Sterndogg

Last week A320 BOS-IAH equipped...system was totally down entire flight and unusable. Later in the week IAH-BOS...$9.99 and could barely send small emails or timed out for the entire flight. Granted full flight so bandwidth was probably slim to nil but still a joke when UA is sending out marketing emails reminding you that the plane has wifi. Offered 5K miles for the troubles.

hobo13

How did you get the 5K miles? Did you write to 1Kvoice?

I'd be happy to buy 5K miles for $9.99! And get some 14.4K internet for free!

Sterndogg

Haha exactly!!! Yeah I wrote to 1kvoice stating my frustration that they are marketing a service that is clearly not reliable and consistent. While I enjoy being disconnected I had booked these specific flights in order to get some work done which was not possible at all. Stated the facts and they quickly responded with that offer.

Kacee

I know it says you can access united.com for free, but the system seems to relegate the free access requests to the back of the queue. I've had the same issue, then paid, and voila - speed increased from worthlessly slow to only frustratringly slow.

hobo13

I'd like to hear some others chime in on this.

From a technical standpoint, this just seems surprising. The only free content is United.com so it seems like United would want their customers to be able to access it. Heck, somebody might even buy a ticket!

Boo_Radley

I've found it to be a mixed bag. It's been very hit or miss on both the Gogo system used on ps and the more common global satellite system (Panasonic?). Haven't had a change to try the system in DirecTV planes yet. Personally, I'm glad they chose a global system over a CONUS-only system, even if it does take a bit longer to iron out. They always refund me if the service truly sucks anyways.

Staymates788

I have been on 3 separate flights which "supposedly" offered wifi. Not one worked... Couldn't even get to the page to give them my $$,

But the united.com page sure seemed to work just fine

kenn0223

I must be in an alternate universe. The last month or two I've found wifi to be very available (10 out of 10 on my last airbus flights). I've been impressed with speed too, I think it's often as fast or faster than when teathered to my iPhone on AT&T LTE.

I know UA had a rough period last year and early this with roll out but I think it's fairly solid now (assuming you're on a plane with it installed). The only thing ice noticed is that it takes 5-10 minutes to fire up after clearing 10k feet (red to green icon) but after that it's been good for me. Well worth the $7-10 and far superior to the old flip down screens.

Clearly I seem to be in the minority.

BTW, I haven't tried using any of the free offers so I cannot comment on the speed there.

hungarianhc

The sad thing is that UA WiFi has actually gotten BETTER since I made this post: http://upgrd.com/blogs/cloudcommutin...e-results.html

DaviddesJ

I was on p.s. today JFK-SFO and the Gogo wifi was nearly unusable. Times of minutes to load a single web page.

bmwe92fan

My experience matches most here - Transocean flights have been surpirsingly good - CONUS intolerable. Maybe no one on OTW flights thinks its avaialable so it's all mine but who knows - and agree with all - other airlines seem to be able to manage this much better... I read somewhere that it costs about $200k per plane to convert to wifi availability - that's not chump change....

jasondc

I've been on a number of ORD/SFO/ORD flights in the past few months. I've used wifi on all and it's been great. Fast and reliable. Reasonably priced minor downtime issues but if it went down came back within 10-20 min. Either way I was happy with it

Firewind

I submit that this, or the theme, is key -- available bandwidth and usage. And moreover, vis a vis streaming. Not just on United, not just in the air. Notice that when we're on a flight, on a train, on a long haul bus, in an airport, or in a hotel where and when there are likely many people streaming - including live TV and video games - the speed is up, down, up, down etc., sometimes slowing to a stall? You'll be flying along - even just doing emails - and then you're not. And you're never sure if it's you until it eases up and you're off and running again. "Ahhhh ... it wasn't me."

I suggest that many hosts, when they purchased the equipment, didn't acquire the capacity for today's and future demands. Slightly OT, I find this to be a regular phenomenon particularly at hotels, and notably in hotels that are in a hotel cluster. Particularly between about 8 and 11 pm. Even when they've tried to compensate by providing several routers. And on transportation, particularly near the beginning and the end of the trip.

Back to United, it's unclear where they are on this progress continuum, but accounts on the ground - er, in the air - raise questions that we see here.

Paging Consumer Reports?

RandomBaritone

You'll get no argument from me that wifi is the future: I think they're right on target with pricing, and in prioritizing it above other types of inflight entertainment and service. What's appalling to me is how slowly and inconsistently they're rolling it out. I fly BOS<>SFO once or twice a month. This is a nearly seven-hour flight when traveling westward -- the longest continental nonstop they fly -- and 90% of the time I'm on an older 752 with neither wifi nor power, even in F.

My last trip I sat next to an intermittent UA flyer who was simply incredulous. Couldn't imagine why a tech manager like myself would choose UA over VX or B6 on this route.

He has a point.

jasondc

well, on BOS-SFO you choose UA over AA as AA requires a connection.

So, if you want a nonstop, you fly UA. Wifi will be there eventually, fleeting decisions aren't really made based on wifi, they're based on economics of the aircraft for the particular mission. BOS-SFO is high volume and decent fares. They need the capacity of a 757 on certain flights/ times of day. So that's where it's assigned.