Post your speed and how much you pay monthly

[TriRan]

I have COX "Ultimate" 150Mbps down/20Mbps up ($109/month). Honestly, I am confused. While I expected this test to be the most accurate because it is not flash (and I assume not Java either) this is the slowest I ever got. I Can hardly hit 20Mbps when testing here but when using other tests (sites), I get 100Mbps + ... someone enlighten me.

this test can detect quite a few issues you won't see on flash or java based tests... this site can detect issues with incorrect settings MTU, RWIN, or browser settings... aswell as HDD issues. can also detect issues with ethernet cables, modems, routers and even issues that might be from your drop or even local node aswell as routing issues

it doesn't look like your having routing issues unless they are very centralized to your location

[CA3LE]

I have COX "Ultimate" 150Mbps down/20Mbps up ($109/month). Honestly, I am confused. While I expected this test to be the most accurate because it is not flash (and I assume not Java either) this is the slowest I ever got. I Can hardly hit 20Mbps when testing here but when using other tests (sites), I get 100Mbps + ... someone enlighten me.

 

What browser are you using?  Cox just upgraded my Ultimate to 150/20 too (It's only $99.99 here, it was 94.99 before the upgrade)... I'm still only getting 50 Mbps.  But I know my connection is on fire fast right now.  I download from Giganews I get 11.5 MB/s which is 92 Mbps.  ... to achieve that however I have to open 50 connections.  TestMy.net is not a multithreaded speed test.  And trust me... you don't need it to be.  I've regularly seen over 200 Mbps from thousands of miles out from the server.  When you test elsewhere they multithread the test, they also often test you automatically on a server that's too close to you to be a true test of your speed OUT to the Internet.  Your Internet isn't being served from within your city or state... why should you test it there? (my opinion but many agree).  It ends up making connections look better than they might actually be.  I've made this test to try to keep ISPs honest and consumers informed.

 

... I'm on the same package as you man.  I'm not seeing 150 Mbps either, anywhere... TestMy.net's results are just more pronounced than other tests out there........ that's because it's showing you that you AREN'T getting what they advertise.  Blatantly.  I'm seeing about half of the advertised upload.  Confirmed by uploading to various sites including YouTube... actually often got worse results than my upload speed tests here.  Don't get me wrong, the connection is fast... but it ain't no 150/20.  Cox is definitely the best game in town so I'm not going to complain about it either.  The competition in Phoenix in CenturyLink... who HAS to still be digging their asses out of the rats nest of twisted pair that US West left behind from before Qwest came in and tried to clean it up.  I opened one of their pedestals by mistake (when I was a cable tech)... I took one look at it and thought to myself, "F*$& THAT JOB!" ... seriously it looked like tens of thousands of twisted pair with no rhyme or reason, you definitely needed a toner to do that job.  And they're still running Internet through that crap, no wonder they can't get over 40Mbps still and half the people that want that are told, "Sorry, not in your area... we have 12 Mbps in your area."  BAH HA HA, it's 2013 and the competition has 150/20Mbps   ....... wait ... or do they.    -- even if Cox was only 40 Mbps it would STILL be better than DSL.  Unless it's fiber to the house DSL the latency on coax is far superior.  Way more stable connection in my experience.  DSL pissed me off, felt jittery in comparison.  Not nearly as smooth.  Plus D5L6UY doesn't have the same ring to it as CA3LE6UY.    

 

Every other package I've upgraded to in the past has performed over what they state.  This time it didn't even feel like an upgrade (was 50/5 before), except when I multithread on Usenet or torrents.  I'm convinced that I'll never see that speed on a single file download... ever.  But other speed tests out there make it seem like it would get close... it won't.  And trust me it's not for lack of bandwidth on TestMy.net's end, the home server is a monster with 2000 Mbps of connectivity in what many consider to be Softlayer's most well connected datacenter... It's also not for lack of the test technology being able to do it, like I said before there are tons of people including myself who've seen well over 200 Mbps.  What is it then?  I think it's our host limiting us, shaping the way our bandwidth can be used.  It's called traffic shaping or packet shaping ... they're doing a form of bandwidth throttling.  This is the first time I've seen it first hand on my own connection and I haven't fully confirmed this with anyone from Cox, but I will.  I haven't worked for them for like 9 years but I still have good friends there that can give me the inside scoop on this if they know anything.  If I find anything I'll write something about and pin it (means it will stay at the top of the forum) in General Discussion.

