Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
The Internet Network

Comcast Reluctantly Agrees To Stop Its Misleading '10G Network' Claims (arstechnica.com) 67

Posted by BeauHD from the cease-and-desist dept.
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: Comcast has reluctantly agreed to discontinue its "Xfinity 10G Network" brand name after losing an appeal of a ruling that found the marketing term was misleading. It will keep using the term 10G in other ways, however. Verizon and T-Mobile both challenged Comcast's advertising of 10G, a term used by cable companies since it was unveiled in January 2019 by industry lobby group NCTA-The Internet & Television Association. We wrote in 2019 that the cable industry's 10G marketing was likely to confuse consumers and seemed to be a way of countering 5G hype generated by wireless companies.

10G doesn't refer to the 10th generation of a technology. It is a reference to potential 10Gbps broadband connections, which would be much faster than the actual speeds on standard cable networks today. The challenges lodged against Comcast marketing were filed with the advertising industry's self-regulatory system run by BBB National Programs. BBB's National Advertising Division (NAD) ruled against Comcast in October 2023, but Comcast appealed to the National Advertising Review Board (NARB). The NARB announced its ruling today, agreeing with the NAD that "Comcast should discontinue use of the term 10G, both when used in the name of the service itself ('Xfinity 10G Network') as well as when used to describe the Xfinity network. The use of 10G in a manner that is not false or misleading and is consistent with the panel decision is not precluded by the panel recommendations."

Comcast agreed to make the change in an advertiser's statement that it provided to the NARB. "Although Comcast strongly disagrees with NARB's analysis and approach, Comcast will discontinue use of the brand name 'Xfinity 10G Network' and will not use the term '10G' in a manner that misleadingly describes the Xfinity network itself," Comcast said. Comcast said it disagrees with "the recommendation to discontinue the brand name" because the company "makes available 10Gbps of Internet speed to 98 percent of its subscribers upon request." But those 10Gbps speeds aren't available in Comcast's typical service plans and require a fiber-to-the-home connection instead of a standard cable installation. Comcast said it may still use 10G in ways that are less likely to confuse consumers. "Consistent with the panel's recommendation... Comcast reserves the right to use the term '10G' or 'Xfinity 10G' in a manner that does not misleadingly describe the Xfinity network itself," the company said.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Comcast Reluctantly Agrees To Stop Its Misleading '10G Network' Claims More

Comcast Reluctantly Agrees To Stop Its Misleading '10G Network' Claims

Comments Filter:
    • Why? I am so confused. It makes 10Gbps fiber connections to the home to 98% of its customers upon request? Is this for real? I don't live in Comcast territory, but will they really pull fiber like FIOS to your home and give you 10Gbps if you just request it? If that is as real as it sounds, then Xfinity 10G is absolutely the right label.

  • 98 percent of its subscribers can get gig pro now?
    Or are people billed way over the $1000 install fee when out of range?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Xenx ( 2211586 )
      Since it involves running fiber to the home, I imagine it isn't cheap. But, I'd also imagine that anyone legitimately interested would understand the costs. I agree with the results here. As long as they start clearly limiting the usage of 10G to marketing new fiber installs, I think it's fine.
      • We've got Tachus in our neighborhood. $90/month for 1Gbps symmetrical fiber to the home. There is a $500 fee for running the fiber to the house, but its free if you stay for a min of 6 months (pay back prorated install cost if canceling early). Otherwise its a month to month deal, no contract, required modem is provided free of charge.

        I'd like to switch, its half the price and more than twice the download speed, but they don't offer a business tier. I'm staying with Comcast Business, even though there is

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Zak3056 ( 69287 )

        Since it involves running fiber to the home, I imagine it isn't cheap.

        The "F" in "HFC" stands for "fiber." The max distance that they're going to have to pull fiber is from the local node, so costs are ultimately not that bad. When we built our HQ site in 2011, install costs for Comcast's coax totaled about $8k (+/- 800 feet of hardline) which they ate the majority of (I think they charged us in the $2k range). I had fiber pulled for a project a few years later (L2 gigabit circuit from knoxville to houston) and our costs for the HQ site were $0 for +/- 3000 feet of OS2 (lo

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Xenx ( 2211586 )
          I work for an ISP that offers fiber. While I don't have actual numbers, I know the costs can add up. We've had installs that costs in the 10's of thousands, but a lot of them are in the $1000-2000 range if I recall correctly. We do cover a portion of the costs, but not all.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by grimr ( 88927 )

          They can't reuse the fiber going to the local node as that would kill existing cable subscriber's service. And more than likely, knowing cable companies, they only paid for a small handful of spare fibers.

