Skip to main content

Hey all, i just upgraded from 100mbps to 400mbps, which worked out both cheaper and faster. next step up is gigabit (1000mbps), which is $10 more and requires a visit from the tech and service fee. Anyway, just wondering what you all have been using, and if you have and complaints, or positives. Thanks.

-kyle

Comments

cyrano Thu, 04/05/2018 - 07:15

Basic service is 40 Mbps down and 7 up here, at 60 €/month. That inludes a free landline and TV, with around 100 channels. It's fast, as these are real (measured) numbers, not marketing speak. For 15 € more, I could get 100 Mbps down, but up would still only be 10 Mbps. Not worth it.

In fact, the upload speed is the limiting factor for me.

Big numbers don't mean a thing, as the rest of the net, outside your ISP becomes the bottleneck. I work on Gbps lines (symmetrical!) sometimes and the browser doesn't feel any faster. Downloads are blazing fast, if they come from within the network. If they come from the net, they're usually throttled by the server they come from.

Some speed can be gained if your ISP has lousy DNS servers. Cloudflare just started a free public DNS at 1.1.1.1 and 1.0.0.1 that could make your internet experience a little less sluggy:

https://1.1.1.1/

They started it on April 1, but it's no joke.

pcrecord Thu, 04/05/2018 - 12:17

Internet services in Quebec/Canada are crasy expensive.
The main players Videotron, Cogeco and Bell Canada are all giving price package for TV, Phone and internet and they don't want you to buy only internet.
So, they'll give you basic internet for 80$ and full package for 78$ (for 6 months).
After the 6months you can deal the package for around 100-120 but this is too expensive for me and my girlfriend.
So we found a reseller giving the Cogeco service 40-10-250gig for 40$/month. (even got a cogeco technician for the install for free)
Our TV is provided by an antenna who grabs 12 channels (including the commons in our area) for free.
Bought a recorder (Tablo) and got an IP Phone with Ooma. (5.95/month)
Other than this, I've got a couple streaming account via a ROKU and I'm happy to pay less.

dvdhawk Thu, 04/05/2018 - 20:02

Are you kidding me? My speed here in rural PA is only slightly faster than Amish, compared to either 100 and 400mbps.

Two questions:
Have you confirmed that actual speed?
Is that symmetrical? (upload at the same speed as the download speed)

Due to the limitations of copper phone line I barely qualify for DSL, despite the fact that one of the largest trunks of fiber in the eastern US literally runs right through my #%&$*#! yard. It connects major hubs Cleveland to Philadelphia uninterrupted other whatever splices were necessary.

pcrecord Fri, 04/06/2018 - 06:27

dvdhawk, post: 456470, member: 36047 wrote: Are you kidding me? My speed here in rural PA is only slightly faster than Amish, compared to either 100 and 400mbps.

Two questions:
Have you confirmed that actual speed?
Is that symmetrical? (upload at the same speed as the download speed)

Due to the limitations of copper phone line I barely qualify for DSL, despite the fact that one of the largest trunks of fiber in the eastern US literally runs right through my #%&$*#! yard. It connects major hubs Cleveland to Philadelphia uninterrupted other whatever splices were necessary.

We have many areas in the same situation in Quebec.. Remote places where not a lot of people live aren't worth connecting to fibers, according to suppliers.
Just sad !

paulears Fri, 04/06/2018 - 13:36

I really had to laugh - after following the inane BT test system, it failed three times, with speed slowing right down - then finally the test completed and BT say it's performing better than they ever promised (forgetting they just told me my promised download speed was 70MBs earlier) and now they say they promised 40, and as it's 42, all is well.

kmetal Fri, 04/06/2018 - 16:35

cyrano, post: 456455, member: 51139 wrote: Basic service is 40 Mbps down and 7 up here, at 60 €/month. That inludes a free landline and TV, with around 100 channels. It's fast, as these are real (measured) numbers, not marketing speak. For 15 € more, I could get 100 Mbps down, but up would still only be 10 Mbps. Not worth it.

In fact, the upload speed is the limiting factor for me.

Big numbers don't mean a thing, as the rest of the net, outside your ISP becomes the bottleneck. I work on Gbps lines (symmetrical!) sometimes and the browser doesn't feel any faster. Downloads are blazing fast, if they come from within the network. If they come from the net, they're usually throttled by the server they come from.

