dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
3770
share rss forum feed

MrMazda86

join:2013-01-29
Kitchener, ON
reply to JMJimmy

Re: Bell from Hell & the 2-Wire 2701HG-G Modem

They do in the sense that they've gone out of their way to try and force their DSL modems with their proprietary crapware on them and force you to have to rent them from them, but you can actually get the same make/model of modem from another provider that isn't network locked and bring them over to Bell, without Bell having issues with it.



Mike2009

join:2009-01-13
Ottawa, ON
kudos:3
reply to MrMazda86

Bell ruins their modems with their shitty firmware. Too bad because they could use the generic 2wire firmware which is excellent or devise their own usable one like Qwest did.


MrMazda86

join:2013-01-29
Kitchener, ON
reply to taraf

@taraf: I suggest that you check your facts because you're incorrect on a number of things. First off, the 2-Wire 2701HG-G is not a wireless N, but rather a wireless G. Let's not forget about the fact that establishing multiple PPPoE sessions with or through the same modem is NOT the same thing as bridging the modem to establish only ONE PPPoE session. The modem does not magically bridge itself. This is something that must be done manually.

Also, you didn't bother to inquire on when I called the lawyer vs when the 9 technicians from hell came down. You also never bothered to ask about the ToS before trying to cram it down my throat. What you don't know is that I gave Bell 2 hours notice to cancel, and they normally require 30 days notice. What you also don't understand obviously is that in the eyes of federal law, once a company breaches their contract on any clause in part or in whole, the contract in its entirety is null and void. The same holds true for ToS agreements. Since Bell has violated theirs repeatedly, I am not bound to the no liability clause, meaning I am fully within my right to pursue legal recourse.

Additionally, you also made mention of not honouring the warranty. This is a pathetic joke because the warranty on any modem is only for 1 year, and this modem is more than 2 years old, therefore there is no warranty. See, the problem here has nothing to do with warranty, rather with a principle of ethics. Bell was charging me a monthly fee for "renting" this modem, which they refused to support (without even being told about the firmware change). They refused to support it based on the fact that it wasn't in the configuration they wanted it in. For the principle of the matter, I simply refused to pay a monthly rental fee for a DSL modem that mysteriously after a power failure just outright refused to allow me to establish a PPPoE link through it any longer. This boils down to a case of the modem itself was broken, yet Bell insisted on charging me a monthly rental fee, but refused to provide me with a modem that actually works. Wouldn't this aggravate you just slightly?

These are just some of the inconsistencies between reality and your claims. Again, I must suggest that you check your facts before you try to rebut any posts as it will save you a lot of time and won't make it obvious that you don't know what you're talking about. It seems to me like you're more concerned with cramming new products down the throats of customers who already have the existing hardware that just needs updating of the software, rather than providing solutions to the problem. What's more laughable is that you do this when you clearly don't have all your facts, trying to give the impression that you know what you're talking about, but clearly don't. This is why I suggest that you check your facts...


taraf

join:2011-05-07
Stittsville, ON

As a general rule, when somebody starts blustering about laws without actually providing any hard evidence and citations of which laws, in particular, they believe have been violated, I tune them out.

However, since you want something more specific...

quote:
First off, the 2-Wire 2701HG-G is not a wireless N, but rather a wireless G.
The first version of the 2-wire had 802.11g. The second version had 802.11n. You say they replaced the modem and it didn't fix it... given that Bell rolled out the Sagemcom modem almost 2 years ago, and launched it in earnest more than a year ago, while it's possible that a repair technician still had a 2-wire in his truck and gave you a replacement 2-wire, it's extremely unlikely that it would have been a rev.1 version, and far more likely they'd have given you a Sagemcom. If they'd mailed you out a modem, you probably wouldn't have gotten a 2-wire in the first place, and while the Sagemcom is an absolutely terrible router, it, too, has 802.11n. They also released a 2nd version of the Cellpipe 61v that had 802.11n on it, too.

While it's true that the Sagemcom is a steaming pile of donkey poop as a router, it, too, has 802.11n, and will bridge the PPPoE on FTTN. They do something weird on FTTH when you try to bridge it, but you're not on FTTH if you're using a 2-wire.

quote:
Let's not forget about the fact that establishing multiple PPPoE sessions with or through the same modem is NOT the same thing as bridging the modem to establish only ONE PPPoE session. The modem does not magically bridge itself. This is something that must be done manually.
Actually, it's something I'm doing right now with my connection. It did not require any special configuration in the modem at all... factory reset the modem, plug in a computer and turn off wireless through the firmware, and then plug in a Linksys router and configure it for PPPoE. The modem establishes a walled-garden PPPoE session which it uses to automatically update the firmware, and it bridges the PPPoE session from the router, offloading all routing to the router.

