Time Warner Cable: Consumers Don't Want Gigabit Internet

103

Comments

+ Add a Comment
avatar

JimmerSD

Time Warner assumes that since we are not willing to compound our already exorbitant cable bills with even more monthly charges, that we do not want faster, better internet.

This is just another example of a large corporation attempting to maintain their failing business model without providing increasingly better service and expecting to see the same profits for it. All the while blaming the consumers of their products for resisting higher rates.

Typical.

avatar

Vano

Wow what a bunch of ignorant idiots.

Let's see. I've been "Lightning" user on Timewarner network since they started offering it. If I'm not mistaking it started at 20mbps, when regular package was 5mbps, but you payed $30 extra for it. Then they started raising up basic internet to 7mbps and the same time they raised up Lightning to 30mbps for the same $30 extra. Then they raised it 10mbps basic and 40mbps lightning, again for $30 extra.
Well, now they got new idea, how about we increase only "Lightning" speed to 60mbps, but will cost you $35, oh and by the way you can't go back to 40mbps because this package is no longer available.

avatar

DoctorX

enjoy your caps?

avatar

coolbreeze27603

When it comes to calling people names, the old adage of the name caller taking a good look in the mirror comes quickly to my mind. Are you that sure that you're in a position to judge others? I think not. Why not delete your first sentence and start your opinion with the second? That way your paragraph would have more credence and be able to display a position far less related to cretinism.

avatar

Glycerin

There's a difference between not wanting it and not wanting to pay a shitload for it

avatar

da_samman

I would LOVE to have Gigabit Internet. Imagine, almost LATENCY FREE online gaming and nearly BUFFERING FREE media streaming. SIGN ME UP!!

avatar

I Like Turtles

It's not that we don't want it. More like we don't want to pay another 30-50 dollars on top of the hundred we already pay!

avatar

Shalbatana

Time Warner Cable is out of touch with its customers. Everyone I talk to in my area wants faster speeds...would love it without having to deal with FIOS's random pricing shenennagins.

Ok, I'll concede one point to TWC, no one is willing to pay the arm and leg more that they currently charge for faster service, but that doesn't mean we don't want it.

(One more fair play note: TWC in my area just gave everyone a free speed bump of about 10%. Now their speeds seem like they are on par with what I had using Optimum cable's Internet 8 years ago, which was pretty good for most users back then.)

Honestly their Internet speed is really the only complaint I have about their service.

avatar

bigrigross

I dont want gigabit internet unless its cheaper than what they offer. I have time warner since they are the only place that offer faster than 1Mb/s service. I pay for business class which cost me 115 dollars a month and thats at 15Mbps dl and 5Mbps upload. That also included 3 Static IP's at 5 dollars a piece. Its terrible pricing.

avatar

PCLinuxguy

Ouch.. I have AT&T fiber with 18MB Down and about 3MB up for about $40 a month. I usually hit between 5 and 17 MB down

avatar

bigrigross

Yeah, its terrible. And their customer service is even worse. It takes them 4 days to even come look at my internet when their crappy proprietary modem fails to work. But at least the two web servers I run have a decent connection. Time warner does have good QOS controls since I have 7Mbps dedicated for my servers and the other 8 for my personal use and it generally works pretty well and I do get a consistent 14 to 15 Mbps and still get a good framerate in CSS.

avatar

PCLinuxguy

Glad to hear that it's not always bad but 4 days? yikes! I hope TWC takes a second look at things and finds a way to increase their speed and preferably get it to 1GB like Google Fiber without it costing $400 a month for service. if they can keep it under $130 I think it'd be worth using for those already shelling out that cash for the slow speed they get now.

avatar

visibly_stealthy

You guys really pay that much? that's outrageous!That should be considered stealing!! I live smack dab in the middle of South Dakota(Which is sparsely populated by the way). Yet I still get 50mbs download 7mbs up.... And for $50 a month to boot! They have other options much faster, For reasonable prices it seems looking at your guys' prices....... Ouch!

avatar

Johmama

Whoa, this is quite the coincidence considering the population of the town, but I also live in Pierre. Where do you get your Internet? Mine's through Midco and I pay $45 for 30mbps down, 5 mbps up. I'm all for jumping ship if I can get your speed at that price!

avatar

praack

hah- the real reason is that in survey's people would not go for the high amount of cash time warner wanted to see for the bandwidth

so when the public gets to the point of having to go for the extra cost- then they will take the step

avatar

jeffroland

Two main points I'd like to make:

1. Echoing other posts, I think Time Warner meant that residential consumers don't want to pay the exorbitant amounts of money that Time Warner will charge for a 1GB/s download. If it were affordable, who wouldn't want it, honestly?

2. If the infrastructural were actually in place to support the entire Time Warner customer base at 1GB/s then I think they would actually offer it. Why not? What would they have to lose? Obviously they would charge a LOT of money for such a connection and there would be a few rich people at least that would actually pay for it.

But I don't think that's the case. I'd be willing to bet that the infrastructure is still not where it needs to be. Bottlenecks at the local level will probably develop if everyone started downloading at 1GB/s download speeds.

avatar

scottmana

double post

avatar

scottmana

No one understood how far we would go putting in roads. No one grasped what the internet would become. Phone lines needed better wires because no one thought fidelity would be valuable. Trade has built empires. Trade is an exchange of valuables just like all the above. They all add up to the human empire we have today.

We are every bit held back by the limit of our transfer of ideas and materials. The internet's boom in the 1990s caused an unexpected economic boom because it was there. Many years ago Rome built roads not because it was easy, but because it had learned a lesson we seem to have lost.

Even if you don't understand this, the internet is one of those areas that if you blindly supported due to a lack of imagination, you would still win in the end. This is so powerful that it alone could overcome any problems the US currently has and keep the US on top as a world power.

And we ask why?!

avatar

xRadeon

I want it, yeah I don't need it 95% of time, but when I actually do need it, it's really nice.

So just give it to us already.... :)

avatar

Freebar

I remember dial-up internet with a 56K modem and I happily paid AOL $25 a month. Then I thought I'd be able to attract Hollywood starlets when I paid $56 a month for 768K DSL. With the latter I was able to watch short video clips in small windows for maybe 15-20 seconds between buffering. Now for the same price I enjoy 59Mbps downloads and 30Mbps uploads and I can watch Vudu's HDX movies full screen without hiccups or buffering. For that price I'd have Google Fiber. I have an Asus Crosshair IV Formula 890FX/SB850 motherboard with the latest driver updates, but can my PC process 1Gbps data? What bottlenecks exist in my PCI-e 2.0 X 16 lanes, South Bridge, chipset before the point of diminishing returns? Thank you.

avatar

timekills

Insert prerequisite "won't need more than 640K memory" comment here.

Which of course he didn't say. So TWC's reps are really dumb, not just internet false rumor dumb.

ANd I really appreciate the comments from responders that obviously just KNOW the only reason one would need Gb+ speeds is for pirating. Not, perhaps, backing up my data to a remote location and later recovering it. Or doing the same in a multi-homed environment for my less tecnically inclined family members. Or VPN in from remote locations (i.e. as I'm deployed) to assist my family members in network and/or system repairs. Or to update multiple PCs. Or to allow my four kids to do increasing bandwidth intensive research, gaming, and video streaming. Or to keep from having to have local copies of all my home videos and music when I could have them on a cloud storage site. Or to allow other family members to see them if I still kept them at home because cloud storage is also prohibitively expensive. Or..
Well. You get the point. Thanks for telling me what I need. Clearly NO ONE wants faster Internet. That's why you charge more for offering faster Internet that no one wants and so no one orders.

avatar

Ghost XFX

Like tossing pig slop onto our faces, and calling it a beauty facial...

Just open up the freaking gates already, stop the BS with the cap and overpricing the market.

avatar

Broadbanned

Show me a legitimate average user that needs anything more than ADSL speeds. To all you pirates out there, stop complaining and gtfo.

avatar

PCLinuxguy

considering all the replies you got for legitimate users and such i believe you just got "pwned" not take your own advice troll

avatar

DoctorX

i work from home... have 4 rokus... stream internet tv. Download legal softare and isos (linux and msdn), on steam (so is my son). All on 50 down and 5 up.

