Anathema890
join:2004-08-04
Phoenix, AZ
| Seriously considering switching to Qwest
Hi Everyone,
I'm currently a Cox customer in PHX. I'm pretty happy with Cox, but it's so darn expensive. I'm paying $152/month for internet, phone and cable.
I priced a similar package from Qwest at about $50 less a month (before taxes). I'd have to go with slower internet (12Mb as opposed to the 20 I get now) but that's fine.
My questions are:
Does Qwest fiber work the same as DSL where the further I am from them the slower the internet gets?
What am I going to have to pay up front? I'm disabled from birth and I'm on a fixed income. I can't pay my Cox bill than pay Qwest in the same month.
Ummm I think that's it.
Thanks! |
|
mrhuggles
join:2007-03-29
Ames, IA | yes, the further the weaker, i cant say much about the up front charges tho, i wasnt the one that signed up for our service :?
one thing i do know is that if you are close its really good. |
|
no_one
@QWEST.NET
| reply to Anathema890
adsl2 is less susceptible than adsl so you should be ok. If remote terminal should be close.
Used to offer free I think 30 day databacker. Any problems in that time fixed free. Do not know now or on the new adsl2 service. Someone else may know or ask. Makes the startup safe if still available, may not be now. Qwest fine and should be stable.
Qwest techs are usually ok on setup no problems.
My new experience with resell direct tv techs from Qwest and supposedly one bill. rant. tech so clean does not do more than necessary. talks u out of it. If not talk out came back with stupid reason. Split billing just well who gives me the discount and who screws me. If I could send a signal back up the downlink. |
|
needforspeed59
Cruise Ship Just Passing Through
join:2001-05-02
Glendale, AZ
| reply to Anathema890
Just consider that the DirecTV deal is a 12 month discount and then goes up $23/mo + what ever rate increase there is. Directv raises its rates every year. You may be protected from that in the 2nd year though. And you have to commit to a 2-year deal with termination fees from both Qwest and Directv. Yo may want to consider Cox's 12M tier which will save you $15 bucks a month with no contract.
--
Great success! High five! |
|
christcorp
Premium
join:2001-05-21
Cheyenne, WY
 ·Bresnan Online
 ·VOIPo
| I don't bundle services with qwest. Matter of fact, I am really against bundling. It costs a lot more than shopping for individual services. But I do have Directv. And for what it's worth; at least where I live; Directv is a MUCH better deal than cable TV. I get more channels; all the HD (More than available with cable). The premiums like HBO. And the QUALITY is definitely better than cable. And the reliability isn't even debatable. I think I had 3 storms in 10 years that actually affected the signal. Then it was only for an hour or so. And the actual quality on my television also isn't debatable. Directv blows the cable company away. I've had 3 different cable providers with my moving around. None of them compares to Directv's quality. Oh; and to top it all off; my Directv bill is Bout $30 a month cheaper.
I am considering going to cable for broadband internet service. I LOVE Qwest DSL. It is as reliable as it comes. And it is the most consistent I've seen. And the price is right. However; my neighborhood is STUCK at 1.5/896 service, and has been for the last 8 years. And they have no plans to change that any time soon. It really sucks considering that the pair-gain is fed with fiber; but they decided to connect the DSLAMS with copper T1 lines. Thus limiting the service to 1.5/896. I know, because I helped install the dslam and service.
Cable would be about $10 more a month, but I'd be able to get 8mb/384 service. The only thing holding me back is that I use VOIP for phone service; remember, I DON'T BELIEVE IN BUNDLING; and I don't really like going to 384kb upload bandwidth. Cable does have a 15mb/1mb service available which would be PERFECT, and I am considering it, but that would be a total of $20 a month more than I am paying. But the way I look at it; 3,5, or 7mb service would be $10 more than I am paying now, So cable's 8mb/384kb would be about the same price as Qwest's 7mb/896kb service; and their 15mb/1mb service would really only be $10 more than that. So, it's a matter of convincing the Department of Defense (Wife) that I really need it.
