Search:  

 






how-to block ads



Member review of Grande Communications


News tagged to this company
more information on the company
Ad-hoc Grande Communications Forum
Cable providers forum

Reviews:
read 43 reviews (18 positive) (12 negative)
If you wish to review this company, email reviews@dslreports.com
login for new review notification feature
Six Month Rating Unavailable
More reviews are required before ratings can be averaged

$54 per month avg ($30 to $78)

Speed test results

Review by dallas_tx See Profile
UPDATED: 11 days ago
member for 89 days, 5 visits, last login: 10 days ago


Allen,Collin,TX
$30 per month
"Very high latency during peak hours. Sub-par d/l speeds"
"Stay away"
Pre Sales information:
Install Co-ordination:
Connection Reliability:
Tech Support:
Services:
Value for money:

    I've been with grandecommunications for about two years now. They used to be okay, but have recently gone downhill. I live outside the Dallas area, and there are EXTREMELY high latencies most evenings. A simple ping to grande's default router will average between 40 and 120ms, with peaks above that. If you play online games, forget it.

    You may pay for the 6 or 8 Mbps bundle, but will usually get significantly less, especially in the evenings.

    I have called their tech support numerous times, but so far have been unable to make any progress on the latency issues. Latencies are generally lower and speeds faster in the mornings, which tends to point to "not enough bandwidth for our subscriber base".

    Here is an example of HOW BAD IT IS: (this is a ping test from my cable modem to a router internal to grande):

    Fri Nov 21 19:00:39 CST 2008
    PING 24.155.121.224 (24.155.121.224) 56(84) bytes of data.
    64 bytes from 24.155.121.224: icmp_seq=1 ttl=61 time=207 ms
    64 bytes from 24.155.121.224: icmp_seq=2 ttl=61 time=178 ms
    64 bytes from 24.155.121.224: icmp_seq=3 ttl=61 time=129 ms
    64 bytes from 24.155.121.224: icmp_seq=4 ttl=61 time=108 ms
    64 bytes from 24.155.121.224: icmp_seq=5 ttl=61 time=131 ms
    64 bytes from 24.155.121.224: icmp_seq=6 ttl=61 time=146 ms
    64 bytes from 24.155.121.224: icmp_seq=7 ttl=61 time=112 ms
    64 bytes from 24.155.121.224: icmp_seq=8 ttl=61 time=157 ms
    64 bytes from 24.155.121.224: icmp_seq=9 ttl=61 time=111 ms
    64 bytes from 24.155.121.224: icmp_seq=10 ttl=61 time=132 ms
    64 bytes from 24.155.121.224: icmp_seq=11 ttl=61 time=155 ms
    64 bytes from 24.155.121.224: icmp_seq=12 ttl=61 time=107 ms
    64 bytes from 24.155.121.224: icmp_seq=13 ttl=61 time=133 ms
    64 bytes from 24.155.121.224: icmp_seq=14 ttl=61 time=86.7 ms
    64 bytes from 24.155.121.224: icmp_seq=15 ttl=61 time=177 ms
    64 bytes from 24.155.121.224: icmp_seq=16 ttl=61 time=195 ms
    64 bytes from 24.155.121.224: icmp_seq=17 ttl=61 time=143 ms
    64 bytes from 24.155.121.224: icmp_seq=18 ttl=61 time=112 ms
    64 bytes from 24.155.121.224: icmp_seq=19 ttl=61 time=105 ms
    64 bytes from 24.155.121.224: icmp_seq=20 ttl=61 time=139 ms

    --- 24.155.121.224 ping statistics ---
    20 packets transmitted, 20 received, 0% packet loss, time 18998ms
    rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 86.755/138.720/207.909/31.463 ms



    Followup comments:

    TestedDoughnut

    @rackspace.com

    David

    I used to work for Grande, and I can tell you the place where we got the weirdest tech problems was the Dallas area. Grande acquired that network from Advantex back in 2003. Advantex used ADSL technology, while Grande was predominantly cable/fiber-coax-hybrid. Since then, Grande has been slowly converting the area to cable, but it has caused weird problems in the process. Eah.
    Forums » comments on review of Grande Communications


Thursday, 04-Dec 13:59:48 Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Hosting by www.nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo | feedback | contact
over 9 years online! © 1999-2008 dslreports.com.