dslreports logo
site
spacer

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

spacer




how-to block ads



Qwest.net page on DSLReports
Six Month Rating
Closed to new reviews.

Reviews:
bullet 872 reviews (473 good) (210 bad)

Review by mystica See Profile

  • Location: Aurora,Arapahoe,CO
  • Cost: $80 per month
  • Install: about 7 days
  • Telco party Qwest
Good "Amazing speeds, much faster than Comcast for the price! Low interleave delay, Youtube HD saturates the 40megs with ease!"
Bad "Line quality/makeup data in their provisioning database was WRONG. 1 mo. to get 40x5."
Overall "If you like the speeds Qwest.net's configurator gives, you will be fine. If you KNOW you can get faster, it will be hell."
Pre Sales information:
Install Co-ordination:
Connection reliability:
Tech Support:
Services:
Value for money:

$80/mo includes the $70 line charge $8 modem rental and taxes/fees/etc.
I am still in a promo period where the DSL line itself is at $29.99/mo for 6 months.

------ History ------

I had wanted to try a different ISP last October after having received tons of flyers in the mail for "Fiber Optic Fast - Upto 40 Meg" internet from Qwest. After having ATTBI/Comcast after Digizip DSL for many many years between 2004 and 2011, I decided that the fees I was paying were too high for the service I was receiving. I ended on their 22x5 DOCSIS3 tier, which was quite nice. Of course, their marketing changed this to read "30x7 with Powerboost" and I think right after I disconnected they changed their tiers again, as the new 105mbit service was installed in my area.

------ Pre-install Misinformation ------

Every time I checked Qwest's online service qualification page, I saw that my address was listed as a maximum of 20 x 0.896. This seemed strange, because I literally live "down the block and around the corner" from the remote terminal which one day mid-2010 appeared out of the ground next to the old peeling-paint neighborhood splice box that's been here since it said US West on the side. »twitpic.com/33ks9h

I then took Google Maps and found the approximate loop-distance, by tracing my line from my house, to the pole, to the avenue at the end of my block, and 1 street over to the DSLAM as 1000 feet. Well within any and all VDSL2 specs and graphs I have seen for a very high sync-rate.

All things optimal, Ikanos has released (through a trade magazine it would seem) some graphs of the potential for line-length vs distance at full VDSL2 bandwidth: »www.convergedigest.com/blueprint···p?ID=232

Granted, Qwest likes using Profiles 8a and 12a (8 and 12mhz bandwidth) which effectively limits some of the speed. Even with the 8a profile "speed vs distance" graphs I had found from others showed I still could achieve good speeds, so I knew that it was not specifically a problem with VDSL2 itself or my line length.

»chipdesignmag.com/images/idesign···ure1.gif is the actual diagram comparing ASDL2 and VDSL2 at lengths for certain spectral bandwidths (profiles) and the article it came from is at »chipdesignmag.com/display.php?articleId=1130 . The "+" marked graph lines are Profile 12a (what Qwest gives for 40x20) and the "triangle" graph lines are Profile 8a that Qwest is doing for the 40x5 tier. Also note that the "+" and "triangle" lines MATCH for downstream- this is because the difference between profiles 8a and 12a: 4mhz UPLOAD bandwidth! There is no extra Downstream until profile 17a. Check out a VDSL2 bandplan: »www.ospmag.com/files/Magic_Fig1_0908.jpg a much bigger one can be found in the actual white paper by Aware Inc. »www.aware.com/dsl/whitepapers/wp_vdsl2.pdf

Please note that I have seen far higher speeds in testing than the graph shows, yet, it still indicates regardless of Profile 8 or 12, my house should be faster than 20x0.896 at 1000-1500 feet of line length.

Qwest's provisioning database dictated however, for some strange reason, that this house was not able to receive such fast speeds. Everyone I contacted mentioned "20x0.896" as the max.

Interestingly enough, I started punching in addresses near my house... ACROSS THE STREET from me, same remote terminal, the database stated THEY could receive 40x5. Nobody on my side of the street, merely 120 feet approximately more wire length, could get past 20x0.896. If I lived exactly one block North, I could have subscribed to 40x20 initially. This result came up from the initial first flyer sent to my house.

