|
Let's talk about all the companies we hate (or love) that provide us with access to the internet (and occasionally moving pictures that are first broadcast and re-transmitted through wires). Here's the basic layout of ISPs in the US today. Cable  Coaxial cables. This is what most people traditionally think of when they think of cable tv/internet. One major advantage cable has is in upgrades to the DOCSIS protocol which dramatically increase speeds. The 3.0 upgrade brought 100Mbps service within easy reach. The forthcoming 3.1 upgrade is said to bring Gbps service (previously only the domain of Fiber services) to everyone. However, cable connections are shared between multiple subscribers. During heavy usage periods, you should expect to not get the speed you are paying for. Here are your big players: Comcast (aka xfinity)  The largest provider of cable tv and internet in the US. Owner of NBCUniversal among other entertainment giants and overall behemoth. Consistently rated at the bottom of customer satisfaction for any company. Has close to a 50% market share of cable internet subscribers. Time Warner Cable/Charter  The second and third largest cable companies, respectively. They are in the process of attempting to merge, pending government approval. Cox  Yes, it sounds hilarious. Assorted Others Most of these are regional players that don't extend beyond their core area. These include Brighthouse, Wow!, RCN, and Cablevision. DSL  Phone lines. DSL offered a path towards higher speeds in the late-90s when dial-up was your only other option. However, the technology is limited by distance from a "node" or a central point of service where customers' phone lines connect to the network's fiber network. If you are beyond a certain distance, you are not allowed to sign up for this service. It is also limited by its own technology. The max speed of a "high-speed" DSL line is about 20Mbps though you could get up to 45Mbps if you're really close to the node. However, cable internet has long since surpassed the speeds offered by DSL and continues to grow faster with newer DOCSIS tech. The major players here are: AT&T U-Verse  Figures that an old phone company would be the major player in internet access over phone lines. Verizon High Speed  Ditto but laughably slow. CenturyLink  Mostly located in the western US. Not as many subscribers as Verizon but the speeds are better (but still don't meet the 25Mbps threshold for broadband in the US). Fiber  Oooo, shiny! Specifically, Fiber-to-the-home service is a relatively new concept for US internet service. The reason it's newer is due to the high upfront costs to building out a new network. Fiber cables are fragile and expensive and are usually buried. That means building a new network involves tearing up and patching streets and property. Building permits, contractors, fees, taxes, and more. Cable and DSL have the advantage here of being able to use existing infrastructure. Very few existing neighborhoods have existing fiber networks to take advantage of. Still, the outlook on fiber is good as some DSL operators are switching over to fiber to get competitive and a certain internet giant is getting involved in select regions. Consider this the wild west of the ISP landscape. Major Fiber ISPs: Verizon FIOS  Consider yourself lucky if you live in an area serviced by FIOS. Verizon isn't expanding the network any further due to the aforementioned costs of building the network. You have access to 500Mbps service but it's still pretty expensive. Honorable mentions: Google Fiber  FIOS may have been first on the scene but Google is making a splash by providing 1Gbps connections for a relatively inexpensive monthly cost ($70 per month versus FIOS's $250 per month for half that speed). However, their footprint is still very small with only the Kansas City (both MO and KC) area and Provo, UT areas being hooked up. They are actively looking at expanding into several different metro areas across the US. AT&T U-Verse with Gigapower  Confusing co-branded with U-verse, this is AT&T's future shift away from DSL and building out something that can compete with cable. Also, it was mandated by the government in exchange for merging with DirecTV. Municipal Fiber Congrats on living in Chatanooga, TN, Sandy, OR, and a handful of other locations. You get low-cost fiber service with excellent customer service that's operated like a local utility. High speeds are the norm but expansion is limited beyond the municipality. Satellite Internet HughesNet  If you live in the middle of nowhere and have no other option, you can get 15Mbps from a satellite ISP. The pings are atrocious so expect online gaming to be a non-starter and it doesn't even qualify as broadband anymore. Mobile ISPs You get the Internet from the air. Mobile ISPs are not suitable to home usage as the low data caps prevent you from doing much of anything before hitting overage fees. Here's the links to the existing mobile network threads: Verizon Wireless AT&T T-Mobile Sprint Wireless ISPs Differing from the mobile operators, these start-ups utilize line-of-sight radio signals to create a wireless network. Nextlink, Rise, and, recently, Vivint have begun to offer service to under-served areas. Speeds are better than DSL but can't match cable. They do currently meet the 25Mbps definition of broadband though. However, without direct line of sight to a tower/transmitter, you will be denied service. Competition The major thing about the US broadband picture is the absolute lack of competition across most of the country. Building a network is expensive and to get the initial build out completed, many regions granted actual or defacto monopolies as incentives. The FCC estimated that about 75% of the US has access to 25+Mbps through only 1 ISP. You can call satellite or wireless service as active competition but those networks do not compare to the kind of usage you expect out of a home internet connection. The reason Google made such a splash with their Fiber roll out was the low cost of monthly service. Almost immediately, those areas services by Google saw the existing ISPs lower costs and increase speeds. Noteably, AT&T's Gigapower service is $110 per month in areas not also serviced by Google and $70 where Google Fiber is present. Maybe Fiber-to-the-Home deployments will encourage a new age of competition but it'll be years before we see it happen, if at all. Anyways, use this thread to ask questions about your local/regional/national TV/Internet provider. I'm sure a number of goons are in the employ of the above companies and can provide insight as to why the cable guy didn't come during his window and then proceeded to kick your puppy into the neighbor's yard while installing your new XJoey5 Blazing modem. Thwomp fucked around with this message at 22:15 on Jan 8, 2016 |