 

Cheers!     -- thank you for your patronage, I hope you like what I've built.  

[Sir Jaxxy]

No, they don't advertize them per se but, they do exist. Although I'm not sure how strict they are on enforcing them.

 

 

Well I don't know about there in Arizona. However, here in Las Vegas they are very strict. I broke my cap on the Premier plan (250GB) 2 months in a row and they blocked my account  until  I upgraded to the Ultimate plan! Now I am almost hitting that cap and they have told me if I go over it I will have to purchase 2 plans.

[Sir Jaxxy]

What browser are you using?  Cox just upgraded my Ultimate to 150/20 too (It's only $99.99 here, it was 94.99 before the upgrade)... I'm still only getting 50 Mbps.  But I know my connection is on fire fast right now.  I download from Giganews I get 11.5 MB/s which is 92 Mbps.  ... to achieve that however I have to open 50 connections.  TestMy.net is not a multithreaded speed test.  And trust me... you don't need it to be.  I've regularly seen over 200 Mbps from thousands of miles out from the server.  When you test elsewhere they multithread the test, they also often test you automatically on a server that's too close to you to be a true test of your speed OUT to the Internet.  Your Internet isn't being served from within your city or state... why should you test it there? (my opinion but many agree).  It ends up making connections look better than they might actually be.  I've made this test to try to keep ISPs honest and consumers informed.

 

... I'm on the same package as you man.  I'm not seeing 150 Mbps either, anywhere... TestMy.net's results are just more pronounced than other tests out there........ that's because it's showing you that you AREN'T getting what they advertise.  Blatantly.  I'm seeing about half of the advertised upload.  Confirmed by uploading to various sites including YouTube... actually often got worse results than my upload speed tests here.  Don't get me wrong, the connection is fast... but it ain't no 150/20.  Cox is definitely the best game in town so I'm not going to complain about it either.  The competition in Phoenix in CenturyLink... who HAS to still be digging their asses out of the rats nest of twisted pair that US West left behind from before Qwest came in and tried to clean it up.  I opened one of their pedestals by mistake (when I was a cable tech)... I took one look at it and thought to myself, "F*$& THAT JOB!" ... seriously it looked like tens of thousands of twisted pair with no rhyme or reason, you definitely needed a toner to do that job.  And they're still running Internet through that crap, no wonder they can't get over 40Mbps still and half the people that want that are told, "Sorry, not in your area... we have 12 Mbps in your area."  BAH HA HA, it's 2013 and the competition has 150/20Mbps   ....... wait ... or do they.    -- even if Cox was only 40 Mbps it would STILL be better than DSL.  Unless it's fiber to the house DSL the latency on coax is far superior.  Way more stable connection in my experience.  DSL pissed me off, felt jittery in comparison.  Not nearly as smooth.  Plus D5L6UY doesn't have the same ring to it as CA3LE6UY.    

 

Every other package I've upgraded to in the past has performed over what they state.  This time it didn't even feel like an upgrade (was 50/5 before), except when I multithread on Usenet or torrents.  I'm convinced that I'll never see that speed on a single file download... ever.  But other speed tests out there make it seem like it would get close... it won't.  And trust me it's not for lack of bandwidth on TestMy.net's end, the home server is a monster with 2000 Mbps of connectivity in what many consider to be Softlayer's most well connected datacenter... It's also not for lack of the test technology being able to do it, like I said before there are tons of people including myself who've seen well over 200 Mbps.  What is it then?  I think it's our host limiting us, shaping the way our bandwidth can be used.  It's called traffic shaping or packet shaping ... they're doing a form of bandwidth throttling.  This is the first time I've seen it first hand on my own connection and I haven't fully confirmed this with anyone from Cox, but I will.  I haven't worked for them for like 9 years but I still have good friends there that can give me the inside scoop on this if they know anything.  If I find anything I'll write something about and pin it (means it will stay at the top of the forum) in General Discussion.

 

Cheers!     -- thank you for your patronage, I hope you like what I've built.  

 

I Could not agree more. I am in Las Vegas and was forced into upgrading to Ultimate (150/20). I say forced because I had their Premier package (50/10) and was rather happy with my speed (even though my upload was on average only 4-5). However, we used like 300GB 2 months in a row and they shut down my account until I agreed to upgrade to the Ultimate plane with a 400GB cap. 

