Comcast advertising “10G” in hopes to confuse consumers to accept slower speeds::Comcast says Xfinity offers 10G home internet, but the term “10G” is hazy and potentially misleading—especially because it has no relation to 5G for cell phones.
Even when they use industry-standard terms, like Mbps, they don’t even advertise their upload speed (because it is piss-poor).
I’m at up to 250mbps down and 10mbps up for $90 usd a month. In fairness though I do see that max speed, and even a bit over it regularly.
There is a local Power company around here that started running fiber to their service area, but sadly I am not in it so I am stuck with ComCrap
I will say I think I’m till in an intro price. But I’m at $60 for 800 down and I think 20 up
Most people don’t even understand mbps. People get the most expensive plans when it won’t even make a difference for what they do, they just believe it will work better.
Xfinity’s 10G network is technically slower than 5G. Peak theoretical throughput on an uncongested 5G network offers up to 20Gbps download and 10Gbps upload. Xfinity caps out at 10Gbps down and up.
In what world are people getting that kind of speed on 5G? In like a lab with perfect conditions and non-consumer equipment? Is this article written by T-Mobile home internet or something? I’ll take Comcast 10G over 5G wireless any day and I hate Comcast.
I automatically assumed 10G was short for 10Gb/s, so I guess I found nothing confusing about the name? They literally are advertising the speed in the name, I think that’s great compared to when they called shit “Blast” and other weird names.
In what world are people getting that kind of speed on 5G? In like a lab with perfect conditions and non-consumer equipment?
It’s right in your quote: “Peak theoretical throughput on an uncongested 5G network”
It’s the theoretical limit of the technology, not real-world numbers.
The author of this article is a grade A dumbass, or it’s a paid smear piece. Honestly I can’t tell.
If he’s comparing theoreticals, why not include the theoretical 44000Gbps of a fiber optic connection? If the author is somehow reading this: 44000 is more than 20!
It’s all that Millimeter Wave 5G garbage that drops coverage like a fart in the wind, hardly ever works, requires more expensive phone plans, and requires a special radio on your phone in addition to the normal 5g one.
That hasn’t been my experience with it at all. I quite enjoy the >500Mbps and 19 ms ping, and reliability is fine now.
Oh man, this sounds like a repeat of the whole debacle with AT&T and their “5Ge” bullshit. As soon as the whole 5G hype started, AT&T decided to claim that their entire network was now “5Ge” and capable of faster speeds. When in reality the “5Ge” label simply meant that the network in that area was flagged to be upgraded to 5G sometime in the near future, there was zero increase in network bandwidth or performance, just a little “5GE” symbol on your phone. IIRC they were taken to court over it and ordered to stop using the “5Ge” label, but they figured out a way to weasel out of it and never followed thru.
Many years ago, when even smartphones were relatively rare, I learned that AT&T was offering a little USB dongle that would give your computer internet access via their cell phone network for a monthly fee. I thought it was a fantastic idea and I wanted exactly that, so I went in to buy one.
I asked the lady how much data per month was included. She said it was unlimited. I said that it’s definitely not. I just want to know what the limit is. We want back and forth a little bit, and after a while I just asked to see the written agreement, dug through it a little bit, and found the part where it said that I was limited to 5 gigabytes of internet per month. I pointed it out to her, reiterating that 5 gigs is fine, I just had wanted to know what the limit was.
She said, “Oh that’s what comes with the unlimited plan.” She argued that no human being would realistically use 5 gigabytes in a single month, so the plan was unlimited.
I gave up and just bought the thing and left, but it was such a frustrating interaction that it still comes to mind almost 20 years later when someone says “AT&T” and “bullshit” in the same sentence.
You have an unlimited amount of water in that glass, assuming you don’t drink it all.
Reminds me of that guy who repeatedly asked Verizon to confirm their price was X cents per byte, but ultimately was charged X dollars per byte.
Found it: http://verizonmath.blogspot.com/2006/12/verizon-doesnt-know-dollars-from-cents.html
See also: AT&T marketing HSPA+ as 4G LTE.
More things that could never fly if there was honest, real competition in the internet provider market.
Yes, go after Comcast for their confusing marketing and shitty business practices, but nothing would fix the situation faster and better than having them have to actually compete for customers because there were a few other internet providers out there that customers could choose from.
This is the new DOCSIS4.0 network. I really don’t understand how it is as contentious as everyone makes it out to be. It’s a new standard allowing for faster speeds.
It’s contentious because it is intentionally confusing and doesn’t need to be.
They can just call it DOCSIS 4.0 and tell their actual speeds. It’s not like they need to hide it. Comcast and other cable providers are finally getting multi gig speeds and their piss poor upload speeds are being raised. Meanwhile fiber providers like Verizon FIOS have yet to roll out consumer multgig outside of NYC and still don’t have IPV6 available everywhere.
What are the “actual speeds?” They’re selling 10gbps circuits so I don’t really see a problem with this.
This article talks about low upload speeds on existing infra and completely ignores the fact that the limitations they spell out are a factor of extremely limited upload spectra on traditional DOCSIS networks. This is a problem with the technical standard, not the carriers (which have their own problems)
The funniest part is that the DOCSIS4.0 spec is addressing this limitation yet here we are.
Is node over subscription a problem? Absolutely. But I don’t think the root of that problem is the marketing department.
I would not put much stock in this article because they are either uninformed on what they’re reporting on, or intentionally telling half truths. There are enough reasons to hate cable companies, we don’t need to invent new ones.
