Any Experiences - - Good or Bad - - with Linksys BEFCMU10 Ver 3?

Hi, I'm still mucking around with going to Comcast, or remaining with

56K and watching the grass grow. You've been helpful in the past, steering me away from no-win experiences.

I was given (New in Box) a Linksys Cable Modem (BECFMU10, Version 3) by my neighbor. Why? I wish I knew! < g > (He owed me for running a trial of his Federal Income Tax on my Turbo Tax to see whether he should stay in the country, or defect to Mexico)

The Comcast web page lists this modem as supported; however, do any of you have good, neutral, questionable or unfavorable words about this modem. I'd rather not rent from Comcast, but I don't want to start out with a marginal modem in the loop.

Running a late iMac G4 with OS 10.3.2

TIA

George

I'm using a BECFMU10 version 1 and haven't had any problems with it at all. It's worked perfectly for over 3 years. I know some have reported problems with the version 1 and especially version 2. But I've heard that the version 3 modems are pretty good.

I can confirm that. It works better than a motorola SB5100 on Comcast, specifically. -Dave

Works better how?

It could have been defective, but when you set forth the facts of your situation, all indications were that it was not defective.

But whether it was defective, or it was something else, using that situation to say "It works better than a motorola SB5100 on Comcast, specifically" would be an illogical leap. (But it would be consistent with your illogical assessment of your situation when you wanted to buy a new modem despite everyone here telling you that your facts weren't pointing to a modem problem.)

Web pages load faster without "pausing". Also, speed tests confirm that the Linksys is faster for download speeds. But to be fair, I suspected that the SB5100 I used to use was defective. That's why I replaced it. -Dave

You're rewriting history. I was certainly not alone in pointing out to you that coincidence does not equal causation. Do we really need to rehash how your conclusion was based on throwing out all the facts you initially presented, and ignoring the logical conclusions of every technical person that participated? You used absolutely zero logic in coming to your conclusion, basing your beliefs on a coincidence.

But maybe we do need to rehash it for the new comers. You posted quite a few symptoms that you were experiencing. The consensus was that it was not a problem at your end, but someplace between your house and the CMTS. You rejected that consensus, and tried representing just some of the facts, hoping to get some justification for your desire to buy a new modem. Again, the reduced fact set you presented still didn't point towards modem problems, but to problems between your house and the CMTS. So you pared down the facts even further, to the point that the remaining facts could not lead to a conclusion. But since everyone still could see your original posts, you could not get anyone to provide any justification to get a new modem.

Then you went out and got a modem, and the problems disappeared. You decided that this wasn't a coincidence, but was evidence that you were the only person who knew what they were talking about, and that the rest of us were wrong. You insisted that this coincidence trumped all the logic, and that you were right and the rest of us were wrong.

That is a textbook example of illogical beliefs.

So now you're coming back saying that Linksys modems aren't as good as Motorola modems because your Motorola modem was defective. Well, let's say for argument sake that you were right. Your Motorola modem was defective. To jump from that to saying that Linksys modems are better than Motorola modems is also illogical.

Now as for your belief that logical people not believing in coincidence, that's the most illogical thing you've said yet! I had an upset stomach the last time the moon was full. That these two events happened at the same time doesn't mean they were related. Even if my upset stomach got better as soon as the moon was no longer full. So you expect us to believe that logical people don't believe in coincidence? Or do you think that the full moon caused my upset stomach?

There are people out there who would believe the moon can affect the stomach based on that set of facts. But if I had also mentioned the fact that I ate a large pizza all by myself that evening, a logical person would see that the pizza is more related to my stomach than the phase of the moon. Even if I came back and said to forget about the pizza, and focus on the phase of the moon, the logical person is still going to look at all the evidence despite my attempt to narrow their scope. In fact, had I not mentioned the pizza in the first place, skepticism would cause most people to ask for more facts before accepting my theory that the moon caused my upset stomach. And thus we see that a logical person can believe in coincidences.

So before you start raising the "I'm logical, you're not" flag over your camp, be aware that most of us would view your use of the logical flag as a joke.

So again you are claiming that the connection problems I was having magically disappeared when the cable modem was replaced. Sorry, but most logical people do not believe in coincidences like that. But as you are obviously illogical, I expect you to disagree with the facts yet gain. -Dave

(snip war and peace)

Holy crap, I really got you wound up now, didn't I? -Dave

That is a lame response, Dave. But I guess when you are wrong and dont want to admit it you would resort to that type of response.

Hi, Guys -

I didn't mean to start a continuing flame war among those who answered my original question.

I was just looking for an objective assessment of the modem in answer to my question.

Sorry for butting in! But, "Thank You" for what little I did learn that the modem in question is OK.

George

It is illogical to think that I AM wrong, when the facts support my being right. But I wouldn't expect someone non-technical to understand that symptoms can often point elsewhere than the real cause of a problem. As I've stated numerous times, the problems disappeared at the exact instant that I replaced my cable modem. Is it possible that the problem could have been elsewhere and JUST HAPPENED TO FIX ITSELF IN THE FEW MINUTES IT TOOK TO REPLACE THE CABLE MODEM? Possible, yes. Also very damned bloody unlikely. Logically speaking, anyone with a brain would conclude that the cable modem was most likely the problem. If the problem was somewhere other than the cable modem, it is REALLY ODD that I haven't had a single problem with my cable modem Internet service in the several months since the cable modem was replaced. -Dave

That's the first logical thing you've said.

The only problem is that the facts support a conclusion other than the one you reached.

No one said the problem fixed itself. The problem was between your house and the CMTS. You discovered it was fixed when you replaced the cable modem because someone fixed the problem. You just coincidentally first discovered it upon changing cable modems.

Possibly. If you had never mentioned any of the facts that you previously had mentioned.

If the only thing we knew was that you had some unspecified problems, replaced your cable modem, and the unspecified problems went away, it wouldn't be illogical to assume the new modem had something to do with it. But that's not what happened. You spent at least a week describing and redescribing symptoms that excluded the cable modem as being the problem. The symptoms you described all pointed towards a line problem.

You tried reframing your presentation many times trying to get someone to say that your symptoms pointed to a justification to buy a new cable modem, but nothing you said even suggested the cable modem was the problem. You were told that over and over again that it wasn't the cable modem. It became very obvious that you wanted to buy a new cable modem, and would ignore anyone (everyone) who didn't tell you it was a good idea to buy a new modem.

"Logically speaking, anyone with a brain would conclude that the cable modem was...." not the problem. Not likely the problem. Not possibly the problem. Logically, the cable modem could not have been the problem.

Why would it be odd? Someone from the cable company came out and fixed what was wrong. It's no longer a problem. We could bring your old modem back, and it would work, too.

You know, it's interesting that I haven't had an upset stomach since the last full moon ended. So the full moon must have been the cause of my upset stomach. Let's just forget that I ever mentioned I ate an entire large pizza by myself the night of the full moon, and that I haven't done that since then, either. It's the pizza that's the coincidence, and the moon that turned out to be the actual cause.

Is that logical? Of course not. Neither is your conclusion that changing the modem was the solution to a problem that was very clearly a line problem.

It is illogical to think that you are right, when the facts - not just your single, hand picked fact, but all the facts together - support you being wrong.

You might want to go back and read Warren's account of this issue, since it was not only accurate but also clearly showed that the facts DIDN'T support your conclusions.

It was very clear at the time that you wanted this group to help you justify your decision to purchase a new cable modem. When the facts didn't support that conclusion, you modified the facts, and now you want to call those who disagree with you 'non-technical'.

It's much more likely that the real problem was fixed at about the same time that you unilaterally decided to replace the modem. Logically speaking, it takes more than a coincidental relationship in time to support a theory of cause and effect.

Some other cause, such as a loose cable connection on the cable to the modem could have been the problem. That could have been fixed by the simple act of disconnecting, and reconnecting the cable. Like you said, it isn't always the obvious cause.

when you can refute what Warren has said with sound reasoning in a mature fashion I might change my mind that you are clueless. However since the best you could do was "Holy crap" I dont hold much hope.

You are getting close to "Game Over".

I signed up with Cox Internet a couple of months ago and I am using that modem (v3). It has worked flawlessly. I keep it turned on all the time, and I have never had to reset it or cycle the power. When I do turn it on, it syncs right up. It just works. My service is advertised as 4 Mbps, and I usually get greater than when I do a speed test with a nearby site.

It is also designed to stack with other Linksys products. I have a Linksys router sitting on top of it. I have never had an overheat problem even with it stacked, and both powered up 24 hours a day.

The only thing other modems might over this one is better diagnostic functions. For example, the Motorola surfboard modem has an event log. The Linksys gives you basic signal strength and SNR measurements, but no log. But as I said, my service has been flawless, so I have not really needed any of these functions.

Some modems may perform better than others with a weak or noisy signal. I don't know how the Linksys fares in that kind of environment.

Gregg

I was wondering what diagnostic pages the version 3 had. I have the version

1 and it has 5 pages (System, Startup, Signal, Status and Log). What does the version 3 include?

That's one helluva coincidence, considering symptoms were present up to a few minutes before the old cable modem was disconnected, and the symptoms were GONE immediately after the new one was installed. Sorry, I don't buy it. Never will, as it's not logical. Besides which, you are just uessing. -Dave