Hacker News Reader

Comment by bluedino | Hacker News Reader

Over the last 8 years my Spectrum bill has almost doubled. I don't have any complaints about uptime or performance, speed has gone from 100 to 160mbs (kind of an odd number) during that time.

I realize inflation, wages, etc. But how much of this increase is just because? I'm glad I'm not paying more, but who's preventing that?

My other options are some real low-end local wireless providers, very slow DSL (7-12mbs with 1.5mb or less upload). We are just now starting to see Tmobile and Verizon offer home wireless. I've tried both and they are only around half the speed of my cable connection but they are a little cheaper (25% or so)

View on HN

I have Spectrum and AT&T because I work from home and need redundancy. Spectrum recently pushed my $100-ish a month package up to 2.5 Gbps for the same price I signed up with at 1 Gbps.

What's interesting is the arm-twisting I got when I signed up and the rep tried multiple times to persuade me to cancel AT&T's service and how hard they pushed me to sign up for wireless as well.

Basically - I assume the increase to 2.5 Gbps is because gasp there's moderate competition in my neighborhood. If AT&T wasn't here, I doubt I'd have seen an increase without a bump in monthly cost.

> I realize inflation, wages, etc. But how much of this increase is just because?

I can assure you with certainty that it’s all in the because category. Their approach in my experience is raise prices until the customer complains.

I had to quit spectrum due to moving out of the country (10Gbps symmetric now for €25/mo thank you very much) and they still offered a reduced price “in case any roommates are staying behind”. I was paying ~$100 and the “discount” was significant but I don’t recall the exact number.

I was too lazy to basically fight for a better price, but if you threaten to quit (or better quit it for a while) they’ll 100% lower your bill. I’m sure there are more sophisticated “negotiation” tactics a search away.

Starlink isn't cheap from what I can see, but may be an option if cable keeps going the way it's been going.

"Reliable high-speed internet, wherever you live. $120/mo in most locations & hardware cost of $599."

If you replace the hardware every 5 years just count on $120 (service) + $10 (hw) a month.

I'm using StarLink now and it's pretty great. I was skeptical of satellite working very well, but zoom meetings and all work just fine. It's about as plug and play as internet can get. Speed doesn't match my 1gb at home, but it's only noticeable when downloading something large.

I have done zero research, but my assumption is that ping/lag is far from where gamers would want it. Back in the day I would have said that wouldn't really tip the scales but it's more uncertain now...

Starlink satellites are a couple orders of magnitude closer to Earth than legacy satellite internet. If you are in a remote area Starlink could actually be faster than ground connections because it’s one hop to the base station which is likely to be near your desired servers.

I don't game, but Speed test shows < 150ms ping and a < 100ms idle ping. There's no latency doing video chats.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com