It’s just clickbait for under-informed people looking for another “cable co bad” article. Granted, they really should say 10Gig, but I genuinely don’t see how Joe Consumer would see that ad and go “oh wow! That’s twice as fast as my phone!!!1!!1”
I agree. It would be one thing if they advertised symmetric speeds, but they aren’t. The FCC will also have cable companies labeling internet plans with these soon. This seems like a nonissue.
How is it intentionally confusing?
Providers have been using G for speeds for a long time. Just because the media became obsessed with 5G for some reason, which uses G for Gen, doesn’t mean the other use of G became intentionally confusing.
They can just call it DOCSIS 4.0
And nobody, including myself will know what it means without searching. The actual speed is 10G. As in 10gbps.
I’ve beenbkinda tracking this 10g branding for a while. The link speed isn’t actually 10g and they say it’s the 10th generation of their service.
Because it’s not 10G. Not in Gigs or Generations. Docsis 3.1 is 10G/2G. They’re not handing out those speeds. It doesn’t matter that they have 10G/6G capable hardware when they’re still selling people 800/300 at best.
Agreed. My area already has 100mpbs and 200mpbs uploads too.
Cable companies are garbage but this is a rare unneeded self own on Comcast’s part. They’re cashing in on the 5G hype even though their offerings are better. 5G is barely faster than LTE outside of UWB in the US which is extremely limited in coverage.
They’re rolling out multi gig when even my fiber FIOS connection is limited to just under 1Gbps DL. Cable companies like Comcast are even increasing their piss poor upload speeds. There is no need to try to confuse people with this 10G marketing nonsense.
They’re scared shitless of wireless / 5G/LTE providers offering service. I’ve never seen so many scare ads about how three old ladies watching YouTube will yank your home wifi or that you’ll have to cut down every tree so you can see the cell tower to get service.
The only places they were installing faster service is where they have competition from fiber and with viable wireless competitors they’re running scared.
And that’s where Comcast and other ISPs should be focusing their energy. Not in places where there is currently good wired competition. But in the rural and underserved areas where even when you have a wired cable option, the service is terrible and you have no other options but cellular and satellite which have their own challenges and problems.
I never cared so much about internet experience as I have now when I have both a cable and fiber option. The only thing that would make it better would be if I had a municipal ISP that would compete with them both.
I am so thankful to have fiber. I am paying $50 a month for 300 mbps up and down. It’s nice.
I live in a small city with municipal fiber. 1 Gbps symmetrical is glorious and I would happily pay more than the $70 they’re charging.
Fuck it, why not 100G?
Mine is 11.
Actually mine is .007, because I live 120 miles away from silicon valley, which may as well be a 3rd world country the way we let service “providers” only cater to markets they choose.
The 5G cancer thing is laughable, C-band and Ka-band have been in use for years. I have been around them (plus X/Ku/L/S bands) for decades I’m still here. I have been exposed accidentally over 1000x times the FCC limits for more than a short time in the 90’s and am still here. Non ionizing radiation isnt that bad.
You know (other than the accidental breaches) is the worst leaking device onsite. The microwave oven.
I didn’t need that last part bro I’m just tryna eat a burrito
Imagine how crazy it would be if ISPs just… actually… upgrades infrastructure with their billions in profits+government subsidies/handouts? Like, damn, imagine. US might actually have internet on par with the countries it considers shitholes
… That’s exactly what’s happening here?
They are offering 10gbps residential speeds. That’s the highest consumer hardware is capable of. And even then, you would need a $100 network card to make use of it.
And even then, this is faster than sata3 ssds. You’d need an nvme ssd if you want to download a file at that speed.
Futhermore, unless you have a personal server somewhere, or paying a huge premium, you’d be hard pressed to find anyone serving you anything at 10gbps. Your best bet would be steam or an expensive plan from a file hosting service.
If everybody followed that logic in the 90s we’d still be on dialup. The root of the point though is “we” gave them billions of dollars like 20 years ago which they immediately did the absolute bare-ass minimum to claim “well, we did do that one thing over there in 2005…” and the rest of the money just kinda went poof along with all those profits stolen from the workers. Not reinvested into infrastructure, just shat out their asses to “investors” and executive officers.
We should’ve all had symmetrical (which is another thing Comcast sucks at) 1gig up/down a decade ago at least.
I’ve personally had gigabit fiber for years now, but that’s only because I specifically shopped for houses with multiple ISPs available and gigabit ready to go. That shouldn’t be necessary. Everyone should have it available with some very few exceptions for very rural people.
This very specific article is silly though if it’s any consolation to the reaming I’m giving Comcast. Yeah they should make this stuff more obvious I guess, but it seems like such a niche boomer grandma thing to fall for. I’d prefer an article ripping into the specific corruptions of officers and big investors at the telecomms and their regulators. Name and shame and provide addresses too. These people don’t deserve any semblance of peace
10 Gold coins for our shitty internet please, hand it over 😐✋
I absolutely abhor when they say “gig speed network” like they want to say gigabit but they know it isn’t and make up some bullshit term that sounds similar. Every time I hear a commercial for it I get irrationally angry.
I can’t wait for the new Comcast I like your cut-g network
Yeah I’m seeing this stupid 10G thing advertised by Mediacom, too in my area. Like, we’re just entering 5G era here and there’s this…10G? So, you’re meaning to tell me that we’ve been duped into believing 5G all along as being the next best thing but oh wait, did they dig this 10G shit out from some governmental secret program that was hidden for years to provide us this speed to browse with?
Shouldn’t that be illegal?