Speaking of the modem automatically updating its firmware, has it ocurred to you that this is what happened when you plugged in your Bell modem? If you didn't want it to happen, then you shouldn't have plugged it in.

quote:
What you also don't understand obviously is that in the eyes of federal law, once a company breaches their contract on any clause in part or in whole, the contract in its entirety is null and void. The same holds true for ToS agreements.
I sincerely doubt that Bell violated their terms of service in any way, because nowhere in their terms of service for residential service do they assure a level of service at all, or even service availability. In fact, their service contract and even the fine print on their website is quite clear that they cannot guarantee service availability. If you want an SLA, then they will politely suggest you contact Bell Business Internet instead of Bell Residential Sales.

quote:
Since Bell has violated theirs repeatedly, I am not bound to the no liability clause, meaning I am fully within my right to pursue legal recourse.
As I said, good luck with that. It's your money. The most you will *ever* get back from them is what you've paid them over the course of your contract, and it's extremely unlikely you'd even get that. If your lawyer believes otherwise, that's his prerogative, but if I had a lawyer who believed that, I'd retain other council.

quote:
Additionally, you also made mention of not honouring the warranty. This is a pathetic joke because the warranty on any modem is only for 1 year, and this modem is more than 2 years old, therefore there is no warranty.
Not true, actually. As long as you're renting the modem from them, they have an obligation to make sure it's in working order. Even if the hardware is more than 2 years old, they will still replace it free of charge. While you can raise a stink and get them to waive the modem rental fee, it's still considered a rental and not an outright purchase, even on the new one-time modem rental fee.

quote:
They refused to support it based on the fact that it wasn't in the configuration they wanted it in.
So, you expected them to support something they didn't sell you, and with no guarantee that your hardware wasn't the cause of the issues? Did it occur to you to put it into the configuration they wanted in order to prove it was their hardware, so that they could, you know, send you a replacement modem like you wanted?

quote:
This boils down to a case of the modem itself was broken, yet Bell insisted on charging me a monthly rental fee, but refused to provide me with a modem that actually works. Wouldn't this aggravate you just slightly?
Not really. You wouldn't let them follow their procedures to prove the hardware issue, and I have no idea how you managed to make it to executive care without somebody suggesting that they waive the modem rental fee. Heck, they don't even charge the modem rental fee any more on new installs, just a one-time $50 "modem rental fee" that usually gets waived. You wouldn't even have had to escalate to a supervisor to get that option applied to your bill, let alone gone as far as executive care.

quote:
These are just some of the inconsistencies between reality and your claims. Again, I must suggest that you check your facts before you try to rebut any posts as it will save you a lot of time and won't make it obvious that you don't know what you're talking about.
*shrugs* I work in the industry and I'm familiar with Bell's products and procedures. I've also been in the situation of having to answer the claims when somebody goes to his lawyer and doesn't tell the lawyer the whole truth. If your lawyer is in full possession of the facts, and still says that you should try suing Bell, then I'd hire a new lawyer. But that's just me.

I think you have some reading to do. Specifically, this. Start with section 7, page 15. Sections 12 and 20 are worth reading, too. Section 21 is the one that deals with your 3rd party router, and basically says you're on your own. Section 22 is the one that makes me laugh about your $13k claim, btw, and the one you should probably make sure your lawyer has read.

You agreed to their ToS by purchasing the service. Now you've cancelled the service. If you choose to sue them, that's your choice to make. But you *really* should leave it at that and call it a day. You stand to lose a lot more than you stand to gain.

quote:
It seems to me like you're more concerned with cramming new products down the throats of customers who already have the existing hardware that just needs updating of the software, rather than providing solutions to the problem.
You're expressing surprise that a Bell modem would try to update its firmware, and you're saying that I'm the one who's not in possession of all the facts? Interesting. I'm not pretending to know everything that's happened in your situation: I don't have access to your account data/ticket history with Bell, and I can't listen to the calls you had with tech. support. But I'm equally certain that you're not telling the whole truth here, and that at the very least, you haven't actually *read* the ToS that you agreed to when you signed up for Bell in the first place.

Mods, please don't delete his post this time... I don't take personal offense to it, and I have a feeling somebody at Bell legal is going to enjoy reading this thread.


Mike2009

join:2009-01-13
Ottawa, ON
kudos:3

Are you sure there's an N version of the 2701? If there is I'm not aware of it.



