Slashdot Mirror
Qwest To Offer 'Naked DSL'
hussar writes "Qwest is expected to announce today its plan to delink telephone service from its DSL offering. Given some comments I have seen in /. discussions of broadband issues, the plan, nicknamed 'naked DSL,' should be a welcome change." Update: 02/25 13:55 GMT by T :
cpfeifer points to the
Wall Street Journal's coverage.
This will be very welcome in areas where qwest is the ONLY dsl provider. I know someone in just such an area who was almost ready to go back to dialup just because the dsl package was so overpriced.
Too bad, for me at least, this doesnt solve the issue with their high latency, and mediocre speed (relative to their cost). I hate to be a jerk but honestly, I've had nothing but bad luck with their service, and tech support.
I pay $17 a month for my landline in NYC. No long distance, no voicemail, caller id or call waiting. Obviously it's just for dsl and ordering delivery... and the occasional 911 call :)
Did I understand this correcly? Until now, you had to have a phone line and a subscription with a phone company to get DSL in the US? Wow, that must really be inconvenient.
This has been possible for years in Denmark. How come the US is so far behind?
(this post brought to you by a 3072/512 ADSL connection from a home that never had a phone line)
You know, Microsoft's street address also says a lot about their mentality.
We're switching from Comcast to Qwest DSL. You can get 1.5 down / 867 up in my area for $28 a month in my area. Qwest will try to sell you MSN, but here's a secret: ask the CSR for "Qwest.net" internet service. The basic package (just connectivity and DNS) is $7 a month. Renting a modem is $3 a month. There are no restrictions on running a server, and the faster upstream is nice (Comcast is capped at 256K up).
Recently, Qwest has done a much better job. Their customer service is decent. They let you do a self install. The modem has a NAT box built in. They even have cheap, no-monthly fee long distance. Oh, and fast DSL now too.
>Charter cable starts at $29.99 a month, but mail and web server ports are blocked.
Huh? I have charter cable and run a website off my cable modem with no problems.
Now I wouldn't want to run an important website on it, but works great for personal use.
It's not that suprising if you know how your DSL "connection fee" is spent. Telecom companies have large racks of switches that your phone line physically plugs into near where you live. All a company has to do to give you DSL is pull the plug out of the "phone only" card and plug it into the "DSL too" card (which has all the phone-handling capabilities of the simpler card).
That's it. Every now and then, as enough DSL customers sign up, they replace an empty "phone only" card with a DSL card. Since the DSL card has all the voice handling capabilities built into it, it's not like you can truly have a DSL-only connection. Also your DSL connection is addressed by a phone number (if I recall correctly). So, the phone companies see no valid reason to disconnect the services.
I wonder if Qwest's idea will result in "dead" phone numbers that aren't used being taken up.
Would someone with more knowledge of telcom hardware please correct any misconceptions that I might have?
If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
(also, i doubt that $14.99 a month for a landline includes taxes)
Nope. My Qwest bill goes something like this: $15 for basic phone service (just so I can have DSL, of course), $15 for DSL (cheap because I use my university as my ISP), and $15 in taxes on the phone line. As far as I can tell, all of those taxes are associated with the phone line, not the DSL. So when I cancel my phone service, my bill will be $15 instead of $45!
I am the hub of Jack's digital lifestyle.
A couple of weeks ago I wanted to switch my local phone service carrier from Qwest to USTel because they offer better features for the price. I was (and still am) a Qwest DSL subscriber. When I talked to USTel on the phone they said that they couldn't switch me over unless I suspended DSL service for a few days then had it restored once the switch-over was done. When I called Qwest to have them do that the Qwest sales representative said that unless I had local phone service through Qwest I couldn't get DSL. I mentioned to him that USTel had told me a different story and he insisted that it couldn't be done.
My next call was to Qwest DSL tech support and I asked them the same thing -- they said it shouldn't be a problem at all to have a different local phone service provider as well as Qwest DSL since the other provider just leases their lines from Qwest anyway.