Remember however that each person's neighborhood and experiences will be different. These are mine that I have to decide with. later... mike... |
|
lightwaver
join:2008-12-07
Portland, OR
2 edits | reply to Anathema890
I bundle my services and have had all Qwest offers for 4 yrs now.
The Directv is a separate company that allows for its billing through Qwest, but Directv is the supplier of the service. Directv requires Qwest run a credit check and in some cases requires a deposit for service. If you get any equiptment that isnt part of a free upgrade offer you would be required to pay for that upfront along with any deposit Directv might require. I think there is some sort of FREE HD/DVR receiver rebate they are currently offering for one tv and they give free standard receivers so you potentially could have no upfront fees for the Directv portion. There is only an 18 month committment (not 2yr as mentioned by prev poster) with Directv. Their early termination amount becomes smaller as you have the service longer though so its not really a huge negative.
As far as the Qwest portion, the internet is a dsl service not a cable internet service so you would need a dsl modem. If you are leasing the modem, Qwest puts the cost on your bill. If you are purchasing they can also put the cost of the modem on your bill and they will split it up into three bills to make it easier to pay for. I think they also have an online deal for the modem to save you even more money. Qwest offers a 2yr agreement for the special pricing deals on their internet but if you don't take the agreement you still get the price for 1 yr. If you take the 2yr agreement, you have the first 30days to change your mind so its a winwin deal.
If you have never had a Qwest landline or service and have no outstanding back bills, you basically have no additional upfront costs.
Qwest charges a onetime connection fee of $16.50 to activate a landline, which is billed, but if you go through a sales rep, ask if they can waive that because Qwest ALWAYS offers to waive certain fees to "WIN BACK" your service from alternate providers.
Good Luck! |
|
Turbocpe
Premium
join:2001-12-22
IA
| reply to christcorp
said by christcorp  :I am considering going to cable for broadband internet service. I LOVE Qwest DSL. It is as reliable as it comes. And it is the most consistent I've seen. And the price is right. However; my neighborhood is STUCK at 1.5/896 service, and has been for the last 8 years. And they have no plans to change that any time soon. It really sucks considering that the pair-gain is fed with fiber; but they decided to connect the DSLAMS with copper T1 lines. Thus limiting the service to 1.5/896. I know, because I helped install the dslam and service. Cable would be about $10 more a month, but I'd be able to get 8mb/384 service. The only thing holding me back is that I use VOIP for phone service; remember, I DON'T BELIEVE IN BUNDLING; and I don't really like going to 384kb upload bandwidth. Cable does have a 15mb/1mb service available which would be PERFECT, and I am considering it, but that would be a total of $20 a month more than I am paying. But the way I look at it; 3,5, or 7mb service would be $10 more than I am paying now, So cable's 8mb/384kb would be about the same price as Qwest's 7mb/896kb service; and their 15mb/1mb service would really only be $10 more than that. So, it's a matter of convincing the Department of Defense (Wife) that I really need it. Remember however that each person's neighborhood and experiences will be different. These are mine that I have to decide with. later... mike... ....
said by christcorp :Anyway, I've had them both, and I would never go back to cable. They always seem to put too many people on their network and they never seem to provide a high enough upload »Re: RT question
No offense intended, Mike. You've helped me often. I was just caught off guard that you're looking to go to cable. |
|
christcorp
Premium
join:2001-05-21
Cheyenne, WY
·Bresnan Online
·VOIPo
| And you've rightly seen my dilemma. The truth however is; the cable company that we have in our town now, is NOT the same cable company I used 8 years ago.
But you do have very legitimate points. There is no doubt in my mind that if I could get qwest 5 or 7mb service, that I wouldn't even be considering this. However, that is not going to be a possibility for a long time. And the cable company here that I USE to use, at the time could only max out to about 3mb down and 256kb up service. Since then, it's a new company with fiber to the nodes.
Having said all that; this is not the same all over. I happen to live in the capital city where the new cable company started their expansion. In the other towns and such, the new company basically just took over the old company's infrastructure. If I was in one of those towns, I wouldn't trust their service. I've always said that the thing about cable is that no 2 towns are the same. Even with the same company. Qwest, and DSL as a technology, is consistent and the same throughout the company. Cable is totally dependent on the infrastructure in the town.
