22
votes
What's your monthly internet access bill? (And why does your ISP suck?)
My north Seattle-area service provider is Frontier, to whom I currently pay USD $42/month for "50/50" Mbps service (which in practice is closer to a download/upload ratio of 42/12 Mbps, even through LAN cable).
I do not recommend Frontier, as I got the above "discounted" price after calling to cancel my prior "30/30" deal (again, overly optimistic speeds) when that $40/mo. bill spiked to $52 for no reason. Plus, I had to lodge an FCC complaint against Frontier when they overcharged me by $200 a couple years ago, which was resolved in my favor after nearly two months.
My mobile internet provider is Google's Project Fi. I pay them $20/mo. for their phone plan + around $5/mo. for the data I typically use. Highly recommended.
My ISP will do Shady stuff. They have this note system and then whatever they put in the notes becomes fact. Which irritates me because they will get something wrong, and then you call up and they say, "Well our notes indicate this. Is there anything else I can help you with?" They do it for all kinds of things and never checked their facts and they don't really have to because they're a big company and I'm just one consumer. They are the Monopoly here so I kind of just have to take it and they know that.
They sold me a DOCSIS 2 modem telling me it was a 3. My internet plan was too fast for the modem and whenever I would call they would tell me that it was a 3. I canceled my service for a little bit and then when I went back they asked me if I had a modem and I told them, "I already have a modem." So they wrote in my notes that I bought the modem from a retail outlet instead of from them. So the next time I called they admitted that it was a DOCSIS 2. So I press them and then I realize they were admitting it because they didn't realize that they had sold it to me because of what their notes said. And then they kept sticking to that. Well our notes say this.
And a big issue here is a lot of the area doesn't have internet. But this isp will sit on areas it doesn't intend to cover so other providers can't provide service and be competition.
If you live in an area with a demand for internet and no coverage it might be worth looking into starting a WISP. To my understanding it's essentially a group of people pitching in to set up a huge WIFI network in an area by placing transmitters on towers, trees, or tall buildings with permission. If successful it can end up paying for itself, but at the very least you'll get better internet access
I've also heard you can get fairly good internet through microwave towers already in most areas, haven't done much research into that however
I can get high speed at my house. I just feel for those who don't have it, because if you don't have it by now you never will. All money and effort goes into upgrading us who already have it. And because of that everyone has this attitude of, "tough shit" to everyone else.
We currently pay $185/month for internet, tv, and (home) phone from comcast in SW Florida. Supposedly the internet is 100+Mbps but I have noticed what seems to be throttling even when I'm right next to the router. Moreover, they speed up the service whenever speedtest.net is visited to make it seem faster than it is. I noticed this when a download was downloading at 500Kbps so I visited the website to check my speed and although it was initially slow, it sped up fast when I pressed the start button and after the speedtest finished the download slowed back down as well. Thinking this was a coincidence, I tried again and this pattern held true for the next 8 speedtests... For context, I just checked and I am supposedly getting 177.57Mbps download & 11.78Mbps upload.
I'm thinking of throwing out the phones, getting satellite, and downgrading to the internet-only $100/month 40Mbps option.
I usually use fast.com because it's faster, but I wanted to see if there was a speed difference, so I ran them at the same time. The results were not only different, but way below the 25Mbps that my company pays $100/mo for. It took about an hour for it to finally jump back up to 25 Mbps (on both sites).
HOLY SHIT
I pay $50/month for 100Mbps.
From comcast? Do you have any competitors in your area or anything? The only competitor in my area is a fiber company but only if you live in one specific neighbourhood.
Spectrum. AT&T is the only real competition but can’t match the speed
I pay $105AUD for 8/1 that includes landline with no call costs. I'm not sure if many readers are familiar with the NBN (National Broadband Network) disaster but there is not much light at the end of the tunnel for some. Nowadays, the reporting on it is diluted with all sorts of misinformation so it's hard to stay abreast of what the future is.
