dslreports logo
 story category
Time Warner Cries Foul
Threatens to sue New England DSL provider
As we mentioned yesterday, a DSL provider named Great Works Internet hired a stat farm to conclude their DSL service was faster than Time Warner's elusive Roadrunner. The folks at Time Warner Cable apparently aren't pleased, and have threatened to sue the provider if they don't stop using the ads by the end of the day. Time Warner agreed to (and participated in) the study, but later "found fault with the sample size and methods The Tolly Group was using," according to this Portland Press Herald article. "We're looking at this as Time Warner being anti-competitive and a sore loser," says Rick Preti, GWI's vice president of marketing.
view:
topics flat nest 
page: 1 · 2 · next

dks7
join:2004-05-31
Omak, WA

dks7

Member

Poor Babies

Meh bunch of babies. I love competition, without it we'd still be stuck at 14.4k.

PhoenixDown
FIOS is Awesome
Premium Member
join:2003-06-08
Fresh Meadows, NY

PhoenixDown

Premium Member

Re: Poor Babies

I am not knocking the study since I dont know anything about it, or Maine for that matter, but if Cable is 3 meg down and dsl is barely 1 meg down - how is it faster?!?
k_mumm
join:2001-06-14
Laramie, WY

k_mumm

Member

Re: Poor Babies

Try 8 meg down.

tiger72
SexaT duorP
Premium Member
join:2001-03-28
Saint Louis, MO

tiger72

Premium Member

Re: Poor Babies

...if you live next door. 2.5 miles my ass.
gondola_fry
join:2004-06-29
Portland, ME

gondola_fry

Member

Re: Poor Babies

Yes, 2.5 miles you can still get 3/768. Have you ever used this kind of service (Lucent Stinger DSLAMs)? Do you know anything about it? Again, I reiterate that cable has had too big of an influence on the perception of DSL. Yes, cable (depending on the provider) is really good, but so is this, and it costs less. May want to do a little research before you just dismiss the possibility based on your media-influenced opinions.
koveman
join:2002-01-23
Phoenix, AZ

koveman

Member

Re: Poor Babies

I've used dsl. I've been a subscriber and I've done tech support for other subscribers.

dsl SUCKS!

Could be bad service by the bells, but I've witnessed poor performance in at least three markets. My opinion is definitely "media-influenced" as in if your transmission media is a copper phone line and it's not a T1, then it sucks.

dsl makes me want to puke.
Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

Skippy25

Member

Re: Poor Babies

100's of thousands of people can come here and make a stupid broad statement as you have for either service.

I have had DSL for a few years now and love it. I support people using both cable and DSL neither having any more or less issues then the other. When asked about broadband options I simply state you probably wont go wrong with either one so get the one that is cheaper and provides what you need. HOWEVER, DSL is generally cheaper for comparible speed.

Basically this will come down to the market and the company. Some markets will have great DSL and crap cable, where as others it may be the opposite way, and the remaining will have equal services where it won't matter which one you get.
Freezone
join:2000-09-29
Southfield, MI

Freezone

Member

Re: Poor Babies

I have both dsl and cable and I can honestly say"THEY BOTH SUCK" There

Oh and my dsl (I have 2) are 6.0 down and my cable is 3.3 down (On a good day).

But then if it rains too hard my dsl like to go down. So I chose to keep 3 providers and two technologies. This way I do not lose money when one hits the crapper. And even a T1 can not provide this type of internet uptime, becuase you only get 1 back bone where I have access to 3.

tiger72
SexaT duorP
Premium Member
join:2001-03-28
Saint Louis, MO

tiger72 to gondola_fry

Premium Member

to gondola_fry
said by gondola_fry:
Yes, 2.5 miles you can still get 3/768. Have you ever used this kind of service (Lucent Stinger DSLAMs)? Do you know anything about it? Again, I reiterate that cable has had too big of an influence on the perception of DSL. Yes, cable (depending on the provider) is really good, but so is this, and it costs less. May want to do a little research before you just dismiss the possibility based on your media-influenced opinions.