One thing is for sure; IF, "I haven't decided yes yet"; I decide to give the new cable a try, I will still keep Qwest dsl going until I am sure the cable will suffice. But with today's changing bandwidth requirements, the 1.5/896 is really taxing my needs. But again, DSL technology at 7mb is so much better than cable at the same or even higher speeds. At least in my opinion. later... mike... |
|
Mountain Man
join:2002-08-10
Tucson, AZ
| said by christcorp :One thing is for sure; IF, "I haven't decided yes yet"; I decide to give the new cable a try, I will still keep Qwest dsl going until I am sure the cable will suffice. But with today's changing bandwidth requirements, the 1.5/896 is really taxing my needs. But again, DSL technology at 7mb is so much better than cable at the same or even higher speeds. At least in my opinion. later... mike... I don't post here often but this thread touched on my own Qwest quandary. Four years ago when I established my 1.5/896 service I was pleased with the price to performance ratio. I also have a home based email server and static IP which are allowed under the Qwest TOS. Today that bandwidth just doesn't seem adequate. However, if I were to switch to Comcast I would have to use their business class service which would easily run 2 to 3X the cost of the Qwest service. I am very pleased with the reliability of the service and for many years Qwest has been a valued and loyal customer for product lines that I represent. All of which engenders a certain amount of loyalty to the company.
It is really frustrating to know that you have fiber present (presently oversubscribed) in a CEV directly adjacent to the DSLAM that provides your DSL service. Yet Qwest can't seem to get around to upgrading the connectivity to the node leaving me in a broadband black hole.
I don't know what I will do at this point. I'll likely hang on the service for a few more months and see what they do about upgrading going into next year. Beyond that point I will likely switch to Comcast as much as that pains me. |
|
christcorp
Premium
join:2001-05-21
Cheyenne, WY
·Bresnan Online
·VOIPo
| reply to Anathema890
In the immortal words of Some Dude; "I FEEL YOUR PAIN!"
For you however, can't you use something like DynDNS? It automatically updates the dns servers as the IP address changes. People have been using this for years hosting Web Sites and servers, while having dynamic IP addresses that changed all the time. This way, you could get regular Cable and a dynamic IP address. Just a thought.
My problem is that I need more bandwidth. The upload of 896kb is enough, but the 1.5mb just isn't cutting it. With more and more bandwidth intensive applications, the 1.5mb just isn't cutting it. For the vast majority of internet users, 1.5mb is more than enough. And Qwest realizes that. Also, I understand financials and economics and how difficult it is for qwest to upgrade every dslam. Most days, my 1.5mb is enough. But there are times where downloads are more intensive. Is it something i can live with? Yes. It's something I have to consider.
Qwest's service, quality, and reliability has been something I have never had problems with. And the price is also cheaper than cable or wireless. But, the cable I've used in the past were with ATT, Comcast and TCI Cable. Since then, they have been bought out by Bresnan Cable. They have made major upgrades to the town's infrastructure. Fiber to the nodes. More bandwidth. And higher reliability. (According to friends who use it). I would never use the 3 previous companies again unless they were the only game in town. Not because of technology; I know that is always evolving. But because I never liked their customer service and their constant over subscribing.
I don't know if the NEW Bresnan that we have is good or bad. But I think I may be willing to try them for a month or so to find out. It might be worth paying for both cable and DSL to determine. later... mike...
|
|
Mountain Man
join:2002-08-10
Tucson, AZ
| I could use Dynamic DNS but I believe that most cable companies TOS's preclude the use of server on their residential connections. My bandwidth needs are relatively modest but that doesn't mean that they wouldn't block port 25 if they found I was in violation. Nor would I be a big fan of throwing more money at Comcast who already charge me way too much for a marginal cable TV product. Unfortunately, to your point 1.5mb service is just not quite enough and soon the 896mb up isn't going to be enough either.
