Netflix has launched a site that will show the average ISP speed for each of the major providers for their streaming videos.
Here is the list for May 2014. If you're paying for high speed Internet with U-Verse, you might want to be asking some questions. Cox is looking good here.

http://oi59.tinypic.com/2rqg4ns.jpg

USA ISP Speed Index Results| Netflix ISP Speed Index (http://ispspeedindex.netflix.com/usa)

I thought about switching to AT&T to save money, but I've heard nothing but bad about their Internet service. I guess you really do get what you pay for.

I thought about switching to AT&T to save money, but I've heard nothing but bad about their Internet service. I guess you really do get what you pay for.

We had ATT for a few months. It was pretty bad though cheaper.

We went back to Cox and it has been pretty good for the 54 bucks a month for the second to top tier Internet. We don't have cable so that saves us some money. They do have a data "cap" of 250gb but it is not enforced at all. I wish we had more competition in OKC but it looks like for decent speed Internet we are stuck with Cox.

Maybe Google Fiber will come? Doubtful as I don't think we have any dark fiber

I have ATT Uverse and have no issues. Was with Cox before and don't notice a speed change. Average speed about 11-12.

Have had a few grumbles with money-grubbing and slow-to-upgrade tech on the DVR/Cable side with Cox, but I've never had any issues with their Internet service. Top notch and consistently speedy.

Have had a few grumbles with money-grubbing and slow-to-upgrade tech on the DVR/Cable side with Cox, but I've never had any issues with their Internet service. Top notch and consistently speedy.

I agree. OKC residents should be thankful they don't have to deal with Time Warner Internet. The speeds they offer, or at least did when I used them, are laughable for this day and age. My only gripe with Cox is their pricing, especially for the TV service.

Well I just ordered Comcast here in SEA...

I agree. OKC residents should be thankful they don't have to deal with Time Warner Internet. The speeds they offer, or at least did when I used them, are laughable for this day and age. My only gripe with Cox is their pricing, especially for the TV service.
I had Time Warner in Austin, it was fine, nothing special. About the only thing that I watched online was the MotoGP races through their subscription package, the HD feed would lag at times but seemed to improve year to year so I don't know if the improvements happened on the TWC side or DORNA's side. I had Sprint Broadband Direct (fixed wireless) in OKC and the service was great but part of that may have been they quit signing up new people not too long before I moved to Austin.


Well I just ordered Comcast here in SEA...
Did you just move?

I have Comcast here in Denver, it has been decent, no complaints. Century Link DSL seems to get some more gripes around here. I have had Directv since 1998 so I have no experience with the TV side of TWC or Comcast. Haven't had Cox cable since 1997, switched to Multimedia Cablevision in Edmond and then transferred it to The Village. Once in The Village the service would go out when the wind blew, that was after the tornadoes there with the overhead lines. That drove my switch to Directv.

Thanks to the OP I need to reconsider my previous opinion regarding paying CoxCom $200 a month for basic service.
(and when you factor in all of the inconvenience involved in changing all your internet stuff . . .)
Priceless.

(ps: I was one of the people who took advantage of the loss leader bundles over a decade ago. I think there should be a bit of balance in the billing restored.)

I was with Cox and I am now on AT&T. I can't really say I notice a difference between the two. I think most people are fooled into thinking they need a super speed connection when they really don't. We have a Roku. We can watch Netflix, Amazon and or Hulu and browse the web at the same time. I have noticed a lag or anything like that.

I think internet service is much like options on a car. The salesman tries to sale you the car with all the bells and whistles. In reality all you need is a car with modest options. As as society we have fooled ourselves into believing we need the biggest, strongest, latest and greatest when practical use should be the main drive behind products and services we purchase.

I have Charter and I'm pretty happy with it

I have been on AT&T (formerly SBC) DSL since January, 2006. I am retired and spend too much time on it but I have never knowingly lost it. I have lost voice communications (phone) but the internet still worked. I watch a lot of Netflix streaming video and it's perfect. I'm really surprised to see the complaints about them. I have no ax to grind and don't care if they get your money or not, it's just that they are perfect for me.
C. T.

