Yeah, I can switch to 1.5/.7mbps DSL or stay with 16/3mbps cable. I saw u-verse came to my area but I had to yell at a manager to even get them to consider selling it to me without video. They agreed but when I asked them to cut my DSL the same day uverse comes in, they told me they could do that if I bought the video package. Toss in how AT&T treats its wireless customers and you're dealing with a level of incompetence and evil that makes Comcast look very attractive.
The question isn't whether comcast sucks, its whether it sucks worse than the competition. Here in Chicago, its clearly the better choice. That 3mpbs upload is pretty sweet for RDP and file transfer. Heck I even run a little webserver off my desktop and my dynamic IP hasn't changed in 2 years.
While I have no problem with the comcast bitching (they can be terrible at times) I just never see the equivalent for AT&T and other monopoly telcos. Why don't AT&T and Verizon get the same treatment? It took me 2 months of phone calls to get business DSL at our satellite office (new building) with Verizon and they even managed to fuck that up on site. I'm finding it hard to believe Comcast is any worse than these guys. In fact, I'd go as far as saying Comcast Business is pretty impressive. American based tech support during normal hours, great speeds, and no caps.
I suspect most of the complaints are from home users who are just joining the rage-fest and have zero experience with actually switching to the competition and will pretend to enjoy substandard speed and service just to "stick it to Comcast." Err okay, but that's not a rational or positive attitude.
Also, some of the comments in this thread are hilarious. Sick of the 250gb cap so you'll switch to wireless 4G? Heh, enjoy non-published dynamic throttling to 128kbps when Clear decides you've had too much internet. I'd rather have 250gb at 16mbps than "unlimited" at 128kbps.