Yes i've had DSL. Been rated at 3mbps, but couldn't top 1.2mbps. Good ol DSL. It's good that you can get 3/768 at 2.5 miles. Most cant. Until it's the norm and not the exception, i'll repeat: 2.5 miles my ass. OTOH, i don't think the consumer should have to be concerned if Lucent Stinger DSLAMs are used, or whatever else. It shouldn't be the consomers duty to go find out what DSLAMs are used, what modems are used, what kind of quality telephone wire was used, the wire-distance from the CO, etc... Provide what you advertise, or GTFOtheway. You may want to get your head out of your ass and stop ASSuming you know what i have/haven't done.
wentlanc
You Can't Fix Dumb..
join:2003-07-30
Maineville, OH

wentlanc to PhoenixDown

Member

to PhoenixDown
Bacause with cable you have to share the bandwidth with your neighbors. With DSL, you have dedicated bandwidth to you. You could find that 2 of your 3 megs on your cable provider is unusable becaus of all of the broadcast, multicast, and normal unicast traffic. When you get a web page, everyone on the network has to get it and then subsequently drop it. That chews up bandwidth. The old rule of traditional unswitched ethernet was that 40% utilization is almost too much. Cable operates in exactly the same fashion.

puritan

ruscorp
I Never Stop Posting For You
Premium Member
join:2002-08-29
Earth

ruscorp

Premium Member

Re: Poor Babies

It's all shared at some point.

BonezX
Basement Dweller
Premium Member
join:2004-04-13
Canada

BonezX

Premium Member

Re: Poor Babies

well what's 4500 of 5000, that's over 40%
Freezone
join:2000-09-29
Southfield, MI

Freezone to ruscorp

Member

to ruscorp
Yes, but I am annoyed by all the traffic on my cable con when my dsl is silent. When the lights flash on my dsl modem chances are i know what is going on. My cable modem is constantly going.

ruscorp
I Never Stop Posting For You
Premium Member
join:2002-08-29
Earth

ruscorp

Premium Member

Re: Poor Babies

said by Freezone:
Yes, but I am annoyed by all the traffic on my cable con when my dsl is silent. When the lights flash on my dsl modem chances are i know what is going on. My cable modem is constantly going.

I've had both cable and dsl as well. I've always wondered why that was.

Cho Baka
MVM
join:2000-11-23
there

Cho Baka

MVM

Re: Poor Babies

Those are ARP requests.
Perfectly normal, and harmless.

ruscorp
I Never Stop Posting For You
Premium Member
join:2002-08-29
Earth

ruscorp

Premium Member

Re: Poor Babies

said by Cho Baka:
Those are ARP requests.
Perfectly normal, and harmless.

All the time and never happening with DSL? Are you sure?

Cho Baka
MVM
join:2000-11-23
there

Cho Baka

MVM

Re: Poor Babies

Yes.
I cannot speak to the exact technical reason, but it was explained in detail by a network admin in the Cogeco forum a while back.
(I couldn't find the link)

rolande
Certifiable
MVM,
join:2002-05-24
Dallas, TX
ARRIS BGW210-700
Cisco Meraki MR42

1 recommendation

rolande to ruscorp

MVM,

to ruscorp
said by ruscorp:
It's all shared at some point.

That IS the general idea of how networks operate. But, for those of you who are protocol challenged, a protocol like CMTS that is shared at layer 2 without any deterministic qualities like a TDM network makes a whole connection act like garbage when enough other stations on the segment are busy. Most DSL providers on the other hand are typically using ATM at layer 2 with either PPPoA or PPPoE for the client connectivity. This provides a whole different class of connection quality that is scalable and fully manageable by the providers. Cable providers don't have that flexibility on their networks and have little ability to control the congestion in their networks at the edge except to enforce harsh ToS agreements to limit upstream traffic. DSL's downfall is usually the physical limitations of the wire to the customer's premises. Luckily for the cable companies this is something they don't have to worry about. Everyone can connect just the same. They just have to try and control upstream bandwidth usage without a technical way to do it with the access protocol to avoid upstream congestion within their nodes.

