Qwest Wants To Avoid 'Speed Game' - As if they actually had a choice...
Links: home · search · speed test · login · more ·

Qwest Wants To Avoid 'Speed Game'
As if they actually had a choice...
(old news - 05:42PM Monday May 18 2009)
tags: business · bandwidth · Op/Ed · telco · consumers · Qwest.net
Since Qwest is hemorrhaging landline customers at an amazing pace (they lost 259,000 last quarter alone), they're eager to rebrand themselves as a next-generation broadband company via a spiffy new ad campaign. The problem is Qwest is still nursing last-gen copper technology, their "next-gen" ADSL2+ upgrades (when they're available to consumers) offer downstream speeds up to 20Mbps, but upstream speeds limited to a paltry 896kbps.

Speaking to analysts, Qwest COO Tom Richards continues the "have your cake and eat it too" game Qwest is playing with next-generation broadband. With sagging landline revenues and no directly owned wireless operations, Qwest lacks the resources for serious upgrades. Richards pretends their lagging speeds are by choice, telling analysts it's about the "actual experience" and that many customers won't notice slower speeds anyway:
Richards was quick to note that the company shouldn't get caught up in the "speed game." "What's important is the actual experience, and if they can discern the difference," he said, noting that consumers who don't watch a lot of online videos wouldn't notice the higher speed.
You don't have to be a very heavy user to notice that 896kbps is slow for a next-generation "user experience." Qwest is working on line bonding for customers with extra available pairs, but even that's only going to go so far in competition with cable DOCSIS 3.0 deployments. Qwest executives may be busy looking down the road at a possible sale, and the company is already rumored to be shopping its long-haul network.

For now, Qwest has found that it's far less expensive to confuse customers into thinking core network fiber and last-mile fiber are the same thing, advertising their ADSL2+ service as "fiber optic Internet service." Even then, most of their customers remain out of range of these faster services, many regular users in our forums saying they're lucky to get a 3Mbps "user experience" from the carrier.

Skimping on infrastructure and then assuming your customers aren't attentive enough to notice the difference doesn't seem like a long-term recipe for success.

Related:
  1. Qwest Brings a Knife To a Utah Gun Fight
  2. Verizon's Open Development Initiative? So Far It's A Joke
  3. Qwest: Remember How We Said Speed Didn't Matter? Forget That.
  4. Verizon's New Wireless Pricing Is An Insult
  5. What Network Neutrality Is REALLY About
  6. AT&T: Google Is The Enemy Of Nuns
  7. Wall Street Journal Tries, Fails To Cover Metered Billing Debate
  8. Verizon Again Hints At Metered Billing
Links: New Topic
Forums »

expert007 @ 18th May 04:43PM:
Fios or Fois

"fiber optic internet speeds"

That's one hell of a sleazy way to advertise.
reply
questionable @ 18th May 04:46PM:
DOCSIS 3.0???

Please, I doubt Cox will deploy that in Phoenix why should they? Most areas get a max of 7 anyways and even that is pushing it more like 3-5.
reply
freeze @ 18th May 04:47PM:
Re: Fios or Fois

said by expert007 :

"fiber optic internet speeds"

That's one hell of a sleazy way to advertise.
That's clever. More than I care to admit.
reply
WiseOldNerd @ 18th May 04:55PM:
Incompetence Executives Spout BS

Qwest senior management are arrogant, incompetent buffoons hiding away in their sumptuous offices in Denver without a clue as to what is happening in the rest of their so called customer area. I would not own Qwest stock if they gave it to me and when I can pry the copper connected phone from my spouses hand they are gone. Enough bullsh*t Qwest get off the pot and rebuild your cruddy infrastructure with all the stolen USF funds.
--
My perception is REALITY

reply
Lazlow @ 18th May 05:06PM:
IF web browsing is all you do on the net

IF web browsing is all you do on the net, then he is probably right. There is very little difference between 10Mbps and 100Mbps when you are browsing "normal" web pages (yes I have used both). There is just not enough data being transferred on a typical web page to see the difference. 10Mbps is 1.25MBs and 100Mbps is 12.5MBps, so if you are transferring less than 5MB(?) most people will not see any difference.