I dont pirate. So why dont you just STFU and GTFO Broadbanned.

My list:

laptop for work (i can do 10-40GB a day)
gaming pc 1 with hexacore and steam + interenet tv
gaming pc 2 with quad core and steam
cr48 constant use
netbook constant use
2 nexus 7
3 phones (wifi at home)
4 rokus
1 mce watches cablecard and hulu +
nook color
plus whomever comes over either has a laptop or phone.

avatar

harz3000gt

You're on MAXIMUM-freakin'-PC talking to us about average consumers, most of whom download and install 10+ GB games from Steam/XBox Live, etc. have a multi-room HD Netflix, Hulu Plus, etc., 50GB Dropbox, Sugarsync, Cubby, Bitcassa, VNC-running, FTP server, home media center, blah blah blah, the point is you're an idiot.

avatar

SeriousBeeEss

My list of devices connected to my home internet connection consist of:

2 - Android cell phones (Netflix/Hulu/Youtube/Pandora)
1 - Android tablet (Netflix/Hulu/Youtube/Pandora)
1 - Nook
2 - Xbox 360's (HD Netflix/Hulu/Youtube/Pandora)
1 - Blu ray player (HD Netflix/Hulu/Youtube/Pandora)
1 - WD TV Live Hub (HD Netflix/Hulu/Youtube/Pandora)
2 - Desktop computers (HD Netflix/Hulu/Youtube/Pandora to say the least)
3 - Laptop computers (HD Netflix/Hulu/Youtube/Pandora to say the least)

That is 13 devices that need an active internet connection. All of these devices need to download updates regularly. I understand that I may not be using all of these at the same time, but my internet usage is very high without pirating. This list does not include any friends that come over to my house and use my internet.

Almost everyone that I know has a similar set up give or take a couple devices. So with or without pirating, we do in fact need faster internet. With everything from alarm clocks to refrigerators (my moms new car needs internet updates) needing an internet connection to work optimally, internet usage will keep climbing almost endlessly.

avatar

majorsuave

I agree.
3 iPod touch
1 iPhone
3 Android phones
3 laptops
4 desktops
1 PS3
1 Xbox 360
3 Nintendo DS
1 Raspberry PI

We have kids and set them the best example possible : no pirating is ever tolerated. I actually throttle their bandwidth because we have a silly data cap at 90GB which is insanely low when you factor in the size of game demos, Steam games, youtube videos, netflix and all.

I would love a Gbps connection but it would also need a high data cap.

avatar

majorsuave

oops double post * sorry

avatar

supercourier

Oh god, thank you Time-Warner! Save us from excessive bandwidth and have the wisdom to artificially data cap it if we find a way to use it that breaks your monopolistic business model! THANK GOD FOR YOUR INSIGHTFUL BENEFICENCE!!!!

avatar

Ryu

I logged on just for this -> +9000
I love satirical sarcasm.

avatar

acidic

around here i only have the option of TWC. i can get verizon phone but not dsl. when i call TWC support it even gives me the option of taking care of verizon phone services. i pay $60/month for shitty 10mb but due to constant problems prior to purchasing my own modem, they are giving me 20mb for "free" for 6 months which is running out soon.

i dont understand how netflix can stream a GB for only $0.01 while consumer ISPs rape us with "bandwidth caps" and "throttling" to keep their traffic "under control". it just all boils down to what numerous people have already stated in that it is all about the green.

avatar

AFDozerman

No infrastructure my ass. We could easily be at 1+ gigabit if we repurposed some certain old tech. I have a point to make, but I like telling stories to give you a better idea of where I'm coming from, so bear with me here. If you want the short version, though, here it is: Mesh Networks over CB = free gigabit without these stupid ISPs getting in the way.
*********
I'm originally from the deep South, and though I'm not all that old now, I can still vividly remember the days before it was even possible to have cell phones or Internet. We didn't get real Internet til about '03 or so, and before that, long distance communications happened through landline telephones and Citizen's Band radios.

