said by openbox9 :

If you're talking about 200 kilobytes per second, then it's actually 1.6 megabits per second. You forgot a decimal.

said by pabster :

Yeah, FTP or HTTP upload to a fast server I see 200k/s. That's still not 2Mbit but it's better than 1Mbit so I'm fine with it.

said by Malask :

Just curious, but if I am currently unimpressed with the performance of my connection (except on rare occasions), would upgrading to the MAX do my any good? I have the basic service of 8mb/512kb, and I rarely, ever get full bandwidth where I live in Marion. Typical download speeds are in the 200-400 range (mostly 250), while sometimes I get great speeds of 800-900.

you need to call and call and call and call tech support and make them roll a truck to come out and fix your lines.

i cant tell you how many guys i have had out looking at my lines and they never found anything, then one day i did a walk around my house and found 3 spots where critters had chewed all the way down to the copper.
NEVER once did those guys look around at the cable outside, except for once to replace a splitter that didnt do any good.
Would upping my service make a difference, or is this a case of my "node" being oversold?

said by pabster :

I'm only seeing around 1.25Mbit upstream, not 2Mbit.

said by drslash :

Try:

»ftp://ftp1.optonline.net/

It will require an FTP client. There are large test files to download.

said by Clever Name :

Upload is still cut in half in Davenport, at least my part.

said by kirbyj2 :

I'm wondering if the reason why I can't get over 16000 kb/s down and 1100 kb/s up is because the coax in my house at least 8 years old. I know it's a new line (about a year) running to the house from the pole. But from there on it's at least 8 years old. How can I test the line without getting a tech out?

said by elios :

most speed test sites cant handle more much more then a 15Mbps connection

test with a linux iso torrent or some thing
my speed tests were all over the place but torrent tests showed i could pull almost all 20mbps

said by wardfan :

It used to be that you had to get the wireless modem from mediacom for the Max upgrade, that has since been abolished. They probably just want the phone modem back since they are expensive. What the CSR "probably" was talking about was if you wanted wireless service then you'd have to purchase a router, she/he probably got confused and tried to act like they knew more than they did.

Tell them to upgrad you to the max WITHOUT a truck roll, WITHOUT a modem swap out, and WITHOUT an upgrade fee (there is a 1.99 electronic fee). If that doesn't work, PM Bainch here, he should be able to fix it for you, he has for others in the past.

said by mertz67 :

I have the SMC8013G too. Did you reboot the modem first? It will not detect the new settings until you do so?

said by aaronfitz :


Another CSR I had a conversation with about upgrading my account was trying to tell me I was required to buy a wireless router AND go swap my modem to upgrade.

said by IceMe :

listen guys...they give me the upgrade and i can connect directly through my modem to the computer and get the speeds as promised however when i try and connect through my router i barely get 10down and 1 up...my router is a dlink dgl 4300 i called them and they said to change wan settings to 100mbps only and that is not helping either...my firewall on the router is also disabled

said by GrandMstrBud :

A Motorola SB5120 should pick up the 20/2 right? The modem is DOCSIS 2.0 so it should pick it up just fine and it is fine with the 15/1. I think its fine but I'm sure if I were to call they will tell me that it's not.

said by Anonymous :

Any phone modem will do just fine. Other decent modems are RCA DCM 425, SB5100 and a smaller version of Ambit modem (forgot the model number).

said by GrandMstrBud :

I can not seem to get above 1.2 MB on the upload side of it and the download has not gone above 16 MB or so. I've always got full speed any time of day so I'm not sure why I don't have better speeds here. I guess time will tell if it gets better and it's not official yet anyway. I'm waiting for the faster upload to see how well my slingbox improves.

said by mertz67 :

Have the up in Davenport. The down is not changed for me though it does not appear. (at least from this test site) *I get better results testing to Minneapolis than Chicago, even though it is further away*



Still not complaining. I am just happy to have the upload raised!

Thanks!

said by GrandMstrBud :

LOL, I never thought I would see the day when we complain about a 22 MB download.

said by Anonymous :

Are you a Mediacom employee?

Employees have the power-boost feature. 15 sec of whatever the available bandwidth is then back to 10/1.

My speed SUCKS compared to yours though :( only 22 Mbit down

said by natedog4983 :

I don't know if this is speedtest problem or what the hell is going on.

said by saku :



Free upgrade for already MAX customers right?

said by natedog4983 :

I don't know if this is speedtest problem or what the hell is going on.

said by natedog4983 :

I don't know if this is speedtest problem or what the hell is going on.

said by psitool :

said by hdtv00 :

Today I for the first time in a decade I finally have something good to say about them. I called them and told them so too.

said by Clever Name :

Upload is still cut in half in Davenport. Wish docsdiag would work because the result seems too consistent not to be a cap in the config file.

said by Clever Name :

Upload is still cut in half in Davenport. Wish docsdiag would work because the result seems too consistent not to be a cap in the config file.