 

My download speeds on here so far are only in the high 20's to low 30's. But my upload speeds I am not to sure on. They seem to be browser dependent and vary greatly. If I actually used  a browser to upload I would know to use Waterfox or Pale Moon. But seeing that I upload via FTP (FileZilla) and through live streaming I have no clue what my upload is. Here is the huge  variance  I get:

 

 

33MB File Upload 2-13-2013

    Maxthon 6:05 Am = 1.2 Mbps 148 kB/s

    Waterfox 6:09 Am = 14.7 Mbps 1.8 MB/s

    Firefox 6:20 Am = 15 Mbps 1.9 MB/s

    Pale Moon 6:22 Am = 14.1 Mbps 1.8 MB/s

    Chrome 6:23 Am = 4.7 Mbps 586 kB/s

    IE 9 6:24 Am = 9.5 Mbps 1.2 MB/s

    Chrome 6:26 Am = 4.4 Mbps 556 kB/s

    Pale Moon 6:27 Am = 14.1 Mbps 1.8 MB/s

[CA3LE]

I have no clue what my upload is. Here is the huge  variance  I get:

 

 

33MB File Upload 2-13-2013

    Maxthon 6:05 Am = 1.2 Mbps 148 kB/s

    Waterfox 6:09 Am = 14.7 Mbps 1.8 MB/s

    Firefox 6:20 Am = 15 Mbps 1.9 MB/s

    Pale Moon 6:22 Am = 14.1 Mbps 1.8 MB/s

    Chrome 6:23 Am = 4.7 Mbps 586 kB/s

    IE 9 6:24 Am = 9.5 Mbps 1.2 MB/s

    Chrome 6:26 Am = 4.4 Mbps 556 kB/s

    Pale Moon 6:27 Am = 14.1 Mbps 1.8 MB/s

 

Well... your upload is all of those numbers    -- you're seeing how the browser choice effects upload speed to websites.  I recommend that you test with the browser that provides the fastest result.  The fastest result is going to be closest to your actual speed... the slower speeds are being caused by browser inefficiency.  As you've just displayed this isn't only a Internet speed test... it's also a great way to benchmark performance between browsers.       --- other speed tests out there don't work this way because the plugins that they use bypass much of the browser... imagine that a flash or java speed test is actually a program within a program.  Truly, you're running the test through Flash or java protocol, not really the browser.  The browser in that instance is merely a frame holding the third party program... that in turn can cause the test to miss MANY common issues that slow down your browsing experience.

 

What I show you is the speed at which things load in your browser.  I could have made it a thousand different ways but my thought was that the average Internet user is spending their time in the browser.  Also, testing outside of the browser requires either a program running outside of the browser, Flash or Java.  Flash... is faulty,  Java inconveniences people who don't have it and so does downloading and installing programs..... so I built mine with PHP and HTML5 so that people could just load the site and do what they came to do without frustration.  I aim for 100% compatibility with a single program. Others do it differently... all I know is that time and time again TestMy.net passively detects physical issues that others fail to pick up on.  Some of the things I've seen and heard it do have amazed and baffled me... and I wrote the program!  I don't get how it does it sometimes but it does.  The forums here are littered with accounts.  I also know this, if everything is in order and running correctly... you'll max your connection out here.  TestMy.net is just a much harder test to ace but isn't that what a benchmark should be?  

[Sir Jaxxy]

Well... your upload is all of those numbers    -- you're seeing how the browser choice effects upload speed to websites.  I recommend that you test with the browser that provides the fastest result.  The fastest result is going to be closest to your actual speed... the slower speeds are being caused by browser inefficiency.  As you've just displayed this isn't only a Internet speed test... it's also a great way to benchmark performance between browsers.       --- other speed tests out there don't work this way because the plugins that they use bypass much of the browser... imagine that a flash or java speed test is actually a program within a program.  Truly, you're running the test through Flash or java protocol, not really the browser.  The browser in that instance is merely a frame holding the third party program... that in turn can cause the test to miss MANY common issues that slow down your browsing experience.