Latest rumour was that because we live rural, wireless towers were meant to be built but they may be retracting that and moving everyone to high latency satellite with a much reduced download cap and turning off the ADSL. Strange thing is, our rural area for whatever reason is connected by fibre optic to the main exchange (with a mini exchange on the entrance road) and at the main exchange there is wired NBN for the local school. We would happen to be one of the few rural areas that could connect to fibre NBN with very little expense but that's not happening.
Fellow Australian here. The NBN is all shades of shit. 3 years ago I was living in Queensland and the NBN rolled through the suburb we lived in and holy good damn it was awful! I remember through the day when the rest of the street was at work or school the speeds were amazing. Insanely fast. But the moment 4pm rolled around you may as well have been on dial up, it was utterly horrible.
I currently have cable with Telstra and our house is fairly close to the exchange, I really don't want the NBN to roll around. I've been keeping an eye on the roll out plan and thankfully my suburb isn't anywhere on the list. Yet.
Kiwi here, just coming in to laugh at you guys. Our Ultra Fast Broadband roll out has been one of the most successful nationwide upgrades to fibre in the world. Definitely the best thing to come out of the previous government.
Well, you're cheating. It's pretty easy when you have such a tiny area to cover with fiber. :P
Congratulations, will you sponsor me for citizenship? That will never happen in the USA because.
Mate, if you're an Australian you can come here all you like as you've already eligible for residency or permanent residency.
I wish, I'm in the USA. Adopt me?
Nah. I only Internet-adopt people like @domothy.
That isn't the NBN's fault entirely, more your ISP not provisioning enough. And that makes it hard, you may have now have 5 different flavours of NBN, coupled with backhaul and CVC provisioning issues and ISP problems on top of that. Cable, wireless towers are two technologies that don't scale well for excess users either.
The whole point was to remove those problems and lay fibre for most, wireless tower the rest, and satellite the absolute fringe. Now the goalposts are moving all over the place and the NBN CEO is saying/said that gaming is the problem. It's the definition of a disaster.
I remember reading something about gaming being blamed. Of course it's not the fact they are running utter garbage from the exchange to the house..
I honestly didn't know it was more a provider issue. thank you for clearing that up, when the NBN does roll through (hopefully it stays away for some time still) I'll really look into the best provider
You're right, from the node to your property is a crapshoot (which FttH/FttP) was supposed to eliminate entirely.
No matter what you do (except buy or move into an area where you know they have the original FttP/H), it's up to the NBN Gods if you will get a good result. ISPs do have some skin in the game so proper research will help there. Some providers are building their own private networks to prevent some of the problems. That's how bad it is.
The private network thing I've been reading a bit about, that seems far more promising than the NBN gamble.
It's insane that is how bad things have gotten.
As an American, I've only heard bits and pieces about Australia's NBN initiative, most of it bad.
What is it, and why has it been deemed to be a failure?
Good question. Any answer I give could likely be wrong as I'm exposed to the same misinformation everyone is.
It was/is the National Broadband Network. A replacement or improvement to the copper line network of advancing age sold to Telstra when they privatised after being sold by a conservative government. Telstra dragged their feet on ADSL uptake, even limiting the speed for a long time. They have a Comcast-like reputation for dealings with them, high prices and reportedly shoddy maintenance.
Initially the government in power considered FTTN, fibre to the node, and was accused of 'Fraudband' by the opposition government. After retooling and industry consultation, they proposed FTTH, fibre to the home, an expensive undertaking but would cut the telecommunications monopoly out of the picture and give a huge percentage of homes decent speed with a strong upgrade path in the future, low energy requirements etc.
Rollout began on quieter cities and outskirts of big cities as it was believed if the opposition government got in they would cancel it. The Murdoch media went mental, the Opposition Government went mental, even the more neutral media failed to report properly on the benefits of a decent network (this was before Netflix, it was also tagged the network of pirates). The opposition government were voted in on the premise they could build it "better, faster, cheaper" by 2016. The very fraudband they shouted about before was implemented, a 'multi-technology mix' of decrepit copper and other networking methods such as HFC rather than fibre.
