dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
19
share rss forum feed

Zeonis

join:2009-03-16
reply to WCSonic

Re: Pace 4111N

said by WCSonic :

Also, be sure to complain on the forums about this rental folly. If enough users complain, I'm sure Sonic will relent since they are a company that cares about their users.

I agree with you that it is a folly and many users have complained about it. In my opinion if they really cared about their users/customers they never would have started charging a modem rental fee. Sonic.net is the only company I can think of that does not allow you to purchase the modem they are offering or use/purchase your own to avoid having to pay a rental fee.


DaneJasper
Sonic.Net
Premium,VIP
join:2001-08-20
Santa Rosa, CA
kudos:9
said by Zeonis:

Sonic.net is the only company I can think of that does not allow you to purchase the modem they are offering or use/purchase your own to avoid having to pay a rental fee.

Most carriers today charge an equipment fee, but AT&T and Frontier are the only other ones that I am sure require it. Most others allow consumers to buy or supply their own equipment, though for some services (particularly cable with voice) this is often challenging due to limited compatible equipment lists.

AT&T charges an equipment fee for their U-verse broadband service, $6.00 monthly. This does not apply to customer who buy their older DSL service, but is mandatory with U-verse.

Frontier has gone to the far end of the spectrum, charging $7 for a basic modem, and $15 for a wireless gateway. The carrier is not allowing customers to avoid this fee - even if you own your equipment, the fee is applied. »Frontier Imposes Owned Modem Fee

Comcast charges $7.00 monthly for equipment, but customers can replace it with customer supplied equipment. It's unclear though if this is possible if you have voice service too with them.

CenturyLink charges an equipment fee, $4.95 monthly for their modem/router. It's totally unclear if this is mandatory or not; it seems that for some services it now is. (I also read recently that they're also now charging a fee to disconnect service, how about that?!)

BrightHouse just started charging their customers too, $2 monthly for the modem that they already have. Customers CAN supply their own, from a short list of approved devices. »Bright House Adds $2 Modem Rental Fee

Time Warner is charging a modem fee, $3.95 monthly. Customers can supply and avoid. »Time Warner Cable Modem Lease Fee Expands

It's certainly a trend, with more and more providers charging a fee to cover the cost of equipment. FYI.


BronsCon

join:2003-10-24
Walnut Creek, CA
Reviews:
·Comcast Business..
·SONIC.NET

1 edit
said by DaneJasper:

said by Zeonis:

Sonic.net is the only company I can think of that does not allow you to purchase the modem they are offering or use/purchase your own to avoid having to pay a rental fee.

Comcast charges $7.00 monthly for equipment, but customers can replace it with customer supplied equipment. It's unclear though if this is possible if you have voice service too with them.

Voice service requires the use of a Comcast-supplied eMTA, but I do not recall being billed for rental of the unit. On the other hand, when I did not have voice service through Comcast, they were billing me $7/mo to use my own modem, though they were gracious enough to credit my account $21 every 3 months if I called and complained enough times.

Honestly, with Cable it does make sense to own your own equipment, but I'd prefer to rent a DSL modem. When the next revision of ADSL comes out or Sonic switches to VDSL or some other flavor, I know all I need to do is make a phone call and ask for an upgrade. Modem craps out? Make a phone call. Decide to upgrade to 2 lines? Make a phone call.

So what if, after 19 months I've paid $3.50 more in rental fees (if you ignore sales tax) for that modem than if I had bought it? Had I bought it, it would be 7 months out of warranty and quite likely already failed or about to fail (they don't make 'em like the old SpeedStream models you couldn't kill with a lightning strike, anymore). Equipment and upgrade assurance, combined with an eternal warranty is only costing me $36 more than buying the modem at the end of 2 years, after which I'd probably be in the market for a replacement anyway if I owned the equipment; and that's assuming I didn't have to replace a unit, out of my own pocket, that failed a week out of warranty.

In some instances, and I'll admit it's the majority, rental simply does not make sense. This is not one of those times. For another $1/mo, it likely would be, though.

Zeonis

join:2009-03-16
reply to DaneJasper
said by DaneJasper:

AT&T charges an equipment fee for their U-verse broadband service, $6.00 monthly. This does not apply to customer who buy their older DSL service, but is mandatory with U-verse.

You pay the equipment fee if you get the U-verse TV service. If however you want U-verse internet only or U-verse internet and U-verse voice then you can buy the modem. In fact that is the only option given to you if you order online. This is the second time I have told you this Dane and at least my third time mentioning the fact you can buy the modem if you do not get the TV service on this forum.


BronsCon

join:2003-10-24
Walnut Creek, CA
Reviews:
·Comcast Business..
·SONIC.NET
Is there a circumstance under which the fee is charged? If so, then is it reasonable to say they charge a fee. From my conversations with AT&T, even they don't consider U-Verse without TV service to be U-Verse, internally; so, even from AT&T's perspective, Dane's statement that it's mandatory with U-Verse service is 100% correct. They market it as U-Verse, but internally it's just DSL if you don't subscribe to the TV service.