Now move up to 400MB(or larger) files, then you are talking five minutes versus 30 seconds. That people will notice.
reply
hottboiinnc @ 18th May 05:07PM:
Re: Fios or Fois

ATT advertises it that way. So why not Qwest? ATT uses:
Fiber Optic Internet and Speeds, Fiber Optic TV and Fiber Optic phone service. and they're using DSL.
reply
tubbynet @ 18th May 05:12PM:
Re: DOCSIS 3.0???

i've heard rumours that cox will be deploying d3 to the phoenix area, but only in 28/2 (maybe 2.5) speed tiers. there is no need for them to ramp up and do the 50meg plan in phoenix, so we're going to stay lacking. there is no need to push high speeds, why do it?
reply
Hpower @ 18th May 05:31PM:
Fail

lol @ 896kbps upload "fiber optic internet speeds" Common, get with the news today. I gave up on ADSL long time ago. Cable is just dominating the broadband world now with docsis 3.0. ADSL = dead.
--
The Internet is about to go down....it is actually.

reply
iansltx @ 18th May 05:31PM:
Re: Fios or Fois

True, but AT&T's fiber is less than a mile from your home (less than 3k feet in most cases). Qwest's is 6k feet or more.

No, I'm not standing up for AT&T. They're not fiber optic either. It's just that fiber is closer to the home with them than with Qwest.
reply
iansltx @ 18th May 05:33PM:
Re: DOCSIS 3.0???

$140 for a 50/5 tier, what's why. If they can offer 50 Mbps speeds they don't have to do ANYTHING to their network until Qwest gets bought by someone else, and they can rake in the customers who want 5 Mbps uploads.
reply
Vesentac @ 18th May 05:37PM:
Iceberg hit!

The real problem is Qwest has no money to do the infrastructure changes they need to compete. I say 1-2 more years before they go bankrupt in the current state of the economy.
reply
Omega @ 18th May 06:02PM:
Re: Fail

When I first moved to Cheyenne, which is serviced by Quester, I went to one of their Kiosks at the mall. I asked how fast of speed I could get with them. They replied with 1.5mbps. I literally laughed at them and said "that's it?"

Meanwhile the cable provider here offers 8mbit and 16mbit packages.
reply
rcdailey @ 18th May 06:04PM:
Re: Iceberg hit!

said by Vesentac :

The real problem is Qwest has no money to do the infrastructure changes they need to compete. I say 1-2 more years before they go bankrupt in the current state of the economy.
Since Qwest was already in trouble before the meltdown in the mortgage, insurance, and banking sectors, how does this really change anything? Laws require some sort of phone service to the rural areas, but it doesn't have to be modern. I remember party lines. Everyone on the line could listen in. There were different rings for each customer. We have that now, with distinctive ringing, but it was more fun when the phone had a crank on the side to turn a magneto and generate a ring.
reply
iansltx @ 18th May 06:16PM:
Qwest = joke

In Golden, CO (mere minutes from Denver) there's no ADSL2+. Some people get 7 Mbps, some get 5 Mbps, some get 3, some get 1.5. 896k up. Subtract 15% for ATM overhead and you've got real speeds...during nonpeak hours. The twon is full of college students so if Qwest rolled out decent-speed internet people would buy it, instead of using Comcast. As it stands, nearly everyone uses Comcast.

Note to Qwest: the people who are willing to pay you more per month for internet access CAN tell the difference between 716k (896k * .85) and 2M upload speeds. They can also tell the difference between "7 Mbit" and true 8 Mbit service from Comcast. Heck, they'll even pay more for the 8 Mbit service because it has 2 Mit upload speeds.