It's 2018, the network isn't built, has constant problems, no upgrade path, we paid for the very copper network we sold (but in a far worse condition), cost blowouts, the board is stacked with industry insiders etc.
If you are going to build something, do it right the first time was the theory. It's true.
Ouch. Sounds like a clusterfuck. Thanks for the explanation.
Comcast. ~$80/mo for 1000/50. I get 500/40. I could drop down to the 500/30 package for a little less, but having a good upload speed is nice.
I live less than half a mile from google and it drives me crazy I can't get fiber.
I've got Verizon FIOS. I pay about $80/month. The best that can be said for them is that they aren't Comcast, but they still need to be broken up -- just like every other corporation in the US that operates across state lines and gets the financial equivalent of sloppy blowjobs from state and local governments.
About 22$/month for 100 mbps up+down, includes TV and static IP address.
No blocking, no throttling, no data cap, all ports allowed, speeds most of the time 80+. Includes Net Neutrality.
Europe.
Actually, it's getting worse for the ISPs. Several states have enacted / are enacting their own NN laws, most of them are far more strict than the old federal standard. By killing NN at the federal level, the lobbyists have created their own hydra of NN laws, making far more work for themselves. California and New York have the strictest ones - NY's law even makes data caps illegal.
Fun fact about wireless ISP data caps - they honestly haven't got a choice. If they let everyone run full speed all the time, it'll overload their networks and lead to a situation much like brownouts in power grids. It seems that NY doesn't even care about that and is willing to force all of the wireless providers to give one single unchanging guaranteed speed to all cell customers. This is going to cost wireless providers a fortune changing their networks to support it. Can you imagine how a company like Verizon is going to have to handle that just in the advertising and packages they present to their customers? It's a nightmare for them... but one they made for themselves meddling with the open internet, so I find I'm not shedding any tears for them.
Do you have links for more info on these stricter state laws? I haven't previously seen anything about a law in NY that would make caps illegal.
It's not a law yet, it's in process. There's been some media coverage. Here's a broader overview of the whole issue on ars.
Some ISPs in Vancouver, Canada, offer gigabit internet speeds but only in select buildings/neighbourhoods. Right now I spend $59 CAD monthly for 150Mbit download and 15Mbit upload with no bandwidth cap.
Mobile internet I pay $45 monthly for 10GB bandwidth cap with unlimited Canada-wide calling, and unlimited international text (within Canada).
The trick I've found at least here in my city is to be aware of the alternative cable resellers for home internet thanks to the CRTC (Canada's FCC equivalent) otherwise I'd be paying upwards of $109 a month for the same home internet plan.
For mobile internet, never be on a contract but be willing to swap carriers whenever a promotion comes up around the holidays with a BYOD plan. If I were to get 10GB in my province now, I'd pay upwards of $280 a month.
£25/month for an unlimited, unfiltered, unlogged, business-grade connection as fast as my crappy aluminium cables can allow. Which is 22Mbps down, 1 up. I get a voice line on that package too, but that's more to do with the fact you can't really get data-only provision than anything else.
My ISP, Uno (previously Xilo) doesn't suck at all, they're consistently rated as one of the top three not-sucky ISPs in the UK and I've been with them for many years very happily, but the infrastructure I have to deal with does suck. I can see a fibre cabinet from my house but my cable runs the other way. Ironically, after years of ADSL wanting to keep distances short, I'm now too close to the exchange and there's no VDSL/Fibre hardware between me and there, and they can't install it in the exchange because it interferes with voice hardware. There is currently no fix and no plans for one that I'm aware of, so I'm stuck with ADSL until I move or when my 4G gets cheaper.
I get far better speeds over mobile (40/15Mbps D/U) than wired but at £20/20GB it's a bit pricey for home use right now.
