 
Lumberjack
Premium
join:2003-01-18
Newport News, VA
3 edits | Great! Now if they just.... Get all of their ducks in a row and figure out why folks have problems with games and packet loss. I for one get kick ass download speed but apparently that doesn't mean squat for packet loss in games. And this time they can't tell me its my equipment, I have no problems with Verizon DSL to verify.
Edit: Just ran these line tests:
Cox: »/quality/nil/1476285
Verizon: »/quality/nil/1476290 | |
| rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO
 ·Charter Pipeline
| $25, $40, $55 Look at the speeds you get for these three prices:
$25 256/256
$40 4M/512
$55 5M/768
What's the deal with the $25 tier? Isn't it about time that this tier gets respectable download speeds? Do they fear that making the $25 too good won't get $40/month out of subscribers? Odds are that they are right. 5M is great but if they offered 1Mbps for $25/month, it's more than most need. Perhaps they can glue some fins or exhaust headers onto the cable modem to make it look faster... | |
|  | 
Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02
Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
| Re: $25, $40, $55 quote:
Do they fear that making the $25 too good won't get $40/month out of subscribers?
That's exactly what they fear, and I think it's a big reason many companies like TWC haven't rolled out "lite" tiers yet.... | |
| | | 
SquareSlinky
Premium
join:2004-05-25
Tampa, FL
 ·Verizon FIOS
 ·ViaTalk
2 edits | Re: $25, $40, $55 TWC has a light teir in many areas, they just don't tell anybody about it.
I love the guys that come into these forums and tell everybody that X speed is all that anybody needs. Well some people have different needs, you might like a skateboard to get to work and I prefer a car.
Those packages are a pretty good price (with the exception of the light one). Hopefully RR will follow, but it doesn't look like it. | |
| | | |
Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02 | Re: $25, $40, $55 I know. Right now they're using it as a "catch" tier, offered to users who think they're paying too much and are threatening to cancel service.... | |
| | | | rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO | No. I recognize when a company is trying to hide the insane profits by adding more of the same instead of just lowering the price. Didn't Microsoft corner the market on this strategy? | |
| 
dg2
Premium
join:2004-01-22
Lowell, AR
·Cox HSI
| Fast is UGLY here What the press release doesn't address, and what the article neglects to mention, is that a large Cox region (Middle America) GOT NO INCREASE! Our best residential package remains at 1024/128, for $40/month, bundled, if you own the modem.
Cox has completely screwed millions of customers in this market, and they did it on purpose. They have known for a long time that improvements are overdue on this system they purchased 5 years ago, and have chosen to upgrade the rest of the nation AGAIN instead of evening out their network by serving Middle America Cox customers with a reasonable product.
Their "official" reasoning? "You can't do this overnight." Well, it's been 5 years, and apparently this article says you CAN do it overnight!
Shame on you, Cox!
--
Note to SBC: Please light up my RT! I want a new broadband provider! | |
| |
Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02 | Re: Fast is UGLY here Yes, the article does mention it....and we mentioned it yesterday. | |
| | |
dg2
Premium
join:2004-01-22
Lowell, AR
·Cox HSI
| Re: Fast is UGLY here quote:
Customers in Cox's Las Vegas, NV, Gainesville, FL and Middle America Cox markets will not experience the speed increases described above at this time. Additional information on the deployment of higher speeds in these markets will be made later this year.
Well, I'm sorry I missed in my first reading this paragraph saying you don't have any announcement to make about M.A.C.! Did you tell the press that we're running at 1/4 the speed for the same fee? Did you mention to the press that we'd already been running at 1/3 the speed for the same money for nearly 5 years? Did you mention to the press that one of your products here costs 40% more than on the rest of the network for now 1/2 the speed (128 vs. 256 symmetrical)?
Hang me out on a technicality here if you want, Karl, but the fact is Cox did not inform the press about our situation. Maybe our local papers here will be interested.
The fact remains, "Middle America" got screwed again, and you know it.
--
Note to SBC: Please light up my RT! I want a new broadband provider! | |
| | | |
Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02 | Re: Fast is UGLY here Easy, soldier. I don't work for Cox, I work for this site. Just saying we've made reference to the "MAC Clique" being left behind twice in two days..... | |
| | | | |
dg2
Premium
join:2004-01-22
Lowell, AR
·Cox HSI
| Re: Fast is UGLY here Sorry, I misunderstood who "we" was. BBR has definitely made mention of the fact, much to your credit.
