Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

ISPs Offer Faster Speeds, Why Don't We Get Them? 688

Ron Williams asks: "I'm infuriated every time I see that companies are raising their speeds when they can't maintain their current speeds. Here's my biggest issue: my grandmother signed up for the 3Mbps DSL plan through Verizon, however a speed test said she was only getting 750Kbps. Why pay for the extra bandwidth when she's not getting it? She downgraded to the 768K plan expecting to still have 750K. Wrong, instead her speed dropped to 300K. So, how about instead of companies constantly claiming to increase their speeds, they get their actual speeds correct. Comcast has done the same thing, I had their 6Mbps plan at one point, I got 2.5Mbps usually and sometimes 3Mbps, so they're all doing the same thing. In closing, with all these speed increases, why is my Internet not getting faster?" What practices and tools do you use to test your bandwidth speed and how have you approached your ISP when the performance repeatedly fell short of your expectations?
One thing to note is that you'll never get the top speed advertised for any connection due to transmission overhead; even so, you should be able to get close (within about 10-20%). Also, ISPs oversell their bandwidth, so if you run your speed tests when other customers are using their connection, you will notice the performance hit.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

ISPs Offer Faster Speeds, Why Don't We Get Them?

Comments Filter:
  • SLA? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Jordan Catalano ( 915885 ) on Thursday June 01, 2006 @11:23PM (#15450979) Homepage
    SLA? Bullshit. If I buy a car called "Toyota 85MPH Blue Car" it had damned well better not be goverened to 55MPH. "But when you bought the car, the dealer never signed an agreement guaranteeing speed." Bull-shit.
  • Bit Versus Byte (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Wizarth ( 785742 ) on Thursday June 01, 2006 @11:25PM (#15450989) Homepage
    Something I've heard from my friends a lot is that they don't realise companies sell their connection speeds in BITS per second.

    Myself, I have 512Kb/s down, and as a rule of thumb I divide by 10 to get it in bytes. I get at best 54KB/s downloads, which works out by this rule.

    I know, a byte is 8 bits, but as a rule of thumb, dividing by 10 seems to include overhead.

    I know my 512Kb/s ADSL connection doesn't rate against these 3Mb/s cable connections, but, this is my experience, learn from it what you will.
  • Re:Shocking! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by ScrewMaster ( 602015 ) on Thursday June 01, 2006 @11:26PM (#15450997)
    What does gramma need with 3Mbps anyway?!

    Irrelevant. They sold her on 3 Mbps, they aren't delivering it. It's not my business or yours what she wants it for.
  • by Flexagon ( 740643 ) on Thursday June 01, 2006 @11:35PM (#15451059)

    ... you get no SLA...

    My cable connection (Comcast) is the same, and specifically includes a disclaimer that no guarantee is made that I will actually receive the rated throughput.

    In practice, it blazes in the off-hours, sludges out during prime time. And the most noticable effect when it's bad is latency, not throughput.

  • Re:Shocking! (Score:2, Insightful)

    by nolife ( 233813 ) on Thursday June 01, 2006 @11:37PM (#15451079) Homepage Journal
    On cable connections, you're sharing the connection

    Are you implying that DSL is not shared? The only part of DSL that is not shared is from your house to the CO. From there it is shared as the bandwidth in and out of your CO is shared by everyone that terminates in that CO, I guess the only person you would not share that CO bandwidth with is if you were connecting directly to one of your neighbors.

    On a side note. I have Comcast. I can always got my advertised speed any time of the day or night. Not all areas are maxed out or "oversold".
       
  • by ScrewMaster ( 602015 ) on Thursday June 01, 2006 @11:38PM (#15451083)
    Actually, it's because the vast majority of their customers never use the promised resources and don't notice the fact that the ISP is technically fibbing. Unfortunately, since the advent of Gnutella and Bit Torrent millions of people are noticing that they aren't receiving the service levels they were expecting. Browsing, email and instant messaging don't give you any real feedback about line conditions ... but just run a few torrents and it becomes painfully obvious when the performance isn't there. The fact that ISP's business models (and profit margins) depend upon the bulk of their customers not using what they were told they were paying for doesn't change the fact that they are paying for it. If bandwidth-intensive applications continue to be popular (and usage shows no sign of slowing down in spite of numerous lawsuits to the contrary) the big ISPs may very well have to change their offerings. Either that, or build out their networks to the point where they can sustain the traffic. Neither option appeals to them, so they're trying to take the easy way out by labeling certain customers as "bandwidth hogs" or "account abusers" and maintaining undisclosed usage limits (to intimidate customers into limiting their consumption.) That works to a degree, but when the number of bandwidth hogs begins to number in the tens of millions there's definitely a problem.
  • by Mistshadow2k4 ( 748958 ) on Thursday June 01, 2006 @11:46PM (#15451140) Journal
    Sometimes it's your onboard LAN. Check what its maximum speed is supposed to be. I assume that whoever posted this article thought of that but you'd be amazed how many don't think of it or just don't know.
  • Re:Bit Versus Byte (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Justin205 ( 662116 ) on Friday June 02, 2006 @12:00AM (#15451212) Homepage
    Same here. 5 Mbps down, 512 Kbps up (Cable), and I get around 600 kb/s down (on a fast server), and 60 kb/s up, which is almost exactly what I 'should' have.