I guess I just have a case of acute fiber envy. I have a customer in Albuquerque that tells me he plans to offer 1 gig Ethernet to the home user on a single stand not a PON architecture at a price point in the $50-$60 range. Don't hold me to that as it may be a metered service the point being is that 1 Gig symmetrical would be available. I know his costs (at least what he thinks they are) and he is making good money at that price point. Qwest could be doing likewise but is in danger of loosing what is left of their residential customer base. Which may well be their long term business plan. Milk the existing customer base as long as possible, continue to cut costs, grow the business customer base as much as possible and hope someday to be acquired. Unfortunate but true for many of us in their service region. |
|
Turbocpe
Premium
join:2001-12-22
IA
| reply to christcorp
Hi Mike, as I said, no offense was meant. I've just been here for some time (as you have) and have seen you state your satisfaction with Qwest DSL over cable due to various reasons that you've stated (latency being one large factor) and thought you'd almost never switch. So I was pretty shocked to read your post about considering cable.
Mike, can I ask, how did you find out that your area won't be upgraded for atleast 2 more years? Qwest can only offer 1.5/896 (or 640 for some) in my area. However, my neighborhood is not on a remote DSLAM, but instead, is served from the central office over 18K feet away. My neighborhood isn't some neighborhood out in the sticks. It's a full blown neighborhood inside Des Moines. We're also surrounded by businesses.
I would think you're closer to seeing upgrades in speed than we are, since we don't even have a remote DSLAM in the area. You already have a remote DSLAM, just no fiber? So you're one step closer than my neighborhood. |
|
christcorp
Premium
join:2001-05-21
Cheyenne, WY
·Bresnan Online
·VOIPo
| Yea turbo, it's crazy. I know what's in my area mainly because I've either worked on it or helped install it. We have an IPG which is fiber fed from the C.O. It feeds numerous Cross Boxes and 3 dslams. They use copper pairs to feed T1's to the DSLAM. Talking with those i "Use to" work with, there were plans to BOND the T1's. That would have given us 3mb download service. But, because of Frequency issues, 3mb service has an upload of 640kb. I probably would have dealt with that. Anyway, because of higher priorities, they scrapped that plan. So, the only way to get 7mb or ADSL2, is to have fiber brought from the IPG to the DSLAMS. Unfortunately, Qwest's business plan is set with 2 equal priorities, then everything else. The priority is to first provide DSL, even if it's only 256kb-1mb, to areas that don't have broadband. Then upgrade existing remote dslams. C.O. based DSL doesn't require much upgrade, so those are offered the 3,5,7mb. The other priority is Cherry Picked high profile communities. Basically, political upgrades. Well, where I live, including the entire state, is pretty low on the priorities. The engineers and techs I've spoken with have pretty much said that areas that don't have dsl at all will be taken care of before remote dslams are upgraded. Of course, each town and neighborhood has their own level of politics and motivation. But for me, it looks like it could be a while.
But you have understood me correctly. I am completely satisfied with the dsl service I am currently getting. (As for uptime, service, etc...) My issue is strictly the need for more bandwidth. I wouldn't think twice about switching if I new higher bandwidth was in the near future. E.g. within 12 months. But every time I inquire, it's still the same story about they are always upgrading. Unfortunately, that is only for larger metro areas. If my choice was 7mb qwest dsl or 15mb cable; I'd take the DSL. But the further the distance gets between DSL and Cable's bandwidth, the more I need to question. I haven't decided 100% yet, but still thinking. later... mike....
|
|
djweis
join:2006-04-02
West Des Moines, IA | reply to christcorp
Find a local 3rd party ISP that allow multilink PPP and you can have a pair of lines bonded to give you 3 down by 2 up. For some reason Qwest.net won't allow it. |
|
christcorp
Premium
join:2001-05-21
Cheyenne, WY
·Bresnan Online
·VOIPo
| That would definitely be an option if there was no other broadband available. But the cost makes absolutely no sense. Between the 2 circuits on Qwest's side; whatever form that might be; and the 3rd party ISP providing the multilink connection; you're looking at probably close to $100 a month. Even with cable's high prices, they aren't near that price. Plus the bandwidth would be much greater with cable. Great idea if DSL is the only thing available. Not if Cable @ 15mb/1mb is available at $62. Later... mike.... |
|
