RE: Broadband Router Comparisons

["Keith Medcalf" <kmedcalf () dessus com>]

On Sunday, 27 December, 2015 17:58, Larry Sheldon <larrysheldon () cox net> said:
> On 12/26/2015 23:49, Mike wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> > Firstly, they are all junk. Every last one of them. Period. Broadband
> > routers are designed to be cheap and to appeal to people who don't know
> > any better, and who respond well (eg: make purchasing decisions) based
> > on the shape of the plastic, the color scheme employed, and number of
> > mysterious blinking lights that convey 'something important is
> > happening'. Further, the price point is $45 - $70 thereabouts, putting
> > some definite constraints on the actual quality of the engineering and
> > components that go into them. I feel that we, the service provider,
> > endure a significantly high and undue burden of cost associated with
> > providing ongoing support to customers as a result of the defects
> > contained therein.

> Why don't you offer an acceptable (to you) device at a price acceptable
> to me as a part of the service.  I'd buy it.

Cable Companies / Telco's cannot do that.
If you bought the device you would want control of it.  (PWC do not permit foreign controlled devices on their networks)
This is anti-thetical to their (CableCo/TelCo) business model.

This is why most PWC (People With Clue) have the CableCo/TelCo configure their crap as a pure bridge with all other 
features disabled and use their own equipment.  The local lan port on the bridge is the Demarc.

If there is "no transport" at the demarc port, the problem lies with the CableCo/TelCo.  If there is, the problem is 
your own equipment.

Telling where the problem lies is trivial.