Shared interfaces at aggregation points like 100Meg or Gig or OC-3, OC-12, OC-48 etc. are a complete world apart from the shared technology behind the DOCSIS standard. You are trying to compare shared service within an access technology versus shared service within a core network technology. So you can't even begin to compare these apples and oranges. Obviously speed of those technologies is a factor. But, aside from the speeds, the methods of traffic queueing that can occur on those types of interfaces, depending on the layer 2 protocol, is like comparing a Ferrari to a Pinto. When you aggregate thousands of broadband connections into upstream network connections that are shared in this manner, that is whole different kind of shared connection than cable uses.

Cho Baka
MVM
join:2000-11-23
there

Cho Baka

MVM

Re: Poor Babies

Yes, that is the technical way of looking at things.

I look at the speed test archive here at dslr:
»/archive

Judge for yourself.
Theory vs execution!

(As was said earlier, either DSL or Cable can be done well, or done poorly.)

Hot_Rats
He's Not Tor Johnson
join:2003-07-08
Indianapolis, IN

Hot_Rats to wentlanc

Member

to wentlanc
said by wentlanc:
You could find that 2 of your 3 megs on your cable provider is unusable becaus of all of the broadcast, multicast, and normal unicast traffic.

You could, but so far, I'm finding that I can maintain a steady 2.7-2.9 Mb down, at virtually any time of day/night/week, just like two years ago when it was 2 Mb down and I could maintain 1.7-1.9 Mb consistently.

I had DSL; 768/128. It was OK, and I did get the advertised speed (heck, I'm within 2000 feet IIRC) but after dealing with Ameritech through lie after lie after billing f*ckup after billing f*ckup, well, let's just say we parted ways and I'm far happier with my provider these days. The only way I'd go back to DSL is for a business account, because RR's business class stuff is a ripoff.

Count Hogula3
John Forged Kerry
Premium Member
join:2004-07-10
Corona, CA

Count Hogula3 to PhoenixDown

Premium Member

to PhoenixDown
said by PhoenixDown:
I am not knocking the study since I dont know anything about it, or Maine for that matter, but if Cable is 3 meg down and dsl is barely 1 meg down - how is it faster?!?

That's like saying if cable is 1 meg down and DSL 3 meg down, how is cable faster. The point is that they're offering DSL that is faster than cable.
NicNitro
join:2004-01-13
Portland, ME

NicNitro to PhoenixDown

Member

to PhoenixDown
I live in portland and rr.
when it is 8pm at night, good luck...it will be around dsl or less quality.

day time it blazes because every residential user is at work. GWI is a nice maine company. Time Warner is being a bully.

BIGMIKE
Q
Premium Member
join:2002-06-07
Gainesville, FL

BIGMIKE to dks7

Premium Member

to dks7

Re: Technical limitations to qualifying for DSL

Technical limitations to qualifying for DSL
Unfortunately, ordering the service isn't the only obstacle between you and DSL. There are a few stumbling blocks, especially prevalent in the Clovis area, that prevent a number of people from qualifying.

First: DSL services can only run over straight copper phone lines with no digital conversions.

This means that an office location using a PBX phone system wouldn't qualify for DSL. A PBX system is digital, and thus prevents the DSL conversion from happening.

(The location might qualify if a straight analog phone line from Qwest was run to the location, but there are no promises that even that would qualify.)

Also, if fiber optic cable is used anywhere between your house and Qwest's central office, the line cannot be converted to DSL. Some newer housing areas have used fiber optic cable for the housing units. While this is great for voice, it means no DSL.

Second: You need to be within about 15,000 feet of a phone company's central office to get the service. In testing the circuits, Qwest has found that some people as far as 18,000 feet away from a central office can get DSL service.

The 15,000 foot limit is because of signal loss. Typically, if you are over 15,000 feet away from the central office serving your location, too much data will be lost to make the service usable.

Third: Even if you are within 15,000 feet, you still might not qualify because of line conditions and signal loss.

Certain devices and wiring may prevent a line that would otherwise qualify from doing so.

For example, Qwest commonly uses "pair gain" devices like SLCs. An SLC is like DSL in that it converts a line to use digital instead of analog. However, the increased capacity is then used to carry more phone lines instead of enhancing the one. Such areas in Clovis are North half of Colonial Park, Country Medows, Sandsen, and Mariposa Dr.