This intrigued and bothered me. I clearly was close enough as every single street I checked I believe to be attached to this particular neighborhood splice box, DSLAM and fiber vault. as I have gone around looking and detailing where the physical wire goes underground from the aerial plant.

------ Initial contact to TalkToUs led to 0 actual result ------

During October 2010, I had started to try initial contacts with the Twitter/TalkToUs end of Qwest's customer service team, to attempt to get a straight answer of either: "Why can't I" or "Is your info wrong and perhaps I could?". After many tweets and about 5 back and forth emails with a manager, I still failed to get any concrete information. A network engineer finally delivered a simple screenshot stating my address was able to get 20x0.896. Hardly new info...

------ Waiting it out and initial order ------

I stuck with Comcast for a few more months, as I was guaranteed the 5meg upload I have come to rely upon, and the reasonable 22 megabits of download. (All speeds *after* shaping, as Comcast would PowerBoost burst to 35x10 for about 50-60 megabytes of data transfer at the beginning of a long upload/download. )

Come March 2011, I had enough of paying $220 for TV and Internet and killed off my cable entirely. I finally and ordered Qwest DSL online and and got in on their current promo which was 6 months at 19.99 (with voice) or 29.99 (dry-line) so I chose the dry-line option. VoIP and cell are all I personally use. I decided to keep the billing for my line separate from the preexisting house line which my family uses so as to not have to deal with paying family a portion of the monthly bill.

There were of course the standard choices: self install or tech install; rented or purchased cheap or full-featured modem. I chose the rented Q1000 modem as I was unsure if I wanted to keep it should I be unable to get the line speed fixed and because I have seen such modems sell on Craigslist/Ebay for significantly less than Qwest wanted to charge. I also chose a self-install, as I had plenty of cat5 and keystone jacks for all sorts of connectors. I wired my own cable into the modem a few weeks post-install, (yes I'm lazy) and prior to that, all the initial setup/testing/speed-increase were on my modem through a cable out my window into the 'test' jack for my line in the NID outside.

------ Order process fails to properly delete the DirecTV package using the 'remove from order' feature ------

I had initially looked into doing a package deal with DirecTV, but before I submitted the form, I had removed (so I thought) the line-item from my order. Their order system did something wonky and I still got info stating I owe a deposit to DirecTV and this canceled Qwest's side of the DTV order. I honestly wonder why after I clicked "remove" it still showed up on the final email confirm, but not the webpage confirm.

Strange and potentially buggy order system. Check!

I thought to myself, after ordering, "Well, once the technician sees that I am so close, maybe he can just have the odd info in their database changed so I can get faster service here."

The tech was scheduled 7 days from that order date.

------ Installation ------

I was UPSed my modem, from Denver, to Aurora (I could have walked there and back in 4 hours, instead of the 5 days it took for them to send it off...) and it arrived the day before the technician was scheduled.

When the tech arrived, he and I discussed in detail what would be done before he even went to grab the latter from his van. Then he worked his magic on the drop to my old house, circa 1960. The wiring inside seems to have been replaced since then, mid-80s, but there is still one rather old looking cable that darts into the house through the utility hole between the foundation and floorboards. A brand new drop was installed with 2 pairs, one specifically for my DSL and the other for the house's already present landline. As stated above, I decided to self-install a home-run with CAT5 cable from the NID to my modem directly. This was completed 2 weeks after the tech was here, and I had the green CAT3 cord hanging out my window going into the NID's test port.

His installation was efficient, fast and still extremely well executed. The quality of the drop: taught but not stretching, secured to the house and snaked down an existing cable bundle (yay comcast wiring too much crap) to the new NID, was very good. He was literally THE most professional technician I have ever had the pleasure to watch at work. During our pre-install chat, he was both very informed and informative when answering my questions and the end result was beautiful. This was far superior than the 'mediocre at best' work done by Comcast/ATTBI/TCI and their contractors over the years.

------ Astonishment ------

After installing the new NID and testing the line with his meter, he exclaimed that the line was one of the best he had ever tested, something like 35dB SNR margin up/down, 0 attenuation. He was quite curious as well as to why Qwest's line database said I couldn't get the higher speeds, as he himself had installed a 40 meg line at about 1700 wire-feet.

