Recommend me a cable modem

I just realized that Comcast, in all their sneaky glory, has upped their charge for renting their cable modem to 7.00 a month. (Yes, take a moment to chuckle at how silly it is that I've been renting a cable modem for the last 3 years, effectively paying ~ 200 dollars on a modem I don't own).

I've been holding out on the hope that someday soon, UVerse would actually become competitive on price, or FIOS would show up in my neighborhood. Neither seem to be happening any time soon. So I want to buy. The cable modem has to:

1) Be compatable with Comcast.

2) Be AT LEAST DOCSIS 2.0 compliant, although 3.0 would be nice. I called Comcast and my area is DOCSIS 2.0 with "TBA" for the expected upgrade to 3.0, but I figure what the hell, might as well future proof.

3) Be within spitting range of what I have been paying to rent Comcast's modem over a 12 month period. In this case, say between 65 -- 105 dollars.

I'm leaning toward this one from Motorola because when I typed into google "I need a good cable modem" it's what popped up. What does the hivemind think?

Those modems are what the indie cable providers here use. Motorola modems are good solid all-rounders. Probably your best bet.

That one is supposed to work fine. The newer model (SB6121) apparently is problematic on Comcast for some reason.

I was also looking at this Zoom.

I picked up a DOCSIS 2.0 modem on a sale several years ago, I was just thinking of going DOCSIS 3.

I've had an SB6120 for a little over a month now since switching to Comcast. Works like a charm, and it's a bit future proof for when DOCSIS 3.0 comes to my area.

Motorola has been in the cable modem (CM) market the longest and I've got one that has lasted me just about 10 years but when DOCSIS3 comes I'll have to bite the bullet, luckily my cable company is in 2003 times. The coolest looking CM I ever had was a 3COM that looked like a shark fin on my desk.
I would just recommend you avoid ones with the router/wifi built in, sure it will cost a bit more to buy separate but you can shop on features and things like using 3rd party firmwares, etc.

For DOCSIS 2.0, I'd definitely go for the motorola. I've had, on a number of occasions, been surprised to find these working in homes where the signal was really messed up. I had one working at a 57 dB transmit, -13 downstream, and a -5/-5 BER. Blew my mind.

I haven't really seen the DOCSIS 3.0 modems from them, but the Arris modems tend to work well for me. The only problem I have with them is that they transmit 1-3 dBmV higher than they need to. And that really only screws up a report for me.

Definitely stay away from gateways (modem/router combo). They're so unreliable we got rid of them in the county I work in.

When I stepped up my Comcast tier I had to get a DOCSIS 3 modem and went with the SB6120. It's been bulletproof and I highly recommend it.

Hmm, I'm using an old Surfboard from 2006 and I get perfectly fine 3MB/s (Bytes, not bits) DL speeds for the 1st ~1GB and then it drops to 2.5MB/s. That's up from pre-January speeds of always maxed at 1.4MB/s. Why would someone like me be bothered to upgrade?

I have no idea what DOCSIS stands for.

mrtomaytohead wrote:

Hmm, I'm using an old Surfboard from 2006 and I get perfectly fine 3MB/s (Bytes, not bits) DL speeds for the 1st ~1GB and then it drops to 2.5MB/s. That's up from pre-January speeds of always maxed at 1.4MB/s. Why would someone like me be bothered to upgrade?

I have no idea what DOCSIS stands for.

Maybe you have powerboost? I know I get a huge surge of download speed that eventually tapers off using Comcast.

I ended up ordering that 6120. Hoping it'll serve me well.

Seth wrote:

Maybe you have powerboost? I know I get a huge surge of download speed that eventually tapers off using Comcast.

I'm sure the difference in speed is that. I maintained that 2.5MB/s throughout the entire download of Portal 2 of more than 9GB, after the aforementioned higher speed, with only a couple dips here and there. My real question is, what's the point of a new cable modem if I'm not experiencing any bandwidth issues?

You need it at higher tiers of service. For example my package is only provided over DOCSIS 3.0

IMAGE(http://www.speedtest.net/result/1261449906.png)

But basically there's no reason to upgrade when you're getting your plan's throughput. You're currently maxing DOCSIS 2.0 though and to go up would require a new modem.