Crowbar1

join:2009-06-23
Toronto , ON

said by Mike2009:

Are you sure there's an N version of the 2701? If there is I'm not aware of it.

I don't believe N was even around when the 2701 was in vogue ......

MrMazda86

join:2013-01-29
Kitchener, ON

Precisely my point... This is why I suggest that taraf actually gets all of his facts before he starts trying to make his point. There's a number of inconsistencies between what he says and what actually is. He can doubt things all he wants, but that doesn't mean that they're the way he thinks they should be.

It's a bit of a pot calling the kettle black really because he asks for proof and citations, yet will make outrageous claims himself without getting all of the facts and also without making reference to where he is getting this magical information that conflicts with everything else out there, including what the manufacturer says.

I also suggest that he stops trying to put words in my mouth, because trying to imply that I'm saying things that I never said will get him nowhere. It's clear that he doesn't know what he's talking about. He's proven that already.



Crowbar1

join:2009-06-23
Toronto , ON

He is a She


MrMazda86

join:2013-01-29
Kitchener, ON

said by Crowbar1:

He is a She

Oops... My bad

Cloneman

join:2002-08-29
Montreal
kudos:4
reply to MrMazda86

Dear Lord....

tl;dr

I don't even unwrap the 2wire from its packaging when I setup people with bell. 20$-30$ ADSL modem serves them better.


MrMazda86

join:2013-01-29
Kitchener, ON

said by Cloneman:

Dear Lord....

tl;dr

I don't even unwrap the 2wire from its packaging when I setup people with bell. 20$-30$ ADSL modem serves them better.

Haha!! I can't say that I blame you there. That particular modem is a curse I tell you... a curse! lol


Teddy Boom
k kudos Received
Premium
join:2007-01-29
Toronto, ON
kudos:21
reply to Cloneman

said by Cloneman:

I don't even unwrap the 2wire from its packaging when I setup people with bell. 20$-30$ ADSL modem serves them better.

I don't do much DSL at all any more, but.. Back in the day I really liked the 2701. Super stable DSL, great wireless range. Bell locked firmware sucks of course, but SingTel took care of that problem. I'm really surprised to see so many people down on the 2701 to be honest.
--
electronicsguru.ca


Crowbar1

join:2009-06-23
Toronto , ON

said by Teddy Boom:

Back in the day I really liked the 2701. Super stable DSL, great wireless range. Bell locked firmware sucks of course, but SingTel took care of that problem. I'm really surprised to see so many people down on the 2701 to be honest.

X2 , back in it's day it worked great . I flashed one or two with the Singtel firmware and they still function well to this day ...


Mike2009

join:2009-01-13
Ottawa, ON
kudos:3

I've never used a Bell one or Singtel firmware but the ones I purchased from Caneris with AT+T firmware and the Kijiji one with Qwest firmware have worked very well.


MrMazda86

join:2013-01-29
Kitchener, ON
reply to Crowbar1

Beware of the Singtel firmware... They will work just fine on them until all of the sudden *BAM!* they don't work at all anymore and the only way that you'll be able to even connect to the web interface to be able to do anything with them will be to power the modem off, disconnect the phone line from it, then power it back on.

When this happens as well, regardless of whether or not the modem is in bridge mode, you will be unable to establish a PPPoE link through it. The strange thing is though that when this happens, the modem will still appear as though it is functioning properly and all of the lights will appear normal, however you'll just suddenly run into issues with erratic and frequent packet loss issues until you get the Singel firmware off of them. I unfortunately have had this happen to not one, but THREE of these things.

I will be working on a fix for this though similar to what Teddy Boom has come up with for the Thompson DCM-476 modem for the cable platform. I have come to discover from having friends in low places that apparently, there is a way in which the Hell Telecom firmware can be both ripped from the modem and unlocked. This will allow me the ability to get a proper copy of the Hell Telecom firmware to be able to install onto (or over) an existing or older firmware. I will love being able to unlock them, without Bell being any the wiser because it's still running a Hell Telecom firmware, just *slightly* improved lol



Crowbar1

join:2009-06-23
Toronto , ON

Good to know .... thanks Also the power supplies are known to cause issues over time



Mike2009

join:2009-01-13
Ottawa, ON
kudos:3
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL

said by Crowbar1:

Good to know .... thanks Also the power supplies are known to cause issues over time

Replacements are easy to find on ebay.


Crowbar1

join:2009-06-23
Toronto , ON

said by Mike2009:

Replacements are easy to find on ebay.

Yep , i just happen to have some , as i,m familiar with that issue