Upload Speeds Need Increased for Gigabit Internet Tier

Yes, I've ran into roadblocks trying to get Gigabit Pro at my residence.  Even corporate has had difficulty seeing if I qualify (within 1/2 mile of the nearest splice point I believe).

I'm aware of the limitations.  However, Comcast has been moving a lot of channels to IPTV which should free up bandwidth for increased upload speeds.

To my knowledge, I do not believe they are field testing any DOCSIS 4 setups.  I read that they field tested higher upload speeds in Jacksonville if I remember correctly using DOCSIS 3.1.

DOCSIS 3.1 can do much higher upload speeds than what we're getting.  Comcast doesn't even use the upstream OFDM channels and only has one downstream OFDM channel.  On top of that I don't think I've seen anyone post signal stats on here with all 8 upstream DOCSIS 3.0 channels active.  Usually it's 4-5, sometimes 3 or 6.  I get 4.

There are an assortment of impediments in the way of getting faster speeds.  One of them is likely a need for equipment upgrades.  Cable TV and DOCSIS 3.0 support are also taking up a lot of bandwidth, and that stuff needs to be moved around to make room for faster uploads.  One of the problems there is people with DOCSIS 3.0 modems.  They're still supported and people are still buying them.  Customers would be irate if Comcast suddenly kicked their brand new modem off the network.

I'd like to see DOCSIS 3.1 fully implemented sooner rather than later, so the first thing I'd like to see Comcast do is halt marketing approval for new DOCSIS 3.0 modems and combo cable WiFi routers.  No more Xfinity approved branding on DOCSIS 3.0 equipment, and they show up as "Supported, near end of life, not recommended" on the supported devices page.  That way people don't buy equipment that's hopefully going to become obsolete in not too long and it builds up a larger base of customers who are chomping at the bit for a full DOCSIS 3.1 implementation.

The problem with Gigabit Pro is it's way too expensive.  I just don't need 3000/3000 for $300/mo.  If I could get 1000/1000 for what I'm paying for 1200/35 or not too much more I'd do it, and I'd be ok with dropping a grand or two on installation fees.  But $300/mo is too much.  I don't really care about symmetrical.  I just want a decent amount of upload.  A few hundred would be fine.  I can get by with 35 no problem, it's just annoying.  So light up an OFDM upstream channel and I'll be happy.  Unlike some people on here I'm not inclined to jump ship from Comcast over reliability issues.  I've had the service for nearly 5 years and had few problems, plus my signal stats are quite nice.  But if the phone company shows up with 1000/1000 fiber I'll be very tempted.  It's not here yet, but it's getting close and when it arrives I'll be very tempted unless I have a good bit more upload by then.

One thing I love about Comcast is you can use your own modem and router.  You aren't forced to use Comcast's modem/router and put it in bypass mode like you are with AT&T.

I would still get AT&T fiber if they offered it in my area due to lower latency and increased upload speed.  Like you, I don't need 1G upload but 100-200 Mbps would be ideal.  

There is a lot of technical jargon to hide behind but the truth all comes down to profit margins.  Cox operates more like a cartel than a free market business. Only when competition from businesses like Starlink or Dish Network's 5G starts to steal significant market share will they suddenly "upgrade" our uploads. I bet it is as simple as a server checkbox and a reboot to double everyone's upload speeds. It seems just about that easy to boast our downloads.

I lived in Seoul, South Korea from 2016 - 2020.  I paid $40/mo for symmetrical 1Gbps.  When they connected me I joked that I wanted the fastest thing they had available for my address... the sales guy looked at me very seriously and said, "The 10 Gbps symmetrical connection is very expensive ($100/mo).  Are you sure you need that much?"  I settled with the measly 1G.