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

Comcast reluctantly agrees to stop its misleading "10G Network" claims

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 145 posts

Re: Comcast reluctantly agrees to stop its misleading "10G Network" claims

#61

Post by epiccoleman »

kevingadd wrote: post #38
happytiger wrote: post #29

Slimecast constantly lies at every tier of their organization. I won’t overwhelm you with example as they can be easily searched for, but here’s three good ones: https://www.reddit.com/r/Comcast_Xfinity/comments/17cdku6/li... https://forums.xfinity.com/conversations/plan/i-was-lied-to-... https://forums.xfinity.com/conversations/customer-service/xf... I personally have experienced the lying on every recent interactio…

They thanked me for my loyalty as a business class customer when I moved by charging me money for equipment I had returned + continuing to bill me after I cancelled and had moved away from the location. I ended up having to go through a local regulator to bludgeon them into submission, at which point an upper management level Comcast employee called me on the phone and begged me to sign a paper to make the regulatory…

Please tell us that you didn't sign!

Re: Comcast reluctantly agrees to stop its misleading "10G Network" claims

#62

Post by acdha »

mrblah wrote: post #59
happytiger wrote: post #29

Slimecast constantly lies at every tier of their organization. I won’t overwhelm you with example as they can be easily searched for, but here’s three good ones: https://www.reddit.com/r/Comcast_Xfinity/comments/17cdku6/li... https://forums.xfinity.com/conversations/plan/i-was-lied-to-... https://forums.xfinity.com/conversations/customer-service/xf... I personally have experienced the lying on every recent interactio…

When I moved to a comcast area around 2014, I brought my own modem and they wouldn't let me connect over the phone without an "internet installation kit". I didn't need an install tech to come out since the place was already wired. I think it was about $29, and when the box arrived, it was literally a piece of paper with a url to go to for instructions. Absolute slimeballs.

I had a similar experience with them: they swore they had to have an installer plug the modem in, agreed to waive the $120 fine, and then it came back every month and I had to call their executive office to get it corrected. That last part did double duty because they never once billed at the quoted rate in the year we lived in that area.

Where I live now, Comcast has competition from Verizon and RCN. Starting a few blocks away, it’s only them. Shockingly, neighbors on the no-competition side report the same kind of routine casual fraud but it never happens here.

Re: Comcast reluctantly agrees to stop its misleading "10G Network" claims

#63

Post by toast0 »

vanchor3 wrote: post #22
kccqzy wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article says it provides 10Gbps of service to 98% of customers upon request, which would be powered by fiber-to-the-home. I don't need 10Gbps, but I do want symmetric upload and download speeds. Does anyone know if it's possible to ask them to run fiber and have only an upload speed increase?

> The article says it provides 10Gbps of service to 98% of customers upon request This part is funny to me because I've tried to sign up for their FttH and they declined despite it being in the area, and the same thing happened to others I know. I'm not sure how they came to that percentage but I don't believe it.

I suspect there's something like of the people who go through qualification and get an offer from Comcast 98% request to install it.

You probably didn't give them all the info unless you were ready to pay for it. And all the other people that get disqualified didn't count.

Re: Comcast reluctantly agrees to stop its misleading "10G Network" claims

#64

Post by zamadatix »

StillBored wrote: post #60
Alupis wrote: post #47

Even if 10Gbps to the home is technically available, it's not posted on their website, and I would be willing to bet majority of consumers will be denied due to installation costs (it's not trivial to run a fiber just to your house). So, why on earth was their network called "10G" if near zero percent of Comcast customers are even aware of that service, let alone actually have that service? Further muddying the water…

Yes, but ATT advertises 1G fiber connections, and it's only available at a small fraction of their service addresses. Or for that matter spectrum with Internet Gig (or whatever they call the 850/30 Mbit service). I would be in favor of a bit more truth in advertising such that they have to provide a service (not "up to") at, say, 80%+ of their service addresses before being allowed to advertise it. Or, for that matte…

I like the spirit but I'm highly cautious of the measure we choose. E.g. "80%+ of their service addresses" basically means "They can only advertise 25 mbit plans despite massive fiber investments". The intent being few people hear about plans not available in their area but the effect being yet another reason to not bother trying to serve rural areas.

Obviously the measure could be improved, particularly by making it an "and" instead of an "only" (e.g. "Most all service areas with up to 25 mbps, select service areas with up to 5 gbps. Check your location for details") but, for all the song and dance, I'm not sure such a thing really makes much meaningful impact to the consumer in the end (unless, again, it's so restrictive to have negative impacts instead) as regardless you're going to have to check your actual address and see if you're in the remaining x% that doesn't get that speed anyways.

I'm a big fan of just flat requiring "up/down for up to x GB/TB per month" in the advertisement though. Worst impact of that is the viewer just doesn't care.

Re: Comcast reluctantly agrees to stop its misleading "10G Network" claims

#65

Post by happytiger »

smegger001 wrote: post #58
happytiger wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are the HOA of the Internet world. I’ve had the exact same equipment scam happen. I ended up paying the first time. The second time I had a full video of me walking into the office (because at the time you had to return the equipment to the actual office, couldn’t ship it) and it took only a few months to get resolved. I don’t think there are many places that aren’t Comcast only. I briefly lived in an area with…

I bought my own router and modem before I signed up for their service as they were the only internet provider in my apartment building at the time. I viewed it as a preemptive measure against bullshit equipment rental fees. Everytime I have had to interact with them since they have tried offer me extra services (none of which I want) for free or reduced price if i would use their shitty box.

Did you get hit with the “no bandwidth cap” if you use their equipment or the $15 a month charge for using your own equipment or a combination thereof? Because that’s their official policy in many places (it’s insanely unethical and barely hidden consumer exploitation of fees).