I'm paying $80/mo for Verizon's 'unlimited' plan. Where I live, there isn't even cable service. I route my entire home network through the Verizon hotspot, so functionally, everything on my home network does have internet access. The bitch of it is after 15GB it's throttled to around 80kbps (roughly 3x modem speeds) each month, and that 15GB evaporates pretty damn fast for updates. Frankly, it sucks, but it's functional as long as one has patience. Even at those speeds, youtube does work fine if I scale the quality way down. Oddly enough torrenting isn't really a problem either thanks to BitThief. People say you can't torrent safely on Verizon wireless but you just have to use a client they can't detect. Been doing it for years and not so much as a nasty email.
Nobody's ever run better connectivity here because we live in a very strange location. It's on the border of a county line, so we pay school taxes for one county and property taxes for another. The power lines were run from a different direction, so half of my couple-mile road gets power from one grid, the other half from another, and since the middle section had no homes, no poles were put in to bridge the two, which also means there's no continuous pathway for say a cable company or fiber company to run lines. I'm sure they looked at it and decided the expense wasn't worth the perhaps 10-15 customers they'd get out of it.
That's about to change, though. Turns out we've had several new homes go up and it's less than a half a mile now without poles. Also, there's a dark fiber line running along a highway at one end of my road, and another new fiber line coming in at the other. The fiber company is planning to use our road to link up that dark fiber and take their internet access to several smaller rural towns essentially using us as the gateway route. I think the fiber company pushing has finally caused the local county to get off their asses, so they've cut trees back along that half mile stretch and are clearly planning to put up poles there this summer. I imagine with the fiber co, local county, nyseg, and cable companies all wanting the bridge completed it'll finally get done. A couple guys were scouting the poles on my property to check their fitness for the fiber line, and this is what they told me when I chatted them up about it.
So, hopefully, I'll be getting fiber access within a year, they do have proper business class with a static IP and 1gbps/100mbps speeds at $50/mo. I cannot wait to tell Verizon to fuck off - both the cell and the land line I'm still paying for.
Can you tell us more about this "BitThief" Is it simply a client like Deluge?
https://bitthief.ethz.ch/
BitThief is an old experimental java torrent client that was developed at some European university as a prototype of a 'hostile' bittorrent client. It exploits weaknesses in the design of the torrent protocol to free-leech any torrent without leaking so much as one bit of information back to the torrent swarm. Basically, you can use it to torrent invisibly. Your IP will never show up in the swarm, and it does not allow anyone to download from you. Yes, this is cheating the protocol, and yes, if everyone did this, torrents would stop working.
All of those nice C&D letters you get when you download a cam rip of the latest shitty star wars movie depend on the businesses watching those torrent swarms identifying your IP address. They do this by studying the swarm and recording all the IPs. Since BitThief is built to cheat the swarm by not revealing that information, they will never see it. That means your ISP will never get the trigger event sent to them that causes their systems to dispatch a notice to you.
There's another way to do this using 'legit' torrent clients. If you load Tor on your system (the full Tor, not the browser, as a proxy), some clients will allow you to reroute all bittorrent swarm traffic (tracker access, dht etc) through Tor using that proxy while leaving the actual download traffic in the open, not running through Tor. This registers your Tor exit node's IP address in all of the swarms, but lets you to continue to download normally from those hosting the file. The watchdogs get the Tor node's IP, not yours, and since the IP is wrong, no one can connect back to you to download bits of the file. This is tricky and requires some careful custom configuration of the torrent client's options and communication settings.
These are the kinds of things you have to do now if you have a hostile ISP and don't feel like paying for a VPN. :/
Fucking brilliant!
Okay, so the upcoming rant isn't just about my personal Internet service (which is Comcast 100/20 for $80/mo. in SoFla. That's a bit of a guesstimate, since the whole services bundle is about $150/mo. And they can eat a giant bag of phalli as far as I'm concerned, given multiple micro-outages daily).
It's been one of my grim work duties to help keep about 800 sites around the U.S. and territories online, and I've ordered well over a hundred circuits from various carriers in the past 5 years.
