Broadband speed

[Chuckanut]

Here's an interesting article in ArsTechnica concerning what several broadband providers think is adequate speed for our internet services. Many of us here use our broadband service quite often during the day.

AT&T and Verizon have asked the Federal Communications Commission not to change its definition of broadband from 4Mbps to 10Mbps, saying many Internet users get by just fine at the lower speeds.

AT&T and Verizon say 10Mbps is too fast for “broadband,” 4Mbps is enough | Ars Technica

 

[gauss]

Hah, from those who are looking to "reform" net-neutrality -- figures.

-gauss

 

[Lsbcal]

Comcast recently increased our speeds from 25 Mbps to 50 Mbps. Haven't really noticed much change though.

I think 3 Mbps would be too slow as we had something like that before getting a cable modem and Comcast.

BTW, have had to switch out a Comcast cable modem twice in the last 2 years. If one is having intermittent issues, that is probably a good place to start in repairing the issue. Don't call Comcast, just go down and swap the cable modem.

 

[Chuckanut]

Comcast recently increased our speeds from 25 Mbps to 50 Mbps. Haven't really noticed much change though.

I am curious. Have you actually tested that speed using some of the speed test sites? I find that many of these speeds are 'upto' speeds, as in 'up to 50MPS'. In reality, that means that a speed of 3MPS meets the standard. Not so good.

 

[rodi]

We were having speed issues with Time Warner. We were paying for "standard" speed which is listed as "up to" 15mbps. In fact we were getting between 1 and 3 mbps. I had already changed out the modem to one I'd purchased that was supposed to be superior to the one provided for rent from Time Warner. My kids were complaining their video games were crashing and it was virtually impossible to stream movies.

Our tenant wanted a faster broadband connection - "ultra". Time warner has their connection split off our's. When the tech came out - I'm not sure what happened - but we're consistently getting 10 mbps now... and life is much better.

When I talked to time warner, prior to this - they were entirely unhelpful. I'm glad our tenant wanted faster internet... I got the truck roll for free, and my speed improved.

 

[Lsbcal]

I am curious. Have you actually tested that speed using some of the speed test sites? I find that many of these speeds are 'upto' speeds, as in 'up to 50MPS'. In reality, that means that a speed of 3MPS meets the standard. Not so good.

Yes I tested the speed a few times. Today it's showing 57 Mbps on 2 speed sites.

 

[GrayHare]

I believe these broadband speed measurements are akin to the exaggerated "characters per second" speed measurements of dot matrix printers decades ago. Those did not reflect the real cps, but rather one that assumed areas of blank space on the page.

 

[ERD50]

I don't care what they call it, and what is 'good enough' for one person isn't 'good enough' for another, so don't assume anything. Heck, if someone just emails, or only occasionally browses, they could be perfectly fine with a low rate that would be practically unusable for others. And for VOIP, ping times, jitter, and packet loss is far more important than speed (once you've reached some fairly low minimum speed, like ~ 0.2Mbps?).

So all I would ask for is consistent terms, and some 'truth in advertising' on these speeds. As mentioned, 'up to xxMbps' is meaningless. There should be some standards that say speed must be at least the advertised rate of xxMbps 98% of the time, or some such standardized language, which if standardized would not need to be in tech-speak, everyone would know what it meant for comparison purposes.

-ERD50

 

[MichaelB]

Too clever, these businesses are. If a level of service can be classified as a fixed number it also can be frozen, new and greater capabilities need not be rolled out to all, but can be selectively provided to some and for a high price, without fear of being called anti-competitive. Net neutrality would be claimed but not practiced.

Good thing this discussion didn't take place when we all had dial-up or 1st generation DSL speeds of 384K.

 

[robnplunder]

I use broadband to stream HD movies. 12 Mbs that I get is borderline fast enough. I download (instead of streaming) an HD movie if I don't want any disruption.

BTW, my AT&T contract is for 12 Mbs and I get that on the average, plus or minus 3 Mbs. I think AT&T sets the maximum rate to the contract rate + 3Mbs to reduce performance related complaints. A simple majority of speed test shows 15 Mbs although my contract is for 12 Mbs.

To OP, I don't see the point of AT&T & Verizon trying to hold on to the old definition. 4 Mbs isn't broad enough for most applications (video, gaming, etc) to come.

 

[easysurfer]

I switched from ATT DSL to Comcast economy plus a few months ago. I got the slowest speed, cheapest priced at Comcast and have been quite happy and even seen a couple of streamed movies. So nice to not have to wait and buffer and buffer like what happened with DSL.

 

[donheff]

It all seems like BS to me. The only reason for anything over about 1Mb is streaming movies and that usually gets throttled down due to traffic outside your ISP's pipe. I don't care what kind of Mbs you have, you can still run into extended "buffering" sessions on Netflix Friday and Saturday evenings.