This knowledge came about after I moved from a U-Verse service area (TV available) to a U-Verse IPDSLAM area (no TV available) and even though I did own my modem, which was allowed since I did not subscribe to their TV services, I could not bring it with me (I ended up giving it to a neighbor who was switching to U-Verse) as it would not work with their IPDSLAM service. Of course, I ended up not using U-Verse at all at my current location and that modem also would not have worked with Sonic, so I wish at this point that I had rented it for the 4 months I had service; I would have saved $106.

Edit: Various typos.


leibold
Premium,MVM
join:2002-07-09
Sunnyvale, CA
kudos:10
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
It is very clear that uverse is just a marketing term and that actual implementing technologies vary (not just from region to region but sometimes even within the same city).

There are some who have uverse Internet service that can only use att provided dsl modems with an embedded certificate signed by att. If those customers try to use their own equipment it fails to authenticate even if their modem implements all the required standards.
--
Got some spare cpu cycles ? Join Team Helix or Team Starfire!

Zeonis

join:2009-03-16
reply to BronsCon
said by BronsCon:

Is there a circumstance under which the fee is charged? If so, then is it reasonable to say they charge a fee. From my conversations with AT&T, even they don't consider U-Verse without TV service to be U-Verse, internally; so, even from AT&T's perspective, Dane's statement that it's mandatory with U-Verse service is 100% correct.

You are entitled to your opinion of course but I don't agree. There is U-verse TV, U-verse Internet, and U-verse Voice. Just like Comcast offers Xfinity TV, Xfinity Internet, and Xfinity Voice. Don't you see the difference? With AT&T you are not forced to pay the rental/equipment fee unless you want U-verse TV whereas with Sonic.net you are forced to pay the rental/equipment fee no matter what.


BronsCon

join:2003-10-24
Walnut Creek, CA
Reviews:
·Comcast Business..
·SONIC.NET

1 edit
My point (which, by the way, is based in fact [detailed in parts of my post which you did not quote], not opinion) is that AT&T internally only considers U-Verse to be the TV service and, as they only require that you pay the fee if you subscribe to that service, they do, in fact (and it's this phrase that makes it clear I'm not stating an opinion), charge a mandatory equipment fee for (what everyone outside of their marketing department considers) U-Verse.

You opinion is welcome to differ from this fact, but that's called being wrong.

Now, can we stop being pedantic and start considering that maybe rental isn't so bad? For the record, my rented Pace 4111 didn't burst into flames when I put it in bridged mode and it's trivial to switch it back if I need to call in for support; it's also light-years ahead of the $130 modem AT&T made me buy when I signed up for U-Verse (a $32.50/mo rental fee when amortized over the 4mo I had service before I moved out of the U-Verse-serviced area and the device became a paperweight).

Zeonis

join:2009-03-16

1 edit
I don't care what ignorant people that you have spoke to consider U-verse to be. The company decides what U-verse is and they have decided that their services (whether it be TV, Internet, or VOIP phone) delivered via FTTN (Fiber to the Node) are U-verse.


BronsCon

join:2003-10-24
Walnut Creek, CA
Reviews:
·Comcast Business..
·SONIC.NET
said by Zeonis:

I don't care what ignorant people that you have spoke to on the phone consider U-verse to be. The company decides what U-verse is and they have decided that their services (whether it be TV, Internet, or VOIP phone) delivered via FTTN (Fiber to the Node) are U-verse.

That's quite an assumption you've made, there. For your reference, my contact with AT&T personnel is not limited to phone reps and field techs.

Tobester

join:2000-11-14
San Francisco, CA
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET

1 recommendation

said by BronsCon:

said by Zeonis:

I don't care what ignorant people that you have spoke to on the phone consider U-verse to be. The company decides what U-verse is and they have decided that their services (whether it be TV, Internet, or VOIP phone) delivered via FTTN (Fiber to the Node) are U-verse.

That's quite an assumption you've made, there. For your reference, my contact with AT&T personnel is not limited to phone reps and field techs.

Zeonis needs to step back and take a long look in the mirror.

His previous long thread rants in this forum show a lack of courtesy and respect, especially towards the Sonic representatives trying to give assistance.

Zeonis

join:2009-03-16
You are going way off topic Tobester but I just wanted to tell you I was very patient and courteous when dealing with the Sonic.net representatives who attempted to fix my issue when I had Sonic Fusion.


Nora Hollywo

@sbcglobal.net
Zeonis,

Although it has not come up in this thread, itemizing the $6.50 as a rental fee lowers the taxes on the service, so that is one reason to do it. Also, I just comparison-shopped between Comcast, U-verse, Sonic, and my last provider DSL Extreme, and even with this rental fee, Sonic is a far better deal in terms of speed-and-overall-package-for-the-money. If you know of a better option, please let me know. I'd like my internet service to be cheaper, too, but I don't think hammering on the cheapest provider will get me there.