1 edit | woohoo Now I cant wait till they roll this out the the WV market although the upload is laughable at 5 | |
|
 | glinc
join:2009-04-07
New York, NY | Re: woohoo I'll take and keep my fios 25/25 over this 100/5 any time. Upload is a joke lol | |
|
| | jca2050Premium
join:2002-02-04
Hacienda Heights, CA | Re: woohoo I have 25/25 and I would take 100/5 over it any day. I download a lot more then upload so it would benefit me more. | |
|
|  ArchonXD40Docsis 3.0
join:2003-02-24
Bossier City, LA | sweet!
 | |
|
| | Highest residential speed? From Paxio at »www.paxio.com/Residentialinternet
Internet 1000 Mbps= 1 Gbps that is upstream and downstream.
PAXIO’s Gigabit residential service. $245.00 | |
|
| | | Re: Highest residential speed? That's in the US of course. Other countries already have gigabit service. | |
|
| | | | Re: Highest residential speed? and have had it for 5 years or so. | |
|
| |
|
2 edits | Is this Paxio a fake service? Seems a little spam-ish - need my email phone and home address just to check for service.
This is the only ISP website that I have ever seen that has no coverage maps.
(unless its buried somewhere?) | |
|
| | Reviews:
 ·Millenicom
 ·AT&T Southeast
·Verizon Wireless..
| Re: Highest residential speed? AT&T UVerse refuses to put out a service or build out map. Cox Cable refuses to put out a service or build out map. Verizon FIOS refuses to put up a build out or service map. All require me to submit information before they tell me if they can provide service to my location. The only coverage maps for wireline ISPs that I have seen are from municipal buildouts like LUS Fiber in Louisiana. | |
|
| | |  Simba7
join:2003-03-24
Billings, MT | Re: Highest residential speed? One main reason the Broadband Mapping thing was such a clusterfsck.
If the ISPs won't give people the map of their services, it's less of a headache for them when they confront congress and lie their asses off. | |
|
| | | | rebus9
join:2002-03-26
Tampa Bay Reviews:
 ·RoadRunner Cable
 ·Verizon FiOS
1 edit | Re: Highest residential speed? said by Simba7:One main reason the Broadband Mapping thing was such a clusterfsck. If the ISPs won't give people the map of their services, it's less of a headache for them when they confront congress and lie their asses off. One reason is maps don't show granularity. You've heard it before-- one person can get (insert_service_here) yet his neighbor 50 feet away cannot.
If you show a map with the neighborhood marked as a service area, you're going to have angry callers insisting the service IS available because the map says so, even when it is not.
Plus, maps have to be updated as areas are added/deleted, and we all know how out of date many ISP websites are. | |
|
| | | Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
4 edits | said by davidhoffman:AT&T UVerse refuses to put out a service or build out map. Cox Cable refuses to put out a service or build out map. Verizon FIOS refuses to put up a build out or service map. All require me to submit information before they tell me if they can provide service to my location. The only coverage maps for wireline ISPs that I have seen are from municipal buildouts like LUS Fiber in Louisiana. Nobody said anything about buildout maps. I was very obviously referring to eligibility.
They should say on the front page only offered in the SF bay area so 99.99999% of people looking at the page can save valuable time.
Instead they want your email and phone number - seems kind of fishy.
And by the way, cox checked my eligibility over the phone no email or phone number was asked, just my address.
When you sign up for the service that is a different question.
By the way: (only need an address)
»www.att.com/u-verse/availability/ (uverse)
»www22.verizon.com/residential/fi···lity.htm (FIOS)
»intercept.cox.com/dispatch/32289···less.cox (COX -with a coverage map) | |
|
| | | | | | Re: Highest residential speed? Yes, they should put some of the location information from the Company tab into the Home tab. That would make it more obvious that they are San Francisco Bay area only. | |
|
| |  joebarnhartPaxio evangelist
join:2005-12-15
Santa Clara, CA
·Comcast
1 edit | said by DataRiker:Is this Paxio a fake service? Oh, it's real all right!
But Paxio has a very small footprint right now. They only serve the S.F. Bay Area presently. They have customers in Emeryville, Santa Clara, San Jose, Sunnyvale, Oakland, etc. But by no means full coverage in those cities. | |
|
| | | Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
| Re: Highest residential speed? said by joebarnhart:said by DataRiker:Is this Paxio a fake service? Oh, it's real all right! They only serve the S.F. Bay Area presently. This proves my point exactly. Just put that on the website, so 99.99% of the people who look at it can immediately leave the page.
Instead they "offer" you service with your email and phone number required.
Seems kind of "spammy" | |
|
| | | | | | Re: Highest residential speed? I suppose they want to know how many people are interested, and in what areas. | |
|
| | | | | | It's 1gbps service and people still have a reason to bitch. Incredible.... | |
|
| | | | | Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
| Re: Highest residential speed? said by michieru:It's 1gbps service and people still have a reason to bitch. Incredible.... I'm sorry go ahead and sign up, its available in your area.  | |
|
| | | That's very fast and very expensive! | |
|
| | | | Re: Highest residential speed? I pay $20 for each 1 Mbps of DSL.
So 1000 Mbps would be $20 000, if that were technically possible.
$245 for 1000 Mbps translates to $0.245 per 1 Mbps. That is 1.225 % of what I would pay if AT&T had their way. | |
|
|  dvd536as Mr. Pink as they comePremium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:4 | yeah its great[for the handful of people that can get it]
--
When I gez aju zavateh na nalechoo more new yonooz tonigh molinigh - Ken Lee | |
|
 Hookem99Deep In The Heart
join:2007-07-18
Pflugerville, TX
kudos:1
1 edit | woo hoo I'll have to call.....
Edit:
Just got off the phone.
Available now
120/mo standalone
179/mo HD Cable/107mbps internet | |
|
| | | Re: woo hoo Damn, and I just moved to Leander from Round Rock where I had TWC. Leander has SuddenLink and ATT so I went with DSL since there is no hidden cap. If SuddenLink is going to drop the cap with that kind of bandwidth, I'll drop DSL, though it is a heck of a lot cheaper. | |
|
| | | | Re: woo hoo Rocketchild... I could be wrong but i didn't think suddenlink had a download cap. Maybe you are thinking of comcast? I wish my area was suddenlink instead of windjammer cable. | |
|
| | iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 | No caps on SuddenLink. Meters, maybe. Caps, no. | |
|
| | | | | Re: woo hoo Well, if there are no caps then I might jump on it. I just seem to recall that they seem to recall seeing SuddenLink getting into people's business of their online habits. I'll have to go double check that. | |
|
| | | | iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Comcast
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: woo hoo Nope, Suddenlink never did the whole Phorm thing. WOW, yes. SuddenLink, no. No caps either, though extremely high usage in areas without sufficient backhaul (not your area) will result in throttling. I'm guessing that's to keep everyone happy even with a cable node running off a T3... | |
|
| iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Comcast
·Verizon Online DSL
| Dang, pricing isn't bad at all, all things considered. Upload speed sucks but if you're a newsgroup addict like some OOL users are, this is awesome.
Still wondering what 50/5 would cost. Also curious to see how much a business plan would be. Would make a nice circuit for a WISP, though a very asymmetric one. | |
|
| Reviews:
·Suddenlink
| said by Hookem99:I'll have to call..... Edit: Just got off the phone. Available now 120/mo standalone 179/mo HD Cable/107mbps internet Do they have a 50 package too how much do they want for it | |
|
| | Hm. Guess I may have to move to Austin from Houston. ; )
Why can't we get some more activity and competition down here? | |
|
1 edit | retarded Look cable industry! If you don't fix the UPSTREAM to at least 10 megabits UPLOAD, YOU NO LONGER QUALIFY for threads on BBR no matter how fast the downstream is! | |
|
Reviews:
·Windjammer Cable
|  Buy out my area please suddenlink!!!
| |
|
cacoPremium
join:2005-03-10
Whittier, AK | Waiting on ATT announcement . | |
|
|  tubbynetreminds me of the danse russePremium,MVM
join:2008-01-16
Chandler, AZ | Re: Waiting on ATT announcement you had it yesterday. u-verse has 24mbps everywhere that its available.
q. | |
|
| iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 | AT&T: We've completed line bonding trials and will offer 50 Mbps down, 6 Mbps up...if you're close to the VRAD. The new tier, Max Plus Turbo Extreme, will cost $95 per month.
Probably will be six months before that hapens though. | |
|
| | tubbynetreminds me of the danse russePremium,MVM
join:2008-01-16
Chandler, AZ | Re: Waiting on ATT announcement said by iansltx:AT&T: *insert canned press release here* Probably will be six months before that hapens though. channeling the death-star now? that probably needs to be looked at...
q.
--
"...if I in my north room dance naked, grotesquely before my mirror waving my shirt round my head and singing softly to myself..." | |
|
| | | iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 | Re: Waiting on ATT announcement 24 x 2 = 48. Round it up to 50 for a nice round number. 3 x 2 = 6. Just extrapolating | |
|
Tim618
join:2003-10-14
Garrettsville, OH | well.. suddenlink only offers 1mb/256 in my area..down right pathedic | |
|
 gatorkramKaBOOM BabyPremium
join:2002-07-22
Winterville, NC
kudos:2
·Suddenlink
| What about my market? I don't know why they are in such a hurry to announce a very lopsided 107/5 service, when here in my market, we can't even get the 20/2 or 36/2 plans yet.
107/5 is just silly.
While I think its a move in the right direction, and it's great to see the company I use doing serious upgrades, I hope they come to realize, people want more upstream too.
20/5 or 50/5 would be solid packages to roll out.
The 107 should be as fast as you can sync for the upstream.
--
Give me bandwidth or give me death!
»/testhistory/661871/4f240 | |
|
| iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Comcast
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: What about my market? Some providers are even more lopsided (Qwest 20/896 comes to mind) though SUddenlink is up there...
Personally, I don't think SUddenlink will increase upstream speeds beyond 5 Mbps until their competitors do the same; remember that SL is mostly competing against DSL-based technologies, which max out at 1-3 Mbps up depending on whether you're talking about standard-grade ADSL, CenturyLink bonded ADSL2+ or AT&T U-Verse. SL has VERY little fiber to compete with in their footprint, so there's no hurry to speed things up.
Also, going above 5 Mbps up on a cable system requires 64QAM upstream channels to do. SL is probably using 16QAM right now, and would have to clean up their plant in order to get the higher QAM. It's not incredibly difficult...Comcast and Cablevision have both done it...but SL may not have what it takes at the moment. | |
|
Reviews:
·Charter
| lol @ 5mb Upload Sorry but, 107/5.....5? Really? Im sure i don't speak for everyone but when will broadband providers realize there are a ton of people out there that want symmetrical tiers? Im not asking for 100/100 but how about somewhere in the middle ie 35/35 or 50/50? Heck id love to have 25/25. Enough with the expanding DL speeds please...focus more on UL! | |
|
| kd6caeP2p Shouldn't Be A Crime
join:2001-08-27
Palmdale, CA Reviews:
 ·Vitelity VOIP
·AT&T U-Verse
| Re: lol @ 5mb Upload I agree. Why is it that all these Docsis 3.0 downstream expansions include just 5mbps of upstream? Even if Docsis 2.0 must be used while channel bonding on the upload side is being worked on, isn't Docsis 2.0 capable of 10mbps upstream at the very least? If all cable providers are going to offer is 5mbits on the upload, then give those users with only docsis 2.0 equipment say a 30/5 tier that they can upgrade to if they don't wish to have all that downstream but want the upstream that Docsis 2.0 is more than able to provide anyway. Why is it that comcast and Optimum online are the only cable providers offering speeds above 5mbps upstream? Currently download is decent, but start working on increasing upstream to all users! | |
|
dvd536as Mr. Pink as they comePremium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:4 | Perhaps They should focus on giving their subs WHAT THEY CURRENTLY PAY FOR before announcing some pie in the sky package!
--
When I gez aju zavateh na nalechoo more new yonooz tonigh molinigh - Ken Lee | |
|
| iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 | Re: Perhaps SL is pretty good about that in their newly upgraded markets that have DOCSIS 3 20 Mbps service now. | |
|
dvd536as Mr. Pink as they comePremium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:4 | Will five. . . . . megabits up even supply enough ACKs for 107mbps?
C'mon providers quit cheaping out on the upload!
--
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
| Re: Will five. . . . . Yes they will, unless you're sending 64 byte packets
Seriously, SL probably uses 16QAM for upstream connectivity on their network. There's about 10 Mbps of capacity there. So pushing beyond 5 Mbps requires working on their plant a bit more, which is expensive.
Also, they have no competitive reason to go above 5 Mbps. | |
|
 TzaleProud Libertarian ConservativePremium
join:2004-01-06
NYC Metro | Ultra Speed Connections Nice. But it is definitely true that most people don't need that sort of bandwidth yet. I consider myself a heavy user and am quite happy with my 20/5 connection from FIOS. Somewhere along the line, the cost benefit drops sharply for the vast majority of users, including the 'nerds.' The only people (considering residential subs) I can see justifying $100/month or more for a connection are either rich people who just want to have the best of everything even if they don't use it, or ultranerds who just want to have a connection that fast for bragging rights.
-Tzale
--
They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
-:-
"I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism."~Ronald Reagan
-:-
www.freestateproject.org - LIVE LIBERTY | |
|
| iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 | Re: Ultra Speed Connections Or people who don't want to wait to download movies/TV shows online, even if they're Blu-Ray rips or HD captures. | |
|
| | Some nice fiber speeds at this small isp Hi,
I have fios at home and comcast at work...
Canby, a small town / city about 1/2 an hour from portland is installing and running fiber now... The local telco set it up..
d/l and upload speeds are pretty good and prices are fair...
look what a small telco can do.
»www.canbytel.com/internet | |
|
| | | Re: Some nice fiber speeds at this small isp Nice. I wish AT&T or BellSouth had taken the forward looking fiber pill. Too bad they were told they needed more copper in their diet. But I wonder why no symmetric speeds. | |
|
 rolandeCertifiablePremium,Mod
join:2002-05-24
Columbus, OH | Yawn.... Wake me when Verizon decides to finally expand into Ohio.  | |
|
 MrMasterjetsetterPremium
join:2000-12-16
St Thomas, VI | close but not quite Still not enough to get me to move to Pflugerville. | |
|
| | Downloads speeds Anything over 20 megs on cable is a waste, since I doubt most people can top 10 during the evening hours. I have 20 now, but get only 5-6 at night. The upgrade from 10 to 20 is only a few bucks, so I don't feel like I'm getting ripped off. | |
|
| iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 | Re: Downloads speeds Which cable provider are you using? Suddenlink? If not then it isn't a valid comparison; where Suddenlink has launched DOCSIS 3 they're pretty good about keeping the network running at top speed. | |
|
1 edit | Hmm I can get my full 20 around the clock I guess it depends on how heavily populated the area your in is
I could actually make use of 50 but I wont go 107 till they do a serious upload increase | |
|
| iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 | Re: Hmm Wonder how much 50 will cost...could be that they're launching 107 in some markets and 50 in others for the same price. Wouldn't put it past them anyway. | |
|
| | | | Re: Hmm i can not speak for the other markets but when suddenlink switches to docsis 3 here in cabot arkansas they will be using 64 qam modulation for the upstream. | |
|
| | slow upload RR Manhattan Just have to drop the .5 upload via TWC Roadrunner on west
side of midtown. @18 d/l. Bundle of midrange TV & RR. $90.
Not Turbo. At least connection has been solid at long last for
past year. First few years was a hell and only DSL the other
choice tho that bankrupt Boston cable outfit had torn up sidewalks for a service never offered. Back in biz but still
nada. Guess was a fiber cable. | |
|
|
1 edit | Re: slow upload RR Manhattan I laugh at theses cable companies with theses little high speed tiers whats the next company going to do offer 110/2 tier i can imagine afternoons congestion cable people suffer. | |
|
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Comcast
·Verizon Online DSL
| Businesses apparently can't get the higher speeds Just did a call mentioning Pflugerville and business internet tops out at 10/2. Granted, Suddenlink's 10/2 is $200, compared with Time Warner Cable's 10/1.5 for about the same price, but I still find it quite interesting that SL isn't letting business users get that higher speed. | |
|
|
|
