Re: DSL vs Cable in General Questions http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r20678881 en Sat, 05 Dec 2009 19:24:08 EDT Sat, 05 Dec 2009 19:24:08 EDT Re: DSL vs Cable http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20713414 Hayward :
said by databird See Profile :

said by Hayward See Profile :

PINGS only REALLY matter to gammers, especialy the lesser skilled ones....
I'm a skilled gamer, yet high pings adversely affect my performance. Please explain your theory or have it be considered nothing but hot air.
Just where did I say that? Only that it effect less skilled ones more.
And that for most things slightly high pings are not all that important certainly not the like 20ms (2 hundreths sec) some gamers go bonkers over. Even VOIP doesn't get really negatively effected until much higher than that.
--
»haywardm.com (Hayward's Key West)
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20713414 Sat, 28 Jun 2008 17:01:45 EDT Re: DSL vs Cable http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20711564 databird :
said by Hayward See Profile :

PINGS only REALLY matter to gammers, especialy the lesser skilled ones....
I'm a skilled gamer, yet high pings adversely affect my performance. Please explain your theory or have it be considered nothing but hot air.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20711564 Sat, 28 Jun 2008 04:09:07 EDT Re: DSL vs Cable http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20711157 Hayward :
said by databird See Profile :

You guys are forgetting pings. I've heard DSL generally gives better pings than does cable, especially if you're on an ADSL2+ connection with FastPath (as opposed to interleaving).
PINGS only REALLY matter to gammers, especialy the lesser skilled ones.... and guess what no... the whole world doesn't game.... still FAR from it.

The other place it is of importance but to a MUCH lower degree is VOIP, has to be really bad to signifficantly impact that.

And there is no point to have DSL VOIP (Unless dry DSL becomes much more prevalent and lower than normal prices... they really haven't even where available).... VOIP is pretty much wholely a cable market.

Majic Jack (they survive) could be workable on DSL, but there are so many low cost, and pretty much Telco can't make you use anything any more, local or LD, still the monthly rate makes it not economic.
--
»haywardm.com (Hayward's Key West)
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20711157 Sat, 28 Jun 2008 00:47:36 EDT Re: DSL vs Cable http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20709834 databird : You guys are forgetting pings. I've heard DSL generally gives better pings than does cable, especially if you're on an ADSL2+ connection with FastPath (as opposed to interleaving).]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20709834 Fri, 27 Jun 2008 19:34:02 EDT Re: DSL vs Cable http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20692118 centsofhumor : my dsl is fine, cheaper then charter. :D]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20692118 Tue, 24 Jun 2008 14:48:54 EDT Re: DSL vs Cable http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20690424 anon : I re-route my Sprint Mobile Broadband, and while the download speeds aren't as fast, I think it's a better option for those who wish to add the mobility.

-G
Network Support in Maryland]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20690424 Tue, 24 Jun 2008 09:51:11 EDT Re: DSL vs Cable http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20685172 BinaryXtreme : No, I have Charter cable and thank you for backing my point.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20685172 Mon, 23 Jun 2008 11:09:09 EDT Re: DSL vs Cable http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20684359 dvd536 :
said by BinaryXtreme See Profile :

I don't know how to explain it but there is no lag in the loading like DSL has.
Are you in Qwestland in nevada? with qwests interleave, you are at 32ms BEFORE you even get out of qwests network.
When i had qwest DSL, primetime hours were sub-dialup speeds so i used to use the backup dial account they gave you to bring my speeds to dialup speeds!
for what its worth my qwest DSL was a CAP line, not DMT on a cisco 675 DSL modem.
--
When I gez aju zavateh na nalechoo more new yonooz tonigh molinigh - Ken Lee]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20684359 Mon, 23 Jun 2008 07:33:42 EDT Re: DSL vs Cable http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20684008 OZO : As it rightly was said earlier, both DSL and cable are based on old technology and as such are limited. DSL has speed limit, while cable has capacity limits (it's basically a shared media). Putting aside those limits for a moment (they're important and it's matter of the time when customers start demand more and both technologies will be eventually abandoned), there are several factors that are decisive for users like me. And that's why I still use DSL:
• there should be no blocked services and/or ports. I need to be able to run any service I want;
• I should be able to get a small pack of static IP addresses (as support for the point above);
• ability to maintain reverse DNS records.

