> X-No-Archive: Yes
> Hello everyone,
> I am currently with Qwest/MSN residential DSL plan. I have been with
> them since the USWest days so my line is still on CAP mode. They made a
> change at one point and any new customers subscribing after this point
> was given DMT service. Unfortunately, I was given the Intel Pro DSL
> modem 2100, well known for random data transfer loss and computer freeze
> up following an attempt to disconnect from the internet. I will be
> moving and I'm planning on transfering the service to a new address.
> Would Qwest setup a DMT DSL line at my new address or are they going to
> give me a CAP line so they can make me continue using my garbage Intel
> Pro DSL modem 2100? I need to know this, because if I'll be given a new
> modem on DMT line, I'll just transfer the service, but if Qwest will make
> me use Pro DSL 2100 on newly made CAP line I will cancel the service and
> resubsribe for their serivce so I can get their new Aresco modem and DMT
service. You will most likely get either the Cisco 678, or the new
Arescom model. Thus, it shouldn't matter whether you transfer or
cancel / order new.
The specific question answered, I have a couple suggestions/comments.
1) Why are you sticking with MSN? Why not get a decent ISP. There are a
number of third party ISPs that partner with Qwest. Personally, I
wouldn't touch MSN (or AOL) with a 10,000 meter DSL connection, let alone
a 10 foot pole!
2) Having gone through the move process and tried to get US/Qwest hooked
up at the new location myself, I can DEFINITELY say it isn't always a
smooth process. I had USWest.net at the old location (you may remember me
from the old uswest.dsl newsgroup, as I was active in it), and the new
location was on the same CO, and not to far distant, so I expected it
would qualify for DSL as well.
It did, but... After the voice line folks screwed me around for weeks (at
one point the installer claimed the address was a vacant lot!!!, a
reschedule took an entire week, as it did each time for several OTHER
equally lame excuses), I called the day it was finally installed to get
the DSL ball rolling. (They had said I couldn't order it until my new
voice line was in place, because they couldn't test until then.) Well,
they couldn't test it yet, because the transfer wasn't in the computer
yet. After MORE delays and about 10 MORE days, getting their computer
straightened out (hey, at least I had dialup access now), they FINALLY
could run the test, and I qualified. So I placed the order, with all due
haste. MORE delays and several excuses later, they told me that the CO
was full. It had a waiting list, and my former slot had been given to
someone else!!! It would be another THREE MONTHS!!! before the CO was
upgraded with more capacity -- ON TOP OF THE SIX WEEKS OR SO I HAD ALREADY
Now, when I origially scheduled the move, I didn't need to even tell them
I had DSL. They saw it on the account, and asked ME if I wanted it
transfered (of course I said yes). My question is this. (1) They continually
called me a "premiere customer" in their mailings wanting me to buy MORE
stuff from them. (2) They could see that I had DSL and offer to move it.
Why couldn't they (3) tell me, their "premiere customer", that there was a
waiting list, at the BEGINNING of the process, and that I would likely
have to wait 3-6 months for reconnection?
Obviously, by this time, I was fed up. I ordered from Speakeasy
(partnered with Covad), and had DSL up and running 15 days after the
order, still over two months sooner than the order from US/Qwest could
have been installed. That itself was an interesting story, because
the Covad install required a dedicated line. It took Qwest (as usual 1
week to schedule THAT install. Covad was scheduled a week later.
However, in the intervening week, some non-DSL clued US/Qwest tech took my
CLEARLY LABELED (if he had had the training to read it) Covad line, and
used it for someone else's voice line. In some areas the local bells are
known to do this purposefully to the competition. I do not believe that
was the case here, because of how it was resolved. I am convinced it was
a legitimate error.
The Covad install was scheduled for Thursday afternoon. When the Covad
tech got here and found the line was gone, she immediately called it in.
Normal procedure would have been to pack up and go home, but I must have
looked desparate by this time, and she took pity on me and did the
re-jacking inside that was required, and left me the modem. That was
fortunate, as it otherwise would have been another week, possibly two.
I was expecting at least one anyway, due to the fact that it had taken
US/Qwest a week to correct the problem each time, several times before.
However, I was VERY pleasantly suprised when FIRST thing the next morning,
not ONE, but **TWO** Qwest techs were out here, fixing the problem. Thus,
for THIS error, they got TWICE the resources working on it in 1/7th the
time it would have taken them to fix their OWN account's errors.
Considering the call had been put in about 4PM the previous day, and they
were out correcting the problem FIRST thing Friday AM, it was even more
impressive than that. It was the first scheduled task after the repair
order was called in. I can't believe Qwest would have deliberately caused
themselves so much work, and been so prompt at fixing it, so I am sure
this was a legitimate mistake.
Anyway, since I had been able to convince the Covad tech to leave the
modem, and do the inside rejacking, at her Thursday appointment, I was up
and running in time for the weekend, 15 days after original order.
Hopefully, your experience is much better than this. However, know that
things CAN go wrong, and be prepared to take action, if necessary, when
they do. As it turned out, I am glad I switched, because less than a year
after that, USwest.net, by then Qwest.net, began switching its customers
to MSN, and I would have left anyway. Speakeasy was at that time better
than USWest.net had been anway, and for some time, I could with no caveats
recommend SE. Unfortunately, they aren't the #1 rated DSL provider in the
country, any more, as they were then, they have slipped, and I am now
looking at switching to Cox, which here in Phoenix has had a pretty good
reputation (deployment was about 1/2 a mile south of me when I got SE, or
I might have considered cable then). SE is still solid for connectivity,
and supports servers and alternate OSs (like the Linux I run now, having
just switched from W98 last year, I wasn't going to upgrade to XP due to
the spyware/hassleware they packaged with it, so switched to Linux
instead), but broadband usenet is one of the reasons I got broadband in
the first place, and SE only provides two capped 128kbps streams per IP to
Supernews, their outsourced news provider. (MSN is worse, I gather, but
you may already know that or not care about binaries and high speed usenet
access.) I can save about $20 a month with Cox, if I switch my phone as
well, and put that to a third party news server, if necessary.
Duncan - If posted to usenet, usenet replies get priority.
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little
temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." --