Cox, on the other hand, has not. The whole situation is shameful.
--
Note to SBC: Please light up my RT! I want a new broadband provider! | |
| | | | | | Anteater12
join:2004-07-12
El Cajon, CA
| Re: Fast is UGLY here Maybe you should move from the MAC area then and you wouldn't have to deal with such problems. The MAC area is a sub-affiliate of cox communications and independantly run. Take it up with them, not with the people who run dslreports. I guess if I lived in AK I would be upset all the time too. | |
| | | | | | |
dg2
Premium
join:2004-01-22
Lowell, AR
·Cox HSI
| Re: Fast is UGLY here 1. Paying premium prices for 1/4 the service when there is no good technical reason is what bothers me - kind of like you having to pay $2.50 for gasoline earlier this year. Moving won't help that.
2. Thank you, I'm well aware of how MAC is run, having spent a great deal of time with a lot of their people on the phone over the last 6 months.
3. My reference to "the article" was aimed at the TMCnet.com article, not the BBR article. My response to Karl was unfortunate, and due to my mistaking him for a Cox employee. The BBR folks are doing a very good job. The Cox people seem to be doing a very good job making excuses.
4. I guess if I lived in Alaska (AK), I might feel differently one way or the other. I live in Arkansas (AR).
And the whole "fast" campaign is still very unattractive right here, right now.
--
On August 9, 2004 Cox Communications upgraded 3000/256 areas to 4500/500. "Middle America Cox" is still running at 1024/128, for the same fee as the faster areas. Cox officials refuse to announce intentions to upgrade, saying only "we're working on it." | |
| | | | cypher_q3ut
join:2004-01-04
Ann Arbor, MI
| Hey man, I work for a cable ISP. If you know what is involved in an infrastructure speed change you would be singing a different tune »electronics.howstuffworks.com/ca···odem.htm. It's not as simple and punching a few keys at a CMTS console and BOOM! instant speed upgrades. Just because other markets are running faster and you are not. Doesn't mean they aren't listening. Let me tell you from experience, they are. You are they're customer, they're source of revenue. There are other factors that deem a change in speed releases to markets. Physical limitations on the HFC wiring at the poles could be a major limiting factor. Have you seen alot of Cox or contractor wiring trucks hanging around the area during the day hours. They could be rebuilding the area for DOCSIS 2.0. Most cable ISP's have split nodes too much. Since they do that, that could be a major factor in why your speeds haven't increased. More nodes have to be installed on the HFC network to accommodate a faster speed increase on DOCSIS 1.0, 1.1, and especially 2.0. It's on the way. DOCSIS 2.0 is around the corner for alot of cable ISP's. They are just waiting for one of the major players to release it first. After that, LOOK OUT!!!! Speeds will be 3x's - 12x's faster, depending on the provider.  BTW DSL folks, HFC cable modems is where it's at. | |
| | | | |
dg2
Premium
join:2004-01-22
Lowell, AR
·Cox HSI
| Re: Fast is UGLY here With two immediate family members in the CATV business for about 40+ years each, I think I have a clue about what's involved. As a computer person myself since 1979, and a former network administrator, I believe I understand some of the difficulties involved.
The wiring work was all done between 1999 and 2001, with the entire system replaced with new coax and fiber. The fiber backbone connecting all Cox systems for 60 miles was completed about three years ago. No one is asking for "overnight." Cox representatives have stated that all that's left is pushing the new modem configurations. That's not our idea of what's required, it's Cox personnel's idea.
My tune remains the same, thank you.
--
On August 9, 2004 Cox Communications upgraded 3000/256 areas to 4500/500. "Middle America Cox" is still running at 1024/128, for the same fee as the faster areas. Cox officials refuse to announce intentions to upgrade, saying only "we're working on it." | |
| 
atuarre
Here come the drums
Premium
join:2004-02-14
Lake Charles, LA
clubs: 
1 edit | Upgrade most - Neglect some. Cox Communications is giving the majority of its users the good news, and I just delight in waiting for those of us in Middle America Cox, that I have dubbed "The MAC Clique", to receive the bad news. I think it is going to go along the lines of, "Cox Communications Incorporated has received the green light to be acquired by Cox Enterprises; the proposed deal will allow the Cox family to buy out the public ownership of the company, making it once again, a privately owned company. Cox Communications has also decided to put up portions of its network for sale; specifically those areas that fall under Middle-America Cox, or those areas it received through its acquisition of TCA Cable".