DSL doesn't have any feature for me - I need more speed, than I have now (6M/768K). I know that DSL will not deliver. But, cable, from the other side, doesn't provide service I need (see points above) and I'll never switch to it because of that. Thus, I've got stuck unsatisfied... :(
--
Keep it simple, it'll become complex by itself...]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20684008 Mon, 23 Jun 2008 02:25:58 EDT Re: DSL vs Cable http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20683378 Cheddah : Yes I do agree that when it's something beyond a user's control, it is good to call it in but generally the times that I have called TS is when it's a complete outage and of course their response is that they're aware of it and are working on it. I am not sure who your ISP is, but when I call comcast it's 5-6 different menus that you need to get through while listening to them harp about their exciting new features/products that I have no interest of purchasing along with pay per view specials that are coming up. Such a waste of time.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20683378 Sun, 22 Jun 2008 23:05:43 EDT Re: DSL vs Cable http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20683289 Wolfie00 :
said by Cheddah See Profile :

I rarely if ever use tech support so I could care less about that.
I agree with your comments, except that one. Tech support is about a lot more than calling up your ISP because your Internet doesn't work and you don't know what to do. It's also about intelligent and responsive action to a problem that is on their side, and that's where so many of them fall down. Dramatic loss of bandwidth, high latencies, protocol-specific communication failures -- those are all things that can and do happen. I will challenge anyone here on technical qualifications, and I need no help with local networking and equipment, but I still consider ISP technical support to be vitally important for the simple reason that I don't control anything outside the premises.
--
"Until he extends his circle of compassion to include all living things, man will not himself find peace" -- Dr. Albert Schweitzer
"A dog is like a child who never grows old ... always there to love and be loved" -- Aaron Katcher
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20683289 Sun, 22 Jun 2008 22:45:38 EDT Re: DSL vs Cable http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20683183 Cheddah : Apples and oranges. I'll take whatever works the best in my area and is the most stable. I rarely if ever use tech support so I could care less about that. I had comcast last year and loved it and would have recommended it to anymone. Then I moved and now comcast is a POS connection with fluctuations in bandwidth and time outs all the time. I have their 16/2 service but would give that up for a more reliable DSL connection with less latency in a heartbeat but AT&T only has 1.5 connections in my area and that's too slow for me. Speed is not always the most important thing and you cable people posting speed-test screenshots and saying 'Cable roxorz my boxerz over DSL' have obviously never had to try to help a client using a VPN connection to work on a cable connection that keeps timing out.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20683183 Sun, 22 Jun 2008 22:25:42 EDT Re: DSL vs Cable http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20683141 Wolfie00 :
said by tschmidt See Profile :

Customer satisfaction has more to do with ISP business practices then underlying technology.
Give that man a cigar! :) That's the issue in a nutshell.

Cable and DSL are most assuredly very different, but the performance of each is determined much more by the policies of the ISP and the infrastructure provider (if that happens to be someone else) than by the inherent technology.

For example, DSL can be plagued by distance to the CO or DSLAM but a reputable DSL ISP won't make promises that can't be met, or feeble excuses after the fact. Cable has no distance issues but a less-than-reputable operator might overload the PHUB in preference to spending any money on segmentation and equipment upgrades. Either one can shaft you with throttling and traffic shaping and bandwidth caps. And the quality of customer service can make a huge difference as well.

So it all depends, completely and unpredictably, on exactly where your house is located. If I were making a decision in a new unfamiliar neighborhood, I'd find some knowledgeable folks in the immediate area who actually care what speeds they're getting, and ask them what they prefer! There's no way to give generic advice. It's too bad that so many cable operators are such idiots because they do have the technological edge and the theoretical ability to provide the highest bandwidth, but if their engineers are incompetent and they hire drunken monkeys as customer service staff, it doesn't really help!
--
"Until he extends his circle of compassion to include all living things, man will not himself find peace" -- Dr. Albert Schweitzer
"A dog is like a child who never grows old ... always there to love and be loved" -- Aaron Katcher
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20683141 Sun, 22 Jun 2008 22:17:05 EDT Re: DSL vs Cable http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20682180 Siko :
said by jadebangle See Profile :