LiquidMantis wrote:

You need it at higher tiers of service. For example my package is only provided over DOCSIS 3.0

IMAGE(http://www.speedtest.net/result/1261449906.png)

But basically there's no reason to upgrade when you're getting your plan's throughput. You're currently maxing DOCSIS 2.0 though and to go up would require a new modem.

Thanks for the answer in stupid ignorant (read: me) person terms.

Also, according to comcast's current customer offer page for my address, I'm getting the listed powerboost 20Mbps as my standard speed and the details pages says I am only supposed to get that for 20MB worth, so no complaints for now. I'll probably pass on upgrading until they change their services since I have 2 of the same surfboards sitting around anyways.

Yeah, in my experience Comcast's powerboost seems to be a lot more generous than advertised. My only complaint is having to keep an eye on my traffic from their 250GB cap. The minecraft server averages 4GB/day, toss in me telecommuting and watching Hulu and it adds right up. Hopefully with Netflix and Hulu streaming on the rise they'll raise the cap.

You'd have to google DOCSIS to get the definition of the acronym but what it really means is how many cable channels are used and able to be used for internet data transmission.

For instance (these numbers are totally made up)
DOCSIS 2 would allow like 4 channels to be used for data.
DOCSIS 3 would allow 8.

Actually, DOCSIS 1.0, 1.1, and 2.0 all use one frequency channel. DOCSIS 3.0 can use multiple channels, and how many channels depends on the ISP. For example, right now my county (that I work in) is configured for 4 (until we can find a way to free up more bandwidth). It stands for Data Over Cable Service Interface Specification.

The bootfile we send the modem when we activate it tells it to either use it's DOCSIS 3.0 functions or not, and there's usually a light configuration that will tell you if it is. I know the Ubee 3.0 modems will have all green lights, except for one red light to show it's only on 2.0 functions. Arris modems are similar (all yellow except for one green I think). I think the only real advantage to getting a 3.0 modem now (besides not having to upgrade later), would be the IPv6 support.

I was at work when I posted earlier, so I wasn't able to really look up the SB6120, but once I did I realized I have installed a few of those. For the most part, I haven't seen any difference between them and the 2.0 version, which is a really good thing. Those things are tough, and will work through fluctuating signal problems.

Pur, being an insider of a sort, I wonder if maybe you can answer something for me.

Our house is about 80 yards back from the street and in the past when I've tried Cable for TV they've had consistent trouble getting us a decent signal, even after using the big thick cable they use for the whole street to run out to the house itself. Their claim has always been that the house is just too far back from the street.

Now, that's been I think two companies ago as far as our local Cable ISP goes and I have no idea if that was valid or if they were just inept, or if technology has changed enough where that shouldn't be an issue anymore... or what. If they say the same thing the past cable companies have said, could/would a different modem like the Motorola talked about in here make a difference?

Basically, I've been considering switching to cable because their base package is 10mb/1mb and I'm currently getting about 1.3/.5 out of my supposed to be 5mb/1mb DSL plan, and my DSL provider has basically told me I can pound sand because that's actually "higher than our guaranteed minimum".

Hmm... ~250 ft is a bit rough, though if they ran you QR320 (which I'm assuming is the thick cable you're talking about, they wouldn't run feeder cable, but QR320 kinda looks like it), it shouldn't have been an issue. We use RG6 for most drop lines, unless they are over 300 ft because the signal loss on the higher frequencies would give us trouble after that. With QR320, the loss would be half, so you should be looking at no less than maybe 6-10 dB loss on the high... which is typical of most drops lines honestly. As long as the line is good, and the signal feeding it is good, I don't see what the problem is. I do jobs like that all the time.

I hate to say it, but with that setup it's going to depend as much on the tech as it does the location. Worst case scenario would be to put the modem off the first split (which it's supposed to be anyway), then amp the split to the TV's. We can put in a mini-amp as long as the signal loss is from distance/splits, and not from damage. If you don't have many outlets that you're feeding, then we wouldn't even need that.

Now... if you're feeding 12+ TV's on top of that (something I have to deal with fairly regularly in the richy rich part of my county), then it's going to be extremely hard for the tech to configure, which means most of them will tell you it can't be done rather than do it. Unfortunately I work in an industry riddled with lazy morons. The problem becomes making sure all your TV's are getting OnDemand, and can send/receive signals back to the server. Each split adds to the power needed for the box to transmit back (the amp doesn't help in this, it actually hurts), and once you get over 60, OnDemand doesn't work well. It can be really tough and time consuming to configure, and there's a good deal of math involved.

Thanks for the clarification and info. Sounds in theory like it should at least have improved some by now.

To be clear, I would not be getting cable TV this time. I just sort of assumed those signal issues would apply to internet too. I'd only be going for net and phone.

Right now my phone/DSL bill is $70 a month, and DirecTV is also $70 a month. I decided I don't care about Sat/Cable TV anymore and Insight is offering Net/Phone for $43 a month. I can cut probably $90 out of the monthly bills if this works out.

Oh yeah, if you're just getting internet/phone, then you'll be getting an eMTA, and it does both. No splits means it should be a very easy install, and there shouldn't be enough loss on the line to cause issues. We'd set up the eMTA wherever is best, then tie it into whatever phone jack is nearby. If you have an alarm, it's a little more difficult, but not by much. My only concern would be that it sounds like that line hasn't been used in quite some time, and it may not be usable. If water's gotten in, then it's toast, and they may have to replace it before doing the install.

I think the 10mb/1mb rate is the same one I'm getting on my employee account, and I'll admit, I don't have any complaints. Mostly I game a little, and stream movies/shows, so nothing real taxing on bandwidth.

Whelp I got the 6120 and Comcast was unable to activate it. Although I have a hard time beleiving them, they were convinced it was DOA. They were unable to get it to send them a bootfile. or something. This is not my area of expertise, and I feel like a gd idiot.

On the other hand, I was pleasantly surprised with the service and knowledge of the Comcast tech guys. They went so far as, when they couldn't figure it out, escalate it and call me back 15 minutes later with a new solution.

Luckily, Amazon has a very forgiving return policy.

Seth wrote:

Whelp I got the 6120 and Comcast was unable to activate it. Although I have a hard time beleiving them, they were convinced it was DOA. They were unable to get it to send them a bootfile. or something. This is not my area of expertise, and I feel like a gd idiot.

On the other hand, I was pleasantly surprised with the service and knowledge of the Comcast tech guys. They went so far as, when they couldn't figure it out, escalate it and call me back 15 minutes later with a new solution.

Luckily, Amazon has a very forgiving return policy.

You going to exchange it or just return it? If you exchange it, definitely let us know if the next one works.

I was kind of holding off until Comcast approved the 6121, but I'm not really sure what the difference between models is other than the slightly higher model number that makes my inner geek assume it's better

MannishBoy wrote:

You going to exchange it or just return it? If you exchange it, definitely let us know if the next one works.

Exchanging it. Of course, I managed to catch Amazon while they were "waiting on a shipment," apparently, so I'm expecting the replacement in 1-3 weeks. Blah.

Typically, that type of wait would be unacceptable, but...the old modem still works, and it's only an extra 7 bucks if I stretch into next month.

Did you try to activate it yourself? Once it's hooked up, it should redirect you to an activation page asking you account number. If you can get that far, then I doubt there is anything wrong with the modem. If they were having trouble sending the right bootfile, they could have been trying to send it to the old modem. Its MAC will still show in the system. Also, your account has to be changed to remove the rental fee before they try to activate it. Honestly, if you haven't sent it back, I'd at least try again with another rep.

PurEvil wrote:

Did you try to activate it yourself? Once it's hooked up, it should redirect you to an activation page asking you account number. If you can get that far, then I doubt there is anything wrong with the modem. If they were having trouble sending the right bootfile, they could have been trying to send it to the old modem. Its MAC will still show in the system. Also, your account has to be changed to remove the rental fee before they try to activate it. Honestly, if you haven't sent it back, I'd at least try again with another rep.

WHERE WERE YOU THREE HOURS AGO!

Actually they did most of those steps -- recorded the new MAC address, switched the system from the old modem to the new modem....although to be honest they never removed the rental fee. Maybe that was what was causing the problem.

before I ever called comcast, I could get to the screen you're talking about, but I couldn't self activate (I could put in my account #, but I couldn't download the .exe it tried to let me download). After they and I fiddled with it, I couldn't even get to that screen.