 

What I show you is the speed at which things load in your browser.  I could have made it a thousand different ways but my thought was that the average Internet user is spending their time in the browser.  Also, testing outside of the browser requires either a program running outside of the browser, Flash or Java.  Flash... is faulty,  Java inconveniences people who don't have it and so does downloading and installing programs..... so I built mine with PHP and HTML5 so that people could just load the site and do what they came to do without frustration.  I aim for 100% compatibility with a single program. Others do it differently... all I know is that time and time again TestMy.net passively detects physical issues that others fail to pick up on.  Some of the things I've seen and heard it do have amazed and baffled me... and I wrote the program!  I don't get how it does it sometimes but it does.  The forums here are littered with accounts.  I also know this, if everything is in order and running correctly... you'll max your connection out here.  TestMy.net is just a much harder test to ace but isn't that what a benchmark should be?  

 

Thanks, that all makes sense. I kinda figured that was what was going on. I just find it  interesting  that Maxthon has the fastest download speed and the slowest upload speed. Seems like a waste to optimize a browser for download and then not let it communicate back (upload). And it is not a small difference we are talking. Maxthon is  consistently  10 to 15  times  slower then the max speed ;( Looks like I will be making Waterfox or Pale Moon my default browser.

[lawme]

this test can detect quite a few issues you won't see on flash or java based tests... this site can detect issues with incorrect settings MTU, RWIN, or browser settings... aswell as HDD issues. can also detect issues with ethernet cables, modems, routers and even issues that might be from your drop or even local node aswell as routing issues

it doesn't look like your having routing issues unless they are very centralized to your location

 

What browser are you using?  Cox just upgraded my Ultimate to 150/20 too (It's only $99.99 here, it was 94.99 before the upgrade)... I'm still only getting 50 Mbps.  But I know my connection is on fire fast right now.  I download from Giganews I get 11.5 MB/s which is 92 Mbps.  ... to achieve that however I have to open 50 connections.  TestMy.net is not a multithreaded speed test.  And trust me... you don't need it to be.  I've regularly seen over 200 Mbps from thousands of miles out from the server.  When you test elsewhere they multithread the test, they also often test you automatically on a server that's too close to you to be a true test of your speed OUT to the Internet.  Your Internet isn't being served from within your city or state... why should you test it there? (my opinion but many agree).  It ends up making connections look better than they might actually be.  I've made this test to try to keep ISPs honest and consumers informed.

 

... I'm on the same package as you man.  I'm not seeing 150 Mbps either, anywhere... TestMy.net's results are just more pronounced than other tests out there........ that's because it's showing you that you AREN'T getting what they advertise.  Blatantly.  I'm seeing about half of the advertised upload.  Confirmed by uploading to various sites including YouTube... actually often got worse results than my upload speed tests here.  Don't get me wrong, the connection is fast... but it ain't no 150/20.  Cox is definitely the best game in town so I'm not going to complain about it either.  The competition in Phoenix in CenturyLink... who HAS to still be digging their asses out of the rats nest of twisted pair that US West left behind from before Qwest came in and tried to clean it up.  I opened one of their pedestals by mistake (when I was a cable tech)... I took one look at it and thought to myself, "F*$& THAT JOB!" ... seriously it looked like tens of thousands of twisted pair with no rhyme or reason, you definitely needed a toner to do that job.  And they're still running Internet through that crap, no wonder they can't get over 40Mbps still and half the people that want that are told, "Sorry, not in your area... we have 12 Mbps in your area."  BAH HA HA, it's 2013 and the competition has 150/20Mbps   ....... wait ... or do they.    -- even if Cox was only 40 Mbps it would STILL be better than DSL.  Unless it's fiber to the house DSL the latency on coax is far superior.  Way more stable connection in my experience.  DSL pissed me off, felt jittery in comparison.  Not nearly as smooth.  Plus D5L6UY doesn't have the same ring to it as CA3LE6UY.    