Heck, I've seen a 40x20 tier provisioned on a line with much less SNR margin and signal strength listed here in the DSLR forums. ( »Qwest 40/20 - new service - dropped connections.... )

The point is, with a much lower quality point, they *WERE* provisioned, while I was being stonewalled.

------ Fix attempt 1 ------

Over the next few days post-install, the tech contacted Qwest's back-end IT department to attempt a line provisioning change, but the few speed alternatives he could offer were still improperly constrained. Either 18x3 or 12x5.

I didn't want to give up my 20 meg down (close enough to Comcast's) but boy did I want the 5meg up again. He had them set a test on the line at 18x3, which I tried a few days, and the results were the same: I needed faster speeds both directions. I declined to call back to have this setting made permanent.

------ Attempt 2 ------

So the tweets and emails started again to TalkToUs.

(During all of this pre and post install questioning, I initially decided not to call in to either sales tech support as I figured it might be easier to convey my "high quality line" and "extremely short distance" to someone via text and graphics versus trying to yell on the phone.

I included DSL line quality diagnostics from the router, which in no uncertain terms stated maximum speed near 80 meg down and 15 meg up - the upload being stifled by the DSLAM on profile 8a not allowing for upstream2/3 to be used. I included the google map from my house, to the pole, to the avenue, to the DSLAM and indicated 1000-1100 approximate wire-feet.

All of these should have indicated a problem, that something beyond simple "line quality" was affecting my ability to subscribe to a particular service tier.

Yet not a single "Wow maybe we need to escalate this and fix it" sort of reply.

I mostly got no reply or very terse replies via the twitter feed and the manager I had initially conversed with back in October.

------ Attempt 3 ------

I then started pulling any strings I could and looked at my installers business card. His manager was listed, so I tried emailing her. Another week of no response at all.

Now, this set of emails ended at week 3 post-install. Week 1 was technician; 2 was TalkToUs (waited a week for a reply, nothing), 3 was Technician's Manager (another week, no reply)

------ Last straw before I canceled and begrudgingly went back to Comcast ------

Now at this point I'm lacking any idea of where to turn next.

Lo and behold one morning my DSL connection starts flapping, every 5 minutes. PPPoE login/logout. For 8 hours straight while I slept, midnight - 8am.

I tried one last time with tweeting the TalkToUs guys about the issue, and they said they would look into the issue, but as the issue persisted I decided to try calling the repair line.

After being forwarded to some country decidedly not in the same hemisphere of our planet from Denver, CO, I talked through the static-filled-digital-g.729-mangled VoIP trunk to a friendly agent who put in the ticket and then asked if I wanted to be contacted when the issue was fixed. I said 'yes' and then I was prompted to verify my email and my voice phone number.

About 25 minutes later the connection stabilized only disconnecting twice during the interim.

------ HOPE! ------

BUT: The most unexpected thing appeared in my inbox. A boilerplate "Here are a few things you can try while we fix your issue" email, written and 'signed' by someone with the title of "Director of Network Operations".

I thought: If *HE* can't help me, no mere mortal could. (Maybe Superman...)

So I took his name, applied the Firstname.Lastname@qwest.com logic for corporate (as the pattern had been established by the lengthy email trail prior) and sent him a simple letter. I stated the avenues I tried, the responses I received, and my now 3 weeks into service inability to receive a service tier that I should have 0 technical inability to subscribe to.

------ SUCCESS!!!!!!!!!!! ------

Within exactly ONE HOUR I received 2 emails, one from the director and a second from an engineer who would call me back.

By 4 pm that day, after running a remote line-quality loopback test with the Q1000, the back-end engineer called me and stated "Wow, your line definitely can take the 40 meg tier. I'll have it changed and you should be able to call up and order the new tier directly through sales tomorrow."

I profusely thanked this engineer and re-emailed the director a follow up thanking him very much as well. I also described the pains I had gone through trying to bring my issue to a closure to which he thanked me for describing my experience. I hope(d) that this will actually help others, as I believe I have identified a severe ineffectiveness/inability of this particular support channel.

Recent DSLReports forum posts as far as a month past this resolution date seem to indicate that it is still just as hard, if not impossible, to get a straight answer from TalkToUs on the issue of "Can my line actually attain such and such speed?" »Can my line handle 12mbps???