The press release sheds a lot of light on the whole situation -- it isn't physically impossible it's just a business decision.
I wonder if this might backfire as they gain DSL customers but lose local phone service customers?
Who am I to blow against the wind? -- Paul Simon
most of the ISPs have provisions in their contracts forbidding you from running websites on a residential/consumer connection
Qwest doesn't. Many things about them suck -- particularly customer service -- but they give you a pipe and pretty much allow you to do what you like with it. There are some specific provisions in the terms against sending or relaying spam, and some generic words that allow Qwest to suspend or cancel your account for excessive usage that interferes with their ability to provide the service, but I use my pipe pretty heavily* and I've never run into trouble.
For some extra fees, they'll even give you a set of fixed IP addresses (6 usable).
* My definition of heavy usage is a freenet node, capped at about a quarter of my bandwidth each way, plus daily large downloads to feed my Debian unstable habit and frequent large downloads from allofmp3.com. On average, I use about half of the bandwidth available to me.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
Lucky bastard then, Where I live in S. MN its about 30 for the landline after taxes and such and anywhere from +50 to +80 for the DSL connection. I was floored when I got the bill for the first month(135 total). It seems the local phone company (Frontier) charges for the first month of DSL service before you even use it! The real kick in the head part is when I talked a supervisor about why my bill was so high and told them I didn't want the high speed DSL(2 mg) just the basic (384kbs down), I was told that I was misinformed, not mislead and that I was stuck with it for a year because I was getting a deal. (15 /mo off). I am prob stuck with the bastards for a year, but It sure has motivated me to find out what cable access / wireless is in my area. Bare cable internet access through Mediacom(TV - cable or otherwise is all crap) is 55/mo. Add a wireless phone for 35/mo and I am looking at 90 mo for my communications needs. It may not be much cheaper, but dammit, the local telco has pissed me off.
The problem is choice..
Of course this is nothing new for those of us who get our DSL from networks that are not telcos (e.g. Speakeasy.net)
http://alternatives.rzero.com/
I'm encouraged that there is a bit of an ad war between DSL (Verizon) and cable. Hopefully that will lead price competition and unbundling one of these days.
The evaluation of an action as 'practical' . . . depends on what it is that one wishes to practice.
I can't complain.
Yeah- I can't complain about the speed, but when I get my bill and see that the $79.95 per month package I signed up for 6 months ago is now costing me about $107 per month, I CAN complain.
And I do.
Loudly.
And Comcast doesn't give a damn.
"I planned within my means and got a fixed rate mortgage, so where's MY bailout?" -cafepress
Qwest customers lucky, huh? In my experience, they move slower than a dead cow, so it's nice that they finally are making pre-emptive moves rather than following the pack.
The best service I could get from them is 640/256, and then only in selected areas, which didn't include mine until about 2 months ago (actually, it supposedly did, but the area was "saturated" with an expected 2-4 year wait for service according to the Qwest rep I talked to several years ago). They started caring and added hardware when, between cell phones and cable, they were losing most of their residential customers (as this article confirms).
I recently switched to Qwest because the incumbent was required for Speakeasy/Covad (1500/768 with 2 static IPs, but I'm paying $70). Not too long after the switch, I started getting weekly calls pushing Qwest's 256 service for $26. Not bad for price, but it still tops out at 640/256 (which just dropped from $50 to $35, so I don't laugh at them and tell them Speakeasy offers 1500/256 for that same price) and I still can't get a static IP. At least SBC offers 1500-3000 service in some areas (and that's $50/month in some promotions). The best I can do is $90/month for that kind of service, and not from Qwest, and then almost exclusively Business line only (Speakeasy being the only exception I'm aware of, and I've done extensive research including calling a bunch of no-name providers that don't even show up on Broadband Reports).
I agree with you on PPPoE suckage and have avoided it like the plague. I don't know how much of SBC uses it, but if a good chunk of it does, I'd rather have 3rd party than either.
You've obviously never worked in a central office, or with DSL Directly before.
About the only thing you got right was the fact that cards are involved.
On 6100 and 6160 Cisco dslams (as well as FullSize Lucent Stinger systems), the wiring comes off of a real live switch, and the wire is run directly to the dslam equipment, and then back around out to the frame/cablehead.
Secondly, the system already supports phone-numberless operation, each "curcuit" has an ID. Each circuit, just happens to be attatched to a phone number.
I don't get into the politics and whining about paying an extra 15 bucks. Although Qwest may have its issues sometimes, the local cable providers where I am suck complete ass compared to them.
Secondly, in response to some ass hat's comments about "Manditory ISP" above: Ask for something else....ass hat.... its that simple. Lastly, but not leastly. My experience with their DSL tech support has been fairly good. Although they can't always immediately accomplsih what I want, or satisfy every whim. They do their absolute best to resolve my issues. I for one applaud their new spirit of service campaign, and hope that the service continues to improve.
Yesterday the CIO had an all IT meeting, and it was mentioned that Qwest delivers VOIP already in Minnesota, and plans to roll it out to the rest of their territory by summer.
[Anon]
I have an ADSL connection through Speakeasy. They allow servers.
I've got DSL from Wanadoo (France Telecom), and they do things like forcefully change my IP address three times a day, which sucks great big donkey balls if I'm in the middle of a phone conversation. (I use Vonage to talk with friends and family in the States) I pay 13 Euro every two months for the phone line I don't use, and 80 for each month for 1024/128 (I just found it was 128 up, they sold it to me as 1024/256).
Ok my turn:
:)
So I had a professional DSL line. Their pro 640/640 service, bussiness class internet account, and static IPs. One would think you might get a little bit of competent service at that level... er no.
I start to notice the line dropping out. Happens little at first but ever increating until it is happening all the damn time. Layer-1 outage, no signal at all. Well I work in networking and I know precisely what is happening (espically since it's happening to others as well) the DSLAM is going bad.
I call Qwest and try an play the tech support game. First thing they insist is that a home network isn't supported. That's right, they'll sell me 8 IPs, but insist that I use them all on one computer. I try and explain that it CAN'T be my network, since I can telnet to the router. I further try and explain that when I do telnet to the router, it claims the physical link is down. No dice.
Ok so now when I call I lie and claim I don't have a network. Every time I call they insist I reprogram my router. No dammit! It's not like I just randomly change the config for fun or anything. I try and explain that it works, then stops working, then starts, no change in config, just the physical layer going up and down. No dice, they insist.
So I lie about reconfiging my router. Good thing too, the config they give me is the WRONG one. They kept giving me the one for a router getting a DHCP address, and then NATing the systems behind it, not for one that routed static IPs to the systems behind it.
After we go through all this, they claim it's my equipment. Fine, so I swap it for two different routers, I have a backup on hand and borrow a different kind from work. Same result. They claim it must be the line, allegedly send a guy to test it, claims not their problem, must be inside. Get a guy from work to test my lines, etc, etc.
Well they never would be convinced it could possibly be their problem. I just gave up, and worked at getting bussiness class cable. Unfortunately, the cable company is highly competent for consumer lines, but highly incompetent for bussiness lines. Finally one day, Qwest put in a new DSLAM.
The most infurating thing though? They'd never admit they'd done anything. Claimed it had been my problem all along. Never mind that everyone who had the same problems as me cleared up at the exact same time.
Supprisingly enough, I don't have Qwest DSL anymore. Gee, wonder why?
The first question they ask when you try to sign up is "What is your phone number?". If you don't have a phone (through any company) you cannot order Speakeasy DSL. That makes this Qwest service different.
You can pay $30/month for unlimited which works at all T-Mobile hotspots like at Starbucks and Borders. Some local cafes have free wifi for customers too.
There certainly are advantages to it. How about multiple concurrent logins to different providers? For a while I was connecting to both my ISP and the university. When I wanted to try a different ISP, they created a temporary username and password for me to use and thus was able to see what their network and connectivity were like without changing provider. Another benefit is cost... the non-PPPoE DSL solutions are much higher. I like being able to sit down elsewhere and log in to my ISP and access the services only available from within their network. The list goes on...
Trust me, no matter how bad SBC's service ... ... Qwest is worse. I'm glad they're doing this, but as a Denverite (who well remembers the days of Mountain Bell, and then USWest, and now Qwest, and nothing's changed) I have to say that they have a looong way to go before anyone thinks well of them.
The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
$11.23 Basic Local Service
$21.21 Misc Fees and Taxes
$79.95 DSL (1.5m/256k)
What a fscking ripoff!
Thats wierd, my comcast rocks. Its only been down once in 3 years and I actually get the 3.5 downloads speeds. Oh yes, its nice.
After working in broadband tech support for 6 awful months I discovered that the quality of your internet has nothing to do with the company you buy it from and everything to do with were you live. E.g. if you have crappy phone lines your DSL will suck. If you live around a bunch of AIM and pr0n kiddies then your cable will suck from around 3:30pm-9pm. Its just the way it goes.
Anyway, I do have a semi-answer to your problem... This is extreme, but you could cancel your phone service and order ISDN. ISDN is a digital phone network and thus a lifeline service. If you have the money to pay for it your local telecom is required by law to build the facilities. Im not sure if thats 100% true in your state, but it is here in TN. When they build th facilities for the ISDN 99.99999995% of the time (at least with the ISP I worked at) they go ahead and make DSL available in the same area. So basically, ask for ISDN, they have to give it to you, keep it a while, and then ask for DSL. I bet they will have it.
Just make sure of two things first, 1) none of those stupid old AT&T signal repeater things are on the line. If you live in a metro area thats not likely anyway.
2) Make sure your not right across the street from the CO. If you are you probably wouldn't want the DSL anyway because the signal would be too strong to sync up without you putting 90000 filters on the line going to the modem, doing a rain dance, and praying to some heathen gods of DSL.
Matt
You have 1 Moderator Point! Use it or lose it! Is that a threat? -vapid
I then called my local ISP and they told me that they would charge me $100 for a 1.5Mb connection...up from $25 for my 640Kb. So I checked with Qwest about Qwest.com. Took several calls to find out the magic words are "Qwest Choice Internet Basic"...that's the $6.99 ISP service. Once I got to a Qwest.net guy he seemed very helpful and knowledgeable. I do have to get a new modem to replace my Cisco 678, but even with the $3 rental charge my DSL should now be much faster and cheaper.
Old Service (640/256)
Qwest $28.00 Local ISP $25.00
Total $ 53.00
New Service (1.5/896)
Qwest $28.00 Qwest.net $7.00 Modem $3.00 (I can buy for $60)
Total $38.00
If I have problems I will just switch back to my old setup.
Qwest vs SBC (yet again)
Until very recently (maybe 3 months ago?) Qwest used to charge a "Long Distance Restriction" fee... i.e. if you don't have Long Distance service on your phone you get charged a fee.
Though as much as I have dealt with Qwest, the last few months their service seems to be getting better. We'll see if it lasts.
Recent improvements I've noticed:
Lower DSL Price
Got rid of Long Distance Restriction Fee
Outsourced thier call center (have not been on hold for more then 30 seconds since they did this, I used to wait quite some time on hold before)
Faster Response time (new service, change service, etc)
They work on Sundays! (a friend of mine just moved and was stunned when they came out on a Sunday to setup her line)
So we'll see. I suspect they were losing customers because of thier shitty customer service. Many people I know don't have a land line anymore... net access via cable and a cell phone.
Signed on with VISI in August, they've been great to work with. I've had maybe one hiccup since I've had them, and as soon as service came back up, they e-mailed everyone about what had happened, whether all of us were affected or not. They'd also been sending out status reports along with ETA's for repairs. That's good service in my book.