 en102Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | reply to Camelot One
Re: DSL statisfaction (in general) higher than cable? I've been through both Cable and DSL... and experiences vary.
Cogeco: Initial install was botched, and spent MANY hours on hold attempting to get through.. only to find they didn't have a bi-directional amp installed.  . 2Mbps/256kbps
TimeWarner: Self install worked fine - free installation, free equipment, free 2 months of service  Only issue I had was basic channels were analog, and a bad splitter in the condo (installed backwards  ) 2Mbps/384kbps
Comcast: Wanted installation fees, rental fees, basic costs were higher, CS was low (i.e. website allowed for basic cable, however CS only allowed for +$50 cable with $45 HSI. Analog lower channels were poor quality - service switched to DTV. No voice service available.
DSL (AT&T): Cheap(er) Internet, free setup kit/install/filters and modem (they didn't want it back either). It worked... had to get rid of the spam/spyware apps (GATOR/GAIN). 1.5Mbps/128kbps
DSL (DSLEXTREME): 3.0Mbps/512kbps service for 1.5Mbps AT&T renew price... worked well. Too far from the CO for stable service. Tech support has been VERY responsive. I disliked their use of DNS search service... I'm glad its gone.
--
Canada = Hollywood North |