Problem is, in order to upgrade upload speeds beyond 1 Mbps, Qwest has to switch to VDSL or fiber. They ditched VDSL just a bit ago, and they certainly aren't going to go to fiber. So looks like they're screwed, especially since their DSL pricing is pretty darned high when you're not getting full 7-meg speeds.
reply
calvoiper @ 18th May 06:17PM:
Paying the price of incumbency....

Years and years ago, Qworst joined most ILECs in choosing ADSL, because it gave them a "broadband" offering that they believed would not cannibalize their "Hi-Cap Private Line" business (as those Neanderthals called DS-1 & DS-3 at the time.)

This merely became a text book example of the aphorism that "If you don't eat your own lunch, someone else will." The ILECs now see competition for symmetric broadband, but it's not their own offering--it's competition from others.

Enjoy your bed, Qworst. You made it.

calvoiper
--
VoIP--the death knell of remaining voice monopolies!

reply
kdwycha @ 18th May 06:25PM:
hah...fiber optic internet speeds :P

*Fiber optics exists from the Neighborhood Terminal to the Internet. Higher speeds not available in all areas.

...love the fine print but there is no * after "Fiber Optic Internet Speeds"
reply
CCTVTech @ 18th May 06:41PM:
Signs

When they are working in the neighborhoods here in Phoenix they are putting out A-frame signs behind the trucks saying fiber optic broadband coming to your area soon or something like that. :uhh:
--
==== Eye In The Sky ====
I Fight Crime - One Camera At A Time :)

reply
dynodb @ 18th May 06:46PM:
Re: Fios or Fois

said by iansltx :

True, but AT&T's fiber is less than a mile from your home (less than 3k feet in most cases). Qwest's is 6k feet or more.

No, I'm not standing up for AT&T. They're not fiber optic either. It's just that fiber is closer to the home with them than with Qwest.
Uhh... wouldn't that depend on the home and location of the particular node? I doubt that AT&T has a FTTN node within 3kft of every home any more than Qwest does. Certainly there are going to be quite a few homes within 3kft or 6kft to a Qwest FTTN DSLAM- they don't go and intentionally locate them at least 6kft from the nearest potential customer.

Besides, the difference between 3kft and 6kft isn't very significant until you're looking at speeds around 18M. At 10-12M, 6kft would be plenty close.
reply
dynodb @ 18th May 06:49PM:
Re: Qwest = joke

said by iansltx :

Problem is, in order to upgrade upload speeds beyond 1 Mbps, Qwest has to switch to VDSL or fiber. They ditched VDSL just a bit ago, and they certainly aren't going to go to fiber.
They've been working on VDSL2 for some time now, with hints that it'll be ready for deployment in the near future.
reply
iansltx @ 18th May 06:54PM:
Re: Fios or Fois

It's not the download that I'm focused on, its the upload. ADSL2+ tops out at 1Mbps. AT&T profiles customers at 25/2 for their VDSL product, and broadband packages are up to 1.5 Mbps on the upload side.

As for the Qwest side of things, you are correct that there are plenty of homes within 3k feet of a DSLAM. However with AT&T VDSL MOST homes are under 3k feet away due to the technological limits of VDSL. There are a few homes at 5k feet, but on average people are much closer to an AT&T U-Verse fridge than to Qwest's FTTN equipment.

Again, upload is my big deal and cable's too...unless you're comparing cable with fiber. VDSL gets better upload speeds than ADSL2+ and that's what Qwest is lacking even in their "next generation" areas. At 20 Mbps, they're right in saying that download is "just fine" for most people...provided Qwest actually provisioned their systems to deliver advertised speeds.
reply
monkeyslew @ 18th May 06:55PM:
Qwest the Pitiful

Where I live in the Denver metro the fastest download I can get from Qwest is 256K. So, there is no real choice. I have been a happy Comcast customer for several years now. I hope Qwest gets sold to Verizon, and they do the FIOS upgrades
reply
iansltx @ 18th May 06:58PM:
Re: Qwest = joke

Links to this info? I'm only going on what I heard...they shelved Choice, which was their only VDSL product. Then again, Choice maxed out at 3 Mbps.