Some speed can be gained if your ISP has lousy DNS servers. Cloudflare just started a free public DNS at 1.1.1.1 and 1.0.0.1 that could make your internet experience a little less sluggy:

https://1.1.1.1/

They started it on April 1, but it's no joke.

interesting. i asked this questions becuase my intent is to get do remote tracking/mixing/broadcasting, and im trying to figure out how. so even if my connection was Gbps, and i had a fast dedicated server rented, that would only matter if the clients connection was gbps? what if they signed into a dedciated client machine using remote access or virtualization, which was on my network?

sorry, im very green to networking, and ive been kinda putting this concept together slowly over the past couple years, as i gather hardware and knowledge.

pcrecord, post: 456465, member: 46460 wrote: Internet services in Quebec/Canada are crasy expensive.
The main players Videotron, Cogeco and Bell Canada are all giving price package for TV, Phone and internet and they don't want you to buy only internet.
So, they'll give you basic internet for 80$ and full package for 78$ (for 6 months).
After the 6months you can deal the package for around 100-120 but this is too expensive for me and my girlfriend.
So we found a reseller giving the Cogeco service 40-10-250gig for 40$/month. (even got a cogeco technician for the install for free)
Our TV is provided by an antenna who grabs 12 channels (including the commons in our area) for free.
Bought a recorder (Tablo) and got an IP Phone with Ooma. (5.95/month)
Other than this, I've got a couple streaming account via a ROKU and I'm happy to pay less.

thats very similar pricing to my area. im gonna check out those services you mentionded, since ime likely going to have personal and buisness internet/service accounts. im 2 $80 for the 400mbps, with the option to go gbps for $10 more, which im striongly considering, once this house is all cleaned out, and i decide on a router. recommendations welcome

dvdhawk, post: 456470, member: 36047 wrote: Two questions:
Have you confirmed that actual speed?
Is that symmetrical? (upload at the same speed as the download speed)

no, and no. i tested my laptops and devices with the NetPerf app. after several times over months, i average 6-10mbps upload, 30 mbps download. that was via the wifi, dual band 2.5ghz (cable company) modem/router. The connection was a 100mbps service. i havent tried since the upgrade to the '400 mbps', which they cleverly state ' up to 400 mbps'. my civic speedometer went 'up to 160mph' ...

dvdhawk, post: 456470, member: 36047 wrote: Due to the limitations of copper phone line I barely qualify for DSL, despite the fact that one of the largest trunks of fiber in the eastern US literally runs right through my #%&$*#! yard. It connects major hubs Cleveland to Philadelphia uninterrupted other whatever splices were necessary.

ugh that stuff drives me insane. I live 40 miles south of boston, in one of the most densely populated areas, and have no option for fiber optic service provider. So that leaves comcast with a monopoly on general broadband internet and cable. i have the highway, rt. 140/195 running through my backyard, no luck with internet, or custom onramp.

paulears, post: 456480, member: 47782 wrote: Worse - 30/10. Sigh.

thats right about where mine sits, i was experiencing issues trying to watch youtube, and stream pandora, on brand new devices, so something had to give. im gearing up for an online based audio/consulting service, so im trying to feel my way thru the different speeds and bottlenecks.

cyrano Sat, 04/07/2018 - 16:23

paulears, post: 456481, member: 47782 wrote: I really had to laugh - after following the inane BT test system, it failed three times, with speed slowing right down - then finally the test completed and BT say it's performing better than they ever promised (forgetting they just told me my promised download speed was 70MBs earlier) and now they say they promised 40, and as it's 42, all is well.

I'm guessing the lower number is your profile and the higher number is what your account can do at it's theoretical maximum. The profile is what your connection is currently set at to keep it stable. It's guided by distance to the exchange and line quality.

The test from BT runs between your modem and the BT endpoint and is accurate. It can fail because of sudden noises on the line and a number of other reasons, like not enough capacity in the test equipment in the BT exchange. These sudden noises don't matter much for an internet connection, but tend to show wrong test results, so BT notes that as "fail". That is because if it would be included in the test results, it would give a wrong result and your profile might get set lower automatically. You need to run these tests a few times, like once early in the morning, at peek internet hours and late at night, to get a clear picture. Als run them after weeks of rain and when it is very dry, to spot problems with soaked lines. Take notes. If failures are consistent, inform BT. If you have test results in a row, with dates and weather conditions, they just might take it more seriously and take a look at your line history. There could be parasites on the line. Or your splitter filter could be placed in the wrong spot. Or...

Besides that, a 40 Mbps profile that performs at 42 is a bit strange imho. But I don't know BT's procedures.

I have solved problems with our local ADSL system here for a number of years though. We're currently on VDSL, which solves a lot of problems, since it uses fiber to the roadside cabinets, so the distance between modem and endpoint is never more than 900 meters.

Internet speed tests don't tell you anything. Some tests are even fake, others are more or less accurate. But a lot of ISP's have the ip's from test sites on the fast lane. So your test might just show something you'd never get on a normal connection. Besides, the server on which these tests reside, might be on the other end of the globe. And that means a lot of hops between you and the test server. Or, it might be around the corner, just a few hops away. Nothing comparable, really.