I use to be a fanboy of dsl but today my opinion is completely changed after using cable for the first time since cable was introduced. As soon as I signup for cable from comcast I was surfing instantly. Why can't they do this on DSL?
I'm on promotion rates 19.95 for 1 year surfing at 6/1 or 750kb/sec, 125kb/sec
This blows my elite speed away which is 600kb/sec, 75kb/sec
I'm paying less and getting more speed for it.
I am beginning to realize that dsl is a poor man's version of cable with no potential due to ancient technology using copper wire that are so small that you need a microscope to be able to see the copper wire.
They need to do away with DSL and many many people who have cable or fios is gonna put them out of business.
I have use cellphone and pay only 40 a month
Its convenient so I'm actually saving money by cancelling my landline, and dsl recently about 3 weeks ago.
Cable is as widely available as dsl, the coaxial line have a much greater distance so 95 percent of cable subscriber are able to upgrade to any speed available.
Cable really gives fios a run for it's money.
With docsis 3.0 we're talking 152mbit/108mbit
Pretty impressive IMHO.
By using more channel, it will go up to 304mbit/108mbit
I have been feeding the dsl monopoly since 2001, I have never subscribed to cable service even thought was able to get it. I bought into the hypes of dsl being not shared, dedicated line, never runs out of bandwidth use as much as you like.
landline needs to be scraped and replace with something better such as cat5, capable of 1gbps 10 times faster then 100mbit standard ethernet.
DSL being obsolete will be around for as long as consumer do not have a better alternative.
What's keeping the landline monopoly alive? They make a lot of money off it. Their are people who needs to use their landline to make international call which makes them a lot of money. DSL shouldn't exist, it exist because of greed and a desperation for something faster then dialup.

Because the speed of dsl is far less then cable users
Its seems like dsl have more bandwidth.
The majority of dsl user are on 384kbps, 768kbps, 1536kbps
You can subscribe to many more users and without notice of network slowdown or congestion. That's what someone need to take into account when saying DSL has more bandwidth, more stable speed, never slows down.
That's like saying 384kbps is smoother then 6mbit
just because the slowdown isn't noticeable


By the way, I just moved from cable to dsl last November. The downloads are as slow as heck. How did you get $19.99 for one year? The only thing I could find is 6 months. I'm a previous HSI member and I current have Comcast Expanded Basic Cable. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20682180 Sun, 22 Jun 2008 18:18:28 EDT Re: DSL vs Cable http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20682013 s2000_racer : Cable all the way.
New Rich Tex···.rtf.zip 371 bytes
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20682013 Sun, 22 Jun 2008 17:34:03 EDT Re: DSL vs Cable http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20681876 Nightfall :
quote:
For example, if your local Cable Internet provider has enough bandwidth in your area that can handle a lot of users, the speed of your connection will hardly be affected by this sharing. Also, if you use DSL and your DSL provider's central office if far away from your home, your connection will be slower than normal even though you aren't sharing that connection with anyone else. In such a case, Cable would be better, since Cable maintains its rate of data transfer better over long distances while higher ADSL speeds can be limited by distance.

Then you have oversubscription of DSL as well. In my area about 6 years ago, the CO was clearly oversubscribed. I had a few SBC techs that I knew personally that told me the CO was so full that during peak hours, if you got 1/3 of what you paid for you were lucky.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20681876 Sun, 22 Jun 2008 16:49:09 EDT Re: DSL vs Cable http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20681180 lev : In my case, and that for many of my clients, DSL has been the choice because up until recently, it was the only option that could provide static IP addresses with forward and reverse DNS over a DSL connection.

While I appreciate your enthusiasm, you are also on a promotional Comcast rate. Calculating price/performance at regular rates, DSL tends to win out.

Use what works best for you, but as much as you were an admitted fanboy for DSL, don't become one for cable. Most people who understand technology don't care much for people who just go with what they know and tell everyone else it's the best.

Rather, most things are best given certain circumstances.