At this point Qwest seems to be focused on line bonding, which is one way to get halfway-decent upload speeds (around the 1.5 Mbps mark). However this assumes that there are two copper pairs available to put service on per subscriber, and judging by Qwest's current ISP-less DSL costs their 1.5 Mbps upload service will wind up being ridiculously expensive, compared with cable.

As an added bonus, it still won't be able to compete with DOCSIS 3 rollouts. 1.5 Mbps up and even 40 Mbps down is less than 50 Mbps downa nd 10 Mbps up. Unless Qwest prices the 40/1.5 connection below $100 you're back to square one: too little service for too much money.
reply
dynodb @ 18th May 07:03PM:
Re: Iceberg hit!

said by Vesentac :

The real problem is Qwest has no money to do the infrastructure changes they need to compete. I say 1-2 more years before they go bankrupt in the current state of the economy.
Heh- people have predicting that they'd go bankrupt in the next 1-2 years for the past 7 years now. I don't see it happening; though the landline loss is hurting them, they've done a pretty good job of paying down debt.

Also, their recent bond offering had no problem attracting investors, which I don't think would've happened if they believed there was a chance for bankruptcy in the next couple years.
reply
dynodb @ 18th May 07:18PM:
Re: Qwest = joke

said by iansltx :

Links to this info? I'm only going on what I heard...they shelved Choice, which was their only VDSL product. Then again, Choice maxed out at 3 Mbps.
The Choice VDSL that is being phased out is a seperate service using completely different equipment than the VDSL2 service they've been working on.

Don't really know what kind of up/down speeds they'll be offering with it, but VDSL2 is capable of higher up and down speeds than ADSL2+.
reply
fiberguy @ 18th May 07:31PM:
Re: Fios or Fois

said by freeze :

said by expert007 :

"fiber optic internet speeds"

That's one hell of a sleazy way to advertise.
That's clever. More than I care to admit.
That's about the same when all the sudden one day they had "digital phone service" and did nothing different.. ie: they just marketed that their service was digital. Oddly enough, that came about the same time Comcast was launching CDV service in the area.
reply
fiberguy @ 18th May 07:42PM:
Re: Iceberg hit!

No, you're right.. they have NOT gone bankrupt. They've avoided it, however, by NOT servicing the customer properly. Please tell me why I still have a 200' line sitting on my neighbors side of the back yard now for over a year. Please tell me why MY underground drop STILL, 7 years later, has 50' of cable sitting at the base of the telephone pole and they REFUSE to send a tech out to simply cut the 50' line down, attach it to the pole and re-tie the line. When my DSL went down becuase that line out back was damage (I wonder why) that becuase I have stand alone service, it took them 5 days, yes, 5 days, to pass me around to about 9 different people, in circles, to get a tech to fix it. (Had to splice it myself) ... Tell me why techs that DO come to the house will do the minimum to get your service, skimp on really completing the job, and outright telling me that they are told to not do certain tasks.. "becuase of cut backs"... Someone forgot to tell the company that I still pay my full price bill every month.

Seriously, I'm about to cut back on my bills and not pay Qwest the full amount either.

Thank god I'm moving out of Qwest territory. The service is good on its own that its reliable service. The people that operate the company, from just above the CSR group and up, are complete and utter idiots.

It's pretty bad when the MN PUC knows me by name and even voice now, isn't it?

Seriously, "heh" all you want about Qwest.. but it's a sinking ship and the writing is on the wall.

They don't have their own TV service that matters. They resell Satellite service. They sold their own POS cellular network in favor of a MVNO agreement with Sprint and even dumped THAT to "re-sell" a competitor's service, which should be an utter embarrassment to them. And now they're talking about selling off their long haul network too?

I normally am on your side when people here call for a company to go bankrupt, such as Vonage, however, the reputation of Qwest is, in my opinion, GOING to drive that company deep into bankruptcy, and if not that, it will get sold off and gutted like a fish, as it should be.

No self respecting major bell company should be in the position that Qwest is today.