Edit just called tech support to see if they would read my config file for me. The person I spoke to didn't seem to get what I was saying. She also said she heard upload was going to be 15mbps, lol.

said by wardfan :

I don't own a business, but these business speeds should NOT be lower than the residential speeds, not for the price.

said by JTAG :

12/2 is not really much of an upgrade from the 10/1.5

said by JTAG :

Yes i would get something special i would be getting double my current speeds. Hopefully they will boost the business speeds also in regards to this.

said by v_lestat :

See thats even more wierd because Ames is known for its horrible internet because of the college...

try it tonight between 4pm and midnight :(

said by jbond026 :



Ames Iowa

said by cfossy :

Now I'm getting 7 on testmy.net, it was at 16.

said by GrandMstrBud :

Looks like your getting some nice upload speeds. What area are you in?

said by cfossy :

Now I'm getting 7 on testmy.net, it was at 16.

said by GrandMstrBud :

I'm going to reboot my modem and see if I get it here in Davenport also.

said by BAINCH :

Detailed plans are still being worked. All I can say right now is it will be soon (most places well ahead of the announced 6/30 date.) I will post more details as they become solid.

said by dornitram :

What's the actual cost of Max service? I have phone service, but not TV.

Mediacom Intro (formerly known as Mediacom Access)
768k x 128k ==> 3meg x 256k

Mediacom Online (no changes announced)
8meg x 512k
10meg x 1meg if you are VIP package subscriber

Mediacom Max
15meg x 1meg ==> 20meg x 2meg

said by JTAG :

i would be getting double my current speeds.

said by TSOP :

Why will you not just give me a date of when its going to be out somewhere?

said by questorfla :

any idea when this will happen in Santa Rosa Beach?
I was just about ready to get rid of my MAX becuase the I cant justify the price. But if they boost it to 20, i guess i'll stay

said by v_lestat :

i simply mean in this day and age thats a $19.99 package.

said by v_lestat :

what i find frustrating is their upload cripling.

said by v_lestat :

i see no reason in the world why each non MAX package shouldnt be 512 or even 768.

said by openbox9 :

Considering Mediacom's 5/256 offering in 2005 cost ~$45-50/mth, I'd say $30 is relatively good. Considering you're going for the Max, why do you care about the Intro?

said by Turbocpe:

However, my concern is with utilization. Mediacom, like many other cable companies, runs into frequent utilization issues that often take a considerable time (months-year) to resolve. Mediacom is still using Docsis 1.1, and therefore, it doesn't take many users to saturate their local network. Those speeds are great if you can get them and maintain them with a reasonable amount of time. But according to many of the users here in the past months, some don't even get Mediacom's current 15/1 "max" speeds due to over utilization. Making 20/2 a standard upgrade won't resolve the current issues unless Mediacom continues to expand and upgrade their network.

said by funchords:

You and me both. Hey network techs, please answer this question. Other than pushing out a new config file to the modems, is anything being else being done TO THE NETWORK?

Are we doubling the size of the cups without changing the size of the punchbowl?

said by v_lestat :

oh come on guy your kidding right 30 bucks for 3/256 ?
what a total rip-off....

boooooo hissssss

said by Turbocpe :

Does the cost of bandwidth/hardware cost more in 2008 than it did in 2005?

said by Turbocpe :

does not mean v_ isn't entitled to express the opinion of the other packages. Does it?

said by Turbocpe :

But my concern is with utilization, which isn't exactly uncommon.

said by Turbocpe :

Does the cost of bandwidth/hardware cost more in 2008 than it did in 2005? Honest question. But given the DOCSIS 1.1 equipment is getting outdated, I would think the prices today for the equipment is cheaper than it was in 2005.

said by openbox9 :

Considering Mediacom's 5/256 offering in 2005 cost ~$45-50/mth, I'd say $30 is relatively good.

said by openbox9 :

Considering you're going for the Max, why do you care about the Intro?

said by openbox9 :

Considering Mediacom's 5/256 offering in 2005 cost ~$45-50/mth, I'd say $30 is relatively good. Considering you're going for the Max, why do you care about the Intro?

said by v_lestat :

what a total rip-off

said by BAINCH :

$29.95 I believe going forward. Subscribers previously signed up will keep their current rate.

said by drslash :

Mediacom Intro (formerly known as Mediacom Access)
768k x 128k ==> 3meg x 256k

Is this about $25 per month in most markets?

said by elios :

Bainch, do you know when they will start pushing the new configs out to modems?

said by elios :

Bainch, do you know when they will start pushing the new configs out to modems?

said by Krob :

Ok, I am thoroughly confused with the names of the packages we have, etc. I have the 10/1 package. Will I get the upgrade?

said by claydean :

Let me guess they have Iowa Telcom

said by wardfan :

:)

said by Moss :

I'm just listening to Mediacom's 1Q results from 9:30am EST, May 7 conference call. Chairman Rocco Commisso announced the 20Mb down/2Mb package will be in place to 98% of subscribers by 6/30!

I guess the rumors were right!

said by IowaGuy :

On Topic: Maybe with Qwest offering 20 Mb DSL in certain Markets, It will force Mediacom to unleash 20/2 faster then we think as surely they know about it. Maybe BAINCH can offer some input?

said by v_lestat :

its a shame it wont be offered but i see no reason for it to be offered really.