While my Prius is generally a great car for me, I do have to borrow a van on the occasion I have to move something.

While my Macintosh is generally my computer of choice for creative work, anything is fine for browsing, and nothing beats the price/performance of a Linux box as a server for me.

And for me, DSL delivers more of the things I consider important than cable. :::shrug:::]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20681180 Sun, 22 Jun 2008 13:44:02 EDT Re: DSL vs Cable http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20680942 sbcretired : If given a choice, and both are fairly reliable it comes down to "whats it worth in $$"
If money were no object then this discussion would be only about how fast. Many folks don't have tons of discretionary money, so we price shop too.
Then there is the trial periods for "packages" and when they expire many will say, I don't want to bother with changing the computer accounts/email again.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20680942 Sun, 22 Jun 2008 12:42:55 EDT Re: DSL vs Cable http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20680673 BinaryXtreme : True. Thanks for the reply. I will say that when either service goes down, cable has been easier for me to reconnect. Now, my honest question being away from DSL for so long is, what is the fastest speed available now via DSL?

Interesting.....

Bandwidth - From 756 Kbps to 6 Mbps, but you pay higher prices to get the higher rates of data transfer. Also, DSL is typically limited to 128 Kbps upstream. Bandwidth - Although you can theoretically get up to 30 Mbps downstream, the average rate is around 5 Mbps to 6 Mbps downstream and 384 Kbps upstream.
Not Shared - Bandwidth is dedicated, not shared, between the user's location and the nearest central office of your ISP. Shared - The bandwidth to your Cable ISP is shared by you and all the other Internet users in your area using same service.
More Secure - DSL is generally considered more secure since it uses a dedicated rather than shared connection to your ISP. Less Secure - Cable is a shared medium that is subject to eavesdropping, denial of service attacks, service theft, etc.
Distance Sensitive - The further you are from your DSL service provider's facilities, the less speed you will get. Not Distance Sensitive - You receive the same rate of speed no matter what distance you are from your provider.
Installation Fees - Usually no cost, but can have a shipping and modem rental fees. Installation Fees - Usually no cost, but can have a shipping and modem rental fees.
Monthly Rates - Ranges from $15 to $45, but the less you pay the lower your speeds. Monthly Rates - Average from $40 to $55 and you can't pay less for slower speeds.

Do Cable Users Really Share Bandwidth While DSL Users Do Not?

Many salespersons for DSL providers will tell you that DSL does not share bandwidth while Cable does, thus slowing down Cable Internet connections when many people near you are using the Internet. While this is true, it is a general statement that can cause you to make an uninformed decision if you think it means DSL will always be faster than Cable.

For example, if your local Cable Internet provider has enough bandwidth in your area that can handle a lot of users, the speed of your connection will hardly be affected by this sharing. Also, if you use DSL and your DSL provider's central office if far away from your home, your connection will be slower than normal even though you aren't sharing that connection with anyone else. In such a case, Cable would be better, since Cable maintains its rate of data transfer better over long distances while higher ADSL speeds can be limited by distance.

The Decision Usually Comes Down To Exactly Where You Live

For many consumers looking into DSL vs Cable, the debate of which Internet service is better will never even come up. You're often lucky to have one of the two services in your area. For those consumers who actually have both services available to them, the answer to which is a better choice lies in the exact location of your home.

As a rule of thumb, DSL speeds will depend upon the actual distance your building is from the nearest central office of your ISP. For Cable Internet, connection speeds can be affected by the amount of Internet use in your particular neighborhood. And since no objective article on the Internet can tell you how far your individual house is to your DSL-ISP's nearest central office or how many other Cable Internet users are actively using the Internet in your area, you'll just have to do some asking around on your own.

Since the connections speeds in your area will most certainly be different than in other areas, you're best course of action is to talk to other Internet users in your area who utilize the type of connections that you are looking into. Only by gauging the quality of a provider in a certain area directly with the customers who use their service will help you make a sound decision.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20680673 Sun, 22 Jun 2008 11:38:10 EDT Re: DSL vs Cable http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20680627 shdesigns :
said by BinaryXtreme See Profile :

Apples vs. Oranges? That's it? Uh........... I've had both and cable is a lot faster depending on your plan but as far as reliability, cable wins hands down. My mother is forced to use DSL in her area when she moved and does not nearly like it as much as cable. She suffers from the same issues I did. Frequent outages and slower service. The one thing clearly noticeable between the two is that cable has that speed snap to it. I don't know how to explain it but there is no lag in the loading like DSL has. I speak this from home experience as work as well. If I had a choice, cable.
Again, has nothing to do with cable vs DSL.