    Looking at the submitter's ratios, it doesn't look like they did the conversions wrong, though. 3 Mbps is around 400 kb/s max, not 750 kb/s max. So they actually do have a problem, but it's always good to remember these conversions when discussing ISPs.
  • by binaryspiral ( 784263 ) on Friday June 02, 2006 @12:01AM (#15451216)
    Your computer
    connects to
    Your 6MB Cable
    connects to
    Cable Company
    connects to
    A slow or oversold internet connection

    Here is a basic "How to" for calling your ISP... it sucks, and its a tad humiliating for most alpha-geeks... but sometimes we have to play by their rules to get our pr0n and warze faster.

    1. Connect one PC to your cable/dsl modem (nothing else...)
    2. Reboot your PC and your modem
    3. Retest your speeds using a major speed test site
    4. Call your ISP and explain your issue
    5. Listen and follow their instructions (even if its a painful script... do it)
    6. Respond with kindness and friendly responses (remember, they hold the key to escalating your issue or closing it without resolution)

    Hopefully your ISP will recognize their is an issue and resolve it. Otherwise - tell them to go pound sand and move on to the next.
  • by EmbeddedJanitor ( 597831 ) on Friday June 02, 2006 @12:04AM (#15451230)
    No matter how much bandwidth gets installed, it is virtually impossible for all people to get guaranteed throughput. It's a bit like the highway system... you get to drive at 55mph (more if the cops aren't there :-)) but sometimes you get gridlock.

    In my case, I consistently get speed measurements **faster** than my plan provides, but I'm with a new and small ISP and I expect things to get worse as more people sign up.

  • Gas Mileage (Score:5, Insightful)

    by 246o1 ( 914193 ) on Friday June 02, 2006 @12:06AM (#15451238)
    Gas mileage is not determined by the companies, it is determined by a set of specific tests under federal law. If you were able to run those tests and find a discrepancy, then you would have a case as far as fraud/mislabeling/etc. goes. Tests are quite easy to run on bandwidth, so it's an entirely different situation.
  • Re:SLA? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by kahanamoku ( 470295 ) on Friday June 02, 2006 @12:33AM (#15451364)
    Actually, thats is EXACTLY what the post is claiming...

    She downgraded to the 768K plan expecting to still have 750K. Wrong, instead her speed dropped to 300K.

    Using your example, the user has thus now bought a car that only does 60MPH and now magically the traffic has slowed to 30MPH
  • Re:SLA? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Zork the Almighty ( 599344 ) on Friday June 02, 2006 @12:57AM (#15451472) Journal
    Buying a product is not the same as buying a service. The question is whether the ISP is capable of giving the customer their full bandwidth, not just at the particular time when grandma wants it.
  • by Fulcrum of Evil ( 560260 ) on Friday June 02, 2006 @01:25AM (#15451576)

    My cable connection (Comcast) is the same, and specifically includes a disclaimer that no guarantee is made that I will actually receive the rated throughput.

    Doesn't matter. If they never give you the speed you pay for, it's fraud. Otherwise, why wouldn't they sell you 12M internet?

  • by 0racle ( 667029 ) on Friday June 02, 2006 @02:27AM (#15451749)
    Doesn't matter. If they never give you the speed you pay for, it's fraud. Otherwise, why wouldn't they sell you 12M internet?

    Because that would be fraud. However with the absolutely perfect set of circumstances with their current setup you would get what you thought you were paying for. Like every other time in life, the perfect circumstances never happen and they can pass that off as not their fault.

    Is if fraud when hard drive companies sell you a "250GB" HDD? It's the same thing here, you pick the description that makes you look the best.
  • by Chr0n0 ( 833566 ) on Friday June 02, 2006 @03:03AM (#15451863)
    That you dont even live in developing or 3rd world countries as I do ;) Where I am right now, we're lucky to have 24/7 broadband at all, a whopping 64kbps cable connection which is SHARED with 15 other consumer per node for only ~USD35/month, but if you want the speed for yourself, there's the 128kbps for only ~USD130/month, oh, some ISP around here announced a speed improvement to up to 512kbps few months ago, weeee! I hope that gets to my area soon :P It's the problem with humanity, they never get satisfied :D PS: I studied in the states, so I experienced the joy of 1.5 Mbps broadband ;)
  • by SillyNickName4me ( 760022 ) <dotslash@bartsplace.net> on Friday June 02, 2006 @03:44AM (#15451982) Homepage
    I've heard of this phenomenon. I think they call it "lobbying".