 

[BTravlin]

TelMex is consistently giving me 5.25 mbps here. Works okay for most things other than HD movies.

 

[Tadpole]

Comcast 28.14 Mbps down 5.82 up. My bill only says "high speed internet" but the monthly charge is consistent with the Performance tier. We get very slow page loads in browsers though - computers?, router?, Comcast? - we don't know. We don't have many problems with roku feed of Netflix, etc. so I think it's our Window's 7 computers. (No problems with Kindle's either.)

For once I agree with ERD50. Transparency would be great.
I think we would enjoy our retirement less if our internet speeds were less.

 

[braumeister]

I had the lowest level of DSL ("up to 5 mbps") for years, and I felt it was almost good enough but not really what I wanted. I routinely got around 3.

Last year I upgraded my service to "up to 30" and now I routinely get around 28.

I'm very happy with this level. Because of the one year price break for a new level of service, I'm actually paying slightly less than before, but when the year is up I'll pay slightly more. Worth it.

 

[MRG]

What you pay for and what you get may be two different things. In IT vendors supplied 'speeds and feeds' numbers to us for capacity planning. What was sold could be far different than what you thought. I recall one big upgrade, mainly for a servers capacity(TPC). Digging into it you could better performance or worse, depending on the applications architecture.

I'm surprised many have reported similiar numbers to what you pay for. DSL is cheap here, but I think we can only get 2Mbs.

 

[target2019]

If you have Netflix + Comcast, you'll generally get good performance. Netflix pays off Comcast for this reason. I know we have problems with YouTube video, and I ascribe this to Google not paying off comcast. In some cases you are being held hostage by the isp.

Btw, if you get a newer comcast modem, you may become one of their public wifi hotspots without realizing it.

 

[photoguy]

I am curious. Have you actually tested that speed using some of the speed test sites? I find that many of these speeds are 'upto' speeds, as in 'up to 50MPS'. In reality, that means that a speed of 3MPS meets the standard. Not so good.

I always test my internet connection with these sites but I'm such a cynic that I believe the ISPs will prioritize that traffic so that one's measurements tend to look good just for those sites. Then again, ISPs have been known to throttle netflix so maybe it isn't so crazy.

 

[Bikerdude]

I use the slowest (cheapest) speed that does what I want it to do. Most ISP's will probably start to limit the total download data on a monthly basis and charge more if you go over.

 

[IBWino]

Yes I tested the speed a few times. Today it's showing 57 Mbps on 2 speed sites.

Ditto. Currently getting 57.5Mbps down, and 5.85Mbps up. Nice to see we're getting something for what seems like quarterly rate increases. I can't say that I notice a huge difference for general internet browsing and file downloading. We currently don't do any video streaming via Netflix, etc.

 

[Chuckanut]

It all seems like BS to me. The only reason for anything over about 1Mb is streaming movies and that usually gets throttled down due to traffic outside your ISP's pipe. I don't care what kind of Mbs you have, you can still run into extended "buffering" sessions on Netflix Friday and Saturday evenings.

Interestingly since switching to Frontier Fios I have had virtually no more Netflix buffering. My speeds are usually very near what is advertised when I signed up.

 

[donheff]

Interestingly since switching to Frontier Fios I have had virtually no more Netflix buffering. My speeds are usually very near what is advertised when I signed up.

Netflix works great for me most of the time on Verizon DSL. But, occasionally, if we try it on Friday or Saturday evening the buffering will be awful. That tells me it is not the pipe from me to the ISP that is the problem. It could be that Verizon is messing around with service (e.g. throttling me but not customers who pay for ten times more speed than a Netflix stream requires). If that is the case, there oughtta be a law...

 

[Car-Guy]

I've only got 3meg DSL (and happy to get it) out here in the middle of nowhere. Works well except for streaming video which I don't really care about since I don't like watching movies on the computer. (Prefer my 60" TV)

 

[imoldernu]

Comcast 55meg but...
Caveat emptor... read the contract...
No minimum, so when I complained that my speed went down to 3meg, the tech was quick to point out there was no guarantee.

The new Comcast attitude doesn't even pretend to be friendly. The arrogance of a monopoly.

 

[MRG]

Comcast 55meg but...
Caveat emptor... read the contract...
No minimum, so when I complained that my speed went down to 3meg, the tech was quick to point out there was no guarantee.

The new Comcast attitude doesn't even pretend to be friendly. The arrogance of a monopoly.

I'd belive that. They(comcast) have a finite number of bits they can send through a cable. Normally it's sliced and diced up so everyone appears to get a fair share. When the network is saturated and a transmission is sent that has priority(class of service) it gets more resources and other traffic queues. There's about 512 other ways this can happen.

I also agree they and other providers give sub standard support. Im sure I've ranted here about SBC.