To be fair, however, they HAVE taken some positions that ARE customer friendly such as dropping contracts on DSL as a requirement, and offering a DSL service that can be used the way the customer wants, and dropping the requirement for phone service with DSL.. all good moves. However, there are MANY other areas that the company is going to hammer in it's own nails into it's coffin.

With the current state of the economy, and with customers looking for better bargains and lowering their bills, Qwest isn't able to survive doing that.. good books or not, the bottom of the 'economy' has not hit yet, and Qwest WILL stand to lose so long as it continues to bleed land lines.
reply
uid1307457 @ 18th May 07:47PM:
Re: IF web browsing is all you do on the net

said by Lazlow :

IF web browsing is all you do on the net, then he is probably right. There is very little difference between 10Mbps and 100Mbps when you are browsing "normal" web pages (yes I have used both). There is just not enough data being transferred on a typical web page to see the difference. 10Mbps is 1.25MBs and 100Mbps is 12.5MBps, so if you are transferring less than 5MB(?) most people will not see any difference.

Now move up to 400MB(or larger) files, then you are talking five minutes versus 30 seconds. That people will notice.
I use instant netflix and I never notice when my 7mbps connection is at 3mbps vs 6mpbs (max it ever gets). As long as the video does not stop and is fed to me as high quality (3mbps per netflix) then I could care less about higher speeds.
reply
silentcid @ 18th May 08:17PM:
Re: Fios or Fois

ATT does techincally have fiber optic phone services. Called Uverse.
reply
jjeffeory @ 18th May 09:01PM:
Re: Fios or Fois

LOL.
I have U-Verse. It's VDSL Service for the last mile. That's NOT Fiber service, technically...
reply
hottboiinnc @ 18th May 09:15PM:
Re: Iceberg hit!

I agree with you on the Cell network. I think if they had less debt they would have picked up Alltel instead of VZ. Alltel would have made a great buy for Qwest.
reply
hottboiinnc @ 18th May 09:19PM:
Re: Qwest = joke

Choice was only in one or two markets wasn't it? and one of the oldest VDSL networks in the country run by a MaBell and they were the first MaBell Telco to offer IPTV as well.

Qwest's problem is the rural area. They need to ditch the copper and anything land based and run with wireless. WiMAX or something that is out now. Screw LTE.
reply
hottboiinnc @ 18th May 09:21PM:
Re: Qwest the Pitiful

You really see VZ buying anyone? They're not worried about anyone but their FiOS customers they have now and expanding that to the areas they're keeping.

Chances are CO would have been sold off this time around if it belonged to VZ, especially if it was a GTE service area.
reply
cyclone_z @ 18th May 09:38PM:
Re: Qwest the Pitiful

said by monkeyslew :

Verizon, and they do the FIOS upgrades
LOL! Qwest's service territory is too rural for Verizon. If Verizon had owned Qwest for the past several years, no one in Iowa outside of Des Moines would have DSL, because Des Moines is too small and too low income for them... and then it would probably only be a max of 3Mbps in all areas.
reply
cyclone_z @ 18th May 09:43PM:
Re: Qwest = joke

said by dynodb :

They've been working on VDSL2 for some time now, with hints that it'll be ready for deployment in the near future.
This is good news! I was wondering what the hell was the point of doing ADSL2+, considering its limitations.
reply
cyclone_z @ 18th May 10:16PM:
Not completely wrong

I'm disappointed not to see a more agressive attitude from their management on upgrading service, but I don't think the COO is completely wrong. More or less, this is a marketing and perception issue more than anything. I have a 1M connection at my apartment through a local company (it's provided by my landlord), and even though I could get a 3M connection for extra $, I haven't done it. I really am fine with the connection I have. I can watch videos, work remotely, and of course email. I think it's mainly here on DSLR that people are concerned about being able to say they have the biggest peni pipe. Cable gets a lot of Internet customers just because in more cases the customer does not have a business relationship with Qwest.

Which brings me to the real problem Qwest has. Since just about everyone has decided that he or she needs a cell/wireless phone in order to
A) be annoying by talking on it all the time, regardless of surroundings/situation
B) use it while driving so as to increase the carnage on the roads (note: text message is especially helpful in causing collisions)
C) pump lots of non-ionizing radiation into the brain

Qwest is at a disadvantage over cable -- no one can seem to live without the mostly mindless programming that it provides; so the customer already is getting services there and it's the likely choice for Internet service.

I think the other thing that doesn't get brought up much is that my understanding is that Verizon's home territory (Bell Atlantic-NYNEX) is an area where most customers are served by aerial connections. In Iowa, most Qwest customers are served by underground cable. It's much more capital intensive to run a new underground cable to a customer than an aerial connection. So FTTH for Qwest would be a much more expensive endeavor for Qwest than Verizon. You Qwest guys can correct me if I'm wrong.
reply
IowaStudent @ 18th May 10:20PM:
Re: Qwest the Pitiful

I know it seems like I talk about Iowatelecom a lot but the reality is they are just like Qwest, Rural and loosing customers left and right. They refuse to do FTTH upgrades because of the ROI and they have no wireless revenue, There DSL speeds are limited to 15 Mb/1 Mb and there tech support sucks, called them one and I asked them to reset my port on the DSLAM as it was blinking and they said they have to escalate the issue! It was so stupid If someone doesn't come in and by them (Verizon?) I fell sorry for anyone who uses there services
reply
damox @ 18th May 10:22PM:
Re: Incompetence Executives Spout BS

Well the real problem is that Qwest's last CEO ripped them off for hundreds or millions driving the company into the ground, and unfortunately they weren't a great company in the first place. Qwest is trying to recover from a very bad spot.
--
DAMOX

reply
dynodb @ 18th May 10:47PM:
Re: Qwest = joke

said by cyclone_z :

This is good news! I was wondering what the hell was the point of doing ADSL2+, considering its limitations.
Because ADSL2+ is better than ADSL, which has even greater limitations.

VDSL2 is still quite new; keep in mind that the ball got rolling on the ADSL2+ plans in late 2007. Short of FTTH (which they weren't going to do), the choice at time was either ADSL2+ stay with ADSL; VDSL2 wasn't really much of an option yet.
reply
dynodb @ 18th May 10:59PM:
Re: Qwest = joke

WiMax has many of the same kind of limitations (and some additional ones) as DSL. If I remember correctly, Qwest was playing around with the idea of WiMax at one time, but it never really took off- for Qwest or in general.
reply
hidden72 @ 18th May 11:45PM:
They're avoiding the speed game in my city...

They've completely avoided the speed game in my city. 1.5/896 is the fastest tier available. Way to avoid the speed game!
reply
tubbynet @ 18th May 11:47PM:
Re: DOCSIS 3.0???

said by iansltx :

$140 for a 50/5 tier, what's why. If they can offer 50 Mbps speeds they don't have to do ANYTHING to their network until Qwest gets bought by someone else, and they can rake in the customers who want 5 Mbps uploads.
my post above indicated that cox *was not* deploying the 50/5 tier in phoenix at this point in time. they have qwest handily beaten already. why try any harder than they have to?

q.
reply
anon @ 19th May 12:08AM:
wheres my 20/12 mbps in sw colorado springs??

like where is my 20or 12 megs qwest promised in stratimmor hill and security areas . doesnt look like it here comming like qwest "promised" there..im still at 7megs .can anyone tell me about that.looking like "qwest" is gerrymandering el paso county areas for their own pockets.
reply
anon @ 19th May 08:51AM:
Re: Iceberg hit!

Try running over the cable with your lawn mower, thats how my uncle got them to properly repair the temporary phone line that ran across the backyard and the neighbors backyard they left there for two years.
reply
JohnDrenZ @ 19th May 01:46AM:
Qwest is being held together by a thread

First it was ride the light

Then it was the spirit of service

Now it’s the actual experience

Please make bankruptcy next!

We don't need Qworst anymore
reply
iansltx @ 19th May 02:19AM:
Re: DOCSIS 3.0???

My post indicated "why not". Sure they'll intro some midrange tier or whatever, but why not have a $140 supertier that'll make sure all the performance junkies stay with Cox even after Qwest does line bonding?
reply
dvd536 @ 19th May 09:30AM:
Re: Incompetence Executives Spout BS

said by damox :

Well the real problem is that Qwest's last CEO ripped them off for hundreds or millions driving the company into the ground, and unfortunately they weren't a great company in the first place. Qwest is trying to recover from a very bad spot.
US West by any other name stinks as bad.
--
When I gez aju zavateh na nalechoo more new yonooz tonigh molinigh - Ken Lee

reply
MalibuMaxx @ 19th May 12:39PM:
Re: Iceberg hit!

What you have explained sounds like verizon's landline services out here... but what makes them different is they're a much bigger company and profitable.

They took two weeks to get my landline up and runing after a drunk ran into our poll. That was about a month ago. I even contacted their emergency service center or whatever they call it... Got so mad at them I got CDV. Havent had a problem since.
reply
axiomatic @ 19th May 04:55PM:
FACT:

FACT: What Quest wants is FAT PROFIT without having to earn it by paying for necessary upgrades to their network.

At some point in between 1990 and 2000 users of ISP's product (a service) became the enemy to some ISP's. The ISP's seem to have conveniently forgotten that when you provide a service you also must upkeep that service. You cannot loot that money while keeping the service VIABLE just to deliver fat bonuses to upper management and better stock prices for shareholders. If you do you will eventually wind up like Quest and Time Warner who have clearly oversold their capacity and their competitive speed of providing that capacity. What other reason would they have in buying themselves monopoly in some cities? That would be to keep these upgrade costs low because they don't have to compete in the "who has better net speed for the same price game."
reply
CopperMonkey @ 19th May 05:48PM:
They want to avoid a "speed game"?

Then why are they starting on an Ultimate DSL tier using VDSL2? They seem to want to play mind games with speed games...
reply
MSauk @ 20th May 11:02AM:
Re: They want to avoid a "speed game"?

Here is the issue with me....

If you are going to offer really bad speeds, do not make me pay 20 to 30 bucks for 1.5 down! That is what I paid 4 to 7 years ago lol

That is the thing I hate with their new price plans. If you are between 1.5 and 5 I believe you pay the same price. How is that fair?
--
801 Images

reply
anon @ 21st May 06:50PM:
Re: Fail

^^^^^ You sound like you know something that I do not, but I really want to know too!. The internet is going downnnn. Please share with us what you see in the crystal ball. Thanks.



HI everyone. Please understand I am really quite ignorant when it comes to knowing even what it means to have a DSL, ASDL or fiber optics for choices. Many people just have other things to do and are less interested I guess. I have learned quite a lot reading your educated opinions and as you can see from the above test results, compared to most of you I have a seriously limited up speed and in fact is what brought here to the forum.

I will add some news on the Qwest issue however. Recently, in the last 2 weeks, I needed a line in Mesa , a dsl line to connect to someones server. I am in Phoenix. I personally had before that call been only getting speeds up to 1.5 mps and a slightly higher upload rate of 786 roughly. While ordering this new dsl line at the house in Mesa, I was told that for $5 more a month I could have new speeds of 3000kpbs and the addition of linebacker (inside the home line repairs free) and still have the other normal bells and whistles I have now. So woohoo was I excited!

I have never experienced a line using Qwest in the 15 years I have lived in Phoenix that has not a lot of static interference, and still we have no clear line ever. I have lived in at least 2 different locations for this and it just quite frankly indicates poor service ethic. They are a company that provides the min and drags its feet to update or keep up with technology. The new speed is still not working consistently and although very noticeable to me , the upload is where I have a serious issue. Moving along

The dsl line to mesa home was a nightmare and by the way, the speeds to that address was only available in the 1.5 mp area . So they are making some new change on the line itself, but not to every area in the Valley. Anyway, they charged me $120 to run that line to get this poor rate of speed. And it is going to cost $40 a month. Yes I will be canceling this today! hehe

Finally, when I got so fed up with Qwest some years ago and went with AT&T, I learned then the fact is that Qwest owns the lines. AT&T will simply pay them some reduced rate . We actually had a Qwest guy come out to install the AT&T line. If you live in Phoenix, there simply is no escape from the condition and greed of Qwest,... unless you choose cable. Choosing cable is not always an option because it is so much more expensive and most people that may consider the change cannot afford to pay the high deposit prices Cox insists people pay if they have credit that has went through say the hard times of the current rape and burglary of resources and livelyhood going on today. Perhaps they have changed their policy in this regard?

In a place like Phoenix Arizona... a major metropolitan city, there is no excuse other than poor business and moral ethic, greed and monetizing a monopoly for the condition of the situation. This simply does not happen in a corporation without a willful choice made on their part to schmooze and pillage as long as they can. Trust me I know that world, the numbers in each area are crunched, analyzed, spewed and redrawn each and every week. They knew what they were doing and it is now going to be time to pay the cost of greed. Men reaped the success of the company instead of putting some of it back into the company for expansion and upgraded technology.

They had people in it for themselves and not for the well being of the company at the helm. It is sad really, but you can't really blame a person for looking out for his own best interests, when he can see quite clearly from other corporate arenas that being a "company man" gets you screwed big time and one week before that retirement kicks in too!!
reply
anon @ 22nd May 02:56PM:
Re: Incompetence Executives Spout BS

said by WiseOldNerd :

Qwest senior management are arrogant, incompetent buffoons hiding away in their sumptuous offices in Denver without a clue as to what is happening in the rest of their so called customer area. I would not own Qwest stock if they gave it to me and when I can pry the copper connected phone from my spouses hand they are gone. Enough bullsh*t Qwest get off the pot and rebuild your cruddy infrastructure with all the stolen USF funds.
Heck ask higher level management in Phoenix they blame the low level techs for years of laziness and not keeping the plant in good shape, They just need better techs at lower pay all will be great. Plus GPS and time quotas on everything. Last i knew a vast majority of techs was on writeup for something. Unless they are the good techs playing the game and running as fast as they can to the next job leaving the hard stuff for someone else.
reply
anon @ 22nd May 03:43PM:
Re: Incompetence Executives Spout BS

said by damox :

Well the real problem is that Qwest's last CEO ripped them off for hundreds or millions driving the company into the ground, and unfortunately they weren't a great company in the first place. Qwest is trying to recover from a very bad spot.
Try the former owner Phil ripoff for billions. Sure he is a dumb billionaire and had no idea what his underling Joe was doing.
reply
anon @ 22nd May 03:39PM:
Re: Iceberg hit!

said by Vesentac :

The real problem is Qwest has no money to do the infrastructure changes they need to compete. I say 1-2 more years before they go bankrupt in the current state of the economy.
I doubt bankruptcy. Maybe a sale of the company part by part. There is still money to be made by the higher ups. Customers and workers be darned. There is a current cashflow to be used as upper management lines their pockets.
reply
anon @ 22nd May 03:39PM:
Re: Qwest = joke

said by dynodb :

said by iansltx :

Problem is, in order to upgrade upload speeds beyond 1 Mbps, Qwest has to switch to VDSL or fiber. They ditched VDSL just a bit ago, and they certainly aren't going to go to fiber.
They've been working on VDSL2 for some time now, with hints that it'll be ready for deployment in the near future.
Yes another great move. Do not even have th 20 meg service rolled out now onto the next technology. They could have gone straight to VDSL2 but no. Or another type of adsl.
reply
anon @ 24th May 08:56PM:
Re: Incompetence Executives Spout BS

you are correct.
reply

Thank you for using lo-fi dslreports.com - report bugs
© 99-2009 silver matrix LLC