These are theoretically wholesale-priced "business class" contracts, that actually have SLAs and hypothetically premier service. The cost premium is 50 - 100+% over consumer household service - typical 50/10 cable service costs $120 - 150/month, and I just ordered a $2,250/mo.1 GB fiber circuit. In some locations, 25/25 Ethernet costs $1,000/mo.
We still have a few locations where 768kb DSL or 1.5 Mb T1 is the best service available ($150/mo. and $300/mo., respectively).
With best effort, the team responsible for all this manages about 99.5% uptime nationwide. That means, on average, about 7 minutes of outage daily. Of course, this isn't evenly distributed, and "bad weather" or "bad carrier" locations are much, much worse.
"Premium" support from carriers (and again, f*ck Comcast) still entails multiple hours of calls, repeated service visits where the tech invariably claims it's customer equipment on the first visit, and it takes two more to resolve the problem, etc. There's enough regional variation that I really can't recommend one provider over another - they're all far worse than they should be.
Carrier oligopolies are a problem as well; there's no point in getting redundant circuits when both cable and fiber are only available through the same carrier. Backup 4G wireless, where service is adequate, runs $15 - 20/Gb.
The nationwide Comcast outage a couple of weeks ago took down a third of our locations for the better part of a day.
Did I mention I work in healthcare, and many of these sites serve infants and children in critical care? Good times.
I look forward to retiring to a place where I can build out cheap community fiber as a hobby.
TL;DR - U.S. broadband infrastructure and pricing is what you get when you don't regulate common carriers adequately.
$70/mo for 1 gig up and down from my muni fiber company. I’ve had 2 outages in over 3 years of service, and I’ll never move. They even offer 10 gig speeds for like $300. Also we have the fastest Comcast speeds in the nation because they’re forced to compete with the muni fiber. Get this - they rolled out 2 and 4 gig offerings in response to the muni gig package. Who knew that market competition actually works?
Same thing happend the last place I lived and it's happening again where I live now. Spectrum's prices magically drop from $120+ to $30 for the exact same package, and suddenly, the speeds start picking up. I've also noticed Spectrum's ads recently are going out of their way to manufacture an excuse to include the word 'fiber' as often as possible. They are calling it 'fiber-backed' internet now. No shit Sherlock, the entire internet is fiber-backed. Why else would we call it a fiber backbone? :P
I have same service in the same city. Their 24/7 support is also excellent, with a local call center not overseas. Call for help and you're speaking with one of your neighbors; if they can't figure out your problem, they just hand the phone to a network engineer.
The muni fiber is owned by the local power company (which is in turn owned by the city), and is a profitable venture. Electric rates have been frozen for several years due to being subsidized by internet sales.
The free market is amazing when it actually works. Sometimes it works naturally, sometimes the solution is to jab the corporates in the ass with a spike of taxpayer-owned competition. Somehow, despite some people crying about socialism or whatever, the overall effect is a freer market. Amazing.
Yes! You always get someone with a southern accent on those rare occasions you have to call their support line. I’ve called twice, and I can confirm how easily they connect you with an engineer. Had to get them to disable their NAT service on both occasions since it was causing a double-NAT problem, once before I moved and again at my new place.
$71.13/month CDN for unlimited data. 150mbps down, like 10 up I think? I only have internet, no tv or phone or anything else.
Forgot to answer the second part: my ISP (teksavvy) is fine. It was better before it had such major growth, and their customer service has suffered over the past few years, but for the most part I have no trouble. There's no throttling, no data caps on my internet, and the service is fast and reliable. It can just be annoying to get hold of someone if the net goes out, but that happens very rarely.
$60/month for 200/20Mbit cable with Charter. Amazingly, I don't have any complaints.
I have Charters 200/10 Package. I pay $49. I couldnt get the Deal you got so I will have to wait a year and upgrade to the 400/20 package. Of Course that will change if they get their heads out of their asses and offer a respectable Gig Connection.
I really dont have anything bad to say about them either. But I run My own equipment throughout my house aside from their Modem. Everything else is Ubiquiti so I get to see everything happening and where it falls Short.
There is no Data caps and I run my network through VPN so nothing of "notable cause" is going to the ISP.