Qwest commonly uses these devices where they have run out of wires for new lines. (It costs a lot less to setup an SLC than it does to run more copper wires from the central office to the home/business.)

These devices can have a detrimental affect on modem connections and automatically disqualify you for DSL.

Also, there are some older devices used to boost voice quality that will disqualify a line.

Another big culprit is older phone wiring (either in the home or somewhere between the home and Qwest's central office). The older wiring causes increased signal loss and could disqualify a line that is within the distance limit otherwise.

Note: When you order DSL you should be aware that Qwest equates signal loss to distance. Thus if you order DSL, you may be told that you are too far away from the central office when you are not. This result typically means that there is something on the line that is causing excessive signal loss.

Why is distance important with DSL?
If you have heard even something about DSL, you will have heard about distance. Your phone lines normally terminate at a telco office, usually nearby. This distance, (the length of your line between your location and the telco office), is a very important factor in whether or not you can get DSL, and what speed you can get.
Here are some rules of thumb for distance ranges. Please be aware that especially with non Telco ADSL lines, distance limits for speeds can vary widely from company to company. There are cases where it is policy for "residential" DSL lines not to be offered as far out as functionally identical "business" products!

My neighbor has DSL, why don't I?
DSL is a technology where distance really matters.

Most Telcos limit ADSL lines to 15,000 ft from the CO (not as the crow flies, but how long the actual circuit is). If you're lucky, it may be 18,000 ft.

If your neighbor across the street has DSL and the phone company will not qualify you, there are several possible reasons why.

A. Your neighbor may have gotten lucky and he caught the loop before it went around the ENTIRE block.

B. The telco's records may be out of date.

C. Your telephone service could be served out of a different CO than your neighbor's (this is rare but is possible, especially in metropolitan areas where the COs are over-crowded).

In any case, if your neighbor has DSL, odds are you'll get it soon.
MrBentor
join:2003-02-18
Seattle, WA

MrBentor

Member

Re: Technical limitations to qualifying for DSL

I am a just shy of 19,000 feet from my CO. I did have regular DSL at 1500/128 but it kept dropping and stuff. It worked about 85% of the time. (Covad told the DSL reseller they thought I was 13,000 ft from the CO so they gave me service thinking it would be ok.) Well, after I started to have irregular problems I had them check i8t out and they "remeasured" and found I was way past 15,000 feet. How they got me on and stable was they raised my upstream to 400k and lowered my downstream to ~800k and locked the line in “Safe Mode.” Worked fine ever since, Only at to reboot the modem twice in the last 10 months or so. But I probably can never get those super speed lines – like 3m or 8m. Oh – well.
BizFinancing
Premium Member
join:2003-01-10
Port Orchard, WA

BizFinancing to BIGMIKE

Premium Member

to BIGMIKE
Yes, Qwest is very famous for using SLC's to increase the capacity of "voice" services to an area with out having to add additional copper trunks which does pose a problem for DSL availability.

Fortunately, Qwest has been adding RT's to many areas that are serviced by SLC's to bypass this problem as well as the distance limitations.

ramien
@sacoriver.net

ramien to BIGMIKE

Anon

to BIGMIKE
--------------
First: DSL services can only run over straight copper phone lines with no digital conversions.
This means that an office location using a PBX phone system wouldn't qualify for DSL. A PBX system is digital, and thus prevents the DSL conversion from happening.
--------------
Another big culprit is older phone wiring (either in the home or somewhere between the home and Qwest's central office). The older wiring causes increased signal loss and could disqualify a line that is within the distance limit otherwise.
--------------

The line will qualify if a PBX is used, you just can't use DSL through a PBX system. A POTS splitter will solve this issue. You install the splitter before the PBX system and it is bypassed.

Internal wiring issues is the same thing. You install a POTS splitter bypassing all internal wiring.

GWI offers free service calls to install these devices. Now thats customer service.
crackbarrel
join:2004-08-18
Gorham, ME

crackbarrel to dks7

Member

to dks7

Re: TWC response to GWI lies

»www.aroundmaine.com/04/0 ··· ault.asp

Steve
I know your IP address

join:2001-03-10
Tustin, CA

Steve

Looks like a good study to me

The Tolly Group are a pretty top-notch group of people, very experienced in high-end equipment testing, so if they put their name on this, it's probably a pretty good study.