    In most parts of the world this is better known as 'corruption'.
  • Excellent comment. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by bigtallmofo ( 695287 ) on Friday June 02, 2006 @07:00AM (#15452486)
    So, when I have an issue I suck up.

    Unfortunately what you outline is the only effective tactic in dealing with someone that makes $10 per hour, is reading from a script, doesn't really care about their job and knows that they will not get in trouble no matter how nonsensical they are as long as they are reasonably following written procedures. Be nice, and you might land on the nice side of the procedures. Be angry or uncooperative... You'll be following the worst parts of procedures to the letter.
  • Re:SLA? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by smallfries ( 601545 ) on Friday June 02, 2006 @07:05AM (#15452496) Homepage
    If you drive your 85MPH Toyota on a crowded highway and it never gets above 45 would you blame the highway, or would you blame Toyota? The end-to-end link between you and the ISP is sold rated at a certain speed - but you contend for access to the internet across their network with the other customers. This is why a DSL is shit cheap compared to a dedicated line and why millions have DSL rather than one or two organisations.
  • Yeah, it is DSL... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by thebdj ( 768618 ) on Friday June 02, 2006 @07:33AM (#15452583) Journal
    this is absurd. Of course your speeds with DSL might suck depending on your location, and the way they determine what speed you get, of course a speed decrease will lower your actual bandwidth. You'll note the speed decrease is actually a bit less with the lower speed, but they are actuall still comparable and probably somewhat attributable to other networking factors.

    Before complaining about your DSL line being slow, I think you really should read up on how DSL (and most likely ADSL to be specific) works. You are hardly ever going to get max bandwidth out of a service line though I honestly cannot complain about the speeds I am getting with Cable. So, remember, before starting a bitch-fest...know what the hell you are talking about...
  • Re:SLA? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by avdp ( 22065 ) * on Friday June 02, 2006 @07:58AM (#15452689)
    To be fair, you ISP only owns parts of the highway: the on ramp (some might own a bit more than that). I bet you'd find that a bandwidth test against a server in their network would probably report numbers very close to what they're selling you. But there are quite a few bottleneck on the internet, including the bandwidth connection of the website you're trying to reach (including the bandwidth test sites I have seen).
  • by Moraelin ( 679338 ) on Friday June 02, 2006 @09:23AM (#15453195) Journal
    Let me tell you a story about my ISP. So at one point I manage to mangle my password by using the change password form on their web site. Actually, I'd swear that it was the crap web site that mangled it, and thereafter neither the old one nor the new one worked. With or without capslock, etc. But ok, let's give them the benefit of the doubt and assume that it was my fault.

    So I call their tech support, am as nice as it gets (it's not that guy's fault anyway), follow the instructions so he can be sure that indeed I can't log in (can't he just reset my password anyway?), and dutifully recite to him all what software I'm using and how when he asks about that. (With the small hickup of him running out of pre-scripted answers when I tell him I'm using RASPPPOE on Windows 2000. Apparently his sheet only included that under XP.) He also asks for my invoice number to be sure it's really me. Remember that detail, it will be crucial in a jiffy. Since it's a daughter company of the telco here, I get the invoices combined, and he aggrees that the one on the telco's invoice is all he needs. I read it to him, he's satisfied with it.

    Anyway, we have a nice civilized talk and he promises that he'll change my password right away and, as is their (idiotic) policy, I'll get the new one by post. Ok, so I'll be without net for couple of days, but I thank him kindly anyway.

    Now let's think about it for a bit, before we delve deeper in this Lovecraftian madness:

    - DSL is a P2P connection, so even if my password were to get to someone else, they can _only_ log on from my apartment. It's not like someone can trick them into giving them a password that'll work from somewhere else.

    - the new password is sent by post to my home address, so they can freakin' know that _I_ am going to be the one receiving it anyway.

    - my phone line is from the same telco and goes through the same exchange, so they could jolly well know that it was me who called, or at least it was from my phone.

    A week goes by and I still don't have my flippin' password. By now I've dug out the old ISDN card and I'm using an expensive call-by-call account somewhere else to even read my emails.

    So I call again, get someone else on the phone, read them the invoice number, they say "yep, I'm changing it now, you'll get it by post." A week later I call again. Then twice a week. Then every 2 days. The same freaking circus repeats every single time. Read them the invoice number, get told "yep, I'm changing it now, nothing happens." Eventually, after a month and a half, it becomes bloody obvious that they're lying shamelessly and they won't do anything.

    So I'm annoyed, escalate it to hell and back, until eventually someone tells me what's the problem: my invoice number doesn't match the one in their database. Apparently when I moved they gave me a new invoice number, but here's the catch: the telco and their ISP department had given me different ones.

    So for a whole bloody month and a half, the retarded tech support drones had just lied to me. None of them bothered telling me "oi, that number doesn't match." None of them bothered using their freaking brains, and figuring out that there are ways to authenticate me otherwise (e.g., tell me to come personally to one of their offices, if they're that paranoid, or call back to my home number to make sure it's me, or whatever) instead of following a script like a lobotomized robot.

    That's what a month of being nice and polite and patient to lying idiots did for me. Yeah, it soo helped.
  • Re:Gas Mileage (Score:3, Insightful)

    by CastrTroy ( 595695 ) on Friday June 02, 2006 @10:07AM (#15453568)
    The question is, How do you know the speed tests you are doing on your connection are accurate. Maybe your connection is capable of 6 Mbps between your house, and you local router, but the rest of the internet doesn't go that fast. The speed tests are run on computers, often many miles if not hundreds of miles from your house. They are also under load. Can you really expect them to send 6 Mbps to 100 users? I find that I usually get amazing speeds by visiting the newsgroup servers on my ISP. The speeds are phenomenal. This is often the only place you can get speeds that they advertise. It's not like your ISP can control how fast Google serves pages.
  • It doesn't work. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by SanityInAnarchy ( 655584 ) <ninja@slaphack.com> on Friday June 02, 2006 @12:14PM (#15454853) Journal
    What works for me is to show them immediately that I know a fair bit about networking. That is, I'll be logged in to my Linux router, and I'll say things like "I'm not getting a DHCP response." They'll say "Reboot the computer" and I'll say "How about I just restart the interface?"

    The service has been rock solid. My ISP simply delivers, except when they don't. Thus, when I have no Internet, I raise hell. No, I won't plug in another computer, I just tested this network card, plugged in a crossover to my laptop, and it's fine. Hell, I even set up a DHCP server on my laptop to make sure that works. Now, could you tell me who pulled the plug on your end?

    And invariably, whoever I was talking to eventually checks with the Powers That Be and lo and behold, they're doing something on their end, and I'll have Internet back in a day or two. I express my annoyance at being cut off, and I wait, and in a few hours, I have my connection again.

    Playing stupid doesn't work with techsupport people. Being nice might -- a little empathy, a little humor, I know it's just your job, I know your script, but trust me, let's just skip to the part where you call someone else at the company. Most importantly, if you're not a clueless user, prove it.

    Maybe it's arrogant, maybe some techs won't like you acting smarter than them (even if you are), but really, they don't like going through the script any more than you do.
  • by dch24 ( 904899 ) on Friday June 02, 2006 @12:46PM (#15455183) Journal
    I'm having trouble using lynx to access this web page. Does anyone else have these problems? I accepted slashdot's cookie.
  • by dch24 ( 904899 ) on Friday June 02, 2006 @01:38PM (#15455714) Journal
    Oh well, I give up. Lynx is not worth using.
  • by Lagged2Death ( 31596 ) on Friday June 02, 2006 @05:07PM (#15457925)
    In part, this is just the natural result when highly technical products and services are sold to a relatively ignorant public in a competitive system.

    When the users aren't clued-in enough to appreciate real differences between service/product A and service/product B, claimed differences become more important, from an economic point of view.

    If provider A claims N Mbps, provider B better counter with similar speeds or lower prices. If the users, by and large, wouldn't actually know a Mbps if it hit them on the head, then the easiest and most profitable way to compete is claim to provide N+1 Mbps. After all, for most light web browsing / chat-room / e-mail users, 1Mbps and 10Mbps connections provide similar experiences. What the service really is capable of is less important than the way the users feel about it.

    The same circumstances drove claimed CD-ROM drive speeds into meaningless exaggeration in the late 90s. The same circumstances drove Intel to chase gigahertz rather than real-world performance in the Pentium IV line. The same circumstances cause Wi-Fi equipment vendors to make wild claims of 100+ Mbps speeds, when users will be lucky to see a tenth of that.

    The phenomenon applies to other fields as well. Digital cameras make a big deal about megapixels, because that's easy to measure and compare, even though image quality is about more than megapixels, even though other, non-image-quality issues may be of far more importance. Plenty of owners of status-symbol watches have no idea what "jewel" means in that context, but are confident that more is better. Few owners of cars with badges like "DOHC" or "VTEC" can give a coherent explanation of what those badges mean, but the badged cars sell for a premium anyway.

Anyone can make an omelet with eggs. The trick is to make one with none.

Working...