FCC Chooses SamKnows For Broadband Speed Testing > Not Real Data

reply to battleop

Re: Not Real Data

I hope the practice of delivering lower speeds than advertised with regards to DSL and PPPoE will be pushed into the limelight as part of this.

I pay AT&T for 6Mbit DSL but never receive over 5.1Mbit due to the overhead. Other DSL providers, such as Verizon, sync their lines higher so that their customers actually receive the advertised speeds, but not AT&T.

I feel that this is somewhat of a bait-and-switch, although I am otherwise very happy with my AT&T DSL (though I'd like some faster speeds here, please).
--
My PC Gaming Blog
»thegaffadin.blogspot.com

And cable promises 20Mbps but only delivers 10Mbps or less, due to an oversubscribed node.
--
Consumer Rights is more than just a suggestion.

reply to Gaff

reply to Gaff

blue-gw#show dsl interface atm0 | section Speed|Fast
                 Interleave             Fast    Interleave              Fast
Speed (kbps):          7616                0           512                 0

As I said, AT&T only sync their lines to their normal values, and the ATM/PPPoE overhead removes ~13% of this.

»speedtest.silverstar.com/An%20Ex···head.htm

On an AT&T "Elite" 6Mbit DSL line you will never see faster than 5.1Mbit due to this.

Imagine going to buy a 12 pack of sodas and finding you only actually received 10.5. Or you went to buy a hamburger and found 13% of it missing. I don't think you'd be very happy about it, and I am not ok with AT&T reducing the throughput of my line 13% when it is within their power to fix it (by using higher sync speeds).
--
My PC Gaming Blog
»thegaffadin.blogspot.com

reply to Karl Bode
This will be a waste of tax payer dollars. There will be no accuracy! Some people may unknowingly have their home network crippled by a 10 mbit half duplex link. I moved away from Linksys five years ago because their equipment's internet port was only 10 mbit half duplex and their tech support insisted their VPN Firewall could process packets at 100 mbits. There is a potential for seriously skewed results with this FCC scheme, many will report slower than advertised download speed.

reply to Gaff
Problem with your soda and burger analogy is that AT&T offers you 'UP TO' 6Mbps. If the soda box said 'UP TO' 12 sodas were inside, it'd be a different issue.

What we have is a difference in allowable marketing practices. ISPs aren't required to guarantee speeds, while Coca Cola is required to guarantee that their boxes have exactly x amount of cans.
--
»/im/82288374/5591.png

reply to Gaff

reply to Gaff
Soooo.. then be ready for your tier to be dropped to a 5MB tier then. Part of the PPPoE overhead is your speed. Your modem syncs at the speeds provisioned... if you read up on your service agreement, you'll see that. Deceptive? Not really.. I think its more of a place where the consumer needs to educate themselves a little more.

reply to TheRogueX
To agree with you 100% and go a little further.. people need to stop with the comparisons to make/prove their points.. that in itself IS the problem!!!

Don't turn to soda to compare internet, they're not the same. Don't compare apples to oranges.. the point is that when you look at something ELSE to justify what you THINK is right in others, you're going to look at a false model for your answers.

People need to look at the very issue/topic/item that is in question and seek out the correct answer.. in retail or service, nothing is always the same nor is it black and white especially when compared to something else.

Clearly, the internet is far more technical than that of a box of soda. Like you said, a box of soda has 12 cans in it, period. To sell soda, you place a number of cans in a box - it's simple. The internet is far more complex than a box of soda anyway and until someone understands and educates themselves on what the internet IS, then this kind of issue will continue.

Years ago, I about died when I saw McDonalds replace a real cash register with one that has pictures of food on it.. that simply dumbed down the need for people to actually learn and educate themselves. Technology is supposed to make people smarter, not more stupid, as in many cases and for many people, it does.

Oh, and it seems we've been on this can of soda path before.. remember when you'd buy a bag of chips and the bag would be partially full? 12oz of chips were not 12oz volume, rather, it was 12oz weight.. I believe that was the big scandal of the 80's wasn't it?

Sometimes customers DO need to educate themselves and not sit back and wait to be educated. No one ever said life was going to be simple and handed to them ... that is, unless you believe the current democratic administration.

reply to fiberguy
No offense, but my dad will *NEVER* know what "overhead" is when it comes to networking. You really exepct non network admins to understand this stuff? Edjumacation is one thing, but practicality is another.

Sorry, but yes, I do expect your dad to understand.. and if he doesn't, then explain to me, then who is at charge to make him understand? ...or, should we just continue to dumb down America?

You're going to have a time where you're not going to understand either.. maybe YOU could explain it to your dad... personally, I'm one that if someone older in my family complains about something, and they've got it wrong, it's OUR place to explain it to them...

You think they really know EVERYTHING about their cars?? Hell, it seems that about 99% of americans don't know to put their car in neutral and just off the engine if their gas pedal sticks...

Quite honestly, there is always going to be someone or some people that "don't understand"... that's life. Who is to determine what is acceptable and what isn't..? The giverment? Should everything be done at a 4th grade level? You know that your car can prolly do about 100+ miles an hour, right? But, in this case, and in order to drive one on the public roads you're required to learn and show that you know how it works, right? Maybe there's something there... that's a better option than to blame someone else if you know what I mean.

But really, still, it says "up to" in the speeds.. and as long as you are getting "up to" then you are getting what you paid for. I think when you look deep down here, people don't like "up to".. they want "actual" and in wide area networking, on a residential basis, you're likely to not always get "actual" speeds.. as the saying is true.. "many factors can affect the speeds you get" with the technology deployed to most people today.

reply to TheRogueX
Except that if speeds can never actually reach the "up to" point then this is false advertising. "Up to" implies that the speed can reach this point, if it can't it's a lie based on one reading of it. The other way to read "Up to" is that the speed can never exceed this. If you read "up to" this way then you have sue the company if you ever achieve a higher speed than what they advertise. Since most people agree that this is silly the first interpretation feels like it ought to be the correct one. Either that or I know a few people who should sue Verizon when their bottom end DSL lines went too fast.

reply to fiberguy
Aside from the "up to" argument, expecting the layman to understand TCI/IP transport specifics is thouroughly ridiculous. It is disingenuous to advertise a specific access speed, then deliver a lower one and blame it on "overhead". That is like an accountant charging you for a specific service and then taking more and claiming "overhead". You should have known....

reply to zalternate
I have 15/768 cable, and regularly get sustained (multi-gigabyte) transfers of ~14-15mbps. I must be on a good node?