Steve

Disclaimer: they've been a customer in the past

coffaro
Moonie
Premium Member
join:2003-07-05
Arlington, TX

coffaro

Premium Member

Re: Looks like a good study to me

Good for them. Too bad that's not true for all DSL vs Cable. I'd like to see some competition for our money.

C0deZer0
Oc'D To Rhythm And Police
Premium Member
join:2001-10-03
Tempe, AZ

C0deZer0 to Steve

Premium Member

to Steve
Well, what do you expect for a bunch of whino's controlled by Steve Case?

Time Warner lost. Either shape up and improve or shut up and deal with it.

KornyBastich
Premium Member
join:2004-08-03
Carson, CA

KornyBastich

Premium Member

Re: Looks like a good study to me

said by C0deZer0:
Well, what do you expect for a bunch of whino's controlled by Steve Case?

Time Warner lost. Either shape up and improve or shut up and deal with it.

Steve isn't there anymore since last year.

»www.adrants.com/2003/01/ ··· n-of.php

Voyager2K2
join:2001-10-04
Wayne, PA

Voyager2K2

Member

You Can't Fool Mainers

Having spent a decade in Maine I can say this about Mainers.
They aren't easily fooled and recognise the value of a dollar.
GWI should kick-ass in Maine (where available) regardless of what T/W does.
As I see it it's just more free advertising for GWI.

Phooey on T/W!

Lurch77
Premium Member
join:2001-11-22
Green Bay, WI

Lurch77

Premium Member

Re: You Can't Fool Mainers

I agree. I spent 4 years in Maine. GWI was great!

Hall
MVM
join:2000-04-28
Germantown, OH

Hall

MVM

Keep TW blind

You would certainly have to do this with Time Warner "blind". They've been accused of making "special" configurations when their service is being demo'd, for example, at a computer show or similar. Instead of the modem being capped at their standard speed, say 2 or 3mb, they can open it up to 10mb.

borborpa
Slipping Slowly Into Oblivion
Premium Member
join:2002-02-20
New Cumberland, PA

borborpa

Premium Member

But TW does the same thing?!

It's OK for TW to say they are x times faster than DSL, but it's not OK for a group to test and show that they, in fact, aren't? What a bunch of whiners!! How about upgrading the system so it IS faster, then having the test re-done. Oh wait...that would make sense.

Bill
Premium Member
join:2001-12-09

Bill

Premium Member

Re: But TW does the same thing?!

Adelphia does the same thing in this area. All their ads say "8 times faster than DSL !", but whenever a DSL company comes back and says "Our DSL is faster than Cable" people get mad.

SquareSlinky
Premium Member
join:2004-05-25
Tampa, FL

SquareSlinky to borborpa

Premium Member

to borborpa
I couldn't agree more.

How about they not cry and just increase their speeds to they are faster?

exocet_cm
Writing
Premium Member
join:2003-03-23
Brooklyn, NY

1 recommendation

exocet_cm

Premium Member

Aww...

...TW got their feelings hurt, *sniffle*

Subaru
1-3-2-4
Premium Member
join:2001-05-31
Greenwich, CT

Subaru

Premium Member

Re: Aww...

said by exocet_cm:
...TW got their feelings hurt, *sniffle*

LMAO Perfect!

SND2005
Premium Member
join:2001-09-15
Im Over Here

2 edits

SND2005

Premium Member

Frito-Lay can't prove it tastes better.....

Speaking as someone who grew up in Maine- screw Time Warner! Maine is one of the states most behind in broadband tech and just because TW doesn't like the way a ad sounds they have to stomp the little ant to death!? This should speak to people as to the true nature of the corporate giant.

AOL, SBC, AT&T, Sprint.... all these people air commericals making fun of each other and claiming their product is better. Where's the lawsuit there?

For an exmaple of who stupid this can get, check out the Jays Vs. Lays battle....

»www.billingsgazette.com/ ··· hips.inc
Doubledee32
join:2002-06-20
Charlotte, NC

Doubledee32

Member

AWWWWWW!!!

T/W should stop whining and increase their speed!-What a bunch of wussies!!
kpatz
MY HEAD A SPLODE
Premium Member
join:2003-06-13
Manchester, NH

kpatz

Premium Member

TWC in Maine?

Does TWC even cover Maine? Around here (NH), we're either Comcast or Adelphia depending on the town. I didn't think TW/RR covered anything north of Connecticut.

akristov
join:2001-01-31
Tampa, FL

akristov

Member

Re: TWC in Maine?

TWC definitely covers Portland, Maine.
gondola_fry
join:2004-06-29
Portland, ME

gondola_fry to kpatz

Member

to kpatz
Time Warner is the largest cable provider in Maine. The only one that comes close to it is Adelphia which is absolutely horrid here.
ParanoiaInc
join:2002-08-28
Tucker, GA

ParanoiaInc

Member

I see no proof in this pudding.

First, www.tolly.com is not online. I keep getting redirected to Netowrk Solutions. Next, I do not see GWI stating specifically the parameters for the comparison. FOr me, it would have to be restricted to between the customer's premises and the ISP's first hop to the Internet. This way it would include the ISP's internal network and into their gatewya into the upstream provider's network.

Also, I would like to see saturated and unsaturated network portions as well. I have seen Saturated DSLAM's and Headends and they can have a tremendous range of bandwidth consumption. And since GWI may not own the DSLAM's they are using (Verizon?), its a further bust on the matter.

But, there is one thing I can conclude on this kind of 'advertising', and that is if a company cannot rest on their own laurels then the only option is political-style competitor-slamming approaches. And in this, GWI just became no better, in my eyes, than TWC.

••••••••••••••••

VWSpeedRacer
join:2002-10-06
Essex Junction, VT

VWSpeedRacer

Member

Bait and switch... AGAIN!

"Sure, we said you could do the study... but we didn't say you could come out on top! WTF! Where's our lawyer?!?"

ddog
@rr.com

ddog

Anon

why do they compete instead....

how about instead of TWC bitching they complete and RAISE our speeds, bet they never thought of that possibility.

Matt3
All noise, no signal.
Premium Member
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC

Matt3

Premium Member

On Average.....

Well, I'm not going to debate the merits of this "test", but if anyone bothers to read the .pdf, you'll see why they tested better.

Seems to me RR is running a damn fine network up there since their AVERAGE is 2.63Mbps and their cap is 3Mbps. Wow. With only a .18Mbps deviation.

GWI on maintained an average of 3.85Mbps, and that's with 3 tests at or ABOVE the 6Mbit mark! Their deviation was a miserable 1.40Mbps. Hope you live close to the CO folks.

Imagine the poor souls with GWI DSL who decimated that average with their low speeds.

•••••••••••••••

wolfox
Gentle Wolfox
join:2002-11-27
Dunnellon, FL

2 edits

wolfox

Member

I just read the articles...

Hehehehehe! Totally PWND. Their defense? Cry to momma and the lawyers for a reprieve. Grow up!

"The only thing that differentiates these products except price," Jortner said, "is speed."

Those are the two largest mitigating factors in broadband sales. 6mb/608k @ $45 != 1.5mb/256 @ $65+ in my area. My personal choice? Read the profile just to the left.
Minor errors. Glad to catch them before someone else does.
Nothwest Arkansas' ONLY all Techno Radio Webcast, powered by SBC DSL!

ctceo
Premium Member
join:2001-04-26
South Bend, IN

ctceo

Premium Member

Legality

It's only slander if it isn't true. What is see is fact that RoadRunner IS slower than GWI. I could repeat the same tests comparing RoadRunner and AOL with many DSL/Cable providers here in the US, and what we would find would not be much different than what Tolly had already concluded.
JonR800
Premium Member
join:2003-08-06
Farmington, MI

JonR800

Premium Member

Someone yell at comcast

This is silly.. anyone seen Comcast's ads? Where they say that Comcast is 3x faster than DSL. Yet most DSL providers are moving to 3meg down or have moved to 3meg down.

CanadianCable
@cgocable.net

CanadianCable

Anon

Go Canadian!

