Time Warner shared internet "up to" speeds

Page 1 of 2  
Does anyone use Time Warner Cable internet and have you run a speed test? I just got off the phone with U verse to cancel service and the guy said the "up to" speeds TW claims are usually not even close. I have U verse and it consistently runs at the advertised speed.
https://purchase.timewarnercable.com/austin/twcTPDeals?dfaid a&cid=PPC:OMD:43700005403551104&gclid=CIOx2PKq2MUCFQeRaQodjSsAcg&gclsrc=aw.ds
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I have TW internet and usually get about 16 MB on the uplink It is for the 15 MB service. A friend across town gets about the same. Get 1 MB for the uplink. The uplink does not make that much difference to me as I seldom send any large files.
I do have my own modem as they started charging for them a year or so ago. Paid about $ 20 for something they want aboutg $ 5 per month.
I had the TV with them up to about 2 weeks ago. Canceled when they wanted to put some kind of digital box on every TV and will start charging for those boxes. Went to Direct TV, so will see how that plays out for the next two years.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
i use TWC, and at 15 bucks a month, i love it
not sure about speed
marc
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I think they say it is 3 MB. I am almost ready to go to that as the next speed up is over $ 50.
You can test what you have here: http://www.timewarnercable.com/en/support/speed-test.html
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Ralph Mowery wrote:

Are you distinguishing B and b? MB and Mb are two different measurement. I have 50Mb down/3Mb up plan and no issues with all the devices connected wired(Gbit), WiFi(-N and -AC modes) to it thru a router. No stuttering in real time AV streaming always regardless time of the day.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 5/23/2015 3:25 PM, Ralph Mowery wrote:

I switched from cable to DTV a few years back too. Out crappy cble company had plenty of outages and slim HD offerings. DirecTv has been good but I don't think I'm saving any money.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 5/23/2015 3:25 PM, Ralph Mowery wrote:

DirectTV is the best out there but be prepared for the usual rate climb. Started out at $79/month 3 years ago, up to $105 now with no additions or changes.
I would go for Comcast's triple play but I hate those bast^&%$ enough to pay the extra.
John
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
TWC is over subscribed in my neighborhood. Speed is good during the day. Once the kids get home from school and people start streaming movies in the evening the speed was worse than DSL.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 5/23/15 1:01 PM, gonjah wrote:

Years ago, I read that TW does far better than AT&T in delivering advertised speeds. Elsewhere, I've read that TW normally provides a little more than advertised.
I live 400 yards from the telephone office. By looking at my modem's user interface, I concluded that AT&T was deliberately setting me lower than their advertised speed.
The only motive I could see was to push me into paying for a higher tier. I know customers who fell for it. Instead, I switched to TW.
A pitfall to cable is that one node can serve an arbitrarily large "neighborhood." If there are too many others on your node, congestion can slow traffic at busy hours. I had a little trouble for my first month with TW. It has been fine ever since. I guess they added a node.
My big problem with TW was their policy of jacking up prices. Before long, my bill had more than doubled. About that time, I discovered that TW had quietly introduced the Everyday Low Price tier: 2mbs down and 1mbs up for $15.
That was adequate, but by now they were charging $8 a month for their modem. I bought a better one for $65. They sent me a box and a FEDEX label for their obsolete modem. I put it in their box, taped it shut, and left it on my porch.
I consistently get 9.5% above the advertised 2mbs down speed. My up speed also exceeds the nominal figure.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

So is it true that Internet speeds from the phone companies depend on how close you are to those central offices? And the price is the same if you get 25 or 8?
Crazy
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 5/23/15 6:44 PM, cable snipped-for-privacy@comcast.net wrote:

I believe so.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 5/23/2015 7:48 PM, J Burns wrote:

Yes, if you are over certain distances, they bump your speed down one notch. In my case, I'm connected to a remote site just down the mountain. I think I'm being bumped down to 3MB (from 6MB) because they think I'm over 15K feet, which I don't believe, as you can see where the cable runs by following their pedestals. BTW, they still charge the same. Also, prior to Frontier buying the copper base phone system from Verizon, the speeds where ok during the day or wee hours in the morning, however, late afternoon and early evening were a disaster. The speeds were slower than dialup. I complained and the guy in India (Bob) said that I can't power the modem from an outlet strip; it must be plugged directly in the wall. When Frontier bought the system, they had to add lots and lots of bandwidth to make DSL work at close to advertised speeds. Now I routinely get about 2.8MB down. I've got to give Frontier credit, they've really fixed what Verizon couldn't or actually what they didn't want to fix, because they knew they were selling off that part of the business. Same goes for the batteries in the remote site. If there was a power failure, the batteries might last for a minute and then there was not dial tone. Frontier has fixed all that. Sounds like Frontier it great? Not. I could, but won't go into all their problems.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

These days the "central office" can just be another box on the side of the road. It only has to get your copper signal up on the fiber.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sunday, May 24, 2015 at 8:24:00 AM UTC-4, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:

Even decades ago they had what amount to concentrators, if you will, where your copper phone line terminated, was multiplexed with signals from other folks lines, and then went on T1 or similar back to the CO. Typical place they were used would be a new subdivision that was away from the CO. Easier/cheaper to get them all on one line instead of physically connecting each new house direct to the CO.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 5/24/2015 9:26 AM, trader_4 wrote:

Yes but, these (analog type) multiplexer devices don't multiplex DSL signals. They usually have a digital multiplexers next to them for DSL. In my case, they have a remote switcher for regular telephone service and right next to that cabinet, there is another cabinet with DSLMs for lines with DSL. The 2 meet in yet a 3rd cabinet, which also has the line protectors for lightning.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Monday, May 25, 2015 at 9:04:31 AM UTC-4, Art Todesco wrote:

The devices I cite above are not analog, they are digital. With copper phone wires using the above methods, the analog interface ends at the SLC equipment at the subdivision. From there back to the CO it's on a T1 or similar, ie a digital line. T1 is 1.5 Mbits and carries 24 voice channels. This stuff has been around for many decades, back to the 70s.

And presumably your data then winds up riding on some higher speed link back into the network, no? At some point your traffic rides on the same pipe/s with other traffic, the only question is where it starts.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 5/25/2015 9:15 AM, trader_4 wrote:

Agree. But the line to your house is analog. Even DSL to you house is analog ... that's why you have a modem.

Actually, it's regular DSL and rides parallel to the regular voice stuff. That's why you have to strip off the DSL carrier when going to a regular phone, using filters. At the remote site, the data is then combined with all the other data (DSLM) from others and leaves via digital fiber.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tuesday, May 26, 2015 at 7:33:13 AM UTC-4, Art Todesco wrote:

In that sense, what is the internet service that the cable company provides? It's digital, but it too rides on a carrier outside the house. I see what you're saying, it is encoded, and not just a simple string of ones and zeros. Examples of things that would be pure digital would be Ethernet and fiber optics I guess. Even there though it's still an analog world when it comes to transmitting and receiving. An ethernet transceiver makes a call on whether it's a one or a zero by the voltage it sees on the wire.

Good point. DSL is unique in that the voice is done the same way as it always has been, coexisting on the same twisted pair that now has data. At least for most people. I guess you could add any of the independent VOIP services, like Vonage, connect your existing phones to it and then the VOIP would ride on the same DSL pipe. How well that would work, IDK, would depend on how fast your DSL is.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 5/24/2015 9:26 AM, trader_4 wrote:

I forgot one thing, someday maybe, the telcos might go the way of cable, etc. and have only digital coming to you house on the copper pair, like DSL or Uverse. A box at your house would strip off the telephone bits and provide an analog line for "old fashioned" phones. Or maybe we could use digital phones! Probably not as phones seem to be going wireless. I just hate talking on these when you have to keep saying "you just dropped out, repeat!" and "no it's not me it must be you". Who know what the future will bring. Back in the 70s, no one would accept the relatively poor quality of today's cell phones, but we do. Or was that the old AT&T speaking!!!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Monday, May 25, 2015 at 9:13:37 AM UTC-4, Art Todesco wrote:

IDK what you mean here. The Telcos have been offering DSL, which is digital, for two decades. That era is winding down, for the most part as they move to better technologies for most customers.

That's how the Telcos have been doing DSL. Many carriers are way beyond that, at least in some areas. Verizon FIOS for example, is fiber into your house. Cablevision here provides VOIP service, where they give you a cable/modem/router that converts to the analog interface for your phones.
Or maybe we could

Your experience with cell phones is a lot different than mine. I've had Verizon for a long time and then Virgin Mobile which rides on Sprint for the last year. I really don't have a problem with poor call quality. Verizon is better, but Sprint is close. It all depends where you use them, what the coverage is. Here in NJ, those work fine for me. If I go into some rural or mountain area, like snowboarding in Vermont, then yes, there I have had areas with dropped calls, poor coverage, etc.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.