Cable Forum - View Single Post - A Hypothetical Moral Question About Speed

cllp1975 · 24-10-2009, 13:24

So you have your 50meg broadband. It works, on a wired connection, however with the supplied router (which is part of the package and supported by the company - let's call them "Flurgin"), your coverage and speed is down to that of dial-up, often.

After much craziness, and the repair of several other faults, the conclusion is reached that the congestion on 2.4ghz band is so saturated, that achieving reasonable speeds is not likely.

So the question is this, really - both legally and morally:
Given that Flurgin don't supply a dual-band router, which they could quite easily do, are they doing everything they can to provide you with the service you are paying for. And I guess more fundamentally, given that Flurgin (or whoever) supply and support the router, is it therefore reasonable to accept in nearly 2010, that the only way one will get a good speed is to wire every machine?

Don't get me wrong.... wireless speeds drop over wired speeds. That's fine. But a drop of 48meg.... Equally I accept that the wifi network is open, and there's not a lot one can do if it's crammed - but given that there ARE alternative bands (which are damn near empty right now), then don't Flurgin have a duty to customers to exhaust every opportunity to get the customer what they are paying for?

I'd welcome your thoughts....

Any similarity to any similarly named cable company is purely coincidental...

24-10-2009, 13:24	#1
cllp1975 Inactive Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 58	A Hypothetical Moral Question About Speed So you have your 50meg broadband. It works, on a wired connection, however with the supplied router (which is part of the package and supported by the company - let's call them "Flurgin"), your coverage and speed is down to that of dial-up, often. After much craziness, and the repair of several other faults, the conclusion is reached that the congestion on 2.4ghz band is so saturated, that achieving reasonable speeds is not likely. So the question is this, really - both legally and morally: Given that Flurgin don't supply a dual-band router, which they could quite easily do, are they doing everything they can to provide you with the service you are paying for. And I guess more fundamentally, given that Flurgin (or whoever) supply and support the router, is it therefore reasonable to accept in nearly 2010, that the only way one will get a good speed is to wire every machine? Don't get me wrong.... wireless speeds drop over wired speeds. That's fine. But a drop of 48meg.... Equally I accept that the wifi network is open, and there's not a lot one can do if it's crammed - but given that there ARE alternative bands (which are damn near empty right now), then don't Flurgin have a duty to customers to exhaust every opportunity to get the customer what they are paying for? I'd welcome your thoughts.... Any similarity to any similarly named cable company is purely coincidental...