Now I am filled with uncertainty.

Your system might be a bit different from mine. By the time you have to download anything in my county, you're already through most of the activation. I'm just going to go through the steps I do on this type of job, and let me know if it's similar, and if so, how far you got.

1a) Hook up modem, wait for lights to lock in.
2a) Open browser, get activation page asking for account number.
3a) Enter account number, hit next.
4a) Get page verifying account details and MAC address. Hit next.
5a) Home Health Check page. This will show you all the equipment registered to you, and give you the levels of the modem. Once finished, hit next.
6a) The modem should reset after a few seconds, and the page will say Activation Complete under the MAC address. Once it locks back in, hit next.
7a) Another Home Health Check. Most of the time this throws an error and won't show the levels, but it doesn't really matter. Hit next.

The modem now has the correct bootfile. If your account was setup correctly, that would have been it. However, there's a second set of steps if the modem thinks it's a new install.

1b) You'll get a page saying "New Customer" or "Existing Customer". Choose one and fill out the form.
2b) Once through you'll be asked to install some software, click "Setup".
3b) Now a page giving the steps to installing the software. Hit "Install".
4b) Download the installer, hit run.
5b) For vista or Win7, run as admin.
6b) Once the program loads, enter the security code, hit submit.
7b) At this point, either install the software, or you can actually just exit the setup. The modem will work at this point regardless of whether the software is installed or not.

6b will usually stop you if the account isn't set up right. It'll give you a bunch of red text saying there was some kind of error. If you got that far, your modem was fine, and customer service f*cked up. What they would have had to do is correct your account, put the original bootfile back on the modem, and start from the beginning.

Oh, and if you have a router, you have to power-cycle it after it's activated or it's likely you'll just get taken back to the activation page.

Since we have someone 'from within' the industry. How does the CableCo feel about people tuning channels via Clear QAM? Do they realize ever more so people are doing it? Is encryption going to be the answer at some point?

Depends on what part of the company, as most people would expect. As a tech, I couldn't care less. It would make my job easier. From my perspective, the customer feels they get more value out of the service, and it keeps them from thinking about switching.

Corporate definitely caught onto it, and from the steps they've taken, I'd say they don't like it. In my county, we've already encrypted everything but the basic channels. They sneaked that move in when we moved our B2 tier to digital last year. At this point, Clear QAM tuners don't get you anything a 30 year old tube tv couldn't also pick up. It's made my life hell though, having to explain to people that the tv or tuner card they've bought is now more-or-less worthless for that use. I've been cussed out a good number of times over it. And the first week or two of that transition they didn't even tell us techs about it, so we were running in homes with great signal, getting yelled at because we didn't know why their tv suddenly stopped showing most of their channels.

I do understand it from the corporate standpoint though. We have to pay these networks to carry them. If a large base of our customers are just using QAM tuners to get free channels, it hurts revenue. In turn that's going to force us to charge more to all customers. We already catch flak every time the price goes up on something, and most of the time (for TV), that's a network renegotiating their contract with us. Disney is the all-time worst, and normally the reason your bill goes up.

Eezy_Bordone wrote:

Since we have someone 'from within' the industry. How does the CableCo feel about people tuning channels via Clear QAM? Do they realize ever more so people are doing it? Is encryption going to be the answer at some point?

If I'm not mistaken, the locals have to remain unencrypted legally. That's all I have available on comcast in my area. Very few providers have more unencrypted these days.

Yeah, the FCC won't allow us to digitize or encrypt the local channels yet. I'm sure our corporate people are trying to get that overturned though. It takes a lot of bandwidth to broadcast those channels in analog.

PurEvil wrote:

We already catch flak every time the price goes up on something, and most of the time (for TV), that's a network renegotiating their contract with us. Disney is the all-time worst, and normally the reason your bill goes up.

Sure, but the only reason everyone has channels that Disney owns is because all the Cableco's use the same crappy channel package system that force you to get a ton of other channels to get the two you actually want.

Actually, all the big networks do that same thing; they force cable companies to buy channels they don't want in order to get channels they do. The cable companies typically try to mix and match those channels into packages that consumers will want.

I think many of them probably would offer a la carte service if they could buy a la carte service themselves.