Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Wireless Networking Communications Hardware Technology

Comcast Bringing Metropolitan WiMAX To Subscribers 71

Posted by timothy from the let-a-thousand-flowers-bloom dept.
RickRussellTX writes "Comcast plans to offer 4 megabits/sec WiMAX services to customers in Portland, Oregon starting tomorrow. Branded as 'Comcast High-Speed 2go' and '4G,' the service will require a $44.99 per month subscription in addition to existing Comcast home service. For $69.99 they will offer a dual-mode card with access to both Comcast WiMAX and Sprint's national 3G wireless network. Future rollouts are planned for Chicago, Philadelphia, and Atlanta. Say what you will about Comcast (and I know many Slashdot readers have plenty to say about Comcast), this is a daring attempt to bypass entrenched cell phone companies with a direct-to-consumer wireless service."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Comcast Bringing Metropolitan WiMAX To Subscribers More

Comcast Bringing Metropolitan WiMAX To Subscribers

Comments Filter:

  • Comcast is great! (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward

    I mean, what can you say that's bad about Comcast? Their service is Comcastic!

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by ZirbMonkey ( 999495 )

      You need to lay it on a bit thicker. Someone might think you're serious.

    • I mean, what can you say that's bad about Comcrap? Their service is Craptastic!

      There, FTFY. And yes, as a former Comcast subscriber I mean it. And, no, Comcast, I am NOT going to pay you one red cent for that remote you keep claiming I never returned. Fuck you.

  • This is just reselling of Clearwire (Score:3, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 30, 2009 @09:41AM (#28527459)

    "Bypass entrenched cell phone companies" LOL

    This is the Clearwire network ( A spinoff of Sprint) which Comcast and several other cable providers are joint partners with Sprint on.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by OSUBeav ( 173550 )

      Yes, but you get the value-add of Comcast's wonderful way with customers. As a former comcast customer and current Clearwire investor I cringe at the association.

      • Re:This is just reselling of Clearwire (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Miros ( 734652 ) * on Tuesday June 30, 2009 @09:52AM (#28527603)
        Comcast reminds me a lot of a traditional utility company in some ways. They provide, in many areas, a virtually essential service for which they are nearly the only provider. They simply realized the truth that in most cases, for them, treating the customer well is more expensive than treating them like crap, and they're going to pay the same monthly subscriber fee no matter how you treat them in most cases. It's sort of like the incentives of landlords; in the vast majority of cases, the more poorly maintained the building is, the more money the landlord makes.

        • You're absolutely right. The only bright spot is the fact that this new service will force more competition. Comcast, like many cable providers, was built on exclusive contracts with municipalities. Once they go into the wireless business that advantage disappears as they suddenly begin competing with telecoms, even on their "home turf".

          These corporations operate in a predictable fashion according to their environment in order to maximize profits. Good old fashioned competition changes that environment t

          • These corporations operate in a predictable fashion according to their environment in order to maximize profits. Good old fashioned competition changes that environment to the advantage of the consumer.

            Competition would work well if every competing business didn't have "Screw the consumer" in the plan.

    • Ah, so that's why they're going for all the same markets as Clearwire (which was just launched here in Atlanta last week or so). I figured Comcast was trying to steal Clearwire's thunder...

      Of course, who the fuck would pick Comcast over Clearwire -- or really, anyone else -- given the choice?! Even suicidal masochists have limits, and Comcast's BS is infinitely beyond them!

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by GrumblyStuff ( 870046 )

        As a current user of Clearwire in Seattle and a former user of Comcast in Springfield, OR, I'd pick Comcast.

        The reception of the Clearwire signal is horribly spotty and inconsistent. Rain, clouds, wind, SUN... it doesn't matter. It can show 4-5 bars out of 5 and be great for half an hour then be 1-2 and requires being moved 6 inches or rotated 20 degrees.

        Comcast in Springtucky? Never had an issue.

        Now a Comcast wireless connection..? Well, fuck wireless in the first place. Cable, please.

  • 4G? (Score:5, Informative)

    by TheRaven64 ( 641858 ) on Tuesday June 30, 2009 @09:42AM (#28527483) Journal
    As I recall, a 4G system is defined by, among other things, 10ms latency, 100Mb/s nominal throughput and an all-IP network. Mobile WiMAX is all-IP, but 4Mb/s is a long way away from 100Mb/s. HSPA, which is 3.5G or 3.75G depending on the implementation goes from 7.2Mb/s to 42Mb/s.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Miros ( 734652 ) *
      4G the marketing terminology vs. 4G the technical definition?

    • If they gave everyone full speed how will they sell upgrades?

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Miros ( 734652 ) *
        Good point. Why sell something more for the same price if it increases your costs to do so (hey, even at scale, twice as much bandwidth has to carry some added costs, in the peering?) I think WiMAX can even go quite a bit faster than that, at least, I know it can in the lab. Not sure what the fastest actual WiMAX deployment is, anyone know?

    • Could 4MB be the actual speed of the internet portion of the network? I have a 100MB connection to my ISP, but only have a 5Mb/s internet speed at the office. They advertise it as 5MB of internet access. The cable modem is capable of many hundreds of Mb/s, but you only usually get 5 or 10Mb or so.. They have some set aside for actual TV channels..

    • 4G I believe refers to the connection via Sprint wireless card, which is a seperate technology than the WiMax.

    • And how many actual HSPA customers even get over 3Mbps? Check out the speed tests at dslreports.com.

      I'm sick of everybody touting these stupid max speeds of a wireless standard, when most vendors won't even implement them. What phone is going to have 4 antennas to reach a 4x4 MIMO rate anyway?

  • Clear aleady has service... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Zeelan ( 533372 ) on Tuesday June 30, 2009 @09:43AM (#28527487) Homepage
    When I read this and see the location I just have to think that they are trying to do something as an answer to clear. Portland, OR, has had WiMAX service in the form of Clear now for a few months, without the need to tie it to a home account.

  • I'll stick with Quest, thanks. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by leftie ( 667677 ) on Tuesday June 30, 2009 @09:46AM (#28527529)

    Cheaper, better service, no threats of filters, uploading caps, and they're the only major US telecom to say no to Bush wiretaps.

    • Cheaper, better service, no threats of filters, uploading caps, and they're the only major US telecom to say no to Bush wiretaps.

      All that, and you don't even know that it's spelled Qwest /works at an ISP

    • The only thing that keeps me from going with Qwest has been the contractual obligations. I went with Comcast (sadly) because it was flexible, even though I didn't really want to.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Creepy ( 93888 )

        Personally, I never had bad service with Comcast - they answered their phones within 20-30 minutes at the worst and usually had a quick fix for any problems (When I worked for Bell Atlantic our Christmas hold times hit 50-60 minutes due to staffing issues, and even though those jobs are in India now [and BA was absorbed by GTE and became Verizon], India has similar issues around Diwali). Comcast did have lots of outages and my area and was supersaturated making for horrific prime-time ping and data rates f

        • Don't make me laugh, Comcast cuts prices rarely and usually because they don't have to waste money on infrastructure maintenance. Seriously, before we quit them, the service would be out a few hours every single day and they made it perfectly clear that they'd issue a refund if and only if we kept track and notified them of the change. Besides that during the time I was with them, I don't recall them ever cutting rates.

          As for Qwest, the service has been reliable and they're not going to be raising their

    • Re: (Score:1, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward

      And the new WiMax company Clear has also deployed in Portland. You don't have to be an "existing customer of Comcast" (what a load of bollocks bundling) AND their service is completely straightforward with no hidden crap.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by garcia ( 6573 )

      1. It's Qwest.

      2. It's not available everywhere and to everyone (including where I currently reside).

      3. In my experience they force you to bundle data with telephone service (no, I don't want a land line anymore).

      4. 20mbit service is only available in some areas, Comcast has much faster offerings (2x as much) in my area.

      • Dude, you don't have to have a landline, you just have to pay an extra $5 a month for the DSL. And that covers the portion that you would've paid if you had phone service.

        And secondly, what good is 20mbit service if they don't actually provide you with any at times when you need it? Qwest DSL might be slower, but at least it's there when I need it, I can't say that about Comcrap.
        • I've tried again and again to get info on DSL, but the phone company cannot tell me: A) how fast it would be at my address, and B) how much would it cost... not the intro base rate assuming you also pay them for local phone, but the total, bottom-line, amount-out-of-my-bank-account bill, after the intro rate expires. What kind of sucker do they take me for? If they can't tell me how much I'll be paying or what I'll get in return, I can't sign a contract now can I?

  • Yea they need more power... They are just evil.
    Helpful hint to my fellow Comcast victims. If you crab on twitter you will get better service than over the phone.
    Complain long and loud on twitter and use the #Comcast hash tag and you will be surprised how helpful they will be.

    • I generally seek to avoid time-vampires like Twitter (or Slashdot, and we can all see how well that's working out for me) but this is the 4th or 5th thing I've read about using Twitter to shame/force companies into providing adequate customer service.

      This one [canada.com] is among the most recent examples I've found.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by LWATCDR ( 28044 )

        Twitter is like anything else. It really is all in how you use it.
        I follow NASA Engadget and a few friends and a few podcasters.
        I don't tend to post on it much and only check it a few times a day.
        But for getting Comcast to provide service it works great.
        Too bad that you can get them to do the right thing without shaming them.

    • I have Comcast. They're not much more expensive (if at all) than the AT&T U-Verse or DirecTV offerings. I've configured similar packages for each and they all come out about the same. As far as service, they seem really attentive on the phone. If they can fix it while speaking with me, they do. The couple times someone had to come out has always been a problem ("Be there between noon and 5 PM...oh, sorry, technician was delayed...how about noon and 5 PM tomorrow?") but then I've always been credite

  • Interesting (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Miros ( 734652 ) * on Tuesday June 30, 2009 @09:48AM (#28527551)
    This kind of makes sense. For Sprint, it's probably a great way to sell nationwide data services plans through bundling which are usually highly profitable. For Comcast, it's a competitive advantage (wireless metro internet service) that's hard for the other traditional more "hard-wired" ISPs to match. It will be interesting to see how they market it on TV, and what types of non-techie people buy it and why

  • Not Bypassing the Wireless Carriers (Score:5, Informative)

    by saterdaies ( 842986 ) on Tuesday June 30, 2009 @09:48AM (#28527553)

    Most likely this service isn't bypassing the wireless carriers. Comcast (along with TimeWarner and others) are partial owners of a company called Clearwire which Sprint owns roughly half of. Clearwire has been rolling out WiMAX as part of Sprint's 4G strategy.

    So, while it might be being sold under the Comcast name, you're essentially buying service from Clear (http://www.clear.com/) run by Clearwire (http://clearwire.com) which is (half) owned by Sprint.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by jav1231 ( 539129 )
      In the grand scheme, you're alway running on someone else's network at some point. Back in the day I could buy circuits from several companies but no one laid new cable to my house.

      Clearwire's network is showing some great speeds considering it's wireless.

    • Which is a shame because I use Clear for $35.00 a month for all my internet at home, and that's a flat fee (no surcharges/taxes). It was $25 for the first 6 months, too.

      It really says something that Comcast charges more for basic cable than what other companies (or brands) are charging for unlimited 4G internet service.

  • Because it's Comcast, it will Suck. (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward

    They'll cap and meter bandwidth, shape traffic, block ports, hamstring the customers with a draconian TOS, etc, etc, rendering this WiMAX service totally 100% craptastic.

    Oh, and customer support will be stellar, as usual.

  • So those who can already get DSL and Cable service now get WiMAX too..... GREAT!!
    How about a wireless service that actually helps the people who can't get the wires!?

    • Don't we already subsidize your phone and electric service? Whiners!

      Okay, okay, yeah... you grow our food... :)

      • Nope, Got a wind turbine and a cell phone..... sorry

        • Cool, you are really off the grid? Do you have a big battery bank or a backup generator or something? Did you have to go crazy with energy conservation, or do you still use a standard refrigerator and such?

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by kdekorte ( 8768 )

      Totally agree on this... love that the cities get multiple high speed options and I can't get anything where I live other than cellular.

  • WiMAX is pretty awesome. (Score:3, Informative)

    by Omegamogo ( 1388313 ) on Tuesday June 30, 2009 @10:45AM (#28528295)
    I've been using it for the better part of the past two weeks. And I'm pretty satisfied with the service. Although I live in Saudi Arabia, which is...a bit far from Oregon.

    I pay about $190 for a six-month subscription at 2 megabit. ~$30 a month. 2 megabit is the maximum speed they offer, but it's not bad at all- only slightly more expensive than ADSL (which goes all the way up to 20mbit, but costs an arm and a leg at that tier), and I get a ~150ms ping on US servers. More than adaquate for gaming.

    Thing is, the service has been trumpeted out for eons now. Well, since 2004 or so at least. I had long given up on practical residential WiMAX as vaporware, until earlier this year when the service was rolled out in earnest.
  • And I'll only pay $55, rather than the absurd markup you're asking...

  • What are the throughput limits for the service?

    There's always a catch with comcast.

  • Here's a *really* innovative idea for them: (Score:3, Insightful)

    by The Cisco Kid ( 31490 ) on Tuesday June 30, 2009 @01:12PM (#28531107)

    Ditch the requirement to be a wired comcast subscriber. Seriously, there are probably tons of people who arent serviced by comcast (or any cable company) that would love the opportunity to pay $45/mo for high speed wireless. But they are too shortsighted to recognize the potential, and instead want to use this as leverage to sell their cable.

    • Unfortunately, this wireless service is basically subsidized by revenue from wired customers. Comcast is not expecting to meet its expected profit margins by offering this service, so the company assuages its apprehensions by binding the service to its existing customer base (who no doubt are thrilled about the opportunity to pay Comcast even more money).

      Sure, you could ask insightful questions like "Gee, are Comcast's expected profit margins maybe not sustainable?" or "Don't you see the potential size of

  • XOHM (Score:1)

    by lwap0 ( 866326 )
    I've used XOHM, the Spring WiMax service in Baltimore. I tested it at 3 mbps down, 1.5 up, and you can buy in daily blocks if you don't use it every day (like, 10 a day I think). I stream my Netflix with it, and it's pretty fast, haven't tried any gaming with it though. The monthly service is way cheaper than what Comcast is offering. Sucks to be in Portland.

  • Apparently proofreading has gone out of style with the Slashdot editors, since they let the summary get the pricing and details all wrong. The prices Comcast gives in TFA are for WiMAX + Comcast HSI, not just the WiMAX service. Furthermore they're the introductory prices, not the final prices. I'm just going to rip off the DSL Reports piece on this [dslreports.com], since they get it right.

    Comcast today gave their rebranded version of Clearwire Mobile WiMax service a new name: "Comcast High-Speed 2Go." According to a Comca

  • Too expensive. Not worth it. Say no to Comcast.

  • So Comcast is just reselling Clear WiMax service, at the same price as Clear (okay, fine, $0.01 a month cheaper,) then tacking on the requirement that you have Comcast home internet already.

    Uh, okay...

    If they offered some kind of discount, it might be worth getting; but I suppose some people will do it just because of the whole 'single bill' thing.

    I wanted to switch to Clear with a home/mobile bundle a few months ago; but my house has zero signal. (Even though I'm well within the service area.)

  • I heard an ad for this on the radio today. The ad was for a promotional price of 49.99 for their mobile "4G" internet along with home internet for x # of months. I think 12 months. That said I was wondering if they are renting part of Clear's network and rebranding it, especially since the ad was for a bundle rather than standalone service. I was part of the beta for Clear near the end of this year and continued to use it until they shut down the network to go live in about early February. Service was cont

Slashdot Top Deals

Math is like love -- a simple idea but it can get complicated. -- R. Drabek

Close