Search:  

 
 
   News
newer
story category Qwest Launching 20Mbps DSL For $100
New Qwest tiers get a name, forgets upstream bandwidth...
02:59PM Tuesday Apr 22 2008 by Karl Bode
tags: dsl · business · exclusive · Qwest.net
Qwest's delayed next-gen broadband plan (leaked to us first last Summer) is to spend $300 million to deliver 20Mbps ADSL2+ to about 1.5 million customers over the next two years. The company is also testing line-bonded VDSL at speeds of 38Mbps, but they've repeatedly stated they aren't interested in being a video provider. From the limited scope of their upgrades (Compare Qwest's plan to the $6.5 billion AT&T is spending on U-Verse and the $23 billion Verizon is spending on FiOS), they're apparently barely interested in being a broadband provider.

Qwest hopes to see a FTTN penetration rate of 40% by 2010, with upgrades costing the company around $175 per home. So far, Qwest has been mum on the pricing and name of the new 20Mbps tier, but we're starting to see rumbling in our forums that it should be somewhere around $100, provided you bundle phone service. At the very least, the new tiers are expected to look something like this if you bundle and sign a long-term contract:
Qwest Connect Quantum (20M) Up to 20128 Up to 896 $98.00
Qwest Connect Titanium (12M) Up to 12128 Up to 896 $48.00
We're seeking confirmation from Qwest, though they traditionally don't comment on looming launches. There's also rumors surfacing that some slower Qwest DSL tiers could see a $3 price hike very soon. If anyone at Qwest has additional info on the looming launch, please drop us a line.

Update: Digging through the Qwest website, we noticed that the prices are starting to show up on Qwest's website for some locations, and the prices are different depending on the amount of local competition. A screen grab we took just now using zip code 99362:
Click for full size
The price for 20Mbps/1Mbps service without phone service is $105, a price that jumps to $115 per month after a year. The price for 12Mbps/1Mbps service in that market is $52 a month, a price that jumps to $65 a month after 12 months. Still no official announcement from the company, but we wouldn't be surprised to see it surface this week.

Related:
  1. Qwest Next-Gen Broadband Plans Leaked
  2. Qwest Earnings Report
  3. Qwest Doesn't See The Point In FiOS
  4. New Qwest 20Mbps Service Now On Website
  5. Qwest Makes New ADSL2+ Tiers Official
  6. Sorry Qwest, 'Next Generation' Broadband Isn't 896kbps Upstream
  7. Qwest Blames Bad 2nd Quarter on Competition
  8. Qwest Union Authorizes Strike if Negotiations Fail
Forums » Qwest Launching 20Mbps DSL For $100
view: topics flat text 
Post a:

MarkyD
Premium
join:2002-08-20
Oklahoma City, OK
clubs:

What...the...hell?

$100 for less than 1mbps upload? what in the hell are they smoking?
--
MCSE, ACSA, and a lot more

Skeedatl
Ah, push it - push it real good
Premium
join:2007-12-26
The Cloud

Re: What...the...hell?

Not everyone gives a crap about upload.
elister

join:2006-07-17
Seattle, WA

Re: What...the...hell?

i give a crap about upload speeds. for those that qualify for their 7m / 934k, just order two, its almost the same price. i would never pay more to get a slower upload. more and more people need faster uploads thanks to cheap web hosting, digital cameras, slingbox, etc.

Tzale
Ron Paul 2008 - Proud Conservative
Premium
join:2004-01-06
NJ, USA
·Verizon FIOS
·Optimum Online

Re: What...the...hell?

said by elister See Profile :

i give a crap about upload speeds. for those that qualify for their 7m / 934k, just order two, its almost the same price. i would never pay more to get a slower upload. more and more people need faster uploads thanks to cheap web hosting, digital cameras, slingbox, etc.
What good is 2 7m/934k connections? All you'll be doing is getting 2 934k uploads and 2 7m downloads.. Its not like it can be combined bandwidth for one download/upload.
--
Neoconservatives (G.W.B) are not true conservatives. A conservative believes in defending the Constitution. First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win. - RON PAUL 2008 »www.usconstitution.net/const.html
jrsmooth

join:2000-05-17
Washington, DC

Re: What...the...hell?

said by Tzale See Profile :

said by elister See Profile :

i give a crap about upload speeds. for those that qualify for their 7m / 934k, just order two, its almost the same price. i would never pay more to get a slower upload. more and more people need faster uploads thanks to cheap web hosting, digital cameras, slingbox, etc.
What good is 2 7m/934k connections? All you'll be doing is getting 2 934k uploads and 2 7m downloads.. Its not like it can be combined bandwidth for one download/upload.
Can't you use a duo LAN router to do LB?