 

Every other package I've upgraded to in the past has performed over what they state.  This time it didn't even feel like an upgrade (was 50/5 before), except when I multithread on Usenet or torrents.  I'm convinced that I'll never see that speed on a single file download... ever.  But other speed tests out there make it seem like it would get close... it won't.  And trust me it's not for lack of bandwidth on TestMy.net's end, the home server is a monster with 2000 Mbps of connectivity in what many consider to be Softlayer's most well connected datacenter... It's also not for lack of the test technology being able to do it, like I said before there are tons of people including myself who've seen well over 200 Mbps.  What is it then?  I think it's our host limiting us, shaping the way our bandwidth can be used.  It's called traffic shaping or packet shaping ... they're doing a form of bandwidth throttling.  This is the first time I've seen it first hand on my own connection and I haven't fully confirmed this with anyone from Cox, but I will.  I haven't worked for them for like 9 years but I still have good friends there that can give me the inside scoop on this if they know anything.  If I find anything I'll write something about and pin it (means it will stay at the top of the forum) in General Discussion.

 

Cheers!     -- thank you for your patronage, I hope you like what I've built.  

That's what I call "a comprehensive response" ... lol. I guess to summarize it, I can only say "it is what it is." Don't get me wrong, I cannot complaint because no one can beat Cox with what they offer. I agree that I probably never see 150Mbps and I can live with what I get now. After all, no one forced me into it, it was my decison and hitting close to 100Mbps can't be construed as "slow." Cox tech is coming on Friday to work on it and (allegedly) they tested my line at 140Mbps. So, I guess we'll see but I am not holding my breath on this, i don't think they are going to "fix it."

[lawme]

I Could not agree more. I am in Las Vegas and was forced into upgrading to Ultimate (150/20). I say forced because I had their Premier package (50/10) and was rather happy with my speed (even though my upload was on average only 4-5). However, we used like 300GB 2 months in a row and they shut down my account until I agreed to upgrade to the Ultimate plane with a 400GB cap. 

 

My download speeds on here so far are only in the high 20's to low 30's. But my upload speeds I am not to sure on. They seem to be browser dependent and vary greatly. If I actually used  a browser to upload I would know to use Waterfox or Pale Moon. But seeing that I upload via FTP (FileZilla) and through live streaming I have no clue what my upload is. Here is the huge  variance  I get:

 

 

33MB File Upload 2-13-2013

    Maxthon 6:05 Am = 1.2 Mbps 148 kB/s

    Waterfox 6:09 Am = 14.7 Mbps 1.8 MB/s

    Firefox 6:20 Am = 15 Mbps 1.9 MB/s

    Pale Moon 6:22 Am = 14.1 Mbps 1.8 MB/s

    Chrome 6:23 Am = 4.7 Mbps 586 kB/s

    IE 9 6:24 Am = 9.5 Mbps 1.2 MB/s

    Chrome 6:26 Am = 4.4 Mbps 556 kB/s

    Pale Moon 6:27 Am = 14.1 Mbps 1.8 MB/s

That's interesting because I did not even know they have these caps. What bothers me is that when you subscribe to their "ultimate" or what have you, no one bothers to mention there is a cap. I think they need to face a class action suit for not disclosing terms of a agreement, which they are required to do so. It's like At&t's cap on data ... while it sucks, they at least tell you theyare going to limit your data. Cox does not and I think they going to have a problem with it eventualy. Cox relies on ignorance of customer, nothing s going to change until they are ordered to make the change ... by the court. Seriously, I think peole should get together and smack a suit on Cox for this.

[Sir Jaxxy]

That's interesting because I did not even know they have these caps. What bothers me is that when you subscribe to their "ultimate" or what have you, no one bothers to mention there is a cap. I think they need to face a class action suit for not disclosing terms of a agreement, which they are required to do so. It's like At&t's cap on data ... while it sucks, they at least tell you theyare going to limit your data. Cox does not and I think they going to have a problem with it eventualy. Cox relies on ignorance of customer, nothing s going to change until they are ordered to make the change ... by the court. Seriously, I think peole should get together and smack a suit on Cox for this.

 

Not only do they not mention in, they do not even have any information on it any where online if you are not a Cox customer to see prior to buying. This is a transcript of an online chat I had with one of their sales reps about this on February 13, 2013 (yesterday morning):

 

info: Thank you for choosing Cox Communications. A representative will be with you shortly.

info: You are now chatting with Christina.

You: I am just wondering if you have a usage cap for the Premier and Ultimate

Christina: Hello! Welcome to the Sales Department!  How may I assist you with placing the order online today? 

Christina: Yes we do

Christina: The premier has 250Gb and the ultimate has 400Gb

You: were can I find the information on that and why is it not listed openly any where

Christina: I'm sorry that info is not online.