I used to be a die hard, pro Cox customer until someone opened my eyes and made me realize I was being ripped off, in a major way. And I do agree with another users post that I read; that by not investing in MAC, Cox is making us recoup the capital they spent to acquire TCA Cable.
Further more, if they do go private, there is no way they will have the capital to keep up their network. MAC will never ever receive anything then, if they do not sell us off. | |
| |
dg2
Premium
join:2004-01-22
Lowell, AR
·Cox HSI
| Re: Upgrade most - Neglect some. Time for us to go to the newspapers, and make some "press releases" of our own. Most Cox M.A.C. subscribers don't understand that they're paying more for less. If the public were informed, I'm sure the economic pressure on Cox would increase.
Making the first call....
--
Note to SBC: Please light up my RT! I want a new broadband provider! | |
| | | 
Ericthorn
It only hurts when I laugh
Premium
join:2001-08-10
Paragould, AR
clubs:
·Paragould.net
| Re: Upgrade most - Neglect some. I'd be #2 on that list, but after a year of Cox Express and them ripping off all of us who aren't on HSI, I'm done with them. I'm moving to an area (Paragould) that only has local cable TV, and they offer internet at about what Cox Express does (1mg/128k and you have to use their modem, but only 39.95 - whereas Cox charges 10$ extra to 'rent' the modem, all other options - ie email addys, web space, basically the same.. newsgroups are lacking, but I don't use Cox's anyway)... and SBC (who will be my land line carrier), does offer DSL in the area, albeit it's on a 384k/128k package, but it'll be up to at least 1.5/128 within a year.
I just don't think there are enough people in middle america that care about their 'broadband' speeds.. if it's faster than a modem, a majority of them are happy. They have no idea what a 3mg down/384k up does because they'd never use that kind of bandwidth in the first place.
--
Ever try stuffing a melted marshmellow up a wildcat's ass? It can be done, but you have to like your job. - This Is The Way The World Ends by James Morrow - Join a DC club, it can't hurt you! | |
| | | | 
MarkyD
Premium
join:2002-08-20
Oklahoma City, OK
clubs: | great! quote:
Next week, Cox Business Services will begin launching a speed increase/service enhancement initiative as well.
That's great for you SOHO users.
--
HyperJoe 2004 | |
| |
atuarre
Here come the drums
Premium
join:2004-02-14
Lake Charles, LA
clubs: | Re: great! That will be for CBS markets outside of the areas designated as M.A.C. | |
|
MarkyD
Premium
join:2002-08-20
Oklahoma City, OK
clubs:
·Cox HSI
| And...the catch quote:
Customers in Cox's Las Vegas, NV, Gainesville, FL and Middle America Cox markets will not experience the speed increases described above at this time. Additional information on the deployment of higher speeds in these markets will be made later this year
Go figure. Interestingly enough, Las Vegas and Gainesville are technically HSI areas, but they pay WAY more than the rest of us. As for the MAC kids, well, they're left in the dark...again.
--
HyperJoe 2004 | |
| |
atuarre
Here come the drums
Premium
join:2004-02-14
Lake Charles, LA
clubs: | Re: And...the catch I am telling you they are going to sell us off. Just you watch. Mark my words. | |
| | |
dg2
Premium
join:2004-01-22
Lowell, AR
·Cox HSI
| Re: And...the catch said by atuarre  :
I am telling you they are going to sell us off. Just you watch. Mark my words.
PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!
Dear Cox: Please sell off M.A.C.! It couldn't possibly be any worse.
Thanks.
