New Rogers advanced Wi-Fi modem!

Need Help?

That's what we're here for! The goal of the Rogers Community is to help you find answers on everything Rogers. Can't find what you're looking for? Just ask!
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Reply
I'm a Reliable Contributor
Posts: 215

Re: New Rogers advanced Wi-Fi modem!

Interesting.   I just went to the Rogers web site and under Hybrid 60, in the Details expansion area the language now reads as follows:

 

"Advanced Wi-Fi Modem rental included. Wi-Fi modem rental option available."

 

I think this is a change from what it said before.   It's nice to have options.  No mention of price reduction on the 2nd piece but I assume they would charge less, like $ 8 / month for those vs the $ 12 / month of the CGN3 as they did before.

 

I'll probably stick with the CGN3 for mine as it's stable in bridge mode and I think the 24 download channels do provide better speed consistency, at least where I live, to what I saw before with Extreme and the DPC3825 and old SMC gateway modems.

 

Resident Expert
Resident Expert
Posts: 13,850

Re: New Rogers advanced Wi-Fi modem!

Yeah.. i am guessing, since the price now INCLUDES the rental at that listed price... you would have to put a RANGE.


So the 69.99 is with the $12 rental... if you went with the cisco, your total would be at 65.99

 

I am on the 30/5 only, and have chose to go up to the CGN3.. as i figure, like you, overall the best performance with the 24 channels.

(though really.. its like the SAME price i was pay for express beore... i should pay like the $4 more and go up to the 60/10 package Smiley Tongue)



Resident Expert
Resident Expert
Posts: 928

Re: New Rogers advanced Wi-Fi modem!


@Gdkitty wrote:

Yeah.. i am guessing, since the price now INCLUDES the rental at that listed price... you would have to put a RANGE.


So the 69.99 is with the $12 rental... if you went with the cisco, your total would be at 65.99

 


But if Rogers puts that on the web site, everyone is going to ask for the DPC3825/CGN2 and try to save $4...



Resident Expert
Resident Expert
Posts: 13,850

Re: New Rogers advanced Wi-Fi modem!

Lol, true Smiley Happy
The Cisco all in all was a decent unit, but I have been very pleased so far with the cgn3 (above the 24 channel bonus).
Luckily everything I own is gigabit Smiley Tongue


I'm a Reliable Contributor
Posts: 215

Re: New Rogers advanced Wi-Fi modem!

Agreed.  True enough.

 

The sad thing is that public companies like Rogers make their decisions based on increasing revenues.   Even if they don't make more profit renting CGN3's for example vs a CISCO unit at a lower price, the revenue drop is contradictory to what they like to report to their shareholders quarterly.   Always short-sited thinking because of this.

 

I think this is likely the same reason we don't have a modem-only option since they would have to charge less for that as well.

Resident Expert
Resident Expert
Posts: 928

Re: New Rogers advanced Wi-Fi modem!


@techguy001 wrote:

I think this is likely the same reason we don't have a modem-only option since they would have to charge less for that as well.


I don't buy that. I think the reasons for the lack of a modem-only option come down to a few things:

1) Simplified logistics. A modem-only option would mean more types of hardware to keep track of, to keep stores supplied with, keep in the subcontractor techs' vans, etc. Also, you'd need to test another device, approve each firmware update on another device, work with manufacturers to fix bugs on more devices, etc.

 

2) Competitive positioning. Bell offers 'standard' wifi routers. So Rogers must too...

 

3) Customer expectations and confusion. I think the 'normal', non-tech-savvy consumer these days expects to sign up, have the tech show up, drop off a box, and have wireless Internet access without caring too much about the technical details. If you offer a cheaper modem-only option and advertise it, people will be asking why they need the more expensive gateway, they'll start expecting the cheap modem to do the same things as Bell's gateways and saying 'Rogers sucks, I don't have wifi unless I pay $7 more for the gateway?!? what crooks!!! I'm going back to Bell', etc.

 

Unlike some ISPs in the U.S. or Canada, Rogers does provide a bridge mode on all their gateways as an alternative. Last time I checked, Bell doesn't (the 'bridge mode' involves running a second PPPoE session THROUGH the gateway router). Neither do some US providers such as U-Verse or (shocking, I know) Google Fiber.