Tzale
Ron Paul 2008 - Proud Conservative
Premium
join:2004-01-06
NJ, USA
·Verizon FIOS
·Optimum Online

Re: What...the...hell?

said by jrsmooth See Profile :

said by Tzale See Profile :

said by elister See Profile :

i give a crap about upload speeds. for those that qualify for their 7m / 934k, just order two, its almost the same price. i would never pay more to get a slower upload. more and more people need faster uploads thanks to cheap web hosting, digital cameras, slingbox, etc.
What good is 2 7m/934k connections? All you'll be doing is getting 2 934k uploads and 2 7m downloads.. Its not like it can be combined bandwidth for one download/upload.
Can't you use a duo LAN router to do LB?
No, that is load balancing...
--
Neoconservatives (G.W.B) are not true conservatives. A conservative believes in defending the Constitution. First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win. - RON PAUL 2008 »www.usconstitution.net/const.html
jrsmooth

join:2000-05-17
Washington, DC

Re: What...the...hell?

Isn't LB stands for Load Balance?

Tzale
Ron Paul 2008 - Proud Conservative
Premium
join:2004-01-06
NJ, USA
·Verizon FIOS
·Optimum Online

Re: What...the...hell?

said by jrsmooth See Profile :

Isn't LB stands for Load Balance?
Yeah, what I meant is that load balancing isn't what is needed here. It is not possible unless both the server and client are in on the game.
rahvin112

join:2002-05-24
Sandy, UT
Actually, you can. There are number of linux tools that allow you to line bond two connections and make them "one".
battleop

join:2005-09-28
00000

Re: What...the...hell?

You can't bond them unless both ends create a multilink. What you are talking about ends up being a load balanced connection.

Tzale
Ron Paul 2008 - Proud Conservative
Premium
join:2004-01-06
NJ, USA
·Verizon FIOS
·Optimum Online

Re: What...the...hell?

said by battleop See Profile :

You can't bond them unless both ends create a multilink. What you are talking about ends up being a load balanced connection.
Exactly.
patcat88

join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
If your 1337 you can use a VPN that splits traffic over 2 IPs, and recombines the data at the VPN server where it goes out to the internet as 1 IP.
battleop

join:2005-09-28
00000

Re: What...the...hell?

I recently had a customer tell me that at his house he could see 6 wireless networks with 6Mb Comcast connections. He said he had bonded them together to get a "T3" speed. I looked at him and said "Riiiiigggghhhtttt" and went back to what I was doing.
Underplay

join:2003-10-19
Tacoma, WA

Re: What...the...hell?

said by battleop See Profile :

I recently had a customer tell me that at his house he could see 6 wireless networks with 6Mb Comcast connections. He said he had bonded them together to get a "T3" speed. I looked at him and said "Riiiiigggghhhtttt" and went back to what I was doing.
That's funny that you said that.

When I was living in Pullman there were wireless WEP connections everywhere.

I used aircrack-ng to crack about 10 of them, then I bought ANOTHER wireless USB lan card which used the rt61 chipset.

I then configured my Linux kernel running SUSE 10.2 with iptables and the proper modules, which was hard to do because most of the modules were out dated and there was no new documentation on them.

I set up my main chain to switch interfaces every 2 connections.

After all of the kernel stuff was setup, i then setup firefox to use pipeling which would utilize both connections.

THEN, the fun part I used my usenet client to max out both connections...

Now this took me about a week on top of a full time job, and it wasn't easy. But I did manage to combine the connections together and it worked only with limited protocols that supported multiple connections.

The point of my story, its definitely possible, but not in the way most people realize.
TheMG

join:2007-09-04
Edmonton, AB
·TekSavvy Solutions..
·800Hosting.com
·Dreamhost
·TELUS
·Shaw


edit:
April 22nd, @06:30PM

said by Skeedatl See Profile :

Not everyone gives a crap about upload.
Only the people that DON'T upload YouTube videos, DON'T send email attachments, DON'T have to upload files to a remote server/VPN, DON'T send files to their buddies.

Let's face it, the number of people meeting the above criteria are in ever diminishing numbers.

The internet isn't just about receiving information anymore, the need for people to send (upload) is only going to increase, and in bigger and bigger files.

I for one am quite irritated by slow upload speeds. I have two connections specially for the purpose of being able to upload stuff in the background while not having other activities interfere with the process. If you've ever had to restore a 2GB pack of files to a server over 1mbps upload speed, you'd know exactly where I'm coming from.

Now, I guess you could argue that most users who upload stuff in moderate amounts simply don't care and just tough it out, but that's besides the point.

IMO, the low upload-to-download-speed ratios given by ISPs come from the fact that their general customer base is misinformed and not very savvy about how the internet actually works. Most people are surprised when you tell them they aren't likely getting anywhere close to 20mbps off most websites. Yet, people keep asking for faster faster faster, and the ISP gives, because they'll get more revenue. It's about the money, not about providing a balanced service that people will actually use. And what do they do when people actually start using that speed they paid for? Yep, throttle throttle throttle and curse at that "5% of users that use 30% of the bandwidth".

Skeedatl
Ah, push it - push it real good
Premium
join:2007-12-26
The Cloud
·Cox HSI
·Verizon FIOS
·MegaPath
·Cox VOIP
·Verizon west (ex G..
·ViaTalk
·Time Warner VOIP
·RoadRunner Cable


edit:
April 22nd, @08:21PM

Re: What...the...hell?

said by TheMG See Profile :

said by Skeedatl See Profile :

Not everyone gives a crap about upload.
Only the people that DON'T upload YouTube videos, DON'T send email attachments, DON'T have to upload files to a remote server/VPN, DON'T send files to their buddies.
I'd like to see statistics of what percentage of residential users use VPN services that require more than 1Mb upload or what percentage of all residential users upload videos to YouTube. I would guess these numbers to be remarkably low in terms of the whole residential use population. Far more I would venture would benefit from 20Mb service for downloading videos from services like Unbox or iTunes.

IOW, 1Mb is plenty for most people. The people you describe I think are a tiny minority.
hacker90

join:2005-09-01
Winnebago, IL

edit:
April 23rd, @12:15AM

Re: What...the...hell?

Count me in for that small minority. Try administrating 11+ source servers and having to upload 30mb+ maps to the box on a routine basis. Ontop of uploading multiple files over 3-4mb. All on a slow ass 60kb/s connection.

Hacker
Warez_Zealot
Mr. Misanthrope

join:2006-04-19
St Catharines, ON

said by Skeedatl See Profile :

Not everyone gives a crap about upload.
Haha, I like chief Wiggum. He's as fat as he is stupid. lol

C0deZer0
Oc'D To Rhythm And Police
Premium
join:2001-10-03
Davenport, FL
·Verizon Online DSL

said by Skeedatl See Profile :

Not everyone gives a crap about upload.
The amount of ACK packets that you'd need to send for a 20Mbps download would flood an 896k upload.

In short, it does not make sense.

NYPD

join:2001-02-21
Nanuet, NY
As the famous American showman P.T. Barnum once said, ~There`s a sucker born every minute~

wmsaun2

@comcast.net

Qwest targets the areas where FTTN is going in. So, let's do the math. For about the same price as comcast for 12/1 meg (50.00) one can jump from comcast dying bandwith to an Upload near 3 times Comcast for about the same price. OK, 1 meg up is not what we techies really want, but it is triple what most have with comcast in the target areas. Why would one pay the same monies for .384 when I can get 1 mep up and faster down? The same darn price. OK, 3-4 up would have been nice, but I am tired of Comcast crappy .384. I'll take Qwest 1.0 anyday !! Besides Comcast just gets slower daily as saturation has doomed them. Qwest has the smarts to place extra fiber innerduct for the future if needed. The coolpeds are expandable up to four 1148's and if public demands up/down can change fairly easy with public demand. Marketing is business, Qwest sells as with all others Download speed, as most consumers don't even know nor care about upload. Only us. And remember, down/up depends on the db loss from the Coolped (x-box) so I assume barely 30% can even get 20 down. Depends on cable lenght from node and Gauge. IF you get Qwest, ask the installer to cut your bridge-tap at the term. He/she will know exactly what you are asking. Price for life (2 year contract) is awesome, because Comcast raises the price every 6 months !!


woody7
Premium
join:2000-10-13
Torrance, CA

pffttt.....

can you say "half a$$ed"......Peace
--
BlooMe

JunkieXL

join:2004-11-15
Canada!


edit:
April 22nd, @03:25PM

Really?

My guess is those who will be paying a high premium for a fast service are somewhat knowledgable about what they can do with that kind of speed. The average consumer doesn't and will not need 20 mbps anytime soon. Assuming this high tier will attract the tech savvy crowd and businesses, they will sure appreciate want higher upload speeds. A paltry 1 meg upload is shambolic considering the capacity of VDSL/VDSL2(+).
--
Workers of the world unite; you have nothing to lose but your chains.
jreiter

join:2004-01-29
Longmont, CO

Raise the upload speed Qwest

Now if they would make it 20/4-5ish or 12/3-4ish that would be a much better deal. The 1MBps upload is bad as Comcast's 384k upload. Takes forever to send an e-mail with any sort of attachment. People do send stuff as well as downloading.

JunkieXL

join:2004-11-15
Canada!

Re: Raise the upload speed Qwest

Exactly. I'd take a 12/3 connection over a 25/1 anyday.
Kearnstd
Elf Wizard

join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
if comcast can do 16/2 why cant DSL do atleast 20/2
jreiter

join:2004-01-29
Longmont, CO

Re: Raise the upload speed Qwest

Qwest is claiming that it is a limitation of the lame ADSL2+ hardware they are putting in. It's not VDSL. It is FTTN then ADSL2+ to the house.
djweis

join:2006-04-02
West Des Moines, IA

Re: Raise the upload speed Qwest

On short loops with the correct modems you can get up to 3.0 megs upload with ADSL2+ Annex M.
We've got customers on our DSLAM's using it:
6. Up Adsl2+ M 18376/ 2932
7. Up Adsl2+ M 15784/ 2008

Tzale
Ron Paul 2008 - Proud Conservative
Premium
join:2004-01-06
NJ, USA
·Verizon FIOS
·Optimum Online

said by Kearnstd See Profile :

if comcast can do 16/2 why cant DSL do atleast 20/2
Why?

Well I don't know about VDSL2, but I do know that DOCSIS can support a lot more bandwidth than traditional DSL..

-Tzale
patcat88

join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY

Re: Raise the upload speed Qwest

Remember the 100-300mbps numbers they are giving you are totally false. Those numbers are for the entire node, that passes 100-500 houses/families/units. When was the last time you saw a 40mbit/s DOCSIS 1.0 or 2.0 tier (node limit)? Thats how real your 100 mbps will be. DOCSIS 3 might be seen by cable companies more as a way of fixing peak usage node congestion rather than improving speeds since ANYTHING is cheaper than a node split.

morbo
Complete Your Transaction

join:2002-01-22
00000
clubs:

quote

"they're apparently barely interested in being a broadband provider."

SNICKER

dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ

Re: quote

said by morbo See Profile :

"they're apparently barely interested in being a broadband provider."

SNICKER
Whats even sadder is its TRUE!
896kbps up for $100? I DON'T THINK SO.
typical lackluster qworst
--
When I gez aju zavateh na nalechoo more new yonooz tonigh molinigh - Ken Lee

natter

join:2000-12-18
Littleton, CO

/

Show me a website/provider that will give you 20Mbps to download...(besides a silly speedtest)

See 7 replies to this post

DaveNJ
No Fear

join:1999-09-01
New Jersey

They just dont get it

Really 5M up should be the new norm. If you have 2-3 pcs,and 2 voip line it gets used fast. What i dont understand there are alot of people who would prefer higher upload speeds, yet there arent any offers. 10/5 would suit alot of people well.
ernieJohnstn

join:2005-02-27
Lilburn, GA

edit:
April 22nd, @04:19PM

Re: They just dont get it

What I want is 1000 Mbps fixed, both directions, for $99 per month. And throw in mobile at 600 Mbps for $30 more.
eJ
patcat88

join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY

Re: They just dont get it

Its possible with oversubscription, 1 HD can not saturate a 1 GB link.

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


edit:
April 22nd, @04:19PM

Japanese Prices

Considering that Japanese get 2mb up 50M down at $25, HELL NO!

Spread the word and maybe these phone companies will see just how overpriced they really are.

prices courtesy:
»bbpromo.yahoo.co.jp/campaign/dis···dex.html

»www.translatum.gr/converter/currency.htm

Yo

@comcast.net

Re: Japanese Prices

I just have to make a correction to you on the ridiculousness of this statement. Japan is not at all similar to the U.S. geographically, compare the price of running fiber optics a few miles in Japan(to get 50mbps for 25 bucks) and running it many miles(a few hundred) to get 20 mbps. If it were easy and cheap it would have already been done. Another point is the 14 state Qwest region is the most spread out region of any of the baby bells thus making it the hardest to get high internet speeds wired for cheap, there is just too much land. So the simple fact is that yes comparatively it seems expensive this is not the case, it is priced at the right amount for the area it is offered.

As far as the upload speeds I agree 1mbps is a little low, however I strongly believe Qwest will be changing that since this is an extremely new internet speed offer.

*NOTE: I do work for Qwest so obviously I do have a bias, but at the same time like to state facts.
djweis

join:2006-04-02
West Des Moines, IA

Qwest is not installing more VDSL


Please stop saying this is VDSL, everything they have been installing recently is ADSL2+.

partysource

join:2000-11-25
Phoenix, AZ

Re: Qwest is not installing more VDSL

What are you talking about?! This is VDSL..they are using VRADS for internet only and not using the video portion.
djweis

join:2006-04-02
West Des Moines, IA

Re: Qwest is not installing more VDSL

The gear that they were using for VDSL is discontinued, they are using Adtran remote DSLAMs in many locations
»telephonyonline.com/fttp/news/qw···_103007/
»www.lightreading.com/document.as···d=121550
djweis

join:2006-04-02
West Des Moines, IA
We also can look at the FTTN help page on Qwest's site that is filled with ADSL modems.
»www.qwest.com/internethelp/fttn/

partysource

join:2000-11-25
Phoenix, AZ

Re: Qwest is not installing more VDSL

Guess I should read a little better

Your correct ADSL 2
Tallion

join:2002-09-04
Minneapolis, MN

The cost is way too much

There is no reason for residential internet access cost $100 a month. From any company for any speeds.
openbox9

join:2004-01-26
Navarre, FL

Re: The cost is way too much

Then don't pay $100/mth. You have a choice.
robertfl
Premium
join:2005-10-10
Mary Esther, FL
·Cox VOIP
·Cox HSI

Re: The cost is way too much

it's all about greed. accept it or don't

people will buy it.

flood quest and tell them you want upload speeds.

-Rob
--
»www.cband.info - unique radio you won't find elsewhere!

dispatcher21

join:2004-01-22
Walla Walla, WA

Re: The cost is way too much

Isnt the 1meg upload speed a technical limitation of adsl? I dont think they can offer any higher.

a333
A hot cup of integrals please

join:2007-06-12
Corona, NY
·Verizon Online DSL


edit:
April 22nd, @05:56PM

Re: The cost is way too much

Click for full size
Die, Qworst!!
Considering that Quest will continue their company tradition of "ensuring an enjoyable internet experience" for their customers, I especially doubt that this offer will be attractive to the few power users who MIGHT have considered it.
tmc8080

join:2004-04-24
Floral Park, NY

Qwest at the pump...

Might as well be filling up your computer with data from the gas station these days... those are 2004 prices..

The upstream is a move only a cable company could love.. not even a megabit upload.
patcat88

join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY

Re: Qwest at the pump...

Time to spoon out upload like caviar by the teaspoon. 256K chunks.

woodward
XMission Broadband
VIP
join:2000-12-28
Salt Lake City, UT

Info

quote:
We're seeking confirmation from Qwest, though they traditionally don't comment on looming launches. There's also rumors surfacing that some slower Qwest DSL tiers could see a $3 price hike very soon.
It has already launched.

The $3 increase is in the promotional "Price for Life" price in their popular 1.5Mbps products. Where 1.5 Mbps DSL was $22/mo on Price for Life, it is now $25. Standalone 1.5 Mbps was $27, and is now $30.

dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ

Re: Info

said by woodward See Profile :

quote:
We're seeking confirmation from Qwest, though they traditionally don't comment on looming launches. There's also rumors surfacing that some slower Qwest DSL tiers could see a $3 price hike very soon.
It has already launched.

