how-to block ads
|
|
view: topics flat text |
|
Comments on news posted 2007-02-12 08:58:01: Australian regulators recently declared they were going to crack down on any ISPs that used the much maligned "up to" speed classification in advertising, since consumers are consistently complaining they never see the speed advertised. ..
|
 | | This should NOT be cracked down on and I will tell you why. Cable providers write configuration files to allow for maximum access rates. In my system, the customer get the speed caps at nearly ALL TIMES. But, there are times when the web is just super congested. This will only cause trouble calls and truck rolls for speed testing freaks who want to make sure that they are getting what they pay for at all times. The minute their speed test is a meg under, they will call, we will troubleshoot and then send a truck to find NO problems. This will cost the cable companies money and WILL drive the prices for your services higher. Most cable companies work hard to manage capacity and are always looking at where the next bottleneck is going to be. Take away the up-to phrase and people's expectations are going to rise even higher. And as for the "about time" people, you should try managing a cable network and doing some real field troubleshooting. You would not be saying about time, you would be saying please don't. I love my company, my job and my customers and this is a bad thing for all of them. | |
| | | | Re: This should NOT be cracked down on and I will tell you why. Why not just change the configuration files to OC48 speeds? You are saying that the cable provider need only set the config files to whatever they tell the customer is the "up to" speed and that reality (the backbone's shoddy performance) is the mysterious bad guy which means the cable company is good and honest. Frankly, I don't see how you feel about your company and job. Compliance is the customer telling the company to deliver on the perceived value or suffer the consequences. Nothing personal, business is business.
The cable company has the responsibility and duty to its customers (not shareholders) to see to it that the customer can actually enjoy the speeds they advertise. That means a backbone that can handle more than the traffic will bear. Either build it and let everyone know deadlines, etc or use the existing ones that CAN deliver. In Comcast case, they don't want to buy GOOD bandwidth so they crowd everyone onto a "so 90's" network. And they have no guilt. Made the shareholders happy by spending nothing to make something.
Comcast should assign dedicated ip numbers to the customers who understand how the world turns and broadcast that ip across another backbone - AT NO COST TO THE SUBSCRIBER. If they don't, Comcast is slightly lower on the food chain than a night crawler. | |
|
| | Blame the FCC, not the Broadband Service Providers Humand developed, implemented, and operate technologies. As such, the human condition comes into the limitation while adhering to the basic physics at hand.
The 'up to' was a liability in that no ISP could deliver a quoted speed because there are far too many variables that they do not control. Instead of picking on ISPs for using 'up to' in consumer services, why not force the FCC to classify BROADBAND as something a little more 21st century, like 1.5 Mbps minimum?
I think the FCC is bought, and the FTC just overly ignorant of the forces at play. Of course, one safe-harbo would be to only require one customer being sold X service and getting X service delivered. | |
| |  Thrudd
join:2004-06-21
Mississauga, ON | Re: Blame the FCC, not the Broadband Service Providers Don't be an apologetist for the ISPs.
A lie is a lie is a lie ..... That's a simple truth 
A simple meter to even the playing field would be to say;
Guaranteed 99% availability of ##Bps with up to ####Bps on a regular basis..... or some such.
We need a body like the FCC with real Teeth (something to put the HURT on the ISPs and their owners)to stop the rampant abuses by the faceless unfettered corporations.
A corporations first and only goal is to separate you from your money. Only the big stick of law prevents them from not delivering any product at all, and even that doesn't always work.
(BTW - BBR has a spell check function) | |
| | | Reviews:
 ·Comcast
 ·Comcast Digital ..
| Re: Blame the FCC, not the Broadband Service Providers comcast wants you to use speakeasy.net for the speed test. I called to ask about why I was only getting 3-4 meg down on a 6meg plan and the guy on the phone told me that is normal and he told me that is what he gets himself and that the plan is "up to 6meg. NOT GUARANTEED 6meg." Then had me test my speeds at speakeasy.net. It came back as 6meg and he congradulated me on having superb speeds and we said our goodbyes and hung up. | |
| | | | | | Re: Blame the FCC, not the Broadband Service Providers said by mikedz4:comcast wants you to use speakeasy.net for the speed test. I called to ask about why I was only getting 3-4 meg down on a 6meg plan and the guy on the phone told me that is normal and he told me that is what he gets himself and that the plan is "up to 6meg. NOT GUARANTEED 6meg." Then had me test my speeds at speakeasy.net. It came back as 6meg and he congradulated me on having superb speeds and we said our goodbyes and hung up. If you feel that they have misled or lied to you in the marketing then who is worse, them or the consumer that continues to pay them?  | |
|
| | | | I'm not defending the ISPs at all. I could care less about them. I work in wide-area networking that ISPs rely on. I know why it is marketed via the 'up to' method. Unfortunately, many consumer (most) are ignorant of the facts, and worse what overhead goes into transport.