Yeah, it bugs me a bit that the 400Mbit plan is as fast as I can get, considering my town has fiber lines going down every street. But I'm just relieved I don't have to have AT&T, my friend less than 3 miles out from me pays $70 for a 3M/512K DSL connection.
171 USD/month for Fiber 1000/1000 (no data cap) and TV from ATT. Have certainly reached advertised speeds, but I'm using their modem as a pass through only (using Ubiquiti gear behind the ATT modem). Haven't really had any issues at all (in the last two years) in terms of reliability and consistency.
They did, at a point when I first signed up years ago, have substantial issues that appeared to be with their peering relationship to some CDNs. Netflix or Youtube would struggle massively (but via another telco at the same time would work perfectly), but I could still pull substantial data rates from other data sources. I haven't experienced this issue for some time now though.
Fios 75/75. Not that it matters because my router intermittently stops working for no reason and I've been requesting a replacement router six months. smh
Spectrum, Central Ohio. Been a customer through Time Warner since 1995 when I was the 8th RoadRunner customer here.
Heck, I don't know what my Internet fee is. Total bill is $149.
100/30 Internet (no cap, no throttle). I've pulled down a TB in a month twice.
HD Gold package (no hbo, etc.).
2 HD-DVRs (not whole home)
VoIP phone, all the features. Spectrum provided modem that is only for phone so it's free.
I have my own cable modem and router/wifi, so no fee for those.
I can't complain. FUCK, it's been 23 years since I got RR... I've had TWO issues and those were quickly resolved (<4 hours).
Well, we can't have you not complaining about ISPs, that's just not right. If I told you that cable pricing is >98% pure profit, built on systems that were developed and funded with tens of billions of taxpayer dollars, would that help? ;)
We should have put that money into local municipal fiber projects and treated it as a utility class, similar to water and electricity. Thankfully, that's the tact being taken now by most municipalities, having learned their lesson the hard way the first time.
I get it, people hate cable companies.
But the thing is, cable provides me a service I want. And nothing else offers it. Not any of the streaming services, not Internet channels.
It's called surfing. You can't do that on Netflix, or Hulu or Amazon, or Youtube. And yes, we have all those too.
And I do a LOT of that. I'm just from that generation.
Depending on how savvy you are, there are ways to reduce the amount you spend on additional DVR boxes. I don't have a cable subscription but run my OTA signal through what's called an HDHomeRun Extend box. That box then serves the content through the Plex app on my Apple TV, Roku, web app, iOS app (even from outside my home network), etc. etc. with a guide and ability to watch live or DVR (saving files to my NAS). The DVR feature even has an automated commercial recognition and removal function. It's insane. So I don't need multiple OTA antennas because I can access the signal from one anywhere I have the Plex app. Same goes for a cable tuner.
My parents are wanting to reel in their cable bill, so I'm thinking about doing this setup for them but using the HDHomeRun Prime, which is specifically for running a cable signal instead of OTA.
$60/mo with Comcast at 130/6.
The service is generally pretty good, but I haven't had to deal with customer service in a while.
I pay $46 Canadian per month (plus tax) for 20Mbps down and 10Mbps up with a 400GB cap. My ISP, Teksavvy, has only recently started offering speeds above 60Mbps in my area even though I live in a major city.
My ISP has been pretty good to me, and even lowered their prices for current subscribers at one point. They're a reseller, and I'd be paying a lot more if I got service direct from the companies that own the cable/phone lines. The only thing that really sucks is that if there's ever a problem with the cable lines, they can't help me and have to send a request to the company that owns them. I had a cable wire snap in my apartment (luckily it turned out not to be live), and it took me weeks to get any kind of follow up for it. Their hold times for technical support are also NEVER under an hour.
For mobile, I get 1.2GB of data a month plus phone and texting for $32 with Koodo. Mobile data prices are a joke here, so I don't use it much, and my plan is about as cheap as it gets.