20/2 is massive overkill and is only going to saturate the network with extremely heavy download freaks using retarded ass programs like BT which KILL and isp's system.

why the frack do you think so many companies are blocking BT ?

yet those people who use it, and there are many here who do, can't seem to get it thru their pirating little heads that they are doing alot of damage to us users who dont use it and never will.

soon mediacom will have to implement some sort of cap or BT blocking, and i for one am going to be happy if they do.
BT is an insanely intensive network program and should be killed.
it hurts everyone and only makes ISP lay down retarded laws, and caps.

if mediacom lays out a monthly cap im gunna flip.

said by elios :

yup becouse 1mbps just isnt cutting it

said by elios :

yup becouse 1mbps just isnt cutting it

and its thinking like yours that will keep the US from ever being the leader in broadband

said by burner50 :

Still waiting...

said by v_lestat :

yeah im wrong, im looking at my bill but im wrong..

yup...

said by v_lestat :

yeah im wrong, im looking at my bill but im wrong..

yup...

said by v_lestat :

yeah im wrong, im looking at my bill but im wrong..

yup...

said by v_lestat :

i am still getting charged a fee for using my own modem which is way better than their poopy crap SMC modem,

said by v_lestat :

i am very sorry Bainch but your wrong, and wrong on a large scale.

you are charged a $5 rental fee for the crap modem mediacom gives you and you are charged a $5 fee if you don't use their modem.

the $5 for using your own modem was implemented over a year ago. you should know that.

so regardless if you use MC modem or your own. you WILL be charged $5 bucks.

legally i dont know how they are allowed to charge $5 when i use my own freakin modem but they do it, and refuse to stop.

said by BAINCH :

There is no extra rental fee. Just the regular monthly subscription rate for Max, the same whether you use our modem or not.

said by Clever Name :

There's an extra rental fee for the router/modem though right? I mean yeah you can unplug it and use whatever you want.

said by BAINCH :

You are not required to use a Mediacom-provided device for Mediacom Max service.

said by Clever Name :

What's the official modem people that sign up for 15/1 max online service are forced to use? I managed to sign up without the install fee and I was curious what mediacom uses for max.

said by pabster :

It used to be an SMC piece of garbage. Probably still is, if you are stupid enough to pay their install fee and let one of their "techs" install it for you. :D

said by openbox9 :

Some people tend to believe that if Verizon can offer 15/15 residential connections for $64.99/mth that it's sustainable and that every ISP should offer the same...or better. More often than not, bigger and better Internet connections are available but usually people aren't amenable to what it costs to provide those connections.

said by idontknowmuch :

Then if you are willing to pay why don't you get their fiber services?

said by NeroWolf666 :

i use a business account for my services because of the guaranteed routing it has and am very content atm with my up and down that i "actually" get. however saying that i would gladly pay triple what i now pay to be able to get just a 2mbit upload. especially since mediacom is the fastest in my area.

said by elios :

the thing is they do
maybe not in MO but in other markets
and this is why we have shitty net in the US
if more people said "HEY why cant we get that were i live"
AT&T might give better speeds

said by elios :

the govt' needs to step in and do some thing instead

said by elios :

and its thinking like that, that will keep the US FAR FAR behind the rest of the world in broadband

said by openbox9 :

Like it or not, unless you have FiOS service in your area, comparing Mediacom to FiOS is irrelevant.

Also, are you talking about TCP acks in regards to your downstream choking upstream? That's a limitation of TCP.

said by Hardcore :

The whole "all of us play MMOs and use Vent" is weaksauce.

If your bandwidth is being eaten away THAT bad from that sort of activity(I can go ahead and do the research on how much upload all that uses, btw, if you need that), then you should take some money and invest in a second account.

said by Hardcore :

Plain and simple:
You want to work? Get business.

Otherwise stop complaining about the upload speeds.

said by rudnicke :

I don't think it's unreasonable to expect a home connection to work well enough to make a remote connection to work.

said by Hardcore :

Why do you see upload as so important?

The only reason why people need such a high upload are to run servers and P2P.

P2P, no matter how someone tries to make it look, is a piracy app. That's why ISPs are so nuts about usage caps and upload speeds.

If you want to run a server, you might as well go on and get a T3 or so. Stop trying to use a residential service for your hosting needs, and get some better support while you're at it.

While I'm not familiar in-depth with Mediacom's AUP, I can't really say whether or not they allow servers. But there's no real reason why people clamor for higher upload with the exception of what I've previously stated.

Of course, this is all my opinion, and YMMV.

said by elios :

sooo um were did the OTHER people get there info then Hmmmm
and if you work for them how about poking some one to get us another Mbps of upload >.>

said by pabster :

I haven't heard that plans have changed. AFAIK, February remains the target for 20/2.

said by crucify :

This is great news for those of us that play bandwidth eating online games.

I noticed something going on with my connection the other day.
D/L is much faster but the U/L is still the same.

said by pabster :

"Testing" is a loose word. Around Mediacom it can mean many things. :D

The real issue will be the 20Mbit down, not the 2Mbit up. A lot of areas can't even handle 8/512 service reliably...