I have Cogeco cable in Canada and average 4.5-5.3mb down and 618-880 upload ( depending on time day ) and it's only an extra $33/month bundled with the tv signal

•••
inmaine2
join:2004-08-18
Saco, ME

inmaine2

Member

David vs. Goliath?

David vs. Goliath? I don’t think so – Maybe it should be the Truth Vs. The Lies. If the Tolly Group was so truthful why did they pull the report? Are we are going to side with a company just because they claim to be a very small independent company or should we be looking for the truth regardless of the size of the company? ( They claim to be the following – I guess they only use this when it’s in GWI’s best interest).

Great Works Internet (GWI) is Northern New England’s largest local Internet Service Provider. Founded in 1994 and headquartered in Biddeford, Maine, GWI’s broadband network can now deliver non-stop, high-quality, high-speed Internet access to over 300,000 homes and businesses throughout all but two of Maine’s 16 counties and in 12 New Hampshire service regions.

Mr Kittredge why did you pull the report? Did you get what you PAID for or did Time Warner call your bluff?

BOGBS
Premium Member
join:2004-05-11

4 edits

BOGBS

Premium Member

Re: David vs. Goliath?

I'd love to see your connection compare to my 8mbps/1mbps connection... for 4 bucks more than you're paying, if you have RR..

And if you are with RR, I hope you're having fun with your 384kbps upload!

TW is just looking to be a bully, I'm suprised that GWI pulled the report. Well, not really since they are tiny in comparison.

I know i'm not stupid when I say 768 is better than 384, and that's on the base plan.

That's part of my opinion. And nice to see that you just joined today, to flame GWI.
rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO

rradina

Member

TW vs GWI

Does the report mention how many total customers TW has vs. GWI?

I think that's an important figure. If TW is providing this level of service (which seems pretty good) to many more customers than GWI, one has to ask the question if GWI's business model can support adding a lot of customers. At some point, GWI will have to buy additional capacity to the Internet.

I know in my area, cable is king. SBC has been painfully slow at expanding coverage to areas too far from the CO while the cable company has aggressively modernized their network for VOD, HSI and digital cable. There certainly have been pain points with cable's growth in my area but they've always revolved around the amount of bandwidth between the plant and the Internet and not the plant itself. I would think that DSL providers have this same problem and need to ensure that their "backbone" between COs and their central NOC is sufficient as well as between the NOC and the Internet.
vag16v
join:2001-07-27
hereandthere

vag16v

Member

Cable..DSL

I don't know why people insist on stating that cable is faster....dsl is faster etc....
They all have the capability of being comparable. If a smaller dsl provider offers 1.5Meg service to its customers, and another cable provider in the same area happens to offer 3 Meg service, guess which system will be the one that "sucks"...yup, the dsl. Its not always the technology that causes an isp to "suck", alot of times its what they decide to offer in terms of bandwidth.
Same thing if an isp offering cable internet, over-sells their product, and people complain that its so slow in the evenings, people will start to get the general idea that cable "sucks"
Its probably just because the ISP has cheesed out, or just plain can't afford the bandwidth to give everyone 4 or 5 megs down. Not because DSL or cable can't do the job.

TWCustomer
@rr.com

TWCustomer

Anon

Cost a huge factor

Frankly I don't care about hair splitting about 3 megs vs 4 megs vs 8 megs. I'm a Time Warner cable internet customer, but if I had choice I'd switch to GWI. Why? Because Time Warner charges 50% more per month. The introductory rate only lasted three months for me (and I had to send in a coupon every month to even claim it) and now it's $45 a month. The TW service is good, pretty fast download, terrible upload, pretty reliable, but all things being equal I'd rather pay $29.95 for service than $44.95 a month. Unfortunately due to my location I don't have a choice...got my fingers crossed for some magic technology upgrade, or at least some competitive pressure on TW that will make it bring the price down a bit.
rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO

rradina

Member

Re: Cost a huge factor

said by TWCustomer:
Unfortunately due to my location I don't have a choice...got my fingers crossed for some magic technology upgrade, or at least some competitive pressure on TW that will make it bring the price down a bit.
That's my only rub in this entire comparison. Cable serves everyone. DSL serves the fortunate few.
page: 1 · 2 · next