This isn't to say that in the transport there are not issues at hand, but many of those issues exist well before the ISP. These ISPs (e.g. Earthlink) usually are at the mercy of the network owners in the last mile. Now, if a problem exists on the upstream (between the ISP and their tier-1 service provider) that is another story.
I disagree in the need for a body 'like the FCC'. Has it not been apparent to you that the FCC can and has repeatedly been bought (ahem, lobbied) to the whims of the telecommunications industry? If you are a consumer looking for something more than a consumer best effort service then be prepared to pay for it like most SLA accounts. Quit being cheap, or poor.  | |
|
| | The issue isn't the "up to". The issue is the fact that there's no baseline guarantee to go along with it. I wouldn't care about my "up to" 12Mbps down if they also said "but you're guaranteed a minimum of 8Mbps or we'll give you a credit".
We all know, of course, that they won't provide that guarantee. Not because they can't - because they won't. They could, it would just cost them more money. | |
| | | I for one... Wouldn't complain if I started getting a full 3mbps (about a 500kbps increase) down and 512kbps (about 70kbps more) up. As long as it wasn't used as a justification to raise prices. I'm more than happy getting a little high than 2.5mbps down and around 430kbps up as this is my usual speed with my DSL.
I do think it's wrong to advertise a speed you'll never have a chance of getting, such as the case of DSL with AT&T/SBC. I already knew about it so I was prepared but for those who don't I'm sure some get annoyed. Besides, I don't remember seeing a disclaimer about overhead... They should really say up to 2.5mbps but of course that doesn't sound as good. Though if people were getting slightly more than that then they'd be happier than if they saw "up to 3mbps" and were getting 2.5mbps. | |
|  vobguyA fool with a tool is still a foolPremium
join:2003-01-21
Mineral, VA | Being a sat internet customer.... As a many year satellite internet user, I know all too well the fuzzy math involved when you multiple "up to" by "as much as"
They should be allowed to use the wording but they should need to state that such speeds are not guaranteed prominently (unless, of course, they are )
--
DW4000 G16/1250; Sony VAIO VGN-FS790 512M DDR2-400 Pentium M 740 XP Home; Dell Insp. 5100 2.66 GHz 512M RAM WinXP Pro w/ orinoco gold; Sun Ultra-5 Solaris 2.7; ICS Host 700 MHz Gateway 512M RAM Windows XP-Home; SMC Wireless router (DHCP off) | |
| | enrolk
join:2002-04-23
Murrells Inlet, SC Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
| Re: Being a sat internet customer.... If we heard what advertising people thought of us, the average customer, we would get a rope.
We are just sheep them. Willing to beleive anything they write in their ad copy.
We are trained, just as with the "Pavlo's Dog" system.
We hear the term "Blazing Fast" and we're ready to by.
Truth in advertising is an oxy-moron. but they are in total control of us.
Truth are lies-War is Peace. We are all in 1984.
Unless you absolutely need the internet to survive don't bother with the Better Business letters, just cancel your contract. Pay the money you owe on your contract and get out. That will show them you mean business.
Don't let them control us any more then they have already.
Show them that the consumers are revolting and we're not sheep.Baaaaah.
--
Satellite gone. Now Cable
Motorola Surfboard | |
| | | | | Here in NEO Here in NEO TWC RR has an up to 5 meg down, or up to 8 meg down. If you are getting anything less then 4.5 and you call in, you best believe I'll get it fixed for you. Plain and simple. Yes we have an up to limit thats set by the .bin (config) file on the modem. The bin file is written across many different servers in order to activate the service. Usually the BPS, billing system, as well as the modem has to be registered on the CMTS. If there is a problem on a cable card, on a UBR, on a hardline, in home wiring, or spyware on a persons computer our group will look at all the possibles for the slow browsing issues (anything less then 4 meg on the 5 meg tier) or (anything less then 7 on the 8) and we will find a resolution. It is not that difficult. It can be done. It is being done. If you ISP is not doing it crawl up the chain of command, ask them to open a ticket to their RDC, (regional data center) GNOC, (global network operations). If you stay on it procedures will change. One person can not make the change alone, but many people will make a company rethink how calls are routed, and what should be done about it. Especially if you refuse to get off the line, and raise the CSRs talk time. | |
|
| |
|