Netflix has launched a site that will show the average ISP speed for each of the major providers for their streaming videos.
Here is the list for May 2014. If you're paying for high speed Internet with U-Verse, you might want to be asking some questions. Cox is looking good here.

http://oi59.tinypic.com/2rqg4ns.jpg

USA ISP Speed Index Results| Netflix ISP Speed Index (http://ispspeedindex.netflix.com/usa)

I wonder how much that's skewed by the lower Mbps options AT&T offers. I've used both Cox and Uverse, and like others have mentioned, didn't see a difference. But of course, I was paying for comparative bandwidths. Cox offers plans from 5 Mbps to 100 Mbps. AT&T offers plan from 3 Mbps to 48 Mbps so their available range is lower.

Yes, Jerrywall makes a good point. If AT&T doesn't offer a tier as high as Cox then, obviously, that would skew things.

C.T. -- It's not about service going down or anything like that, it's about the bandwidth availability and speeds that Netflix compares when streaming content to their customers. And really, unless you have several people in the house doing bandwidth intensive things (like streaming two Netflix or Hulu movies and TV at the same time) it would probably not be noticeable. However, with that said, my neighbor a few doors down had Cox and switched to AT&T U-Verse to save money and his streaming pixelated and stuttered every now and then when streaming Netflix HD movies. He tried and tried with AT&T and they couldn't do anything so he switched back to Cox and says they have smooth streaming again. Sometimes you really do get what you pay for. But in your situation, I doubt you would ever notice a thing.

I have been on AT&T (formerly SBC) DSL since January, 2006. I am retired and spend too much time on it but I have never knowingly lost it. I have lost voice communications (phone) but the internet still worked. I watch a lot of Netflix streaming video and it's perfect. I'm really surprised to see the complaints about them. I have no ax to grind and don't care if they get your money or not, it's just that they are perfect for me.
C. T.

I can agree with this. My mother has the lowest Cox Internet plan and she streams Netflix fine but she is the only one on the network.

My wife and I use a lot of Internet. We usually have two Netflix streams going, I broadcast on Twitch.tv while playing games, iPads and phones all connected, and we download a lot of TV and movies. I think ATT would have been fine had we not used so much bandwidth. We went with Cox because we had a better experience of speed.

For low use users I don't think either would matter. I would go with whatever is cheaper.

Zookeeper,
I don't have U-Verse and I have seen it at a friend's house and didn't like it. It has failed several times. Also, it isn't available to me. I have the original standard DSL. No, I live alone so streaming one movie is not a problem. The bandwidth is excellent for me (actually, I have their optional top tier), and the price is right.
Thanks,
C. T.
Yes, Jerrywall makes a good point. If AT&T doesn't offer a tier as high as Cox then, obviously, that would skew things.

C.T. -- It's not about service going down or anything like that, it's about the bandwidth availability and speeds that Netflix compares when streaming content to their customers. And really, unless you have several people in the house doing bandwidth intensive things (like streaming two Netflix or Hulu movies and TV at the same time) it would probably not be noticeable. However, with that said, my neighbor a few doors down had Cox and switched to AT&T U-Verse to save money and his streaming pixelated and stuttered every now and then when streaming Netflix HD movies. He tried and tried with AT&T and they couldn't do anything so he switched back to Cox and says they have smooth streaming again. Sometimes you really do get what you pay for. But in your situation, I doubt you would ever notice a thing.

Well I just ordered Comcast here in SEA...

I'm sorry... We had it in Puyallup and Sumner, hated them in almost every way possible (outages, bad equipment, bad technicians, slow internet), switched to AT&T DSL just to get away from their internet, and it was just as bad, if not worse. Hope they're better 5 years down the road from when we had them and might be better in Seattle instead of the South Sound.

I wonder how much that's skewed by the lower Mbps options AT&T offers. I've used both Cox and Uverse, and like others have mentioned, didn't see a difference. But of course, I was paying for comparative bandwidths. Cox offers plans from 5 Mbps to 100 Mbps. AT&T offers plan from 3 Mbps to 48 Mbps so their available range is lower.

It's also important to note that most people on AT&T DSL have the standard speed which is 3Mbps. Cox's "Preferred" package which is what you get with most bundles is 25Mbps. They have a value package also at 5Mbps which is faster than AT&T's most common package. We are getting to the point where DSL simply cannot keep up with cable modem w/DOCSIS 3.0.

Yes, there are so many speed options/packages between all the ISP's anymore it can get a bit hard to compare apples to apples.

Did you just move?

Yes ==> http://www.okctalk.com/current-events-open-topic/37737-okc2sea-big-move.html