It was the CBs that fascinated me as a kid because everything else required infrastructure that wasn't ours. You send a letter, the mail service comes and picks it up from the mail box; you make a phone call, it travels through company-owned lines to the other person. CBs were a different story. With a citizens ban radio, it was all yours- every bit of it. You send and receive invisible signals, and they belong to you. At age nine, I started working on CBs, and by fifteen, I was pretty much a CB ninja.

Sadly though, over the years, my interests in the CBs wayned and vanished, replaced by a love for computing- until recently. I was sitting at my laptop reading an article on how mesh networking can never work in sparsely populated areas because of how much energy is needed to carry x amount of data x distance, when I remembered my dad's ham radio setup he used to have. The 50 foot tall tower in our back yard reached over the trees that surrounded our house and allowed us to communicate over huge distances, so much so that in the days immediately after Katrina, we were actually able to leap-frog messages from one station to another to help people communicate with loved ones out of state.

I started looking into how much data can actually travel over a CB's low frequency radio waves, and the outcome is a little surprising; Gigabit is more than possible. The infrastructure exists today, I've seen ham radios still scattered out across America that are sitting, unused in most cases, and I still see a CB in a vehicle from time to time. If we repurposed this tech with built-in 256bit AES to protect your data and something like the Opera web browser's "turbo mode" to help funnel more data down the pipes, we could have free Gigabit for the masses with infrastructure already in place.

avatar

timekills

AFDozerman: You're correct in theory except you're forgetting (or not aware of) this exponentially increasing overhead used in mesh networks on similar or same frequencies. This concept is already used in the military using handheld radios and a TDMA mesh (since the frequency range is limited, as it would be with CB radios, you have to manage transmission via time slots.)

Suffice to say that once you get over 30 nodes in a TDMA mesh, the overhead increases significantly. Now, it isn't really rate-dependant, so the effects on a 1Gb+ mesh network wouldn't be initially as extreme as on 5-10Mb networks we use, but if you're talking on a city-wide or even larger scale, the amount of nodes required would eventually cause overhead to exceed usability.

avatar

Jox

Sadly, as this would be difficult to monetize, it will never happen except as a grassroots movement which means that you, AFDozerman, will need to lead the charge.

I know next to nothing about Ham radio. All I ask is that if something like this comes to pass, it be broadcast at a frequency which my Channelmaster antennae will pick up.

-Jox

avatar

code59656

The reason that Time Warner Cable is making this move, is that there is not a consumer need for 1gbps internet service. Consumers at home are not downloading blu-ray movies from 20 devices. They are not running servers that need to communicate with 100 worldwide locations. Consumers are not hosting download databases like Mediafire or Dropbox, while they may have an account for those services. If the need for such outrageous bandwidth at one time arises for consumers, then Time Warner Cable, as they said, will open that up. While I would love to have 25mbps or 50mbps internet, I know for certain that there is no need for 1gbps.

avatar

timekills

Hubris, much?

You KNOW what I need. Define need, of course, but if you read my and almost everyone else's comments you will see there are absolutely legitmate reasons for people to use Gb speeds. Perhaps if you'd stop considering that not everyone lives by themself, and only has to take care of their one PC, you'd realize you don't KNOW for certain what anyone else needs. Any more than the TWC rep does.

avatar

w2ed

First, for those who've already commented, how many of you are "average" users? You watch a few flicks on Netflix, you do light gaming, some web surfing, but nothing too intensive on your computer or the internet? How many of you don't have your systems primed and geeked to their content, and have to ask others for help when something messes up?

I'd be willing to bet the majority of us on here, myself included, don't ask questions unless something is that new and that cool to try on our own, or unless the crap's really hit the fans. We may not have bleeding edge hardware, but whatever we have isn't slouching, and except for parts, most of us don't have to waste anyone's times with repairs. Chances are we're the ones people come to when there is a problem.

In other words, we're not the "average" user - not by a long shot!

Now look at us from a business standpoint. Most of us, even if we could afford to, probably wouldn't have 1Gbps without the necessity for it. It's not that we couldn't utilize the hell out of it - on the contrary, we'd be the ones blowing it up! That's not worst bit of news, though - that'd fall to the number of us, the small amount that, combined, would still be too small to register a decent enough number to justify, to the businesses, doing it at a reasonable cost.

Second, I don't need to preach to the choir about how wrong Time Warner and all of these companies are, or the fact that they're too cheap to give us reasonable access without charging us more than it's worth for it. We know they're just trying to screw us out of a few extra bucks, and we should be thankful they're not succeeding.

Third, and this royally sucks: We know how technology advances,and while we can be thankful that most people legitimately "don't" need it right now, you can imagine, even with people going to mobile devices, that will increase. The question's not "if" but "when" this will happen, and we already know the gatekeepers are ready, waiting to knock the price down just enough to get a lot of people interested.

Finally, I am biased. I'm one of those people who'd put Gigabit ethernet to great use, but I know it's out of my reach right now.

avatar

SeriousBeeEss

9/10 people that I know use Netflix and have more than 4 devices connected to their internet in some way.

For instance my wife's 65 year old grandmother has 2 3D TV's/3D Blu-ray players, 2 laptops, 1 desktop, 1 printer and a handful of other random household appliances that all need an active internet connection to update and function properly.

The average user knows how to connect a Wifi device just the same as a power user and the need for faster internet will always grow based on the amount of devices that use the internet.

My 3 year old son knows how to use the Android OS and Xbox 360. He opens and uses Netflix on both of them with no help from me.

In my opinion, faster internet is needed right now by the majority of people.

avatar

vkt62

In my hometown in India, we have a local provider who gives about 15 mbps for $20 and throttles it to 256kbps after 30GB. Pretty good deal for the present.

avatar

Markitzero

My mom pays about $56 for 5Mbps but the WISP Provider recently increased to 8Mbps and they are the only provider in the area that offer decent broadband other then the Satellite Internet. The areas that I wish would get help with broadband speeds because were my mom lives is a rural city in California called Phelan.

avatar

milehighxr

I'd kill for 10mbs at the same $45/month I'm spending now, but i know thats not gonna happen...

avatar

livebriand

With AT&T around here, it's more like 'Why transfer at gigabit when we can do it at 1.5mbps'. Yes, you read that right. 1.5mbps. And my only alternative (aside from satellite or dialup is comcast, which at least has good speeds)

On a serious note though, I'd love to have gigabit, but I'm not willing to pay for it. (lol) The 15mbps I have is good enough, though other countries are making me envious...

avatar

warptek2010

Sure, who WOULDN'T want gigabit speeds? The problem is they would probably charge you a hefty fee of $299.00 a month, and who but a business can afford that?

avatar

John Pombrio

The US is just too damn big. It's OK to wire up a tiny country like South Korea that has less than 1% of our landmass but we are the third largest country in the world. Be nice to have better than my 3.5MB/s download speeds but I will take it!

avatar

Electrik

What horseshit. THEY don’t want gigabit speeds because they would not be able to justify caps and their idiotic tiered plans. The cable companies love our 50yr old copper infrastructure; the inherent limits on copper are a gold mine for them.

avatar

Alathorne

I have their "Turbo" service in the Albany NY area: .nycap. They promise "up to 20 Mbps!" With a new modem, we get, consistently, 9.7-9.95 Mbps. It's so consistent I double-checked with them, thinking they forgot to complete the changes.

avatar

acidic

i was in the same boat as you until i bought my own modem. i chose the motorola sb6121. it was around $80 and has been great. no more dropped net everyday and i keep around 20mb nearly 95% of the time. you should really look into getting your own modem to get better quality and to bypass their gay monthly modem rental

avatar

Mungo

For two years I paid TWC $10 extra a month for turbo before I realized the cable modem they had installed was a DOCSIS 2.
I called them on it and they insisted I didn't need a DocSIS 3 modem even though their web site specifically says it is required.

I installed my own DOCSIS 3 cable modem and for the first time I saw the "turboboost" effect at the start of each Speed test I ran.

avatar

jonnyohio

Well if google were to bring it here, I'd be happy show them how much I'd like it at a reasonable price.

Log in to MaximumPC directly or log in using Facebook

Forgot your username or password?
Click here for help.

Login with Facebook
Log in using Facebook to share comments and articles easily with your Facebook feed.