You: why not

You: why are you hiding it from the consumer

Christina: I'm sorry that info is not available inline.

You: OK I get that. But why not?

You: You can not sell a product without full disclosure of all the terms. If I purchase one of your services how do I find out all the Terms of Service prior to entering into the contract/agreement

Christina: I'm sorry I don't have taht information I didn't make the website.

Christina: I don't have access to that information.

Christina: I understand,

You: Yes but how do I get access to the information

Christina: I'm providing the informaiton.

You: but that is not giving me access to the ToS prior to purchase as requiered by law

Christina: I understand.

Christina: In that case you can call the customer service or go to the store they can provide you all the information.

You: but you are selling online correct

Christina: Yes we area.

You: what is your position with Cox Communication?

Christina: I can not provide that information.

Christina: Would you like to place the order for the internet service?

You: you can't tell me your title

Christina: If you need more information about our services please call the customer service or go to one of our stores.

You: I would like to speake to your supervisor please

Christina: I'm sorry we don't make transfers online.

You: I am disabled and homebound there that is why I do business online

 

I would be really interested in finding out how they can hold someone to  certain  terms when they refuse to disclose those terms prior to entering into an agreement with them.

[CA3LE]

Not only do they not mention in, they do not even have any information on it any where online if you are not a Cox customer to see prior to buying. This is a transcript of an online chat I had with one of their sales reps about this on February 13, 2013 (yesterday morning):

I would be really interested in finding out how they can hold someone to certain terms when they refuse to disclose those terms prior to entering into an agreement with them.

Seriously, they said that?! Wow.

With Cox you're not under contract. So they can deny you service for any reason they want to.

I can't believe that customer service. When I worked for them they wouldn't stand for that. Did you email yourself the transcript from their site? You should email that to Cox. I bet that they will happily provide that information. You just talked to a temp... I say temp because people that treat customers that way don't last long there. "I didn't make the website..." How effen rude. Also, when I was with Cox they had caps... but they rarely enforced them. It was more in place to give them a reason to ban people that are abusing connections. They can tell if your traffic for instance is heavily torrents. If you're seeding a bunch of movies... Yeah, they're going to see that you hit that cap and investigate. Case by case. I have months where I pull 1-2 TB on my Cox Ultimate. But it's legitimate traffic. I've never hear a thing from them. ... Here's a tip, if you do download torrents, don't seed. Turn the upload settings down to one thread and 1 kB/s, some clients 0 will mean unlimited. They go after the upload abusers... not the people who are legitimately using their connection.

Someone in Vegas was just talking about that system being more strict. Telling him that he'd have to get more than one connection if be keeps it up. I've never had an issue and my connection is constantly over that 'cap'. That's maybe why they don't mention it anywhere... it's not really a rule. ... I don't know for sure if it still holds true today, it's been 13 years since I was told this information. But when I asked my boss at Cox he told me this stuff. It's not a rule it's just a red flag, basically. They will at least give you a warning if it does become an issue. They WON'T shut you off automatically or anything. I promise you that. As long as you're not abusing your connection.

[TriRan]

Seriously, they said that?! Wow.

With Cox you're not under contract. So they can deny you service for any reason they want to.

I can't believe that customer service. When I worked for them they wouldn't stand for that. Did you email yourself the transcript from their site? You should email that to Cox. I bet that they will happily provide that information. You just talked to a temp... I say temp because people that treat customers that way don't last long there. "I didn't make the website..." How effen rude. Also, when I was with Cox they had caps... but they rarely enforced them. It was more in place to give them a reason to ban people that are abusing connections. They can tell if your traffic for instance is heavily torrents. If you're seeding a bunch of movies... Yeah, they're going to see that you hit that cap and investigate. Case by case. I have months where I pull 1-2 TB on my Cox Ultimate. But it's legitimate traffic. I've never hear a thing from them. ... Here's a tip, if you do download torrents, don't seed. Turn the upload settings down to one thread and 1 kB/s, some clients 0 will mean unlimited. They go after the upload abusers... not the people who are legitimately using their connection.