#
¿
Dec 30, 2015 21:05
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 10:23 |
|
|
To kick things off, I find it incredibly weird that I have access to both Comcast and WOW! plans but I've never found WOW! to offer competitive prices. You'd think they would try to best them on price if they can't match Comcast's speeds.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2015 21:08
|
|
|
Avocados posted:Comcast has been utter garbage in my experience (surprise surprise) and whenever I have to deal with them at my parent's house I have to resort to cancellation threats. I never did figure out why our outage was going on. They had two no-shows (which I negotiated to be free of services charges because they wanted me to pay per visit) and would pingpong me around to different departments. It's sucky because I imagine the outsourced tech support people hate their jobs, I hate their service, and its a crappy situation So this is something that has always caused that weird itch in my brain to go off. Maybe it's because I'm in the suburbs and I don't share my Comcast connection with a giant apartment full of people but I've always had great service. I mostly get the speeds I'm promised and the reps and technicians I contact have been really nice and responsive. I'd love to do the goony thing and make a spreadsheet of people with awful service and maps them out to see where the real bad apples/problem connection areas are.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2016 22:00
|
|
|
That would make sense. Relatedly, The FCC reported today that 10% of Americans still lack access to broadband home connections. The vast majority being rural Americans. It's an improvement over 2013's 17% and 2012's 20%, especially since the FCC redefined broadband last year as 25Mbps down/3Mbps up. Ars has a nice write-up. They especially note that while the report doesn't have anything major to report, several indications allude to 2 possible future changes: the FCC could be looking at possibly introducing minimum required speeds for mobile networks and they are indicating that future broadband redefinitions would require access not only to speedy home connections but speedy mobile connections as well.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2016 22:32
|
|
|
life is killing me posted:tl:dr -- There are wireless service companies that can provide reasonable speeds with no caps in some cities/areas, and might warrant an addition to the OP; useless whining about my lack of broadband options; possible alternative for those without access to broadband at home who just need it to surf the web and do email without going over on their phone data plans. Added a section dedicated to wireless ISPs and renamed the old section mobile ISPs. Thanks for the info!
|
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2016 22:16
|
|
|
Yeah I'm paying only $40 a month for 50Mbps for Internet only (promo rate). It's a great price but I do have to call every six months to get it renewed.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2016 15:46
|
|
|
Yeah that. It also helped that another (but less speedy) ISP had sent an offer mailing I could use as a reference. The key really is to be willing to cancel and retentions will give you an offer that'll last 6-12 months. The fact that most ISPs will do this and not just lower prices across the board is the true crime here.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2016 19:23
|
|
|
The first set of DOCSIS 3.1 modems have been certified, officially signaling the start of the new 3.1 era. Comcast had started some trials earlier with 3.1 modems but those were test hardware and not certified. These all meet the new standard and will, presumably, go into consumer products. Cable ISPs still have to upgrade their network to support the new standard. And of course, you have to pay for the multi-Gbps plan.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2016 20:09
|
|
|
life is killing me posted:Are these modems being offered by the ISPs with install or do you have to buy them for hundreds of dollars at Best Buy? I imagine the first set of consumer modems will be pricey. It'll likely be more cost effective to rent one from the ISP until they become more common. Then again, if you're paying $500 a month for the Xfinity MegaPower Juice with Beats plan then you could probably afford your own hardware.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2016 21:27
|
|
|
The Consumerist has an epic takedown today of all the arguments against Net Neutrality and heavier regulations that the ISPs made last year. They took everything they claimed would occur in their filings with the FCC and compare it to what they told investors at the end of last year/beginning of this year. Shocker: investment has continued without interruption and the sky didn't fall.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2016 19:12
|
|
|
I think that's partly to do with how the business looks three to five years ago. Back then, cable cutting wasn't quite as prevalent as it is now (still not a super big deal but it's grown since then). The focus was still on getting as many people in as many bundles as possible. I think the major ISPs see where things are headed (Internet being the major subscriber draw, TV secondary) and their priorities are less on bundles. What their current priorities are right now would make for an interesting debate.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2016 18:38
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 10:23 |
|
|
Serenade posted:My experience with Verizon fios in the greater Boston area in the past month has been abysmal. Is xfinity so bad that it's not worth considering or am I stuck making angry phone calls until I get the internet I'm paying for from Verizon? General consensus is it depends. One building may be wired better than another, or have tenets who use more or less capacity than others. If fios sucks for you, switch to xfinity and give them a try for a few months. It can't possibly be worse than what you've got, right? I guess there's some rules of thumb to follow: 1) Urban areas tend to be crapshoots. Just look at all the trouble NYC has had to go through to get Time Warner to deliver on its promises. Wiring old buildings is a nightmare and the more people in a building, the better chance you'll have slower than expected speeds. 2) Suburban areas tend to get better service because 3) The further from an urban center you get, the shitter your service will be.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2016 14:52
|
|