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

111–120 of 145 posts

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

#111

Post by kube-system »

starttoaster wrote: post #12
rconti wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

| to anybody paying attention at least Maybe they don't think you should have to follow the industry to know what a company's advertising means? It pissed me off to no end to hear the monopolist advertise their "10G network" ("with speeds starting at 200Mbps") It was CLEARLY meant to mislead.

If you don't know what a 10G network in a given context could be, are you likely to understand the difference between what a 5g and a supposed 10g mobile network would be? Are you a candidate for a person that is likely to care about the difference between 200Mbps and 1Gbps? Perhaps it's naive, but I've heard the words "rack that 10G switch" so many times that it's hard for me to say that Comcast intended on being mi…

"Hey honey, I called Verizon and they have the 1G service for $79.99"

"I called up T-mobile home internet, and they can give us the 5G for $50"

"Looks like Xfinity has the 10G for $79.95"

The vast majority of people buying internet service are non-technical, misunderstandings about the details are common, and Comcast picked a name that is perfect for confusing with all of their competitors. People don't always know what these measurements really mean, but they know that a bigger one should mean faster internet.

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

#112

Post by Schnitz »

datway wrote: post #88
spike021 wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally I haven't had this problem. In fact, every few months they actually increase my plan's advertised max download speed. I wouldn't say the actual download speed is as close as what they say but pretty close. Of course the upload continues to be terrible I use my own modem and router now but this was the case when I "rented" from them as well.

Comcast’s behavior often depends on whether there is broadband competition in a local market. That would explain your experience and the other guy’s.

This! 2 weeks ago my internet started dropping for 1-2 minutes at a time, 3-5 times per day. The modem status page tells the tale, millions of uncorrectable errors, SNR below spec on several channels, and the event log shows all the disconnects. Neither their chatbot, nor the first level human support however will entertain any possibility except it being an issue with "the website you are using" or "your TV" or "your computer". Took maybe 30 minutes of BS until they offer to send a tech, but I have to pay if the tech concludes the issue is on my end. I eventually lost my temper and just told them AT&T is going round my neighborhood right now running fiber offering to buy everyone out of their Comcast contracts and that they have 2 choices, either they come out to fix the issue or they come out to disconnect and clean up my cable drop - their call. Suddenly a tech was available, the next day, guaranteed free of charge. The tech arrives, plugs in his test modem, says "yeah...that's not related to your equipment" after 5 seconds, shows me a huge signal drop in several frequency ranges and is actually surprised that the internet is even usable at all. Unfortunately the issue is further upstream than "our" utility pole, but he ran a new cable drop just in case and cleaned up on the pole before filing that ticket.

It makes you wonder how many people are limping along with half-broken internet just because they don't know how to debug this and force their way through Comcast's support wall and there not being a competitor they can threaten to switch to.

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

#113

Post by theodric »

sschueller wrote: post #106
klabb3 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I pay CHF 64.75 (~USD 75) a month for 25gbit symmetric in Switzerland. I can not understand how they can get away with charging 200+ for 10G. That is nuts. But we have providers selling bullshit here too. One such provider claims 5G wireless is the equivalent of fiber. Sells 1gbit but actuall throughput is bellow 300mbit even with the best tower. Theoretical max is 2gbit but their equipment can't even do 1. Misleadin…

Shit, I was paying 80.-/mo for Swisscom DSL @100Mb in Schwerzenbach because it was the only wireline option available. Eventually just switched to Yallo 4G at 15.-/mo, which was mostly fine.

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

#114

Post by joking »

sschueller wrote: post #106
klabb3 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I pay CHF 64.75 (~USD 75) a month for 25gbit symmetric in Switzerland. I can not understand how they can get away with charging 200+ for 10G. That is nuts. But we have providers selling bullshit here too. One such provider claims 5G wireless is the equivalent of fiber. Sells 1gbit but actuall throughput is bellow 300mbit even with the best tower. Theoretical max is 2gbit but their equipment can't even do 1. Misleadin…

> I can not understand how they can get away with charging 200+ for 10G. That is nuts.

well, truth said, you can pay that and more here if you want a good SLA and bandwidth guarantees. But for residential use it's not needed.

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

#115

Post by adriancr »

crotchfire wrote: post #105
dkjaudyeqooe wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I’m paying €25/mo for 10Gbit symmetric. Can you post where you live so I can move there.

Willing to bet Netherlands. Outside possibility of Romania, because they basically skipped over an entire generation (DSL) of telecom so there were no incumbents to cause trouble.

Romania is 10E a month for 10gbit with ~60E install charge

Netherlands is unlikely, cheapest is ~80e/month for 10gbit and 45e/month for gigabit

> because they basically skipped over an entire generation (DSL) of telecom so there were no incumbents to cause trouble.

