Study shows you’re probably not getting the broadband speeds you’re paying for

[cletus]

Yeah, how dare they give me a better-than-advertised rate!

No, the complaint here is different.. Powerboost works for the first 30-60ish seconds of a download to boost the speeds and then drops down to normal. If you are on a "powerboost" or speed boost ISP you will notice that on longer speedtests your average speed will often dip below the advertised rates and you will also not hit your advertised rates on even the fastest servers when doing a sustained download (Microsoft.com?). Basically these powerboost programs are specifically there to make your slower internet briefly faster and non coincidentally make speedtests rate your speed as higher than the actual sustained speed.

 

It is all a sham.

[JWMaloney]

No, the complaint here is different.. Powerboost works for the first 30-60ish seconds of a download to boost the speeds and then drops down to normal. If you are on a "powerboost" or speed boost ISP you will notice that on longer speedtests your average speed will often dip below the advertised rates and you will also not hit your advertised rates on even the fastest servers when doing a sustained download (Microsoft.com?). Basically these powerboost programs are specifically there to make your slower internet briefly faster and non coincidentally make speedtests rate your speed as higher than the actual sustained speed.

 

It is all a sham.

 

I understand the complaint, and it is not warranted. My speeds rarely, if ever, drop below advertised rates, even with sustained usage. In fact, I have tested this by queuing multiple Linux distribution torrents and watching the download rate consistently rise higher than my advertised rates over time.

 

EDIT: Case in point -- sustained download rate of 6.7 MB/s (53.6 Mb/s). The speeds did dip briefly at one point... while my disk was overloaded. This is encrypted torrent traffic.

 

[cletus]

I understand the complaint, and it is not warranted. My speeds rarely, if ever, drop below advertised rates, even with sustained usage. In fact, I have tested this by queuing multiple Linux distribution torrents and watching the download rate consistently rise higher than my advertised rates over time.

Wow that is nice then. When I had Comcast in Chicago I definitely got the Powerboost runaround and usually only had 70% of my advertised speeds. 

[JWMaloney]

Wow that is nice then. When I had Comcast in Chicago I definitely got the Powerboost runaround and usually only had 70% of my advertised speeds. 

See my edit above for an example. Comcast has been busy upgrading their network all across the country. They offer residential service in my area up to 105 Mbps (as well as even faster business packages).

 

If you are referring to sustained download speeds from a single server for a single file, you'll probably see those drop down over time on any ISP. This is a side effect of both the server you are downloading from and TCP flow control. Long-term single connection sustained rates aren't really indicative of ISP performance. Notice in my screenshot that there are a sum total of 249 download connections.

[WiWavelength]

I understand the complaint, and it is not warranted. My speeds rarely, if ever, drop below advertised rates...

 

 

Hold on.  How can you say unequivocally that the complaint is "unwarranted"?  cletus specifically used the qualifier "here."  Do you have experience with his ISP where "here" is to him?  I doubt it.

 

To add to the data set, I do not have many complaints about my local ISP, but since I upgraded to a DOCSIS 3.0 cable modem a few years ago, I have consistently seen over provisioning on the uplink that persists for a few seconds, then is throttled back to a lower rate.  However, the lower rate is at/near the advertised level, so I am primarily receiving a perk.

 

AJ

[JWMaloney]

Hold on.  How can you say unequivocally that the complaint is "unwarranted"?  cletus specifically used the qualifier "here."  Do you have experience with his ISP where "here" is to him?  I doubt it.

 

To add to the data set, I do not have many complaints about my local ISP, but since I upgraded to a DOCSIS 3.0 cable modem a few years ago, I have consistently seen over provisioning on the uplink that persists for a few seconds, then is throttled back to a lower rate.  However, the lower rate is at/near the advertised level, so I am primarily receiving a perk.

 

AJ

 

Because it wasn't his complaint, it was digiblur's complaint. And it doesn't really matter where "here" is [EDIT: to cletus] because he's referring to a sustained download rate for a single file from a server which is not under his control. The server he is downloading from is in no way required to continuously deliver it to him at his maximum sustainable rate.

 

My overall point was that complaining about a feature that actually *helps* you by briefly over-delivering on advertised rates is pretty silly. If performance is going to degrade due to capacity, it's going to do it either way; having it over-deliver at the beginning doesn't hurt anyone because it only does it when capacity is available. It's no different than how Sprint advertises average rates of 5-8 Mbps on band 25 but will let you use 35 Mbps if capacity is available. I know none of us are complaining that we aren't capped to 8 Mbps like AIO is.

[WiWavelength]

Because it wasn't his complaint, it was digiblur's complaint. And it doesn't really matter where "here" is [EDIT: to cletus] because he's referring to a sustained download rate for a single file from a server which is not under his control.

 

No, it was cletus' complaint.  You replied to and directly quoted his post.  Either you are "moving the goalposts" or you made a mistake in your quote selection earlier in the thread.

 

AJ

[JWMaloney]

No, it was cletus' complaint.  You replied to and directly quoted his post.  Either you are "moving the goalposts" or you made a mistake in your quote selection earlier in the thread.

 

AJ

I'm pretty sure that cletus's post was quantifying digiblur's complaint after I responded sarcastically to it, especially since it begins with "No, the complaint here is"

[WiWavelength]

I'm pretty sure that cletus's post was quantifying digiblur's complaint after I responded sarcastically to it, especially since it begins with "No, the complaint here is"

 

You have already gone back and edited at least one of your previous posts, so that is implicit admission that you made a mistake, changed your mind, or "moved the goalposts."

 

Honestly, I am not sure why you are bothering to defend Comcast.  It is a major player in our broadband dysfunction and arguably the most disliked company in the country.  This is a serious question:  do you have a vested interest?

 

AJ

[JWMaloney]

You have already gone back and edited at least one of your previous posts, so that is implicit admission that you made a mistake, changed your mind, or "moved the goalposts."

I think it's pretty clear that my edit only added a screenshot and text refuting the argument that advertised speeds are "all a sham." I'm sure you either have the power to see that or know someone that does.

 

Honestly, I am not sure why you are bothering to defend Comcast.  It is a major player in our broadband dysfunction and arguably the most disliked company in the country.  This is a serious question:  do you have a vested interest?

 

AJ

Right, because any time anyone ever says something positive about a large corporation on the Internet, they're automatically a paid shill. If you go through my online posting history, that must also make me a shill for Google, Microsoft, Sun, Oracle, Apple, Nokia, Samsung, Comcast, Cox, Sprint, AT&T, Walmart, Capital One, and plenty of other companies. Spare me, please. I'm an advocate of municipal fiber, but I don't go around preaching that Comcast is the devil.

 

I was defending what was referred to as "The powerboost inflation factor" and that should be pretty obvious if you follow the quote trail from my original post. The fact that it's Comcast here is irrelevant. Every ISP I've ever used, including Cox, Comcast, and LUS Fiber have done it. All the big players do it, and all of them are doing major upgrades, and none of them are selling consumer connections with speed SLAs. End thread.