          Even with PON they still have to ditch-witch every single street. That's way more expensive than a single trunk run from a node to a head end.

  • Sure, it's twice as good as 5G, but it's still one less than 11G.

  • I don't want to be 640k guy but... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by iAmWaySmarterThanYou ( 10095012 ) on Wednesday January 31, 2024 @06:24PM (#64204558)

    What normal person or even small/medium business will use anything even close to to 10Gbps?

    I've got 1G, stream 4k, game, play music, my wife is on work vpn all day, my kid is gaming and schooling and watching trash anime videos and even when a few dozen people are here for a family event we don't even get close to maxing it.

    Maybe in some far future where 3D over the net has become a real thing people actually do like in your favorite sci-fi books but really...?

    It feels like a small penis envy purchase.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Backups, transferring large data sets for work or play, downloading multiple 100+ GB games or updates (which may not all fit on a console at the same time), Docker builds are a few. How long would an initial upload for a few TB offsite backup take on Comcast's meager 1.2 Gbps download / 35 Mbps upload service?

      Anyway, California ISP Sonic.net [sonic.com] says that 10 Gbps XGS-PON fiber equipment costs them the same as regular 1 Gbps GPON, so all their new deployments provide symmetric 10 Gbps service for the same $50 pr

      • Same price, sure, of course I'll take it. But pay extra? I can wait a few minutes for a game download. How many people have TBs of data to backup on a regular basis? If I remote backed up my PC, I'm ok waiting however long for the initial image, then after that doing incrementals if the alternative is paying more to have a backup finish faster in the middle of the night.

        I have AT&T fiber. It's been pretty solid at every place I've lived. Comcast, not so much. I've never used sonic.net. If they'r

        • Most download sites can't keep up with gigabit service. 10 gigabit service won't lead to faster downloads from those sites.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by gweihir ( 88907 )

      Yep, pretty much. I have 1Gbps symmetric and I could get that upgraded for a one-time fee of something like $200 to 10Gbps symmetric. So far I have found zero reason to spend that money.

      All my own equipment including optical terminator is 1Gbps and never even remotely fully loaded. My flat even has Cat 7 cabling already in the walls, but there is really no point to upgrade network cards, mainbords, switches, firewall, etc.

      • It is a wonderful era to live in, isn't it? My children will never know the struggle of not having enough Internet. It was a long time coming but my area just installed fiber. As "much as you want" is an enormous contrast to the limitations of telephone modems.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by gweihir ( 88907 )

          Well, it is the point where it turns into a commodity. The ones that experienced it before are thrilled, those that come later do not even notice. It is pretty great to have, say, flowing water, electricity, gas, postal service, shops were you can buy food, heating in winter, a roof over your head, and so on.

    • What normal person or even small/medium business will use anything even close to to 10Gbps?

      Anyone who downloads or uploads anything i.e. everyone. True, most people may not care that a 2Gb app download now takes 2s instead of 20s with 1G but they are still using the full 10G speed for both of those seconds. Uploading photos and Google Drive/Dropbox will also take advantage of it to operate faster. Of course, this also assumes that as well as a 10G subscription and 10G fibre connection to your house you are also using either WiFi 6E/7 or have a 10G card in your desktop.

      • Actually they're probably not downloading a file ant 10G unless the sending side has effectively unlimited bandwidth which is unlikely or the file is coming from multiple locations in pieces like p2p.

    • never changes. Comcast gets away with shit like this thanks to gov't sponsored local monpolies. Execs should be in jail, I'm not "reluctant" to see them there.

  • Let me get this straight. Cell companies pushed a phrase that in meaningless to consumers other than denoting 5th generation is after 4th generation. And now using a very descriptive and accurate name is not allowed. Great move NARB. /s

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Ksevio ( 865461 )

      Yes, because they were trying to brand their network (which is not technically limited to 10Gbps) in a way that made it look like it was the 10th generation. The generation names are also not "meaningless to consumers" as people knew 4G was faster than 3G and 5G faster than 4G, so basically if they found 4G too slow, 5G would be faster.

    • How is this a "very descriptive and accurate" name? What does the 'G' in "10G" stand for? Because it sure as hell isn't Gigabits per second, which already has an industry standard abbreviation of either Gbps or Gb/s.
    • Consumers have a general sense of what 2G, 3G, 4G, 5G mean in terms of cell networks. Even my school-age sons have a sense of what it means. Consumers see ads on TV and other places for the latest 5G phones, and they know that 4G and 3G phones used to be common.

      Yet now Comcast is advertising 10G service, and there are no 10G phones. Of course that is because the Comcast 10G network is not a cell network - even though they offer cell service in many areas - but that sometimes escapes the consumer.

  • This is an extremely common issue! (Score:5, Informative)

    by Murdoch5 ( 1563847 ) on Wednesday January 31, 2024 @06:31PM (#64204572) Homepage
    I'm in Ontario, Canada, and we face this all the time, be it Bell, Rogers, or other ISPs. Bell and Rogers offer 1.5gbps plans, and they provide hardware that physically is incapable of producing or handling such speeds. Both parties will give you modem / routers, that can barely handle 1gbps speeds.

    Rogers will try to sell you a 1.5gbps plan, and then route it over coaxial, on old hardware which can't handle the service on a golden day. Every time you call in, they'll tell you that you'll need N devices all downloading at the same time, to see your 1.5gbps, but that's not how bandwidth works. The only test that matters is if you plug a device which can handle 1.5gbps+ (like a 10gbps equipped firewall / router), and get 1.5gbps +/-1% OUT OF THE MODEM / ROUTER.

    It is absolutely ridiculous how an ISP can get away with this, and rarely if ever be held accountable, because they'll write into your contract language that they could give you 1.5kbps, and ya, that's good enough. I had a Sr Tech Support Special on the phone with Billing at Rogers, and the Tech Guy said (to paraphrase): "You'll never get more than 60% of what you pay for.", ya, he said that, and yet Rogers thinks I should pay 100% of my bill for 60% of what I pay for? The lady from billing sighed, and 2 hours later, I got a two-year agreement to give me $40 off my monthly internet.

    If you don't, make sure to monitor your bandwidth, have a device run speed tests every 5 minutes, then average them for an hour, and if the average is below 95% of the bandwidth, call your ISP and get them over.

    • Every time you call in, they'll tell you that you'll need N devices all downloading at the same time, to see your 1.5gbps, but that's not how bandwidth works.

      Yes, you can do it with one device so long as you have 2.5 gig or better ports throughout your LAN, or maybe a 2x2 5Ghz wifi6 connection, and an NVME drive on the testing device.

      If you don't, make sure to monitor your bandwidth, have a device run speed tests every 5 minutes, then average them for an hour, and if the average is below 95% of the bandwidth, call your ISP and get them over.

      There is also TCP overhead, as well as more at the application layer. I'd assume 10% at least in all but optimal cases.

      • My understanding is that Bell provides a fiber gateway device that is more than just a straight fiber ONT. It divides the available bandwidth into 1Gbps over its RJ45 jack and .5Mbps over its integrated Wifi. You can't get more than 1Gbps on wired or more than .5Mbps wireless. There's no aggregate bandwidth pool. Again, my understanding. I do not personally have their service.

        • My understanding is that Bell provides a fiber gateway device that is more than just a straight fiber ONT. It divides the available bandwidth into 1Gbps over its RJ45 jack and .5Mbps over its integrated Wifi. You can't get more than 1Gbps on wired or more than .5Mbps wireless. There's no aggregate bandwidth pool. Again, my understanding. I do not personally have their service.

          That is entirely possible, would not surprise me. In that case the parent poster's explanation from his ISP would be correct, you would need more than one device to get 1.5Gb/s from the backhaul regardless.

          I have Shaw/Rogers 1Gb service, my routers and switches are all gigabit so not much point in anything faster without upgrading the entire network. Indeed it is quite fast enough for more than a couple dozen devices I have connected, so not really caring if I can max it out from a single one myself.

          • My understanding is that Bell provides a fiber gateway device that is more than just a straight fiber ONT. It divides the available bandwidth into 1Gbps over its RJ45 jack and .5Mbps over its integrated Wifi. You can't get more than 1Gbps on wired or more than .5Mbps wireless. There's no aggregate bandwidth pool. Again, my understanding. I do not personally have their service.

            That is entirely possible, would not surprise me. In that case the parent poster's explanation from his ISP would be correct, you would need more than one device to get 1.5Gb/s from the backhaul regardless. I have Shaw/Rogers 1Gb service, my routers and switches are all gigabit so not much point in anything faster without upgrading the entire network. Indeed it is quite fast enough for more than a couple dozen devices I have connected, so not really caring if I can max it out from a single one myself.

            Yeah, same here. I'm on one of the very few remaining local ISPs, with 1G symmetric. They've got plans to go 2.5G relatively soon, but when it happens they'll be providing an ONT with at least a 2.5G copper port, into which you plug whatever gear you want and use your bandwidth however you want. Because... not Bell.

          • That's correct, at least with the Bell modem I'm familiar with. I actually sued Bell under the CRTC's complaint branch because of that exact problem. It got to a point where about 4 or 5 years ago, they had to pull a TON of advertising about their 1.5gbps plans, and they got hit with a large fine. I'm now blacklisted from ever doing business with them, but in all fairness, they committed a willing and intentional act of fraud.
        • I have 1Gbps service over fibre from Bell and I do generally get 1Gbps from the modem and the network. I only have 1Gb on my Ethernet so I'm kind of capped there for my physical devices but my testing shows that I can definitely approach the 1Gbps speed at the fibre taking into account all of the overhead on the copper side. It may slow down at some point, they may oversell the network in my neighborhood so I end up getting some slowdown but at present it is working as advertised. Also they very clearly ad
          • Saying "Up To" is the same as saying "Not Really", if you pay for 1gbps you should get that +/- 1% to the output of their modem / router.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by grimr ( 88927 )

          Not any more. They now provide a craptastic all in one ONT/Router combo unit.. It does have a multigig 8P8C jack.

          You can request the old 1 Gbps standalone ONT on business accounts I believe.

      • I have no problem assuming a 10% TCP overhead, but if you expect 1.5gbps, and then have to accept +/-10% TCP, +/-5% Line, etc then start with 2gbps, or enough headroom that you average to 1.5gbps.

    • I had a Sr Tech Support Special on the phone with Billing at Rogers, and the Tech Guy said (to paraphrase): "You'll never get more than 60% of what you pay for."

      I'm with Shaw (now Rogers) and regularly get well over 60% of my 1G plan - typically 70-80%. Not getting the full bandwidth is understandable since it depends on a variety of factors including how many other people are using the network. However, I would draw the line at being sold a 1.5G plan and being given a router with a 1G output. These plans should absolutely come with 2.5G routers and/or at least WiFi 6E support.

      • I would honestly say they need 10gbps supported hardware, not 2.5. They throw the 2.5gbps port into the mix just to make it seem like it's you, not them. If you have good networking hardware with 10gbps WAN ports, you can test if their end can meet that. Again, I want to make this clear, it's +/-1% to the output of their modem / router, because up until that point, they own the infrastructure, so it's far measurement. Once you branch from that point to anything else, unless it's 2.5gbps or better, and

    • I have 5gbps/5gbps fiber. The ONIT has a 10gbps ethernet port that I run to my router. I then have a second 10gbps port from that to my desktop. I can speed test around 7gpbs on a good day. My wifi is what most devices in my home use so the 5gbps doesn't help the speed there, but it does help with the congestion of all the devices using the upstream (cameras, zoom, etc).

      I pay less than the 1200/20 Comcast offering in my area which was usually around 500mbps/20mbps. I love rural indiana.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by grimr ( 88927 )

      I'm in Ontario, Canada, and we face this all the time, be it Bell, Rogers, or other ISPs. Bell and Rogers offer 1.5gbps plans, and they provide hardware that physically is incapable of producing or handling such speeds. Both parties will give you modem / routers, that can barely handle 1gbps speeds.

      I have my router connected to the Bell router's 10Gbps port.

      But for those that don't have a > 1Gbps router the provided gateway has another four 1Gbps ports. So five devices at 1Gbps plus WiFi and you can easily saturate the 1.5Gbps and 3Gbps tiers.

      • Well, maybe they have a 10gbps supported modem / router finally, but Rogers still doesn't, and the last time I was with Bell they didn't. On top of that, the modem / router couldn't port aggregate, which was a serious limitation. It's great they have 5 1gbps ports, but if they can't be joined, and the modem / router doesn't have a 2.5gbps or better port, then it doesn't matter.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by grimr ( 88927 )

          Last time I saw someone post a picture, Rogers had a nice standalone ONT with a 1Gbps and 10Gbps port on it. Not sure what crap they're handing out on their DOCSIS (cable) service with the 1.5Gbps tier.

          Not being able to LAG the LAN ports on the Bell router is irrelevant. Nobody promised the advertised speed to a single device. It's an aggregate speed (read: more than one device). And the fact that they have a 10Gbps port make that whole argument moot.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by grimr ( 88927 )

          Just asked my friend. He's on the 1.5 plan on cable and has the XB7. He put a multigig TP SFP+ module into his UDM Pro and he's speedtesting at ~1.8Gbps.

          • That actually is the other part of the problem! In a lot of areas, the infrastructure is terrible and can't support the 1.5gbps packages. I have a 10gpbs Cooper Fibre connection into the Fibre WAN port of my gateway / firewall, and the highest tests I see are ~900mbps. I just ran the speed test and got 852mpbs down, that's 56.8% of the service, and you'd expect even with a 5% tolerance to get 1425mbps.

            Now, let me be fair, a single test proves absolutely nothing. Apart from this test running daily, a

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by grimr ( 88927 )

              That actually is the other part of the problem! In a lot of areas, the infrastructure is terrible and can't support the 1.5gbps packages.

              Yes, DOCSIS is crap. The cable companies are just throwing money at it to sqeeze every bit of speed the

              I have a 10gpbs Cooper Fibre connection into the Fibre WAN port of my gateway / firewall, and the highest tests I see are ~900mbps. I just ran the speed test and got 852mpbs down, that's 56.8% of the service, and you'd expect even with a 5% tolerance to get 1425mbps.

              900Mbps on a 10Gbps connection is suspect. Sounds like there's a 1Gbps bottleneck in there somewhere.

              • Yes, and that's a very fair idea, one I honestly thought I had caused somehow. After not finding any error in my setup, and having a friend whose also in IT check it himself, I decided it must be a cable or that Cooper Fibre module, so I replaced them, and this time vetted them on known good systems before I attached them to the modem. Same problem, and after having 6 different techs to my house, they all, 100% of them, said "Oh ya, that's typical, you'll never see more than that.".

                • Re: (Score:2)

                  by grimr ( 88927 )

                  Fiber does not use a modem. There is nothing to modulate/demodulate. You have ONTs and you have routers. Or if the damned telco (like Bell) is trying to squeeze evert single penny you're stuck with a ONT/Router all in one piece of crap.

                  What kind of module? Standard fiber SFP+ module? I'm trying to figure out if you have active or passive fiber service.

                  • Sorry, I might have incorrectly explained the setup. I have cable from the node to the house. The node is ~50 meters from our property, and that node is cable or cooper back to a distribution node for Rogers. I know all of that because the Techs have told me.

                    Now the cable comes into the house to our electrical room, where it enters an all-in-one POS modem / router thing (I think a XB7 / XB8.... don't quote me, it's white). That modem router thing has a 4 1gbps RJ45 outputs, and 1 2.5gbps RJ45 output.
              • Sorry, one important point, I also confirmed I have the connection from the modem on the 2.5gbps port, and that modem has been replaced a total of three times.

  • Comcast/Xfinity business as usual (Score:3)

    by Daina.0 ( 7328506 ) on Wednesday January 31, 2024 @07:36PM (#64204720)

    I tried to avoid Comcast/Xfinity for years, but finally they were the only internet provider option that had enough speed. Century Link was too slow and with all the trees around here no direct beam internet was possible (I tried.) Reluctantly we signed up but as soon as we could terminate our contract with Comcast/Xfinity we did. It took several months of them lying to us to finally get them out. We finally had a local fiber option and took it as soon as we could.

    I knew Comcast had the worst reputation for customer service anywhere and we fought it all the way. I'm not surprise at the misleading advertising. I just don't think it'll make much difference. They'll continue to lie. My hope is the the FCC will fine them billions ($1 for each lie to each customer) and drive them out of business.

  • After switching to a competitor that offered actual 10Gb/s fiber at 1/4 the price, I definitely did a double take when I saw the Comcast "10G" mailer. Closer inspection revealed it was 200Mb/s.

    Anyway, I didn't interpret it as a competitor to 5G wireless tech, but rather as an offer of higher bandwidth.

  • We will provide our customers with these gold tipped connectors; the cables have these flashing red and blue lights going back and forth. Guaranteed to bring out the shatner in you, wondering what all these blinking lights really mean, and why we don't have a control tower.

  • When will AT&T launch their 15G network?

  • Do Microsoft next (Score:4, Funny)

    by JThundley ( 631154 ) on Wednesday January 31, 2024 @09:08PM (#64204908)

    Microsoft shouldn't be able to call it Office365 when it only works for 360 days of the year.

  • But we have an Eleventy Billion G network! More Eleventy Billion G bars in more places!
    Sincerely,
    AT&T

  • My network goes up to11 G!

  • Currently on Windstream/Kenetic as there are no other options and asked a tech when he came out about getting fiber optic and he said NEVER....

Slashdot Top Deals

Truly simple systems... require infinite testing. -- Norman Augustine

Close