------ Disillusion at the inadequacy of the TalkToUs team ------

Now. I have ONE HUGE question to Qwest:

Why could the TalkToUs team NOT get this issue escalated properly?!

I am incredulous at the seemingly bureaucratic inability for a customer service branch of this
organization to properly identify a problem and escalate to a proper team to investigate further and resolve the issue.

Why must someone with a good question, reasonable supporting documentation and a hell-bent determination to solve such a stupid problem caused by improper database information, go through this hell to find a backwards way into the corporate hierarchy to get some results?!

After a week of waiting for the upgrade on speed, as apparently they need a week to push a button on their provisioning interface, I finally was upgraded to the 40x5 meg tier. The engineer I previously spoke with on that fateful afternoon informed me that perhaps by June to July I could bump up once again to the 20 meg upload tier due to upgrades they were doing in my area, so I will wait patiently for this.

------ Provisioning Delays? ------

And that brings up another thing: Why if I wasn't in the uncommon 'provisional line' situation I was in, does it take 6 days to provision a speed upgrade? The woman on the phone at Sales stated it would be only "one extra day because a tech has to verify the line can take the speed," as it is a provisional line.

To me, this indicates that the 6 day waiting time is normal, and that the 7 days I waited was the exception. Comcast for all their pricing failures, could at least click a button and boom, my modem resets with its new config profile.

------ End result: Delayed extreme happiness! ------

My line so far, has been utterly rock stable. After the initial issues I dealt with, I haven't dropped sync once, never yet have deviated from my faster initial sync rate of 40127 x 5120, and the service is quite zippy!

YOUTUBE is FAST~! - 1080p causes a fully saturated line.

Browsing is instant!

Compared to the PowerBoost bullcrap and packet de-prioritization annoyance from Comcast if you exceed a certain percentage of your capped speed, this VDSL2 line is ALWAYS testing fast.

Qwest's own test:

Last Result:
Download Speed: 36.778 Mbps (4.6 MB/sec transfer rate)
Upload Speed: 4.36 Mbps (0.5 MB/sec transfer rate)
The closest server located in Denver, CO performed this test with a latency of 23 milliseconds.
Test Date: Mon 23 May 2011 12:40:34 PM MDT

GreenHouseData (Cheyenne WY) test, which has higher upload speeds, yet also higher latency due to a weird server (ICMP ping latency is 25ms) »www.speedtest.net/result/1308941226.png

traceroute to speedtest.greenhousedata.com (208.89.163.194), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
1 192.168.0.1 (192.168.0.1) 0.167 ms 0.217 ms 0.275 ms
2 hlrn-dsl-gw82-147.hlrn.qwest.net (207.225.112.147) 21.572 ms 21.956 ms 22.185 ms
3 hlrn-agw1.inet.qwest.net (71.217.190.137) 22.398 ms 22.627 ms 22.859 ms
4 chy-core-02.inet.qwest.net (67.14.24.73) 25.872 ms 26.258 ms 26.290 ms
5 chy-edge-04.inet.qwest.net (205.171.158.101) 26.303 ms 24.186 ms 24.204 ms
6 65.114.247.174 (65.114.247.174) 24.659 ms 24.668 ms 25.121 ms
7 CYSWYDC01ESW1-001-1-1.GREENHOUSEDATA.NET (208.89.160.11) 26.319 ms 26.343 ms 26.366 ms
8 SPEEDTEST.GREENHOUSEDATA.COM (208.89.163.194) 26.126 ms 26.158 ms 26.186 ms

------ Intra-Denver Qwest Comcast routing is FUBARed however... Good thing I don't game ------
I traced to my old IP:

traceroute to 75.70.x.x (75.70.x.x), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
1 192.168.0.1 (192.168.0.1) 0.203 ms 0.246 ms 0.299 ms
2 hlrn-dsl-gw82-147.hlrn.qwest.net (207.225.112.147) 22.139 ms 22.169 ms 22.196 ms
3 hlrn-agw1.inet.qwest.net (71.217.190.137) 22.333 ms 22.530 ms 23.013 ms
4 dap-brdr-03.inet.qwest.net (67.14.2.85) 46.008 ms 46.469 ms 45.753 ms
5 Vlan507.icore2.DTX-Dallas.as6453.net (206.82.142.1) 56.248 ms 49.874 ms 49.892 ms
6 Vlan554.icore2.DTX-Dallas.as6453.net (206.82.142.22) 43.850 ms 45.014 ms Vlan553.icore2.DTX-Dallas.as6453.net (206.82.142.18) 45.036 ms
7 pos-2-5-0-0-cr01.dallas.tx.ibone.comcast.net (68.86.85.25) 45.206 ms 45.757 ms 45.783 ms
8 pos-2-15-0-0-cr01.denver.co.ibone.comcast.net (68.86.85.173) 62.774 ms 62.718 ms 62.891 ms
9 pos-0-14-0-0-ar02.aurora.co.denver.comcast.net (68.86.91.102) 63.321 ms 60.832 ms 61.540 ms
10 te-8-3-ur01.aurora.co.denver.comcast.net (68.86.103.38) 60.989 ms 61.311 ms 61.329 ms
11 te-17-10-cdn15.aurora.co.denver.comcast.net (68.85.107.6) 63.699 ms 61.927 ms 66.783 ms
12 * * * (either host isn't up, or is firewalled ; point still made)

DALLAS to get back to Denver... Where's Level3 in this? Qwest directly peers, and I get nearly the same ping latency to a friend in BOSTON!

traceroute to friends-dyndns-hostname.net (146.115.x.x), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
1 192.168.0.1 (192.168.0.1) 0.165 ms 0.221 ms 0.280 ms
2 hlrn-dsl-gw82-147.hlrn.qwest.net (207.225.112.147) 21.295 ms 21.959 ms 22.172 ms
3 hlrn-agw1.inet.qwest.net (71.217.190.137) 22.656 ms 22.974 ms 22.996 ms
4 dvr-core-02.inet.qwest.net (67.14.24.29) 23.232 ms 23.459 ms 23.939 ms
5 dvr-brdr-01.inet.qwest.net (205.171.10.10) 24.918 ms 22.143 ms 22.158 ms
6 63.146.26.138 (63.146.26.138) 21.861 ms 21.885 ms 21.912 ms
7 vlan52.ebr2.Denver1.Level3.net (4.69.147.126) 22.169 ms 21.975 ms 22.876 ms
8 ae-3-3.ebr1.Chicago2.Level3.net (4.69.132.62) 47.521 ms 47.546 ms 48.127 ms
9 ae-6-6.ebr1.Chicago1.Level3.net (4.69.140.189) 48.836 ms 49.337 ms 49.367 ms
10 ae-1-5.bar1.Boston1.Level3.net (4.69.140.93) 72.266 ms 71.514 ms 71.788 ms
11 ae-0-11.bar2.Boston1.Level3.net (4.69.140.90) 71.000 ms 71.230 ms 71.256 ms
12 RCN-CORPORA.bar2.Boston1.Level3.net (4.53.50.14) 71.728 ms 70.053 ms 70.266 ms
13 port-chan7.aggr1.sbo.ma.rcn.net (207.172.15.135) 69.189 ms 69.473 ms 69.673 ms
14 wtr-ubr1.sbo-wtr.ma.cable.rcn.net (209.6.160.19) 70.376 ms 69.964 ms 70.067 ms ; This is the same "CMTS" hop that my previous trace ended on. Notice, similar latency!
15 146-115-x-x.c3-0.wtr-ubr1.sbo-wtr.ma.cable.rcn.com (146.115.x.x) 79.807 ms 79.830 ms 83.529 ms

------ Addendum: Statistics of my line data that either TalkToUs was unable to understand, or was incapable of acting upon: ------

Line quality graph (SNR per Tone) »i.imgur.com/r4YU4.png

(20x0.896 sync rate, before moving my modem to the CAT5 homerun)
> adsl info --linediag1

Max: Upstream rate = 15308 Kbps, Downstream rate = 79356 Kbps
Path: 0, Upstream rate = 893 Kbps, Downstream rate = 20128 Kbps

