47ms TTL=253
Request timed out.
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=49ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=48ms TTL=253
Request timed out.
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=50ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=49ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=48ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=56ms TTL=253
Request timed out.
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=52ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=46ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=53ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=48ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=56ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=49ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=48ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=47ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=49ms TTL=253
Request timed out.
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=49ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=48ms TTL=253
Request timed out.
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=47ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=50ms TTL=253
Request timed out.
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=49ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=54ms TTL=253
Reply from 129.250.223.145: bytes=32 time=47ms TTL=253

Ping statistics for 129.250.223.145:
Packets: Sent = 119, Received = 107, Lost = 12 (10% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 45ms, Maximum = 58ms, Average = 48ms

Tracing route to d3-0-0-7.a02.chcgil01.us.ra.verio.net [129.250.223.145]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 17 ms 16 ms 19 ms router.lnngmiso.acd.net [207.179.92.1]
2 19 ms 18 ms 21 ms vlan20.lnngmimn.acd.net [207.179.70.200]
3 50 ms * 50 ms d3-0-0-7.a02.chcgil01.us.ra.verio.net [129.250.2
23.145]

Trace complete.

Now, this is entirely unacceptable for an ISP. Also, they have a way to monitor CPU load and such on thier routers. If you look, you will knotice that thier routers are almost completely maxed out. 79% cpu load off peak, 98% on peak. They have about the worst setup i have seen for an ISP. thier network is run at 79% utilization almost constantly?! does that sound like an what an ISP should be doing.

Not to mention its 50ms to hit chicago. On SBC or comcast, your longest trip to chicago is 20ms. And everybody gets better speed with those ISP;s. A friend from work is now getting 3000/1024 from comcast, without any charge. Thats 2 T's Down and 1 Frac-T up.

SBC to dallas round trip - 40ms 0% loss for $26.95 (1500/256 DSL)
Comcast to Dallas round trip - 67ms 0% loss for $40.95 (3000/256 Cable)
ACD to Dallas round trip - 89ms 1.03% loss $25 for $44.95 (960/256 DSL)

News server performance is about the slowest i have ever seen from an ISP. It took me about 2 minutes to recieve a responce from the server.

Also, ACD was infected with the blaster worm. I was running my firewall specificaly tracking attempts to port 135 from ACD.net's IP's to send a letter to abuse department. When Lo and behold, DHCP17.ACD.NET had attempted to connect to me about 5 times one day. They not only use windows servers for their operations (LMAO, what good isp would use anything but UNIX or LINUX, come on guys) but they forgort to update their machines, and were infected with the blaster worm, the worm that almost shut down thier network due to ping flooding. I brought this to their attention, and i never recieved a reponse. Typical ACD.net crap.

Who would you choose in lansing? My money is not in ACD anymore, and alot of their customers are begining to realize that.

Also to everybody here who reads this. I posted to DSL reports a bad review before. I did this in reply's to this review, which you will see. ACD sent me an annonymous letter saying that i should not expect any favors, whatever that meant. Its been ever since then that my internet conection has droped in speed. i used to get at least 600kbps down and 256 up, now im no longer any good for more than 440 down/ 256 up.

I recomend that you try all of your options before going with ACD.net. Their network, grudging technical support reps, and prices should say enough.

member for 12.5 years, 71 visits, last login: 8.5 years ago
updated 11 years ago

Comments:

Review by dharkheart See Profile

  • Location: Grand Rapids,Kent,MI
  • Cost: $59 per month (24 month contract)
  • Install: about 14 days
  • Telco party Ameritech
Good "They're really good at taking money on time; tech support is minimally competent."
Bad "Poor service speeds."
Overall "Would not recommend them to anyone."
Pre Sales information:
Install Co-ordination:
Connection reliability:
Tech Support:
Services:
Value for money:

**edit: In response to the "warning: issued above, I would like to add that I have only logged into this site once before but I've visited quite often.**

ACD.net now ranks lower, in my opinion, than Comcast. I never thought that could be achieved by any broadband supplier but I am painfully aware that I was incorrect. The tech installing the line never labeled it in the telco interface.

ACD is perfectly willing to advertise SDSL @ speeds of 2mbps up and down but cannot confirm them until the line is dropped and you're a customer. At this point, unless you live next door to the substation, you will be very disappointed. I subscribed for the 2mbps/2mbps @$99/month. I have 960/284 @ a reduced $59/mo. I'm stuck with them as I had cancelled cable and am still under contract with ACD. Sure, some people would fight that but I, unlike some, *honor* my word.

SBC advertises 1-6mbps guaranteed. Now, how is this possible if ACD can't even get me the 2mbps I bought? 16k feet is the tech limit for 2mbps and 9k feet the limit for 8mbps -- I live 11.5k feet from the substation and i can't even get 1mbps! Now, either ACD is technically inept or SBC is doing something to their lines ( how can they offer their packages at those speed and ISPs, such as ACD using SBC's lines, not be able to achieve those speeds? ) and ACD may be unwilling to confront them.

At the end of my contract, I am dropping this place faster than a hot potato and going with SBC.



member for 12.5 years, 2 visits, last login: 11.4 years ago
lodged 11.4 years ago

Comments: