Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Most internet service providers are gone – Sonic has survived and thrived

sfchronicle.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 122 posts

Re: Most internet service providers are gone – Sonic has survived and thrived

#51

Post by terinjokes »

inferiorhuman wrote: post #45
cbhl wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That depends on whether you get ADSL (6 Mbps per copper phone line, resold AT&T, but a real phone line) or Fiber Optic (gigabit fiber optic to the apartment, but you get an additional box that exposes a phone jack plugged into the ONT in the closet, so presumably VOIP). I've seen Sonic hook up places in SF with both; they sell the ADSL to try and get the revenue to build out more Fiber. The Sonic technician I spoke t…

That depends on whether you get ADSL (6 Mbps per copper phone line, resold AT&T, but a real phone line) or Fiber Optic (gigabit fiber optic to the apartment, but you get an additional box that exposes a phone jack plugged into the ONT in the closet, so presumably VOIP). ADSL2 goes up to around 20 Mbps, VDSL up to around 50 Mbps. Sonic may or may not still sell bonded DSL service. I believe the only resold AT&T servic…

Where I was living in SOMA, it was resold U-Verse that wasn't even FTTN. It was several thousand feet of copper back to the central office. No one knew the exact length, as those records were lost.

Was ecstatic finally moving away from that place to somewhere else.

Re: Most internet service providers are gone – Sonic has survived and thrived

#52

Post by reaperducer »

robbiet480 wrote: post #38

I tried to get Sonic at 100 Grand Avenue in Oakland after they put fliers on homes and businesses all around saying "We are coming to Oakland with our own fiber and offering gigabit!" (they have been in Oakland for a long time with their AT&T DSL product). Turns out, they decided to not install to my building (254 unit high-rise), most likely due to a, what I believe to be, illegal exclusive line ownership agreement…

illegal exclusive line ownership agreement that my commercial landlords signed with AT&T.

Exclusive, yes. Illegal? Not really. Every apartment building I've lived in has had an agreement with one provider. They don't want to rip open the walls for every company that wants to put in a line. And these days with the way internet providers come and go, I don't blame them.

If you rent, you don't own the building, so you have no say in the matter. If you own a condo, then you can at least influence the board. If you want more control over your home's internet service, buy a house.

The only way around it is to go wireless. Back when WiMax was a thing, the building I lived in had an exclusive deal with AT&T, which could only supply 768k DSL. I got around that by going with ClearWire's WiMax.

Re: Most internet service providers are gone – Sonic has survived and thrived

#53

Post by JustSomeNobody »

I had Comcast out recently due to intermittent connection issues. The very first thing he said when he saw my SB6141 was that it was not on the approved list and that it was likely the issue. Of course, he tested the line and found the real issue (their line and connector outside). After he left, I looked it up and my modem is in fact still on their approved list for the 60Mbps that I pay for.

I seriously dislike the state we are in with all the consolidation of communication companies. It's just mind blowing that this has been allowed to happen.

Re: Most internet service providers are gone – Sonic has survived and thrived

#54

Post by rladd »

I used to be a big support of Sonic for years, but have changed my mind as of late.

They skipped my block for fiber, and I thought there could be some issue (like the fact that a Muni electric line runs down it) that might make it impossible for them to install it. So I asked their tech support if it was going to someday come, or never come.

Sonic would not give me any information. They wouldn't confirm or deny that they'd ever be able to install fiber. They said it would probably happen eventually, but refused to provide even a ballpark figure like "next month, next year, 2 years, 5 years or 10 years".

I finally got a response saying that there were overloaded utility poles on my block and the next block, and that was what was preventing them from stringing fiber. They even sent a map showing which poles were at fault.

So I went to the PUC and worked with them to get the poles replaced, all while sticking with Sonic's slow and expensive ADSL.

Once the poles were replaced, I went back to Sonic and they still refused to say if or when they'd be able to install fiber. Finally (several years have gone by now) someone from the responsible department said that there would never be fiber on my block because of the Muni electric line. What? That's what I asked in the 1st place!?!

After that someone else replied and said that they could actually do it on Muni electric blocks now, but they again refused to give me any semblance of a timeframe. Finally, someone else at Sonic admitted that it could be a very long time, perhaps more than 7 years, because "it's as time consuming to do permitting for a block as it is for a neighborhood" and my block wasn't a priority.

That's all fine, but if so why didn't they say so in the first place rather than giving me a run-around for 3 or 4 years? Wait, I think I know the answer: if they admit that fiber isn't coming any time soon (if at all) people might go to a competitor for faster service!

Pretty cynical, and not what I'd hope for in an ISP committed to transparency. But there you have it: as far as I'm concerned, Sonic just isn't as cool as they seemed.

TL/DR: If Sonic skips your block, they ain't coming back any time soon, if at all, even if the issue that made them skip is corrected.

Re: Most internet service providers are gone – Sonic has survived and thrived

#55

Post by reaperducer »

zalthor wrote: post #22

Maybe I'm being too picky? Or a maybe I'm just in the minority, bit I don't really like using Sonic. I mean, their internet works, and customer support is fine (but I've had as good a service from Comcast too). What I find annoying from Sonic is their billing process. I dislike that they foist a random router onto you and charge you $10 a month (and charge you if you want to return it). I also dislike that they force…

Who in 2019 needs a landline?

People with house alarms. People with fax machines. People with medical equipment that sends information to their doctors a couple of times a day. People who don't trust VOIP providers. People who want to be properly geolocated when they dial 911. People who want to use a phone when the power goes out for longer than a cell phone can hold a charge (think hurricane-prone states).

Here's a good one: People who want to talk on the phone.

I stayed on a remote ranch in New Mexico back in April. The owner was at the next ranch over, about five miles away. I needed to call her, so I picked up the phone. A real land line phone. Good Lord, I'd forgotten what a quality phone call sounds like. It was as if she was right there in the room with me. No awkward cellular delay. Talking over each other was OK and natural and you could still understand the other person. It was an absolute delight. I already have my current place wired with VOIP, but in my next home I'm going to get a landline.

Landlines may not fit into your lifestyle or mindset, but that doesn't mean they don't have value.

Re: Most internet service providers are gone – Sonic has survived and thrived

#56

Post by reaperducer »

JustSomeNobody wrote: post #50
zalthor wrote: post #22

Maybe I'm being too picky? Or a maybe I'm just in the minority, bit I don't really like using Sonic. I mean, their internet works, and customer support is fine (but I've had as good a service from Comcast too). What I find annoying from Sonic is their billing process. I dislike that they foist a random router onto you and charge you $10 a month (and charge you if you want to return it). I also dislike that they force…

> I get that most advertising is not supposed to reflect reality... It actually is supposed to. A lot of companies just seem to get away with not.

Because people have become so used to it that they forget to complain, and to whom they should complain.

Re: Most internet service providers are gone – Sonic has survived and thrived

#57

Post by megaframe »

zalthor wrote: post #22

Maybe I'm being too picky? Or a maybe I'm just in the minority, bit I don't really like using Sonic. I mean, their internet works, and customer support is fine (but I've had as good a service from Comcast too). What I find annoying from Sonic is their billing process. I dislike that they foist a random router onto you and charge you $10 a month (and charge you if you want to return it). I also dislike that they force…

I have Sonic, and it's $64.05 not $75. The promo router is a bit annoying but they only charge you if you return it before the promo period ends or if you keep it after. The land line is annoying but still comes out way cheaper Comcast (at least any plan worthwhile).

I get Bi-directional 1Gbps, top upload from Comcast is 35MBps.

Tested it at 896MBs down/941MBps up from work which has connection that can keep up. Also tested fast.com and speedtest.net *Worth noting most routers you buy at something like Best Buy can't hit those rates in both directions.

Re: Most internet service providers are gone – Sonic has survived and thrived

#58

Post by robbiet480 »

reaperducer wrote: post #52
robbiet480 wrote: post #38

I tried to get Sonic at 100 Grand Avenue in Oakland after they put fliers on homes and businesses all around saying "We are coming to Oakland with our own fiber and offering gigabit!" (they have been in Oakland for a long time with their AT&T DSL product). Turns out, they decided to not install to my building (254 unit high-rise), most likely due to a, what I believe to be, illegal exclusive line ownership agreement…

illegal exclusive line ownership agreement that my commercial landlords signed with AT&T. Exclusive, yes. Illegal? Not really. Every apartment building I've lived in has had an agreement with one provider. They don't want to rip open the walls for every company that wants to put in a line. And these days with the way internet providers come and go, I don't blame them. If you rent, you don't own the building, so you h…

Here's the facts I am aware of, with a massive caveat that this was a few years ago and my memory is pretty fuzzy on it:

- When the building was under construction, Comcast paid some amount of money for coax to be installed. Maybe it was extra coax, maybe it was a headend for the building, I don't know specifics, other than Comcast paid the building owners

- In exchange, between 2008 and 2013, Comcast had a exclusive line agreement, only allowing AT&T access

- In 2014, the Comcast contract expired and AT&T created a exclusive lines agreement with building management, only allowing Comcast to exist

- Based on this [0] statement from the FCC, these exclusivity agreements are illegal in apartments

- At the time that I had looked into this, around 2012, I was attempting to get WebPass (pre-Google acquisition) to come into the building. Turns out that my building was a top sales prospect for them, so I worked with their chief sales officer and chief legal officer to craft letters to my management about the exclusive agreement, although never followed through when WebPass had pushback from the company at other properties than my own.

- Wave G was able to install its own hardware (routers on every floor) and ethernet from the antenna on the 23rd floor all the way down to ground level (in preexisting conduit that was installed at construction time) in April 2019. Wave G was only able to do this after executing a side agreement with my building management to gain access. They were willing to do whatever it took to get into the building because we were blocking (physically with height) line of sight to their tower in downtown Oakland and needed to use our roof as a hop. I assume they paid a good chunk of cash to get in.

Just a note, the building owner is Essex Property Trust, a publicly traded REIT with quite a few buildings on the west coast. One other thing, this exclusivity thing is a real issue in Oakland specifically which is why EFF created OICC [1] which I provided my feedback to.

[0]: https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-280908A1.pdf

[1]: https://oaklandinternetchoice.com

Re: Most internet service providers are gone – Sonic has survived and thrived

#59

Post by johngalt »

reaperducer wrote: post #52
robbiet480 wrote: post #38

I tried to get Sonic at 100 Grand Avenue in Oakland after they put fliers on homes and businesses all around saying "We are coming to Oakland with our own fiber and offering gigabit!" (they have been in Oakland for a long time with their AT&T DSL product). Turns out, they decided to not install to my building (254 unit high-rise), most likely due to a, what I believe to be, illegal exclusive line ownership agreement…

illegal exclusive line ownership agreement that my commercial landlords signed with AT&T. Exclusive, yes. Illegal? Not really. Every apartment building I've lived in has had an agreement with one provider. They don't want to rip open the walls for every company that wants to put in a line. And these days with the way internet providers come and go, I don't blame them. If you rent, you don't own the building, so you h…

Tearing up walls is absolutely not necessary. Structured wiring in the building with an MPOE room for cross connects to the carriers is how it works. This is what usually happens regardless of contractual arrangements.

More accurately, the landlord wants to maximize their revenue while minimizing costs. So they sell out their tenants by signing an agreement with a carrier to build the wiring in exchange for exclusivity.

Re: Most internet service providers are gone – Sonic has survived and thrived

#60

Post by robbiet480 »

johngalt wrote: post #59
reaperducer wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

illegal exclusive line ownership agreement that my commercial landlords signed with AT&T. Exclusive, yes. Illegal? Not really. Every apartment building I've lived in has had an agreement with one provider. They don't want to rip open the walls for every company that wants to put in a line. And these days with the way internet providers come and go, I don't blame them. If you rent, you don't own the building, so you h…

Tearing up walls is absolutely not necessary. Structured wiring in the building with an MPOE room for cross connects to the carriers is how it works. This is what usually happens regardless of contractual arrangements. More accurately, the landlord wants to maximize their revenue while minimizing costs. So they sell out their tenants by signing an agreement with a carrier to build the wiring in exchange for exclusivi…

Yes, the building has excellent structured wiring which is how Wave G was able to install without having to do anything more than bolt a few racks to walls and run fiber through existing conduit.
Post reply on HN