Someone in Vegas was just talking about that system being more strict. Telling him that he'd have to get more than one connection if be keeps it up. I've never had an issue and my connection is constantly over that 'cap'. That's maybe why they don't mention it anywhere... it's not really a rule. ... I don't know for sure if it still holds true today, it's been 13 years since I was told this information. But when I asked my boss at Cox he told me this stuff. It's not a rule it's just a red flag, basically. They will at least give you a warning if it does become an issue. They WON'T shut you off automatically or anything. I promise you that. As long as you're not abusing your connection.

Same here I'm constantly over the caps and never hear anything a lot of streaming hd videos online on my network regularly use 1TB a month

[Sir Jaxxy]

Well I am the guy in Vegas that they told that to LOL. Maybe I should move to Arizona. Seems that Cox runs things very  differently  there!

 

The above is what I find to be common place with Cox CS reps here. I was only over by like 10GB but was told point blank that because it happened 2 months in a row if I did not update from Premium to Ultimate then they would cancel my service. However, I was also told that if I added TV to my service it would help me to cut down on my internet usage. Now that I have had Ultimate for 3 months I just got another email saying that My account "routinely" hits the cap and that if it continues I need to  conceder  adding a second account to my service address.

 

And No I am not doing torrents (have a seedbox for those LOL). My bandwidth is from movie streaming (Amazon, Netflix, Hulu) and gaming. Seems Cox here in Las Vegas don't like folks who cut the cord and watch TV via the internet.

[CA3LE]

Well I am the guy in Vegas that they told that to LOL. Maybe I should move to Arizona. Seems that Cox runs things very differently there!

The above is what I find to be common place with Cox CS reps here. I was only over by like 10GB but was told point blank that because it happened 2 months in a row if I did not update from Premium to Ultimate then they would cancel my service. However, I was also told that if I added TV to my service it would help me to cut down on my internet usage. Now that I have had Ultimate for 3 months I just got another email saying that My account "routinely" hits the cap and that if it continues I need to conceder adding a second account to my service address.

And No I am not doing torrents (have a seedbox for those LOL). My bandwidth is from movie streaming (Amazon, Netflix, Hulu) and gaming. Seems Cox here in Las Vegas don't like folks who cut the cord and watch TV via the internet.

They may tell that to the people with lower packages to get them to upgrade. What that is in my opinion is a clever salesman who's got access to the list of people going over the cap. Dude, I was in sales with them too. I used to go out on Super Bowl Sunday or NBA Playoffs with a list of valid customers... Find thieves and shut them off in the middle of the game. Half the time I'd just wait at the pedestal ... They were stealing cable, they knew right where to check... Lol. Made a lot of sales that way. My point is that it wouldn't surprise me if that's just a sales tactic.

[Sir Jaxxy]

They may tell that to the people with lower packages to get them to upgrade. What that is in my opinion is a clever salesman who's got access to the list of people going over the cap. Dude, I was in sales with them too. I used to go out on Super Bowl Sunday or NBA Playoffs with a list of valid customers... Find thieves and shut them off in the middle of the game. Half the time I'd just wait at the pedestal ... They were stealing cable, they knew right where to check... Lol. Made a lot of sales that way. My point is that it wouldn't surprise me if that's just a sales tactic.

 

I was in sales for a good many years and have half a mind to agree with you. Though, if that is the case it is rather underhanded. What you did was legal.  Shutting off only a percentage of clients going over the cap unless they upgrade is not. Even if the usage limits are in the ToS selective enforcement is illegal. Guess I will just have to see what happens if and when I go over it as an Ultimate user. I almost feel that by telling me I have to buy a second account they are breaking their own policy. As it clearly says in their online documentation (that  supposedly  don't exist):

Cox does not currently charge you additional fees if you exceed your allowance. If you determine that your Internet data usage will continue to exceed your allowance, we recommend that you consider a Cox High Speed Internet package that more closely matches your use of the service. If you are consistently going over your data usage allowance, you will also benefit from the faster speeds that come with a higher Internet package.

 

Sense there is no higher plan I can choose by making me purchase a second plan they are charging me for strictly data usage as the speeds are fine with me.

[mudmanc4]

Your conversation has got me thinking , what are my caps , at the same time , so long as the fish is swimming , leave it swim lol

 

I am suprised CS could not give you even a link to the TOS , or fulfill your request to make the sale. Strange.