VDSL Port Details Upstream Downstream
Attainable Net Data Rate: 15308 kbps 79356 kbps
Actual Aggregate Tx Power: -2.7 dBm 15.7 dBm
============================================================================
VDSL Band Status U0 U1 U2 U3 D1 D2 D3
Line Attenuation: 3.2dB 25.1dB N/A N/A 15.1dB 31.5dB N/A
Signal Attenuation: 3.0dB 25.1dB N/A N/A 15.1dB 31.5dB N/A
SNR Margin: 0.0dB 31.3dB N/A N/A 31.5dB 31.2dB N/A

(Today's test, sync rate 40x5, cat5 home-run to keystone jack next to modem: )

> adsl info --linediag1
adsl: ADSL driver and PHY status
Status: Showtime
Retrain Reason: 0
Max: Upstream rate = 15336 Kbps, Downstream rate = 82464 Kbps
Path: 0, Upstream rate = 5120 Kbps, Downstream rate = 40127 Kbps

VDSL Port Details Upstream Downstream
Attainable Net Data Rate: 15336 kbps 82464 kbps
Actual Aggregate Tx Power: 6.1 dBm 16.9 dBm
============================================================================
VDSL Band Status U0 U1 U2 U3 D1 D2 D3
Line Attenuation: 3.2dB 25.1dB N/A N/A 15.3dB 32.0dB N/A
Signal Attenuation: 3.0dB 25.1dB N/A N/A 15.3dB 32.0dB N/A
SNR Margin: 31.1dB 27.8dB N/A N/A 23.8dB 23.7dB N/A

(Lower SNR margins due to wider-amount of bandwidth consumed; signal power is a sum of OFDM tones aggregated together. Still VERY good.)

member for 12.7 years, 278 visits, last login: 100 days ago
updated 3.1 years ago

Comments:

Review by epiphyte See Profile

  • Location: Minneapolis,Hennepin,MN
  • Cost: $44 per month (12 month contract)
  • Install: about 4 days
  • Telco party Qwest
Good "40% cost saving + 2x achieved download sped over comcast"
Bad "very poor initial reliability - arduous interaction with phone support"
Overall "Took a while to get working reliably, but worth it to ditch Comcast...."
Pre Sales information:
Install Co-ordination:
Connection reliability:
Tech Support:
Services:
Value for money:

I ordered the 12mbps/768kbps "fiber" VDSL2 svc from qwest after comcast hiked my IP-only cable svc another $10/mo. The install went fine (Qwest/actiontec Q1000 modem) and the download speed is as advertised. I get a very large number of modem retrains though - at worst it won't stay up for more than a few minutes at a time. At best it's been up for 16 hours continuously, but that was with the upstream trained to 150kbps or so, (i.e. 75% degraded over the advertised rate). Either of the above are painful for me because I spend a lot of time VPNd in to remote sites with active filesystems mounted across the link.

Over the past two weeks I've had several redundant conversations with service, usually spending a half-hour or so getting the call to the same point in the dialogue at which the previous one was concluded, and being batted back and forth between POTS + IP support. I've had both a POTS tech and an internet tech visit; both cited the other as the source of the problem - so today they are both supposed to show up at once and fight it out. Stay tuned...

Update: 3rd tech. to visit found + removed extra wire and a poor splice from the copper loop. Up solid at full speed for 4 days. Starting to feel a little more confident at this point...

member for 3.2 years, 12 visits, last login: 110 days ago
updated 3.1 years ago

Comments:

Review by bridger_1 See Profile

  • Location: Sandy,Salt Lake,UT
  • Cost: $85 per month (24 month contract)
  • Telco party Qwest
Good "little downtime"
Bad "speeds are not as promised, I get close to half what is promised"
Pre Sales information:
Install Co-ordination:
Connection reliability:
Tech Support:
Services:
Value for money:

I do not get the speeds promised. WHen I contact tech support they do nothing to try and adjust it.

member for 5.7 years, 4 visits, last login: 3.2 years ago
lodged 3.2 years ago

Comments:






Review by jgsull See Profile

  • Location: Medford,Jackson,OR
  • Cost: $40 per month
  • Install: about 1 days
  • Telco party Qwest
Good "Once connected to"
Bad "Voice mail goes on and on."
Overall "Overall, pretty good."
Pre Sales information:
Install Co-ordination:
Connection reliability:
Tech Support:
Services:
Value for money:

Friends with cable and satellite were not happy with their service so I stuck with Qwest, which is my land-line service. I have a nominal 1.5 Down and .6 Up connection. Actual numbers are usually around 1.35 and .58. Satisfactory most of the time. They just replaced my original modem with a refurbished "2 Wire", which seems to be doing the job quite well.