Oh we had that (romtelecom) and people werent willing to use it, they used cheaper local ISPs that just ran copper wires everywhere.

Now a company (RDS) bought up most of those and kept upgrading and keeping prices low and basically are eating the competition. They're basically so far ahead you have construction companies that ask them to put fiber in new builds so its ready when apartments are being sold.

It's mostly competition that drove this from a very competitive company, the rest kind of suck and would go comcast route if they could afford it.

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

#116

Post by sschueller »

theodric wrote: post #113
sschueller wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I pay CHF 64.75 (~USD 75) a month for 25gbit symmetric in Switzerland. I can not understand how they can get away with charging 200+ for 10G. That is nuts. But we have providers selling bullshit here too. One such provider claims 5G wireless is the equivalent of fiber. Sells 1gbit but actuall throughput is bellow 300mbit even with the best tower. Theoretical max is 2gbit but their equipment can't even do 1. Misleadin…

Shit, I was paying 80.-/mo for Swisscom DSL @100Mb in Schwerzenbach because it was the only wireline option available. Eventually just switched to Yallo 4G at 15.-/mo, which was mostly fine.

It looks like your area will be getting fiber around April: https://ftth.init7.net/?x=963376.03977&y=6004593.74257&z=15....

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

#117

Post by happytiger »

epcoa wrote: post #77
happytiger wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 re…

While 30 million is too much, that’s less than 10% of the population. In the most populated areas it’s most common to have a duopoly. Sucks but “I don’t think there are many places that aren’t Comcast only” is not close to being accurate. They’re not even the dominant provider in Texas and New York. If anything it makes it easier for them to survive, antitrust below the national scale is much harder to apply.

It’s not a real number.

> At least 49.7 million Americans only have access to broadband from one of the seven largest cable and telephone companies. In total, at least 83.3 million Americans can only access broadband through a single provider.

> Over the past two years, federal stats suggest that Charter and Comcast have an absolute monopoly over fewer households, but we think this is mostly a mirage resulting from how the FCC reports data. A significant number of the census blocks showing new competition are likely only partially served.

https://ilsr.org/report-most-americans-have-no-real-choice-i...

That’s more accurate but much of the “good data” comes from the providers themselves.

Don’t know why you’ve got such a pro-Comcast / Charter bent, but I assure you they aren’t worth defending.

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

#118

Post by blagie »

wmf wrote: post #34
account-5 wrote: post #16

I am always baffled at how US businesses can pretty much do and get away with anything they want, with little to no concequences. I'm not saying where I live is perfect but every time there's a scandal here I only need to look to the US to see we don't have it that bad.

This is a story about a company not getting away with something. In general the US has turned the dial very far to the free speech side, even for advertising.

The dial should be turned very high on the free speech side.

The problem is that companies are treated as the "corporate person," which is complete nonsense. This isn't about pro/anti-business. It's just that companies aren't people, don't have rights, and good business regulation looks nothing like good human regulation. The Constitution, Universal Declaration of Human Rights, etc. are great document for rights of humans.

They don't apply well to things which aren't humans.

That's not even to say other constructs don't or shouldn't have rights. They're just not the same rights.

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

#119

Post by lotsofpulp »

epcoa wrote: post #77
happytiger wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 re…

While 30 million is too much, that’s less than 10% of the population. In the most populated areas it’s most common to have a duopoly. Sucks but “I don’t think there are many places that aren’t Comcast only” is not close to being accurate. They’re not even the dominant provider in Texas and New York. If anything it makes it easier for them to survive, antitrust below the national scale is much harder to apply.

DSL / wireless does not count. Very, very few homes have access to fiber. Most homes only have coaxial broadband, and most of those are only served by Comcast.

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

#120

Post by lotsofpulp »

Alupis wrote: post #49
heroprotagonist wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Last I knew, they still needed to finish working with their counterpart monopoly on their collaborative new Xumo device and get all the systems lined up to use it. Then they need to kick the little old grandma's still watching traditional cable off their network and set them up on a new Xumo streaming box instead. Then they drop the old video channels and use their frequencies to provide faster service on the same ol…

I don't know how coax internet works, or how the channel allocations work, but it seems to me if they can offer 2Gbps/200Mbps already why can't we opt for a channel reallocation and get like 1Gbps symmetrical, or at least 1Gbps/500Mbps or something? I do understand the legacy channel allocations were designed for almost entirely download - but 2Gbps? That can't be...

> I don't know how coax internet works, or how the channel allocations work, but it seems to me if they can offer 2Gbps/200Mbps already why can't we opt for a channel reallocation and get like 1Gbps symmetrical, or at least 1Gbps/500Mbps or something?

Because they cannot actually offer it, it is all marketing bullshit.

Always assume coaxial upload bandwidth is slim to none. They probably just advertise a burst speed you get for 5 seconds. If it is not symmetrical, it is not real in my mind.

Post reply on HN