 

The gateways-only policy means that the non-tech-savvy customers get what they expect, and the tech-savvy customers grumble mildly, spend 2 minutes researching how to enable bridge mode (or give Rogers tech support a 2 minute call), and get on their way. It's worth noting that in my 15 years as a Rogers cable Internet customer, I've always found that while Rogers marketing/documentation/etc solely catered to the non-tech-savvy customer, various little things (e.g. few inbound ports blocked, the bridge mode on the gateways, the availability of a DNS server that doesn't have the evil search page on unknown domains, etc.) suggest that someone at Rogers HQ quietly was thinking about how to accomodate more tech-savvy customers as well.

 

A friend in the U.S., when he signed up with Comcast, was pointed to a special amazon.com Comcast store and encouraged to buy any modem/gateway listed there, including straight D3 modems (8 channel). We may all wish Rogers did the same (until a few years later, when they say the modem we bought doesn't support enough channels for the current plans), but I certainly understand why they don't want to.



I'm a Reliable Contributor
Posts: 215

Re: New Rogers advanced Wi-Fi modem!

I think you misunderstood.  I wasn't suggesting that we shouldn't have a gateway device.  I think we should have both.   A modem-only for those of us who prefer our own routers and a full gateway for those who want something simple that does it all.   As for a modem-only device, if they implemented the modem-only version of the HITRON that uses the same 24-download channels, they wouldn't have to do anything new as it would already be the same for their network.

 

As for point 1 above in your statement, I disagree.  If that were true, Rogers would have already dropped support for all the other gateway devices, CGN2, SMC, CISCO, Motorola legacy modems, etc.    Having to support all those devices in addition to the CGN3 is a real problem for support, provisioning, stocking for service trucks, etc.   I think they should consider going down to just 2 devices, a gateway and a modem and charge reasonable prices for them.  Their support issues would drop significantly.

Resident Expert
Resident Expert
Posts: 13,850

Re: New Rogers advanced Wi-Fi modem!

Hitron does make a 24 channel modem only.
The LITTLE info i could find out.. it was almost the exact same cost at the CGN3.... and the modem parts are identical.. just doesnt have the router parts.

 

Why have to worry about 2 devices from a support standpoint, when you can do one, which does both?

 

Truthfully though.. i say give it 1-2 more years? And you will see a drop of legacy stuff.. Definately nothing older than D2 and even the D2 stuff, completely being phased out.
They did it recently, with the TV and the PACE and early early SA boxes.



Resident Expert
Resident Expert
Posts: 928

Re: New Rogers advanced Wi-Fi modem!

The big problem, fundamentally, is that most people want/need the gateways. Most people want the integrated solution that delivers wifi to their mobile devices and laptops out of the box. If you don't know you need a straight modem or bridge mode, then you need the gateway.

 

So, how can Rogers offer (and advertise) a straight modem for $6/month and a gateway for $12/month, yet make sure that most people continue to pick the gateways? Rogers' marketing department has a long history of not being able to explain technical concepts clearly, so I doubt they could come up with a clear pitch that explains that the cheaper thing is for technical people or people with one computer who like exposing it to the Internet (say what you want about NAT, it does provide security benefits for the clueless) only.

 

Offering a modem at a lower price creates two kinds of support calls:

1) "Which modem should I pick?"

2) People who presumed the cheaper option was 'good enough' for whatever reason, and who then scream panickedly that 'their wifi' doesn't work. And who then scream even more that Rogers is now trying to rip them off for another $6/month to get the same thing that was 'free' with Bell.
(There is no customer more irate and hard to reason with than a non-technical customer who is confused and intuitively feels wronged. And those customers will go and tell 20 people that Rogers wronged them by making them pay $6 more and wait for another technician just so their iPad could work!)

 

The best way to do this would be to offer the straight modem at the same price or even a higher price option to make sure that only tech-savvy enthusiasts pick it. But then, what's the point? Do you really want a straight Hitron modem for $12/month rather than a bridged CGN3 at the price? I thought a big part of the rationale for wanting a straight modem was that people didn't like paying for functionality they turned off.

 

(Now, if the gateways are not functioning well in bridge mode, that's a different story. But if Hitron's CGN3 bridge mode firmware was lousy... what makes you think the corresponding Hitron straight modem would have higher quality firmware? It's probably 99.99% the same code...)



Highlighted
I Plan to Stick Around
Posts: 10

Re: New Rogers advanced Wi-Fi modem!

I hope they do get somthing better then the CGN3 soon as my 4th one gave up so with lots of trouble I switched to the cisco and bridged it and all is fine now.  Tech support for rogers was sent an email for anyone having problems up to the fibre 60 package can use the cisco now.  Guess we wait and see if they swicth to somthing else.  You think the CGN3 is hardware or firmware when it comes to the problems?