The phone "Help" leaves a lot to be desired. I sometimes have a hard time understanding the techie, who is usually in India. Frankly, I'll no longer bother trying to understand them, but unless they speak understandable english, will just hang up. The techs they send to the house on the other hand, are very knowledgeable and helpful.

All in all, I'd recommend Qwest if you're looking for a reasonable priced, mostly reliable DSL service.

member for 9.8 years, 84 visits, last login: 82 days ago
updated 3.2 years ago

Comments:

Review by StuartMW See Profile

  • Location: Ouray,Ouray,CO
  • Cost: $25 per month
  • Install: about 5 days
Good "Great intro (6 month) rate and fair rate after that. Good speed (7Mbps down)."
Bad "Online (chat) tech support was polite but not tech savy (what's"
Overall "Good service at a (great intro) price."
Pre Sales information:
Install Co-ordination:
Connection reliability:
Tech Support:
Services:
Value for money:

I considered a local microwave provider (Ouraynet) but they were pricey and the previous owner had left a QWest modem (Motorola 3347) so I didn't have to pay any install costs for QWest service. QWest also had a $24.99/month offer, for 6 months and to be honest I prefer DSL to cable/radio systems anyway.

In my area I had two speed choices: 1.5Mbps and 7Mbps. I went with the 7Mbps which is over 2x the speed I had before with AT&T in Austin, TX.

I ordered via phone and the process was very straightforward. QWest sent, via UPS, and installation CD which configured the modem, setup the PPP login password (in the modem) etc. It took a few minutes to get everything up and going.

However for the first few days the modem was resynchronizing every hour or so which was really annoying. I contacted QWest tech support, via online chat, and the rep said my line was good and recommended getting a new modem (for $99!). I checked the log in the modem (I'm tech savy) and saw that the TR-069 authentication process was constantly failing. I assumed this was causing the modem to reboot, so I reset it back to factory defaults (reset button on the modem) and ran the setup CD again to reinitialize the modem. This seems to have fixed the issue and my connection seems solid Presumably the QWest install program doesn't set/reset everything in the modem and there was stuff left over from the previous user.

Even after re-initializing the modem, as described above, I was still getting modem retains. I changed the phone cable from the wall to the modem, for length reasons, and noticed that it affected (positively) the connection reliability. I then removed the phone jack from the wall and the modem immediately lost sync. While checking the wiring one wire broke. Since fixing that my connection appears rock solid.

member for 13.9 years, 7293 visits, last login: a few hours ago
updated 3.3 years ago

Comments:

Review by (hidden by request)

  • Location: Minneapolis,Hennepin,MN
  • Cost: $59 per month (6 month contract)
Good "initially when I signed up it was fine"
Bad "Macs are no longer given the same Norton protection for free as PC's receive"
Overall "Qwest rescinded the free Norton protection for Macs while keeping it for PC/s"
Services:
Value for money:

I have a Mac. 6 months ago, when I subscribed to Qwest for DSL service,

they provided Norton anti-virus protection as part of the plan. Now, they have taken that free service away from Macs, but still offer it for PC's. Qwest did not notify me of this change. I have talked to Customer Service and they seem baffled. I called the Corporate Office and was informed that it was a Corporate decision and I quote: 'end of story', and they won't change it. Qwest treats Mac subscribers with impudence. It is has inept customer service help. The Corporate Office is pathetically aloof.

If you are a Mac user, don't subscribe to Qwest as you will pay the same as PC's and get less.

-

(review was emailed from domain gmail.com)
lodged 3.3 years ago

Comments:

Review by (hidden by request)

  • Location: Flagstaff,Coconino,AZ
  • Cost: $60 per month
Good "faster sometimes"
Bad " slower most of the time"
Overall "not a great value"
Pre Sales information:
Install Co-ordination:
Connection reliability:
Tech Support:
Services:
Value for money:

I recently "upgraded" from 1.5 Mbps to 12Mbps, and initially I was
pleased with the results - initially. I have since discovered that at
certain times of the day (nights especially) the speed drops
significantly to levels approaching that of my old tier. I live in an
outlying area where I am sure many other broadband users utilize the
same pipe, and the difference is likely attributable to them streaming
large files when they get home from work.