[tnt717]

I have SuddenLink in Lake Havasu City, AZ.  I pay $50. per month for 30/5 speeds.  In the last hour my tests have averaged about 25 mbs down and 1.8 up.  Better than most and certainly better than the average in my town but it isn't cheap and isn't always this high.  In fact, my speeds were down to about 4 mbs for the last few days and I realized my bill was due about 10 days ago. I paid it last night and this is what I have this morning.  I don't suppose SuddenLink would lower my bandwidth just to get me to pay on time ...... or would they?

 

My results are here:

 

 

 

Thanks for the site.

 

[CA3LE]

I have SuddenLink in Lake Havasu City, AZ.  I pay $50. per month for 30/5 speeds.  In the last hour my tests have averaged about 25 mbs down and 1.8 up.  Better than most and certainly better than the average in my town but it isn't cheap and isn't always this high.  In fact, my speeds were down to about 4 mbs for the last few days and I realized my bill was due about 10 days ago. I paid it last night and this is what I have this morning.  I don't suppose SuddenLink would lower my bandwidth just to get me to pay on time ...... or would they?

 

My results are here:

 

 

Thanks for the site.

 

I don't think that they'd slow you down to get you to pay the bill.  It may have been a coincidence.  Maybe I'm wrong though.  But I've never heard of a company doing that.  They'll just shut you off if your bill is too late.

 

Your welcome for the site by the way... I hope to see you back.

[Keefer21]

Heres my stats, Im in Hilton NY. Went from turbo 20Mbps/ 786K and upgraded to 30Mbps/5 when docsis 3.0 came out two years ago i think it was. Been extremly satisfied. thinking about moving up to wideband 50/5.

 

I have a triple play package.. all said and done with taxes and extra calling features i pay 115/Month.

 

 

Download Connection Speed:: 31246 Kbps or 31.2 Mbps
Download Speed Test Size:: 20.1 MB or 20608 kB or 21102592 bytes
Download Binary File Transfer Speed:: 3906 kB/s or 3.9 MB/s
Tested At:: http://TestMy.net Version 13
Validation:: https://testmy.net/db/z9beqjf
TiP Measurement Summary:: Min 12.24 Mbps | Middle Avg 31.32 Mbps | Max 37.74 Mbps | 58% Variance
TiP Data Points:: 29.66 Mbps, 30.46 Mbps, 37.74 Mbps, 31.23 Mbps, 29.36 Mbps, 31.04 Mbps, 33.44 Mbps, 31.04 Mbps, 29.6 Mbps, 30.33 Mbps, 31.71 Mbps, 30.97 Mbps, 31.04 Mbps, 31.04 Mbps, 30.91 Mbps, 30.91 Mbps, 31.1 Mbps, 30.58 Mbps, 12.24 Mbps
More Stats:: https://testmy.net/quickstats/Keefer21 https://testmy.net/compID/68495689747
Test Time:: 2013-03-08 04:13:18 Local Time
Location:: Rochester, NY US >> Destination:: Dallas, TX US
1MB Download in 0.26 Seconds - 1GB Download in ~4 Minutes - 558X faster than 56K
This test of exactly 20608 kB took 5.407 seconds to complete
Running at 209% of hosts average (Road Runner https://testmy.net/hoststats/road_runner)
User Agent:: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:19.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/19.0 [!

[jrw1049]

https://testmy.net/xTfWDsK.4UPx3Rl.png

 

I have a 24/2 bonded package with Windstream, no caps and 60.00 bucks a month.

[TunaLiK]

Comcast $120

[tommie gorman]

Nice speeds TunaLiK. I wish mine was $1 per Mbps down.

[ikyuaokii]

i'm paying 136 dollars a month for two virtual connectivity lines, cox 50Mbits premier.

 

[TriRan]

i'm paying 136 dollars a month for two virtual connectivity lines, cox 50Mbits premier.

You know you can get ultimate for less money and get 150/20

[ikyuaokii]

If i gets the ultimate for less than 136 then i would have a 400GB cap limited set compare to what i have with this 600GB cap set for 2x premier tier lines.

 

I'll stick with the two premier tiers for higher cap limited.

[TriRan]

If i gets the ultimate for less than 136 then i would have a 400GB cap limited set compare to what i have with this 600GB cap set for 2x premier tier lines.

 

I'll stick with the two premier tiers for higher cap limited.

 

when i had ultimate i consistantly went over the 400GB cap and even now i consistantly go over the 300GB cap and have never heard a peep from cox about it