dslreports logo
spacer Home Reviews Speed Test Tools News Forums Info About Join  
Comcast, Zoom Settle Modem Feud
Don't Disclose Details Of Settlement
by Karl Bode
Wednesday Mar 09 2011 08:57 EDT
Last November hardware vendor Zoom Telephonics brought out the network neutrality wolf cries, insisting that Comcast was violating neutrality by making it harder to get their devices certified under Comcast's approval process. According to Zoom, Comcast's certification process was a "unreasonable, irrelevant, time-consuming and costly regime," while according to Comcast, Zoom was simply whining -- with the help of former "anti-cable" FCC chairman Kevin Martin, who was one of several attorneys which represented Zoom in the matter. The companies have settled the dispute, but haven't released details about the settlement. "Comcast and Zoom believe that the resolution of their dispute benefits both companies and furthers consumer choice in the cable modem marketplace," a joint statement says. "Comcast and Zoom look forward to working together in the future."

tags: legal · fcc · business · hardware · consumers · Comcast
Forums →

Comcast, Zoom Settle Modem Feud

 view:
topics flat nest 

rchandra
Stargate Universe fan
Premium Member
join:2000-11-09
14225-2105
ARRIS ONT1000GJ4
EnGenius EAP1250

rchandra

Premium Member

2011-Mar-9 10:54 am

ummmm...CableLabs? A little help here?

What is it with these Internet cable companies? Isn't DOCSIS there for a reason? I actually have read pieces of the 2 and 3 standards documents. It seems to me there's very little left to interpretation. I mean, for 3.0, there are even restrictions for consumers' ability to affect the CMTS side at all (so basically, if I (as a consumer) could, my modem would fail certification). Consumer RAs are supposed to be blocked, I think even DHCPOFFERs and ACKs. It's pretty well thought out. The SNMP MIB is standardized. So, the question remains....

As long as the hardware has passed CableLabs tests and has become certified, what is the big problem in cable companies letting a given compliant modem on their network?
2011-Mar-9 10:54 am: · hey mods ·

C0deZer0
Oc'D To Rhythm And Police
Premium Member
join:2001-10-03
Tempe, AZ

C0deZer0

Premium Member

2011-Mar-9 11:12 am

Re: ummmm...CableLabs? A little help here?

They'd rather try to stick you with some kind of extra 'fee' for the privilege. If you buy the modem, they technically can't.

It's one reason I went with Metro as opposed to any of the big four for cell phone service. Sure, the advertised rate from the big four is usually attractive, but by the time you figure in all the extra fees and the required contract, you're paying several times more for service than you should really have to.
2011-Mar-9 11:12 am: · hey mods ·

SLD
Premium Member
join:2002-04-17
San Francisco, CA

SLD

Premium Member

2011-Mar-9 2:12 pm

Re: ummmm...CableLabs? A little help here?

Try Virgin Mobile - you'll save even more these days.
2011-Mar-9 2:12 pm: · hey mods ·

cork1958
Cork
Premium Member
join:2000-02-26

cork1958

Premium Member

2011-Mar-9 3:55 pm

Re: ummmm...CableLabs? A little help here?

said by SLD:

Try Virgin Mobile - you'll save even more these days.

My gosh, man!!

Please don't recommend that totally worthless, incompetent company to anyone!!

My kid has a phone through them and they've screwed up every months bill since he's had it (about 8 months), and he's on the NO CONTRACT, unlimited text, e-mail, type plan!!

I have him "top up" several days before bill is due and these a**holes STILL have charged my credit card EVERY month!!

Their website also sucks green donkey d**k!!

On topic now,
I had to swap out a brand new SB6120 modem for a Zoom 5341 as Charter screwed up the SB with a firmware update and is to dumb to have realized Cox and Comcast had the same issue a while back, but fixed their issues, where as Charter is still screwing with people who have next to no speed using the 6120.

Zoom is working perfectly!!
2011-Mar-9 3:55 pm: · hey mods ·

DocDrew
How can I help?
Premium Member
join:2009-01-28
SoCal
Ubee E31U2V1
Technicolor TC4400
Linksys EA6900
2 edits

1 recommendation

DocDrew to rchandra

Premium Member

2011-Mar-9 11:20 am

to rchandra
Even though there is standards the modem has to meet, there are still problems with modems customers bring on.