Qwest includes weasel words in their disclaimer stating higher tier
speeds may not be available during peak times, and it is frustrating to
see firsthand. If I could realize a 75% utilization rate of higher
speeds it would be acceptable, but I get less than 25%. Bottom line is
if you live at the end of the line like I do, buyer beware.

(review was emailed from domain gmail.com)
lodged 3.3 years ago

Comments:

Review by marzer2 See Profile

  • Location: Colorado Springs,El Paso,CO
  • Cost: $30 per month (6 month contract)
  • Install: about 5 days
  • Telco party Qwest
Good "Consistent speeds, high reliability."
Bad "Online services (account management, integration) are horrible: slow, disparate portal and tech support systems."
Overall "Fast, reliable DSL for the cost; frustrating support services."
Pre Sales information:
Install Co-ordination:
Connection reliability:
Tech Support:
Services:
Value for money:

40Mbps (free upgrade from 7Mbps); self-install, $60 for the modem; ZyXEL Q100 (free upgrade from GT-701). Best experience: As a long term customer (20+ years) with Qwest, they've continued to offer me the $29.99/mos for any speed introduction price over the past year. Worst: Having to navigate the multitude of service portals and tech support systems.

member for 13.4 years, 76 visits, last login: 3.2 years ago
lodged 3.3 years ago

Comments:






Review by MSauk See Profile

  • Location: Sandy,Salt Lake,UT
  • Cost: $54 per month
  • Install: about 3 days
Good "Ordered Online, Installed within 3 days, Solid pings and Speeds"
Bad "Can only use one router for their new service"
Overall "Solid here in Utah. Old speed used to be 1.5, upgraded and now I get 12 down."
Pre Sales information:
Install Co-ordination:
Connection reliability:
Tech Support:
Services:
Value for money:

My Other Reviews

·Comcast
UPDATED 03-07-2010

I have since moved into an area that can get the 40/5 speed. My modem trains at 36/5 and I get 33/4.5 just about every download. Service has been fantastic so far, zero complaints.

view a speed test, click on the link
»www.speedtest.net/result/1189404876.png

UPDATE 7-25-09

Well I ordered qwest to give it a shot here in Utah. My house for many many years was stuck at 1.5 down which was fast 8 or 9 years ago. But todays speeds that is like using dialup.

Our area within the last few months if that was upgraded with fiber to the nod I believe. I am now able to get 12/896 in which I get 10.8/700 to 800 up on a very consistent basis.

My pings for games is under 100 just about everywhere which is great! Overall very happy with the upgrade, but of course would like to get the higher speeds that they are beginning to offer.

--------------

My area I can get 5120 / 896 Kbps and on speed tests I get just about every time, 4300/750. That to me is very acceptable.

Overall the line has been rock solid. No issues, pings are a touch higher then I would like to see them on a DSL line, but seriously not bad at all.

The price I believe is around 15 dollars to high for the speed I get. But I would rather give my money to qwest then have comcast get it.

If your in the Spokane Valley area I would suggest qwest.



member for 12.5 years, 4102 visits, last login: 1 days ago
updated 3.3 years ago

Comments:

Review by jms_smd See Profile

  • Location: Portland,Multnomah,OR
  • Business customer Business customer
  • Cost: $150 per month (36 month contract)
  • Telco party Qwest
Bad "We experienced an outage of 5 days on a business account"
Overall "I do NOT recommend QWest for internet service"
Pre Sales information:
Install Co-ordination:
Connection reliability:
Tech Support:
Services:
Value for money:

I guess the most frustrating thing was they weren't able to provide any specifics on the type or scope of outage, possible workarounds were ruled out and they just woodenly repeated "they were sorry", and "we apologize", "try again in 24 to 48 hours", so we had to switch to another carrier. We haven't disconnected Qwest yet, but I'm pushing hard to do it NOW. Very disappointing experience.

member for 3.3 years, 1 visits, last login: 3.3 years ago
lodged 3.3 years ago

Comments: