Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

ISPs Lie About Broadband "Up To" Speeds

Posted by samzenpus on from the lies-and-damned-lies dept.

Haffner writes "Ars Technica has an article detailing the difference between ISP advertised 'up to x Mbps' speeds and the actual speeds, in addition to some possible solutions. They find that on average, the advertised speeds were 'up to 6.7 Mbps' while the real median was 3 Mbps and the mean was 4 Mbps. This implies that ISPs were falsely advertising by at least 50%."

33 of 547 comments (clear)

  1. ISP's want your money... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    News at 11

    1. Re:ISP's want your money... by Hognoxious · · Score: 4, Funny

      News at up to 12

      FTFY.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  2. Sneaky, yes. Lies, not quite. by Rary · · Score: 5, Informative

    They find that on average, the advertised speeds were 'up to 6.7 Mbps' while the real median was 3 Mbps and the mean was 4 Mbps. This implies that ISPs were falsely advertising by at least 50%.

    "Up to" doesn't mean "median" or "mean". "Up to" means "up to", as in "maximum".

    That being said, it is rather sneaky to advertise a product by focusing on a theoretical maximum that you may (or may not) experience on the rarest of occasions. It's kind of like selling a limited service as "unlimited". But no one would ever do that, right?

    --

    "You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war." -- Albert Einstein

    1. Re:Sneaky, yes. Lies, not quite. by MBCook · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Do you think Doritos would be allowed to sell bags as "up to a pound" when they averaged 9oz and some had quite a bit less? The big problem is it's one way. When you are promised Xmbps, you get some number, Y, where Y<= X. I would be amazed if more than 1% of the broadband population got higher than their rated speed. If it was a real normal distribution, or when you called to sign up they told you "you can expect to get X most of the time".

      But my parents have 12 or 15mbps cable internet. During normal hours (even early afternoon) it is almost never faster than about 8mbps, and that's with multiple downloads coming from what I assume to be a CDN, because most sites aren't anywhere near that. Over the last 5-6 years, the top speed you could reach on their cable line has dropped as more people have signed on, but the advertised speed (and the price) have both increased. They have a medium package since there is no point trying to get more on an oversubscribed line.

      I, on the other hand, pay for 6mbps DSL, and get almost exactly 6. I like getting what I pay for, and if I could only get 3, I'd pay for that service level.

      If your "up to" only applies to 5% of your customers, you're scamming them. If it was 30%, I think we'd all be a lot more forgiving.

      --
      Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
    2. Re:Sneaky, yes. Lies, not quite. by gzipped_tar · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It is not clear from TFA whether the histogram displayed there was drawn from the sample of experimentally measured _maximum_ speeds or just the "daily usage" speeds.

      If it was the former, then it gives us a snapshot of the underlying distribution of the maximum speed, and we can estimate the probability of "ISP lying about the speed", along with the variance of this estimator, directly from it.

      If it was the latter, the distribution of the maximum can still be estimated. However, this is usually difficult to be done in a model-independent way.

      --
      Colorless green Cthulhu waits dreaming furiously.
    3. Re:Sneaky, yes. Lies, not quite. by DeadPixels · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I actually like the parent's Doritos analogy - it's true when you think of it that way; there would be all sorts of uproar if physical goods were advertised and sold the way broadband is.
      "Up to" a dozen bagels in your order, or "up to" two patties on your burger would never fly. And who would work for pay on an "up to" scale? I'm sure companies would be happy to pay someone "up to" four hundred dollars an hour.

      Part of the problem, in my opinion, is the fact that a sizable portion of the population is not terribly computer-literate or technically savvy. They want "an Internet" or "a Google" or (my new favorite) "the Facebook" and don't really care much about how they get it.
      The average end user, in my experience, has difficulty distinguishing between a slow computer and a slow connection. To many, they might as well be one and the same. I get asked for help all the time with people saying "my computer is slow" and it turns out they actually have connectivity problems. ISPs not only take advantage of that mentality, they count on it. I'm sure many of you have seen the commercials for those sites like "FinallyFast" or "MaxMySpeed" or whatever they're called, where they advertise a "free scan" to tell if you're "infected" or "experiencing registry errors", and by purchasing their product, you can avoid having to buy a new computer. That is basically the same demographic ISPs are targeting; the population that knows they want a computer and an internet connection but doesn't know much beyond that. I would honestly describe it as predatory.

      I know I'll probably get modded down for not taking a more pro-capitalistic stance, but in my opinion this is a case where consumers are being taken advantage of - and there simply are no better options. It's very easy to say "vote with your dollar and don't buy their services", but an internet connection is critical for many people nowadays. I know several people who run businesses out of their homes using websites, VOIP lines, etc. For them, canceling their internet connection is just not an option. If there were an ISP that actually provided good service and had consumer-friendly policies, I would be more than happy to switch to their service and recommend all of my friends. The problem is that my options right now are "bad", "worse", and "even worse yet". Comcast blocks all torrent upload data in my area (disclaimer: I don't pirate content, but I do use torrents for FOSS/Linux downloads and similar uses); Verizon has declared that they plan to test a 150GB (if I remember correctly) monthly cap on FIOS in this area; and there's basically no one else around because they've been driven out of business or out of the area. Again, with the nature of the internet and the role it plays in communication and commerce, I would almost consider supporting it being regulated like a public utility, or at least with more oversight. It's all well and good to say "don't give them your money", but when I need the internet to obtain that money, I don't have many options.

    4. Re:Sneaky, yes. Lies, not quite. by daveime · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If by very little control, you mean oversubscribing the line by a factor of N, then okay, whatever.

      The days of people only using the DSL in bursts to checkmail or grab a webpage are gone. In my house, we've got 3 towers and 2 laptops running off a wifi'd 3MB DSL.

      At any moment, one or more of us will be streaming video or running torrents etc, so we're usually running at capacity 24/7 - which I have no qualms about whatsoever, as we were sold a 3MB package, not one of those silly "up to 3MB packages" - and for the most part we DO get what we paid for.

      I guess my point is, they cannot oversubscribe the lines anymore, because it will mean an instant slowdown for everyone else.

  3. Technically correct by fluffy99 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yes, some customers are getting "up to" the advertised speed. Since all the advertising says "up to" this isn't lying. Where's the story in this?

    1. Re:Technically correct by MBCook · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If I sold toilet bowl cleaner tablets that hang in the tank, and say they are good for "up to 1000 flushes", would it be OK if they worked for only 500 flushes for the majority of people, and the rated amount for less than 5%? No one would accept that.

      When other industries advertise something (the weight in a bag of food, or of some raw material) they are advertising mean, and they have a lot of quality control to keep close to that number. Too much and they lose money, too little and people stop buying or they get sued for false advertising.

      But that doesn't happen in broadband. They think it's OK for the speed to be way less than the rated, but it is almost never higher (let alone by 50%). But I have two choices right now. I have DSL that maxes out at 6mbps, and cable that is supposed to go to 24mbps. But if the top cable tier delivers 8, what am I supposed to do? It's the fastest available.

      When bags of concrete mix turn out to be light, contractors stop buying because they are being ripped off and can buy another brand. The free market works there. Broadband has so little competition in most places (the majority of americans only have 2 choices, many only have one) that the options are usually "pay and suck up the false advertising" or "have no broadband at all".

      They aren't selling 24 and delivering 21, they are selling 24 and delivering 12. That's not a "not always quite there", that's "complete exaggeration."

      --
      Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
    2. Re:Technically correct by fermion · · Score: 3, Informative
      It is not lying,but it may be deceptive,and deceptive advertising is an actionable offense. Two examples of not lying that got retailers in trouble.

      Many years a US discount retailer would make up prices and discount off these prices. The ad copy basically said they were made up, but in such a way that the consumer would think there were based in fact. This enabled the retailer to offer 50% savings on almost everything, though the prices were comparable with any other discount retailer. The company, whose name slips my mind, is out of business.

      A department store, maybe Foley's, also got in trouble due to a tactic that many would think was legitimate. They would offer clothing at a rather high price,then advertise a sale discounting off the high price. Now, these products were actually offer for sale, so the retail price was legitimate, but it was still seen as deceptive as there was no intention by the retailer to actually make a sale at this price, just to set a price for advertising a discount. There might have been some sales at the high price, but that was not an issue. This practice is not illegal, but one will see ad copy that states no sales may have occurred at the advertised high price.

      So really, on one hand this is not a big deal. The 'up to' might be enough. But given these two cases, and the fact that so few people get the 'up to' amount(much les than 10%), I would say additional ad copy would be required to make this legit. At minimum I would think a note saying that nearly no one achieves this speed. Ideally I would like to see a listing of the speed that the second and third quartile gets, in this case 0.5-2 mb. This would be most useful for the consumer as it would at least help the consumer know the kind of speeds they are likely to get. The fact that this is not done clearly indicate the 'up to' numbers are meant to be deceptive.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
  4. And I want their bandwidth... by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 4, Funny

    You'd think that'd be a mutually beneficial arrangement of the sort that would make Adam Smith proud...

    But no, it seems they want to keep my money and their bandwidth, so fuck 'em.

    --
    Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
  5. I'm running at 100 Percent by amiga3D · · Score: 4, Funny

    I have a small local ISP here. Comsouth.net they consistently run at 100 percent of advertised speed. I'm amazed sometimes how fast it is. No lag, no drop in speed after the kiddies get home from school. I don't know what's wrong with them.

    1. Re:I'm running at 100 Percent by phantomcircuit · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Clearly they need more MBAs.

    2. Re:I'm running at 100 Percent by Ironhandx · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I'm beginning to subscribe more and more to a friends theory that all that is wrong in first world nations can be blamed on an MBA.

  6. You don't say! by fudoniten · · Score: 5, Funny

    This is unbelievable! Next you're going to tell me that "3.9G wireless" doesn't mean anything, or that 9 out of 10 doctors don't recommend Crest, or that most items in an "up to 90% off!" sale are not in fact 90% off!

    Sounds pretty paranoid to me. If we can't trust company advertisements for unbiased information, what can we trust?

  7. So just what am I paying for? by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    And how do we compare plans? If one ISP has "up to" 10 mbits, and another has "up to" 20 mbits, which one is faster?

    Not lying, but not in any way honest.

    --
    Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
  8. RCN in Chicago by cspankne · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I have RCN (Cable and Internet) in Chicago. I have spoken candidly with technicians who come out to do installations and I have verified through several phone calls with customer representatives that they "aim" for 60% of advertised speeds. I perform speedtests, using their preferred site and have found that I am almost ALWAYS at 60% of advertised speeds. In order to get over 10 mbit/sec down, I have to pay for the "20mbit/sec" rate, and am typically around 12 mbit/sec down. If I was a normal customer, I'd easily compare the 20mbit/sec advertise rate against competition and opt for RCN's as it is the cheapest price for that advertised speed. Complete garbage and misleading to consumers. How is this legal?

  9. Re:Technically.. by jc42 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I learned long ago that whenever an advertiser says "up to", you should always translate it as "less than" in your mind. That's what they're really saying; they're just saying it in a way that's misleading but legal.

    --
    Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
  10. The story is.. by prakslash · · Score: 3, Funny
    They set up false expectations. Unfortunately everyone does it. I have bitten by this more than a few times.

    Weight loss ad told me I could lose UP TO 50 lbs. I still need to request a seat-belt extender on airplanes
    My employer said I could make UP TO a million dollars a year if the company does well. I am still driving a beat up Kia
    And, worse of all, that nice email ad said I could increase my length UP TO 9 inches. My wife still has trouble finding it

    Meh..

  11. Why, send them a nice letter... by zogger · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...tell them you will pay them "up to" the agreed on price for their service, but you will determine what the real sums involved will be.

    1. Re:Why, send them a nice letter... by MojoStan · · Score: 3, Funny

      Someone has to post the oblig. link: http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2009/5/01/

      --
      TO START
      PRESS ANY KEY

      Where's the 'ANY' key? I see Esk, Kitarl, and Pig-Up...

  12. Mean, median, mode, lame by Gothmolly · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The mean is not the maximum. Remember grade school math?

    --
    I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
  13. its a story because by Rivalz · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Not everyone realizes that other people are getting substantially better internet for the same amount from the same company based on the same agreement.
    I think its high time corporate America fully embraces the "Up to" mentality.
    Here are some suggestions
    1) Restaurants / Groceries (Up to meals) Only give half the people half the portions of food.
    2) Gas Stations (Up to 1 gallon for $2.80) Some days we dont have to give any gas but if you go 24hrs without getting any gas we will give you a minor refund of what you paid.
    3) Cell phone minutes (up to 2100 family minutes during peak hours) But really only give 50% of the minutes to half the clients and charge them more for the rest.
    4) Warranty (We warranty all our services up to 2 years ( meaning we can deny your service before or after 2 years, but after 2 we will always deny it.)
    5) Intrest rates ( up to 2% fixed interest rate for the life of the CD ) Up to meaning we dont have to pay anything but at most we will pay 2%.

    Can anyone think of any others?

  14. The incentives are all wrong by Ichijo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    With unlimited plans, the ISP's incentive is to prevent you from using up all your bandwidth, because infrastructure costs money, so if you used up all your neighborhood's bandwidth, they'd have to upgrade their network.

    With a per-megabyte plan, the company's incentive is to provide you with more bandwidth than you could ever possibly need so that nothing will prevent you from downloading as much as possible.

    If we want fast pipes, we should be asking for pay as you go data plans.

    --
    Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
  15. "Up to" means "less than" by Clovert+Agent · · Score: 4, Informative

    It's standard marketing bullshit. Every time you see "up to" in an ad, replace it with "less than". "Up to 10mbps", "up to 80% shinier hair", "up to whatever". If one out of the entire sample/customer base experienced an anomalous outlier result, they will claim "up to" that. You're statistically unlikely to be the anomalous outlier, therefore you will experience less than what they're claiming.

    "Less than" is more accurate anyway. What you experience may be anything in a wide range of values below that, but you KNOW you won't experience more. So do the mental substitution, and I promise your perception of advertising will change as a result.

  16. It's not a lie by Weaselmancer · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Up To" means "Less Than or Equal To".

    What are all the numbers you can name from zero "up to" 6.7? Would you expect to encounter 3 and 4 on your way up to 6.7?

    It's misleading maybe, but it's not a lie. They are publishing their maximum possible speed. YMMV.

    --
    Weaselmancer
    rediculous.
    1. Re:It's not a lie by DimmO · · Score: 4, Funny

      Would you expect to encounter 3 and 4 on your way up to 6.7?

      Four shalt thou not count, nor either count thou two, excepting that thou then proceed to six point seven.

    2. Re:It's not a lie by beh · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Indeed, if it's speed limited, then it would be a lie.

      With your broadband modem, if it's configured for 6.7MBit/s, then that is your speed limitation. Whether the network behind it can serve it is another matter.

      The article itself, on the other hand, is doubly bogus - for one thing, they don't seem to get the wording 'up to', the other thing is that the compare the MEDIAN speed to the 'up to' speed.

      Picture this: Your sports car can go UP TO 300km/h. There is no speed limit on the motorway (in Germany, at least) - yet traffic moves at a median speed of around 130km/h.

      Does this mean the 'UP TO 300km/h' on your sports car brochure is wrong?
      No... The median speed has nothing to do with what the car would be capable of.

      Same thing here - if they were to say 'up to 6.7MBit/s' in the brochure, but their observed TOP speed over half a year would never go past 4MBit/s, they might have a case. Saying the median is lower than the top speed - only one word springs to mind: Duh!

  17. Well, there is a solution of sorts: by Penguinisto · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...what if I, in return, promise to pay the ISP "up to" $45/mo for their service?

    Oh, that's right - they'd cut me off. :/

    /P

    --
    Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    1. Re:Well, there is a solution of sorts: by cynyr · · Score: 3, Insightful

      did your contract with the ISP come with a SLA? no? right, so you agreed to pay $45 a month for what ever they give you... hmm oddly i'm not sure a contract like that would hold up in court though.

      --
      All of the above was encrypted with a Quad ROT-13 method. Unauthorized decryption is in violation of the DMCA.
    2. Re:Well, there is a solution of sorts: by Shakrai · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If everybody switched away from ISPs that pulled this crap they would stop doing it in short order. Just switch to another local provider and this will all go away. It's not like your local government cut a deal with them giving them monopoly status in exchange for bribes^Wfranchise fees or anything.......

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
  18. Missing option... by denzacar · · Score: 3, Informative

    You DO get 6.7 MBit/s - connecting to your ISPs servers and network.

    But from your ISP to wherever... well... they can't really vouch for that. So they don't.
    And they put a clause saying exactly that in your contract.
    Then again, most people don't read contracts.
    Just think of all those EULAs you've OKayed over the years.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  19. Obligatory Penny Arcade by Maarx · · Score: 3, Funny

    The Fivefold Mother