Just search the last few months for Moto 6120 problems on Comcast, Charter, and Cox forums... the firmware upgrades on the CMTSs (which incorporated new features of the DOCSIS 3 spec) weren't compatible with the firmware of the retail modems (which were made before that part of the D3 spec was enacted) and wouldn't allow them to sync. Moto finally realized the issue and updated the retail modems. None of the other D3 modems had such wide spread reported problems.

»/nsear ··· 20&sa=Go

It's been shown time and time again over the last 10 years of cable modems, "spec compliant" doesn't mean it works.
2011-Mar-9 11:20 am: · hey mods ·

FFH5
Premium Member
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ

FFH5

Premium Member

2011-Mar-9 11:40 am

Re: ummmm...CableLabs? A little help here?

said by DocDrew:

Just search the last few months for Moto 6120 problems on Comcast, Charter, and Cox forums... the firmware upgrades on the CMTS weren't compatible with the firmware of the retail modems and wouldn't allow them to sync. Moto finally realized the issue and updated the retail modems.

All Comcast is trying to do is make sure the hardware/firmware will actually work as advertised and also work on Comcast's system. Because the customers who bought their own CM won't be going to Zoom if the cable modem has problems, they will hound Comcast.
2011-Mar-9 11:40 am: · hey mods ·

DocDrew
How can I help?
Premium Member
join:2009-01-28
SoCal
Ubee E31U2V1
Technicolor TC4400
Linksys EA6900

1 recommendation

DocDrew

Premium Member

2011-Mar-9 11:55 pm

Re: ummmm...CableLabs? A little help here?

said by FFH5:

All Comcast is trying to do is make sure the hardware/firmware will actually work as advertised and also work on Comcast's system. Because the customers who bought their own CM won't be going to Zoom if the cable modem has problems, they will hound Comcast.

I know... I said that months ago:
»Re: Huh?
2011-Mar-9 11:55 pm: · hey mods ·

Gbcue
Premium Member
join:2001-09-30
Santa Rosa, CA

Gbcue to rchandra

Premium Member

2011-Mar-9 1:51 pm

to rchandra
said by rchandra:

what is the big problem in cable companies letting a given compliant modem on their network?

They're missing out on the $/month lease fee.
2011-Mar-9 1:51 pm: · hey mods ·

syslock
Premium Member
join:2007-02-03
La La Land

syslock

Premium Member

2011-Mar-9 2:00 pm

Junk

From their days with dial up modems to cable modems now...
They are all junk.

Low grade consumer electronics.

I can't believe they are still around.
2011-Mar-9 2:00 pm: · hey mods ·

SLD
Premium Member
join:2002-04-17
San Francisco, CA

SLD

Premium Member

2011-Mar-9 2:11 pm

Zoom?

LOL - I remember my first Zoom modem from 1991 - it sucked! It had voicemail built into it and I remember it failed so badly I could hear people yelling in frustration as they were inadvertantly recorded trying to navigate the menu.
2011-Mar-9 2:11 pm: · hey mods ·

rcbrcb
Premium Member
join:2007-02-21
60642

rcbrcb

Premium Member

2011-Mar-9 3:27 pm

Zoom Modems

While I am usally not a defender of Comcast, I am sure the delays on Comcast's end are becuase Zoom Modems SUCK, they always have they probably always will! Why would a provider want to approve a shitty product to run on their network??
2011-Mar-9 3:27 pm: · hey mods ·

tshirt
Premium Member
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA

tshirt

Premium Member

2011-Mar-9 11:12 pm

Re: Zoom Modems

said by rcbrcb:

Why would a provider want to approve a shitty product to run on their network??

However as pointed out in the article, if they want to or not they MUST allow...UNLESS..
Assuming ComCast also charged other MFG's the same fees/conditions, ZOOM has no case.
and I'm on CC's side here , it is quite reasonable to charge for the test proceedure, otherwise every crappy MFG would submit their product and allow CC to do the troubleshooting for them.
and that would mean ALL CC customers would help pay XYZ modems Inc.'s development costs even if none of their products were ever approved on the CC system let alone purchased by those people
Most hardware developers raise/allow/set aside substanial capital to pay for the extensivecost/time needed for testing certification and(if needed)redesign/retesting required to bring a product to market .
2011-Mar-9 11:12 pm: · hey mods ·