The $3 increase is in the promotional "Price for Life" price in their popular 1.5Mbps products. Where 1.5 Mbps DSL was $22/mo on Price for Life, it is now $25. Standalone 1.5 Mbps was $27, and is now $30.
What good is 'price for life' if they still jack it up?
--
When I gez aju zavateh na nalechoo more new yonooz tonigh molinigh - Ken Lee

iansltx

@Mines.EDU

whine whine whine

I'm sorry but for those who demand higher upload speeds, get a T1! Okay, I'm being facetious but 20 Mbit down is an upgrade from 12 Mbit down, right? ure it costs about the same per megabit down as the 12 Mbit plan, so no volume discount, but maybe it's worth it to some people. I'm not too familiar with Qwest though they're the telco here but i they don't throttle you then 896k/s upload is better than 384 or 768k upload and I'll take what I can get. $100 per month for an internet connection may seem exhorbitant, but on the other hand it's THE fastest internet in Qwest's service area AFAIK. Comcast may have an 8/1 tier with boost but that's it.

Sure, I'd like better upload speeds, but comparing this with the ISPs in my hometown it's not all that bad. Highest-speed DSL (where you can get it) is 6/384 or maybe 6/768. Highest speed cable i think is 10/1 on Time Warner.

So I welcome the addition of more download speed to Qwest's lineup; I saw the pricing on it last night and it's not that unreasonable for non-bundled internet. Just because Qwest didn't give everyone a pony doesn't mean that (after they introduce a better product) they should be kvetched about 'til kingdom come. What are AT&T's plans like by the way?
patcat88

join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY

Re: whine whine whine

Yeah, stop complaining, $100 a mo for something 15x faster download and .75x faster upload than a $400 line. It pays off. We can put you back on ISDN if you want.
crapmac
It's not the mac, it's my clumsiness.

join:2007-05-03
United State
·Comcast

Is my math wrong?!

I can get Comcast Blast! (16 Mbps down/2 Mbps up) for only $52.XX per month - and I can get it Right Now. Is my math wrong, or is paying almost twice as much money for a tiny bit more speed the worst waste of money I can think of?

In 2 years, Comcast will have released DOCSIS 3.0, with 50 Mbps connections, and by then, it'll probably be available to half of its customers, or maybe even more...

I think Qwest is going to be down the tank in a few years...

until then... let's see what happens! I welcome the good news!

*** I don't work for comcast, I don't like comcast, I'm just stating thy facts...***
--
Out with the old, in with the Antique!
***********
"Hey, have you heard the song... 'Bomb Iran?' *bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, Ir...* n - never mind..." - John McCain
mrphil

join:2001-07-22
Tucson, AZ
·Qwest.net

look at the numbers actually available

Hmmm... If I look at what is available to me in qwest territory from qwest and cox and I'm concerned about upload speed then it's a no brainer...
Qwest offers 1.5 or 7 or 12 or 20 m download with a 896K upload.
Cox offers 1.5 or 9 or 15 m download with 256K, 512K or 1M upload respectively.
Note that until roughly three years ago, just about every ISP offered either 256K or 384K upload max unless you went with SDSL or a T1.
Throwing in numbers for verizon or where comcast is competing with verizon or that are not available to customers in the qwest area is a waste of time... if you want to do that then why aren't you complaining about the prices charged by any of the US providers, compared to that available in Japan or Korea... different markets, different prices...

Fiber boy

@paxio.net

FTTH is way better

Paxio gives you 100/100 for less than $100/mo. And it's not "up to" 100M, it's the real deal. Maybe there are other small FTTH players who offer similar packages.

»www.paxio.com/home.php?link=Internet
kd6cae
P2p Shouldn't Be A Crime

join:2001-08-27
Palmdale, CA
·RoadRunner Cable
·DSL EXTREME
·Dreamhost
·Charter Pipeline

Providers need to offer more upload

Yes more download is always nice, but so is more upload, for those that want/need it. I realize, not everyone will need more than say 512kbps of upload, but does that mean that the option of decently fast upstream for consumers who would make use of it shouldn't be an option at all? Not everyone needs 10mbps or faster download either, yet faster downstream is usually an option. What is this reason for Fear that all ISPs have when it comes to actually providing bandwidth in the outgoing direction!
I personally use my upstream to send large files to my off site backup server, which I pay for. You're connected to the same internet whether you're on a T1, T3, or an ADSL or cable circuit. So give users that want it the best upstream, as well as downstream, that they're lines can handle.
Verizon has a 768k upload package that is actually configured at 864kbps. AT&T on the other hand, using the same technology, only configures it's 768k Package for exactly 768kbps, a difference of nearly 100kbps or