Re: Comcast reluctantly agrees to stop its misleading "10G Network" claims

#66

Post by happytiger »

pxeboot wrote: post #44
happytiger wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are the HOA of the Internet world. I’ve had the exact same equipment scam happen. I ended up paying the first time. The second time I had a full video of me walking into the office (because at the time you had to return the equipment to the actual office, couldn’t ship it) and it took only a few months to get resolved. I don’t think there are many places that aren’t Comcast only. I briefly lived in an area with…

> I don’t think there are many places that aren’t Comcast only. Really? There are entire states (and countries) without a Comcast presence.

I’m sorry I was only speaking of the US, as this is a US company.

> You already knew that home broadband competition is sorely lacking through much of the US, but a new report released today helps shed more light on Americans who have just one choice for high-speed Internet.

> Comcast is the only choice for 30 million Americans when it comes to broadband speeds of at least 25Mbps downstream and 3Mbps upstream, the report says. Charter Communications is the only choice for 38 million Americans. Combined, Comcast and Charter offer service in the majority of the US, with almost no overlap.

> Yet many Americans are even worse off, living in areas where DSL is the best option. AT&T, Verizon, and other telcos still provide only sub-broadband speeds over copper wires throughout huge parts of their territories. The telcos have mostly avoided upgrading their copper networks to fiber—except in areas where they face competition from cable companies.

https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2018/07/comca...

Also, “broadband” being 25 mbit is their lobby’s choice and definitely should not be a legitimate threshold in the modern world.

Then add that even though others operate in different regions, they generally do not compete for high speed service or are very poor at delivering it, thereby not actually presenting an alternative even though they “officially” do.

Also, be clear that these two companies, that dominate areas of the US, collude.

https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/05/comca...

https://corporate.charter.com/newsroom/comcast-charter-annou...

https://corporate.comcast.com/press/releases/comcast-charter...

Re: Comcast reluctantly agrees to stop its misleading "10G Network" claims

#67

Post by zamadatix »

klabb3 wrote: post #55
Alupis wrote: post #47

Even if 10Gbps to the home is technically available, it's not posted on their website, and I would be willing to bet majority of consumers will be denied due to installation costs (it's not trivial to run a fiber just to your house). So, why on earth was their network called "10G" if near zero percent of Comcast customers are even aware of that service, let alone actually have that service? Further muddying the water…

Yes, and: > The Comcast "Gigabit Pro" fiber connection that provides 10Gbps speeds costs $299.95 a month plus a $19.95 modem lease fee. It also requires a $500 installation charge and a $500 activation charge. For reference, I’m paying €25/mo for 10Gbit symmetric. Modem “lease” and installation included. To be fair, I get ~8Gbit/s in practice, but that’s well worth it.

That's gotta be the best deal I've ever seen. Probably a year of service just to break even on the hardware to connect you to the upstream device, not counting actually providing the service. It's hard to find a base VPS with that level of service even allowing for a low data cap for the price and that's just for a connection with no hardware and a limited place to put data in the first place.

They don't happen to offer colocation do they :p.

Re: Comcast reluctantly agrees to stop its misleading "10G Network" claims

#68

Post by idatum »

kccqzy wrote: post #15
vault_ wrote: post #8

I didn't realize they were actually selling a 10 Gbps service tier as part of this branding. It's never been available in my market, so I assumed that they were advertising the uplink capability of the thing my modem was connected to! Happy to see this go, but I'm still shocked to learn that the name was _less_ misleading than I had thought.

The article says it provides 10Gbps of service to 98% of customers upon request, which would be powered by fiber-to-the-home. I don't need 10Gbps, but I do want symmetric upload and download speeds. Does anyone know if it's possible to ask them to run fiber and have only an upload speed increase?

You should push to have fiber. Once you get 1gb symmetrical (in my fortunate case after moving), there is no going back.

Not-fond memories of getting through to Crapcast support to resolve outage (e.g. cable laid in 90s failed) and then being pitched a "a great deal just for you" of "upgrading" to get catv sh*t package, as I waited.

Damn though, Crapcast did get to IPv6 fast and that specifically was solid in my previous house.

Re: Comcast reluctantly agrees to stop its misleading "10G Network" claims

#69

Post by geor9e »

American capitalism let private companies run some co-axial wires to our houses, which was a big capital investment for sure but not that big, and then we let them milk us for the privilege for the next 60 years. We've probably paid for it 1000 times over now. If the government just laid the wires as a public utility, as wasteful as the government is, it wouldn't be this bad.

Re: Comcast reluctantly agrees to stop its misleading "10G Network" claims

#70

Post by bsagdiyev »

StillBored wrote: post #60
Alupis wrote: post #47

Even if 10Gbps to the home is technically available, it's not posted on their website, and I would be willing to bet majority of consumers will be denied due to installation costs (it's not trivial to run a fiber just to your house). So, why on earth was their network called "10G" if near zero percent of Comcast customers are even aware of that service, let alone actually have that service? Further muddying the water…

Yes, but ATT advertises 1G fiber connections, and it's only available at a small fraction of their service addresses. Or for that matter spectrum with Internet Gig (or whatever they call the 850/30 Mbit service). I would be in favor of a bit more truth in advertising such that they have to provide a service (not "up to") at, say, 80%+ of their service addresses before being allowed to advertise it. Or, for that matte…

To Spectrum's credit they seem to be doing a lot of fiber for new builds. Our 1gbit plan is symmetric and pulls those speeds consistently, but yeah their coax footprint is stuck with lower upload, high/low split coax areas should see 500mbit upload at some point but who knows. The state of internet in the US is awful in most places.
Post reply on HN