A soon-to-be former customer
--
On August 9, 2004 Cox Communications upgraded 3000/256 areas to 4500/500. "Middle America Cox" is still running at 1024/128, for the same fee as the faster areas. Cox officials refuse to announce intentions to upgrade, saying only "we're working on it." | |
| | | |
atuarre
Here come the drums
Premium
join:2004-02-14
Lake Charles, LA
clubs: | Re: And...the catch Yes, they could sell us to Communicom, or some other awful cable company that cannot build a decent system, offer decent services, or have the much needed stability in their infrastructure. | |
| | | | | cypher_q3ut
join:2004-01-04
Ann Arbor, MI | Re: And...the catch Well if they are going to sell it off. Maybe Comcast may take you guys on and give you prestige service like they have me. 3.0Mb/256Kb @ $42.95. With $10 more for 4.0Mb/384Kb. | |
| 
montyKD6CAE
@cox.net
| gotta love more upload! I am not a cox user normally as I live in the high desert of California and have DSL at 768KBPS upload, but being here at my friends in San Marcos in Cox teritory, it was awesome to watch the speed increase go live! My friend is even thinking about going to 768KBPS up/5MBPS down, wow I love it! Now the question is, will we ever see cable break the 1MBPS upload barrier any time in the next 5 years? Not complaining, just wondering since I'm a technology freak, lol. Keep it up Cox! | |
| | 
xpc2600
join:2004-05-14
San Diego, CA
| Re: gotta love more upload! got to love being in the wild wild west:):):)
4461(Kbps)Down / 557(KBps)Up
ps here is the cox speed test page for anyone who doesn't know it already
»speedtest.coxinet.net/
remember to hit "Control-F5"
SDSU 4 Life;) | |
| | | Fern4
join:2002-04-04
San Diego, CA
| Re: gotta love more upload! I hear yea 
4090 K Bits/sec (Kbps)
511.2 K Bytes/sec (KBps)
Looks like I got some tweaking to do but not bad. That really sucks for you guys that did not get the increase:( | |
| 
COMMAN
Plug Me In
join:2000-07-17
Mount Juliet, TN
 ·Embarq
·Vonage
| Las Vegas - finding more ways to take your money! "Go figure. Interestingly enough, Las Vegas and Gainesville are technically HSI areas, but they pay WAY more than the rest of us. As for the MAC kids, well, they're left in the dark...again."
As a COX Las Vegas subscriber, I'll say "NO SHITE!!!" Vegas is paying $40/mo. for 1.5/128, and that's if you're a cable TV subscriber AND own your modem! (like me) I had their service in Arkansas, which was THE WORST cable (and internet) service I've ever had. Though the service is better here in Vegas, it's not great, but we also have Sprint for telephone, and large areas of the city (like me) are not serviced by DSL!
Screwed in Sin City without a smile!!! My thought for the day - Cox sux. | |
| | Obi Wan
join:2002-07-22
San Diego, CA
| Re: Las Vegas - finding more ways to take your money! Time to pull your panties out of your Cracks.... The Reason cox Communications hasn't Increased bandwidth in some are is this. Ill use Las Vegas as an Example. #1. A lot of customer bought Cheap Com21 Cable modems. These modems are only Docsis 1.0 Certified. For this Kinda Bandwidth they need Docsis 1.1 . They cant Roll out that high of upload speeds without Running the CMTS and the Cable modem at Docsis 1.1 (QAM 256). So, as Always with these small cable systems, you will get the Increased bandwidth, your just going to have to wait a bit.
Another reason bandwidth wasnt increase.. Your area are still being upgraded. You have to understand that upgrading Fiber Optics in Cities costs 100's of millions of dollar. Some areas would get dragged down if they were to turn the Bandwidth Valve an Higher.
So COMMAN, Cox Bought your Cable system some years ago and has been Breaking there balls getting you guy upgraded. Your out in the middle of the Desert, there isn't a lot of Fiber Backbones ran out there..... Cox is using and Leasing all available Backbones and Network access points. It costs $1 million Dollars a mile to run Fiber.. So don't ignorantly Scream "oh pore me".
Once Spint, AT&T or Level 3 owns most of the bandbones. | |
| | |
atuarre
Here come the drums
Premium
join:2004-02-14
Lake Charles, LA
clubs:
| Re: Las Vegas - finding more ways to take your money! I think you do not understand. Cox has been upgrading. Making excuses as to why they some areas got upgrades and others have not is not warranted. It has nothing to do with fiber, and even if it did, how do you justify the increase in cost of the products and services they are offering in these markets? I guess we are paying for our upgrade now, and it is coming later this year, and Cox will just amazingly reduce the price.