$120/mo (CAD) after tax for 150Mbps down, 150Mbps up, and an unlimited cap. Expensive, but the upload is very nice.
By U.S. standards, that speed for that price is not expensive.
Sony is my internet provider (technically their ISP branch, SoNet). I pay ~¥3700/mo ($35USD) for 2Gbps fiber. I haven't noticed any substantial speed drops that actually impact me, though sometimes I do only get about (wired) 600Mbps during peak hours. I just did a test over wifi and I got 400/450Mbps down/up. The "catch" is there's no router on the market with greater than gigabit ethernet ports, so I can only max out a single connection at 1Gbps. But there's no data cap or throttling, so I'm really just whining.
Overall, I have no real complaints now that I'm connected. The connection is stable, and when I'm hardwired to the network, I get full gigabit speeds. When I first signed up, it took almost a month for them to get my apartment wired (two visits, first to run fiber through my home and then to connect me to the main line) so I had no internet for almost four weeks.
For mobile, I use Docomo, I pay something like ¥7000/mo ($67) for 20GB with rollover and unlimited talk. Texting costs money but everyone in Japan uses Line anyway. I also can't really complain about them! I have good, reliable coverage even in rural areas, and my speeds are fast (120Mbps right now).
The only annoying thing, to me, is that for both Sony and Docomo, my contract is two years with early cancellation fees. That's pretty standard in Japan, but it still feels so dated. I don't know why I'd switch to any other options right now anyway, though!
Gawds. I can't complain very loudly because I'm fortunate to have internet at all, full stop. The horror stories I read from everywhere are just unacceptable and I am also fortunate that we have a choice in using a small ISP, there are 3 providers, the other two are Comcast and Verizon.
I live in the NNE USA in a rural area, its rugged and mountainous. Some areas here still have zero..nada as in NO internet. We are lucky enough to have a small ISP that provides DSL and we are on that last mile. Its enough for us to stream content for entertainment and our computer requirements for now. The push for 4K/UHD content has us nervous because if that becomes the standard, we're screwed as the bandwidth required probably won't be available here for a very, very long time. If we were heavy online gamers, we'd be screwed, but we aren't. Our telephone and ISP are bundled and the cost is about $120/mo USD and so far, no caps.
We don't have cell service available at our location and OTA antenna is blocked by terrain.
10€ / month for DSL. Eagerly waiting for fiber, but other than that I can't complain. France's telco situation is pretty good.
We pay 50 EUR/month for fiber-to-the-home in both our apartment and vacation home (Sweden).
I’ve never bothered to speed test the connection, it’s Fast Enough(tm).
£25 (33 USD) a month for 100mbps, TV and a phone line that we'll never plug a phone into from Virgin Media. I wouldn't say that my ISP is perfect but for the price it's amazing.
It's so shocking how much many Americans are paying for roughly the same thing.
I pay NZ$69/month* for 100mbps down and 20mbps up. No data cap.
I could go up to NZ$129/month for ~900mbps down ~500mbps up. I used to be on this plan and it wasn't really necessary. I'd prefer symmetric 200mbps or 200/100.
*includes a $10/month discount.
Orange in Poland, 2 year contract. It’s around $12/month for first year, $22/month for second year. It’s 10/1 DSL. But I really only get around 5/.5 due to length of copper to the exchange. I live way out in the country, so DSL is the only option.
When I lived in Lincoln Nebraska I had an apartment that had their own private internet access provider. As in the people who owned the apartments owned their own ISP. Even though there were other options in the Lincoln, NE area for internet we were locked to what they offered. I think I paid $60 for 25mbps that had a 1TB data cap a month. The data speed was consistent and even with P2P I only hit about 2/3rds the limit but it still always frustrated me that I had any data cap at all and that that ISP was my only option.
I get 35/4 no cap plus 1000 min. free phone for ~$16. Turkey.
I spent several years at my current address squashed under the oppressive thumb of Comcast. AT&T finally rolled into town with Gigabit. Its not much...but at least I was finally able to say FUCK COMCAST right to their dirty fuck-ass faces.