Cox Brings 50Mbps To Arizona Cox Communications today announced that the company has brought their faster DOCSIS 3.0 service to portions of their Arizona market. The launch comes after Cox unveiled the faster services in Lafayette, Louisiana, portions of Northern Virginia, and portions of Rhode Island earlier this year. According to Cox, the new 50Mbps/5Mbps tier is now available in Carefree and Rio Verde, will be in Scottsdale over the next month, with a complete market deployment over the next year. Prices for the service do vary by location. Cox is offering the service in Arizona for $90 for the first year, the same low price they're offering customers in Lafayette, Loisiana, where Cox does battle with dirt cheap municipal fiber. Other markets aren't so lucky, with customers in Northern Virginia paying $140 for the tier, and customers in Rhode Island paying $145. Behold the benefit of actually having competition in your local market. In all markets, the service comes with three unique IP addresses, 10 e-mail addresses, and 50 hours per month of remote dial access, an interesting perk we've seen a lot of carriers throw by the wayside in recent years. According to Cox, the company hopes to offer the faster DOCSIS 3.0 speeds in more than two-thirds of its systems across the country by the end of 2010. As always, our user opinions on Cox service can be found in our Cox review database, where 1,333 reviews are currently listed, or in our Cox forum.
|
 baineschile2600 ways to livePremium join:2008-05-10 Sterling Heights, MI | Upload Why are companies so afraid of upload speeds? | |
|  |  | | Re: Upload Because upstream DOCSIS 3.0 channel bonding hasn't been perfected yet? | |
|  |  |  binded2 join:2009-08-11 Providence, RI | Re: Upload you dont think that even once they do channel bonding that there going to up your upstream
its not going to happen and if you happen to get 50/20 i bet it will be in the range of like $150 for service just like fios | |
|  |  |  |  | | Re: Upload No, but it's going to be better than 5Mbps upstream for $90-$150 per month. But yes, I get it -- which is why I have FTTH. | |
|  |  |  |  | | CC has 50/10 for 99$ when bundled thats a decent price, i can deal with that. | |
|  |  |  |  jmn1207Premium join:2000-07-19 Reston, VA | said by binded2:you dont think that even once they do channel bonding that there going to up your upstream its not going to happen and if you happen to get 50/20 i bet it will be in the range of like $150 for service just like fios How about $90 for 50/20 FiOS service, like many of us currently enjoy? | |
|  |  |  |  |  | | Re: Upload said by jmn1207:said by binded2:you dont think that even once they do channel bonding that there going to up your upstream its not going to happen and if you happen to get 50/20 i bet it will be in the range of like $150 for service just like fios How about $90 for 50/20 FiOS service, like many of us currently enjoy? Standalone or bundle? | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  | | Re: Upload 50/20 for 90$ is an awesome price espcially if it is standalone, even if it is bundle it is still good. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  jmn1207Premium join:2000-07-19 Reston, VA | said by fifty nine:said by jmn1207:said by binded2:you dont think that even once they do channel bonding that there going to up your upstream its not going to happen and if you happen to get 50/20 i bet it will be in the range of like $150 for service just like fios How about $90 for 50/20 FiOS service, like many of us currently enjoy? Standalone or bundle? I have TV service too, but you can get it for $95 alone with a one year commitment or $115 month-to-month. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  jmn1207Premium join:2000-07-19 Reston, VA | It looks like the price is now $95 with an annual agreement plan, and this is not part of any bundle. So, the prices have gone up $5 since I signed up back in December of last year. The month-to-month price is still the same, but the ETF for breaking the agreement is so low that you would be better off going with the annual plan and cancelling after 2 months of service rather than go month-to-month.
These prices are similar for both the DC metro area and the NY region from what I have discovered. Not sure where Verizon is charging $140+ or more for this service, but it is what they advertise.
 New Pricing
| |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  cacoPremium join:2005-03-10 Whittier, AK | Re: Upload Nice if you can get it. Comcast has pushed Docsis 3.0 to more folks in a couple of months than Verizon has fios subs total. -- »www.seabee.navy.mil | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  kes601 join:2007-04-14 Virginia Beach, VA | Virginia is the only state that gets that low of a price on the top tier on FiOS. I'm not sure of the price in other states, but it is quite a bit higher. | |
|
 |  |  |  |  binded2 join:2009-08-11 Providence, RI | said by jmn1207:said by binded2:you dont think that even once they do channel bonding that there going to up your upstream its not going to happen and if you happen to get 50/20 i bet it will be in the range of like $150 for service just like fios How about $90 for 50/20 FiOS service, like many of us currently enjoy? because not even one gets it for $90 here in rhode island its listed as $145
Fastest Download up to 50 Mbps / Upload up to 20 Mbps
FREE Wi-Fi access included
Wireless router included
Included for one computer
$139.95/mo. with phone
$144.95/mo. with out phone | |
|
 |  |  sporkmedrop the crantini and move it, sisterPremium,MVM join:2000-07-01 Morristown, NJ | said by Karl Bode:Because upstream DOCSIS 3.0 channel bonding hasn't been perfected yet? You're such an industry shill. -- with every mistake we must surely be learning | |
|  |  |  | | said by Karl Bode:Because upstream DOCSIS 3.0 channel bonding hasn't been perfected yet? Actually it's because most people other than techies really don't care about increased upload speeds.
Most people I know don't care about numbers either. They care about it being fast and always on. | |
|
 |  iansltx join:2007-02-19 Golden, CO kudos:2 | Good question. Comcast appears to be comfortable giving people 10 Mbps connections on the high end. Then again, Comcast doesn't put very many houses on a node compared with other cable systems, so Cox may not have a much headroom. | |
|  |  |  TimePremium join:2003-07-05 Reviews:
·Cox HSI
| Re: Upload said by iansltx:Good question. Comcast appears to be comfortable giving people 10 Mbps connections on the high end. Then again, Comcast doesn't put very many houses on a node compared with other cable systems, so Cox may not have a much headroom. Some Cox markets have very few homes on a node. I never drop below advertised speeds here. They've done a great job of network management in Vegas, now if they'd just upgrade speeds. -- "If it can't be done with brains, it can't be done with hours" - Clarence "Kelly" Johnson | |
|  |  |  |  iansltx join:2007-02-19 Golden, CO kudos:2 Reviews:
·Comcast
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: Upload Cool. I was just speculating on why Cox oesn't have 10 Mbps uploads on its highest tier.
Here in Texas, TWC actually gives advertised speeds...and then some due to PowerBoost...on all their tiers. They apparently don't have too many homes per node.
At school I have Comcast. They also give advertised speeds...and then some...so their nodes aren't overloaded either.
On the flip side, companies like Suddenlink are very conservative about their speed tiers because they have lots of houses per node and thus don't have the excess capacity needed to launch super-fast broadband connectivity. | |
|
 |  ajc18aka IGnatius T Foobar join:2000-05-06 Mount Kisco, NY | said by baineschile:Why are companies so afraid of upload speeds? With some technologies, such as DOCSIS and ADSL, each frequency band can only be allocated to either an upstream or downstream channel. As a result, the more channels they dedicate to upstream, the fewer they have available to dedicate to downstream.
Consumer ISP's know that residential subs do a lot more downloading than uploading, so they allocate bandwidth where it's needed.
There are other technical reasons as well. For example, with ADSL you don't have as many issues with crosstalk in the downstream direction. By the time the signal has degraded enough for crosstalk to become a problem, it's already been fanned out to a wide enough geographic area that it's not an issue. Upstream, however, all of the far ends are in the same cable bundle, so they have to stick with lower speeds in order to minimize crosstalk.
And of course there's the cynical reason: upstream bandwidth is for businesses, and they want to charge you more for business service. -- Art Cancro UNCENSORED! BBS »uncensored.citadel.org | |
|  |  |  patcat88 join:2002-04-05 Jamaica, NY kudos:1 | Re: Upload Its not that a channel is allocated to upstream or downstream, its wiring limits. For HFC/coax, the amplifiers have only a handful of upstream channels that have to contain DAVIC, DOCSIS, legacy analog, etc to control the boxes, PPV, MOD, VOD, IPG data, etc.
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Amer···quencies
For DSL, the problem is crosstalk at the CO. When the upstream data reaches the CO, its already weak, but all the RFI/harmonics from all the other pairs in the ducts and building weaken the upload even more by the time it enters the line card. For DSL download channels, its very quiet at your house, you have many times less RFI than at the CO, so your modem gets a much stronger signal and can go faster. | |
|
 |  dvd536as Mr. Pink as they comePremium join:2001-04-27 Phoenix, AZ kudos:4 | said by baineschile:Why are companies so afraid of upload speeds? because upload can ALWAYS be used unlike downstream which depends on how fast the server can upload to you. -- When I gez aju zavateh na nalechoo more new yonooz tonigh molinigh - Ken Lee | |
|  |  kd6caeP2p Shouldn't Be A Crime join:2001-08-27 Palmdale, CA Reviews:
·Vitelity VOIP
·AT&T U-Verse
| As more folks want to do such things as send videos, or do Off site data backups, upstream will become more and more important. Internet providers need to realize that the internet is a two way communications medium. They should not ignore those of us who want to make use of our upstream capacity, and I'm not even talking about p2p file sharing here. I'm talking about such things as sending high quality videos to youtube, or performing off site backups using services such as carbonite or any other backup service or backing up to a dedicated server if one has that. For now, not as many people generally do uploading, but that doesn't mean it should outright be ignored. Here where I live, Time warner offers 2Mbps upload on their top tier, but although my modem is configured for 2mbps, the highest speed I can ever achieve even during non-peak time is about 1.3Mbps or so. I've taken my modem to other locations and have achieved my full 2Mbps upstream, so I wonder why I can't get it here? I hope TWC will offer 5Mbps upstream to all it's user at least at some point. | |
|
 binded2 join:2009-08-11 Providence, RI 1 edit | to much money i dont see why there trying to compete with a service thats only $57.95 for 50Mbps but they want to chage $90 for 50/5
alot less for alot more
death to the cable company
to little to late cable | |
|  |  | | Re: to much money said by binded2:i dont see why there trying to compete with a service thats only $57.95 for 50Mbps but they want to chage $90 for 50/5 alot less for alot more death to the cable company to little to late cable Real nice saying death to the cable company. If it weren't for the cable company you'd probably still be stuck with dialup or DSL 1mbps. | |
|  |  |  | | Re: to much money said by fifty nine:said by binded2:i dont see why there trying to compete with a service thats only $57.95 for 50Mbps but they want to chage $90 for 50/5 alot less for alot more death to the cable company to little to late cable Real nice saying death to the cable company. If it weren't for the cable company you'd probably still be stuck with dialup or DSL 1mbps. Word. My situation is exactly that.
Comcast is hardly perfect (particularly on the caps and throttling), but they pulled fiber to my street to provide high speed internet, less than a year after the ATTBi acquisition.
AT&T has been here since practically the dawn of time, and won't provide anything more than overpriced POTS, and I live in the "Silicon Valley" no less. Complacency is the name of the game for telcos.
I'd still be stuck on dial-up without Comcast. And I'm hardly alone. | |
|
 JoelC707Premium join:2002-07-09 Stone Mountain, GA kudos:2 | Cox Marketing Wow, Cox sure doesn't understand marketing in Lafayette. Lafayette offers the following tiers. 10/10 - $30 30/30 - $45 50/50 - $60
Cox offers: 50/5 - $90
Tell me, which one is the better deal? I'd say ANY of the Lafayette options are. Just completely ignoring the download speed, any of Lafayette's upload speeds are double or better Cox's offerings. Even the closest apples to apples comparison, Cox is still $30 higher than the competition. That's a big difference I think. | |
|  |  | | Re: Cox Marketing Well, Cox has to recoup the money they spent on lawyers who tried for years to crush the Lafayette fiber project (which citizens VOTED FOR) with lawsuits, push polls, and disinformation. | |
|  |  |  JoelC707Premium join:2002-07-09 Stone Mountain, GA kudos:2 | Re: Cox Marketing said by Karl Bode:Well, Cox has to recoup the money they spent on lawyers who tried for years to crush the Lafayette fiber project (which citizens VOTED FOR) with lawsuits, push polls, and disinformation. Haha that sounds like a typical ad during election season. | |
|  |  |  ThrowDemsOutIf you can't convince 'em, confuse 'emPremium join:2002-03-03 Mullica Hill, NJ kudos:4 | said by Karl Bode:Well, Cox has to recoup the money they spent on lawyers who tried for years to crush the Lafayette fiber project (which citizens VOTED FOR) with lawsuits, push polls, and disinformation. Those costs were a drop in the bucket and would have nothing to do with the service fees they are charging now. -- My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page | |
|  |  |  |  | | Re: Cox Marketing It was a joke. They probably recouped those costs in six months. Push pollsters are fairly cheap. | |
|  |  |  |  |  ThrowDemsOutIf you can't convince 'em, confuse 'emPremium join:2002-03-03 Mullica Hill, NJ kudos:4 1 edit | Re: Cox Marketing said by Karl Bode:It was a joke. They probably recouped those costs in six months. Push pollsters are fairly cheap. Should have put a smiley on post then. And the costs were probably recouped in 6 hours and not 6 months.  -- My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page | |
|
 |  tubbynetreminds me of the danse russePremium,MVM join:2008-01-16 Chandler, AZ | said by JoelC707:Wow, Cox sure doesn't understand marketing in Lafayette. Lafayette offers the following tiers. 10/10 - $30 30/30 - $45 50/50 - $60 Cox offers: 50/5 - $90 cox understands it plenty well. lus fiber in lafayette has yet to deploy fiber city-wide. it will take them almost another year or so (if not more) to have fiber in their entire desired footprint. as it stands now, if people want the high speeds but aren't served by ftth - they have to go to cox.
q. -- "...if I in my north room dance naked, grotesquely before my mirror waving my shirt round my head and singing softly to myself..." | |
|  |  dvd536as Mr. Pink as they comePremium join:2001-04-27 Phoenix, AZ kudos:4 | said by JoelC707:Wow, Cox sure doesn't understand marketing in Lafayette. Lafayette offers the following tiers. 10/10 - $30 30/30 - $45 50/50 - $60 Cox offers: 50/5 - $90 Tell me, which one is the better deal? I'd say ANY of the Lafayette options are. Just completely ignoring the download speed, any of Lafayette's upload speeds are double or better Cox's offerings. Even the closest apples to apples comparison, Cox is still $30 higher than the competition. That's a big difference I think. And that $90 is only first year. what does it shoot up to after the intro expires? -- When I gez aju zavateh na nalechoo more new yonooz tonigh molinigh - Ken Lee | |
|
 binded2 join:2009-08-11 Providence, RI | dslextreme if your in ri like me not that i have it but dslextreme has a rebranded fios internet for way cheaper then the cable company or verizon for 50/20 and you dont need to tripple play any thing
»www.dslextreme.com/Services/Inte···ult.aspx
just some thing to look at if any one is interested
they offer service in any place that theres fios | |
|  tubbynetreminds me of the danse russePremium,MVM join:2008-01-16 Chandler, AZ | only a response... this move is only a response to the threat of qwest vdsl speeds in the phoenix market. without qwest announcing the 40/20 plan, arizona would have been another area that was left "just better than the other guys".
q. -- "...if I in my north room dance naked, grotesquely before my mirror waving my shirt round my head and singing softly to myself..." | |
|  |  dvd536as Mr. Pink as they comePremium join:2001-04-27 Phoenix, AZ kudos:4 | Re: only a response... said by tubbynet:this move is only a response to the threat of qwest vdsl speeds in the phoenix market. without qwest announcing the 40/20 plan, arizona would have been another area that was left "just better than the other guys". 5mbps upload is a far cry from the 17mbps upload you'd get from qwest. -- When I gez aju zavateh na nalechoo more new yonooz tonigh molinigh - Ken Lee | |
|
 iansltx join:2007-02-19 Golden, CO kudos:2 Reviews:
·Comcast
·Verizon Online DSL
| Interesting to see what markets Cox thinks are competitive I'd say right off the bat that the Phoenix market, with Qwest's VDSL2 product, is less competitive than FiOS-powered areas, but I guess that's just me. Then again, Cox may realize that they aren't getting any 50/5 customers in FiOS-powered areas because Verizon is pricing themselves around $90 for 50/20 service, with DSLExtreme offering 50/20 FiOS for $100 across Verizon's whole footprint.
Then again, we're talking about a cable company here. Still don't get why they'd have lower access pricing in an area where most people won't be able to get even 40/5 service through Qwest because their VDSL loops are too long.
All that said, I'd probably get 12/5 Qwest VDSL over whatever Cox has if VDSL was available to me. Heck, I'd probably even try 40/20 out though it'd only be for a month...$120 for home internet is a bit rich for my blood unless it's a 100 Mbps symmetric connection  | |
|  |  See 8 replies to this post | |
 thundar join:2001-01-03 Scottsdale, AZ | 50 can't even get 28 right now. They can't even give me my speed on Premier Plus at 28 Mbps so don't know how they are going to offer 50 Mbps. | |
|  |  |  nongobi join:2008-12-03 Lafayette, LA | Re: WAT It's spelled Louisiana, FYI. | |
|
 | |
|
|