Now, wake up and realize that this is the real world. When you make excuses as to why MAC has not been upgraded, all you are doing is putting salt in the wound, and probably personally offending every MAC subscriber that reads this board. It is very easy for you to justify a speed increase when you got yours, and we did not.
We have been putting up with this for five years. | |
| | |
dg2
Premium
join:2004-01-22
Lowell, AR
·Cox HSI
| Your arguments are emotional and not factual. In fact, they are in error:
1. DOCSIS 1.1 is backwards compatible with 1.0. 1.0 modems will still operate if the system switches to 1.1, they just may not go as fast. DOCSIS is not the reason.
2. Cox bought TCA five years ago, and for the first two years rebuilt all the coax and fiber, and installed additional fiber. All of the towns from Ft. Smith to Bella Vista (60+ miles) have been connected by Cox fiber for at least two years. No significant work has been done since then. Yes, new fiber is expensive, which is why it makes no sense to bury it and then not use it. Fiber optic construction is not the reason.
3. There has been no "breaking of balls" here in NW Arkansas. No significant progress was made (as far as I can determine) toward upgrades between 2001 and January of this year. And we've got enough fiber running through this area to light up San Diego. Lack of a fiber-optic backbone is not the reason.
Cox has not upgraded its Middle America division for purely political reasons. The work was stopped mid-stream, and not started again until recently. Obviously they can't make the type of changes they want to make in a few months, as these things take time. What no one wants to acknowledge or answer for is the 3 lost years when nothing happened because no one cared.
Middle America Cox is Cox's largest division. Continual wise-cracks about how "small" this system is are not applicable. You might want to investigate your facts before you jump back into this discussion.
--
On August 9, 2004 Cox Communications upgraded 3000/256 areas to 4500/500. "Middle America Cox" is still running at 1024/128, for the same fee as the faster areas. Cox officials refuse to announce intentions to upgrade, saying only "we're working on it." | |
| | 
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | Can't be anyworse than Comcast - $42.95 + modem rental for $1.5/256 or $57.95 unbundled + modem rental.
I think they're in the process of upgrading to 3000/256
SBC - $26.95 /mo 1.5/256
DSLExtreme - $59.99 6000/608 + 5 static IP | |
| | 
ObdH
Premium
join:2003-06-11
| re packetloss=nr1 problem
left cox for sbc (albeit slower eh)
it stayed at over 70% packet loss for 2 weeks and my friends was the same way and they refused to admit a problem....
why was I paying $60/mo for that overpriced crap when I could have 3/416, with a free modem i own, and little if any packet loss?
screw cox
--
Miserable failure | |
|
sammij
@cox.net
|  lame
"Customers in Cox's Las Vegas, NV, Gainesville, FL and Middle America Cox markets will not experience the speed increases described above at this time. Additional information on the deployment of higher speeds in these markets will be made later this year." Egads, stab with a dull spoon whydontcha Cox! | |
| pnot9
join:2004-04-05
Las Vegas, NV
| Las Vegas bites the big one again... Well i'm a cox customer in Las Vegas as well and i must say i'm pretty upset over the fact that we did not get the speed increase. The network here is pretty damn stable compared to phoenix. We pay more a lot more as well go figure. I used to hook up cable here for 2 years and they've been using that whole "com21" excuse for AGES now. CMON, give me a break. They stop hooking those up over a year ago and still are using that as an excuse. If you don't have a 1.1 then go buy a new one or i'm SURE cox would have no objections to renting them a new one. I honestly think that's the whole reason they have not upgraded due to how many com21 they are renting out right now and how much of a bullet they would bite if they swap'd all those out. Oh well, once again we get the short end of the stick.
I wish sprint would have continued to roll out their fiber to the curb network but it cost them too much especially since the card vendor they use has no way to cap the bandwidth. For now we're stuck.... | |
| ThundarAZ
join:2004-08-10
Scottsdale, AZ | Premiere 2004-08-10 23:20:47 EST: 3355 / 727
Your download speed : 3436044 bps, or 3355 kbps.
A 419.4 KB/sec transfer rate.
Your upload speed : 744981 bps, or 727 kbps.
Hmm, seems like the download is still the 4megs thou... | |
| | Obi Wan
join:2002-07-22
San Diego, CA
| Re: Premiere I Believe that AZ got the upgrade. I saw a News article in Feb. that they just installed a 10gig Network aceess point. The Az market appears to be Upgraded enough to allow the launch of this service.
To all the MAC guys. This is just a first launch. Im sure you guy will be in the next wave of speed upgrades. Cox "appears" to Launch new services in the more Robust systems first. Once everything appears to be work they will Launch it in the others systems.
Car Companies do this also. The Release a Certain Vehicle in Certain states to Monitor Sales for a few months and to make sure they dont have alot of problems. Once everything appears to be A-OK, The open it too all needed markets.
Might actually be a good thing, There can be bugs an slow-downs that can Resoult from this upgrade. Once Cox Engineers learn from there mistake they can launch it in other areas with little backlash.
I've Read some articles and Believe the MAC users will push it into Effect sooner.. I dont know if that is the greatest thing for you guys but Cox is a company that is built on Pleasing its customers. They have a "WHAT EVER IT TAKE" attitude.
As for the Docsis argument. Yes, 1.0 and 1.1 are backwards compatible. QAM 256 is the same for both the modems. But that is like saying PC100 is backward compatible with PC133.
It might fit into the Slot and work but if the Clock Speed it higher on the Bus, It will not be as fast... So this isnt a Compatibility issue, this is a Performance issue.
Hopefully in the next 2 years with verizon pushing FTTP, we as customers will see Docsis 2.0 put into Effect. Docsis 2.0 will push Upstream and Downsstream QoS on the modems over the 10Mb mark. Any new modem sold now is Docsis 2.0 Upgradable through a Firmware upgrade at the CMTS.
:):) | |
| | | pnot9
join:2004-04-05
Las Vegas, NV
| Re: Premiere I've heard cox, verizon, sbc, and sprint all claim they're rolling out this or that but in the end it's all talk except for sprint. I've been in vegas for 5 years now and everything is pretty much the same except for fiber to the curb in VERY select areas that sprint has rolled out. In southern Nevada a power company has been rolling out 10mb to the home for almost a year now.. what gives in vegas =/
For a town that never sleeps we're slow on the upgrades. | |
| | | | mrbass
join:2004-02-17
| Re: Premiere well ordering it for my mom...cox offering blows chunks. I'm in San Diego getting 5Mbps down and 512Kpbs up for $55/month and don't have their cable TV either.
So went to sprints web site for dsl in vegas and it seems that through time warner cable they have first 6 months $19.95 and thereafter it's $41.95 for 3Mbps down and 384Kbps up. This is similiar to paying $59.99 for cox at 3Mbps down and 256Kbps up because you have to pay $39.99 for TV to get the $10 off. They have a very basic cable for $8.91 but that doesn't qualify for $10 off. Screw cox.
What's that power company for 10Mbps to the home? Northern Vegas is that available do you know? | |
| | | | | sheezyfromba
join:2002-08-03
Las Vegas, NV
| Vegas and cox sleezy bussiness practices I live in Vegas as well and I think the reason for lack of upgrades is because THEY DON'T HAVE TO. They do not have any real competition in Las Vegas. Not many people get DSL (it is slower usually has worse pings and is not available everywhere) As for packet loss mine is fine now. It used to be outrageous till I kept calling their asses and they found out they had the voltages WAY off ( I still suspect it is what killed my old modem). Places in California get 10meg service for close to what we pay ( theirs is shared though, but still). Also look how Anal they are. They block ports 80 and 25 so you cannot run web or SMTP servers they say it is to protect their bandwidth, but remember IT IS OUTS WE PAY FOR IT> What kind of bs is it when you buy High speed Internet and they say you are not allowed to use it. Also I am having a strange problem when I run game servers they ill run fine then dump everyone. i have tried it on different computers. I think they have it set so that if you have sustained uploads they disconnect them. Point is they rip us off because they have no competition can someone say trust busters please. | |
| | | |
|
|
Cox Confirms Speed Hike
Great! Now bring it to Alaska, please!