I had crappy DSL with Earthlink, lots of droputs. Was good when it was Mindspring, but after the EL buyout they oversold lines and had poor support.

Changed to a better ISP and all problems went away. Same line, same DSLAM, just routed through different ISP.

Power here is flaky. The slightest flicker and you have to wait for the cable system to "reboot". DSL stays up for at least 4 hours when power goes out.
--
Scott Henion

Embedded Systems Consultant, shenion on #ATU @irc.freenode.net
SHDesigns home]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20680627 Sun, 22 Jun 2008 11:26:25 EDT Re: DSL vs Cable http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20680613 TMMerlin : I never experience "cable fade'..anymore !

My DSL is solid as a rock ..has been for years
My Sat TV is almost always "fade free" ..unless there is a thunderstorm

BUt best of all .."no cable fade" ..anymore !
--
Some people hear their own inner voices with great clearness and they live by what they hear. Such people become crazy but they become legend.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20680613 Sun, 22 Jun 2008 11:22:33 EDT Re: DSL vs Cable http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20680592 BinaryXtreme : Apples vs. Oranges? That's it? Uh........... I've had both and cable is a lot faster depending on your plan but as far as reliability, cable wins hands down. My mother is forced to use DSL in her area when she moved and does not nearly like it as much as cable. She suffers from the same issues I did. Frequent outages and slower service. The one thing clearly noticeable between the two is that cable has that speed snap to it. I don't know how to explain it but there is no lag in the loading like DSL has. I speak this from home experience as work as well. If I had a choice, cable.

]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20680592 Sun, 22 Jun 2008 11:18:35 EDT Re: DSL vs Cable http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20680515 Nightfall :
said by tschmidt See Profile :

Both Cable DOCSIS and DSL are clever engineering designs that added data to network designed for a different purpose.

Cable is a shared medium so adding a customer to cable is much easier as DSL requires the Telco to modify Central Office wiring. It also means everyone on a given node shares the available bandwidth. Whereas DSL is not shared until it hits the DSLAM.

Customer satisfaction has more to do with ISP business practices then underlying technology.

If you are happy with Cable Internet access that is great. As for me I'll stick with DSL and hope to get Fiber to the Premise (FTTP) some day.

/tom
Excellent post tschmidt.

Lets be frank here, both of these technologies are in fact shared mediums. As you said, cable shares at the node whereas DSL is not shared until it hits the DSLAM. I have seen many DSL providers oversubscribe at the CO just as I have seen many nodes oversaturated on the cable side.

The common misconception around these forums is that cable is a shared medium while DSL is not. Some people think their DSL connection plugs right into the backbone of the internet or something which simply is not the case. Any broadband service you get is going to be shared.

The end result is the same, if you are happy with cable, thats awesome. I have Comcast cable in my area and AT&T DSL. I used Comcast at the beginning, moved to AT&T DSL after a year. Their DSL service was so unreliable that I moved back to Comcast for 2 more years. I tried AT&T DSL again back in 2004 and haven't looked back sense. I have subscribed to both lines for about a year and a half and that was quite cool to say the least.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20680515 Sun, 22 Jun 2008 10:53:35 EDT Re: DSL vs Cable http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20680447 ptrowski : I have used cable for years, and was happy. Using VoIP on cable can be frustrating sometimes, especially if your node is oversold.

I went to DSL about a year ago, and I like it alot. Yes, it's not as fast as cable, but it is a very stable line. I don't get the fluctuations I used to during peak hours.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20680447 Sun, 22 Jun 2008 10:32:20 EDT Re: DSL vs Cable http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20680272 Siko : With Verizon dsl, there are no caps and no torrent throttling. :)

Also web pages seem to load the same speed as comcast. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20680272 Sun, 22 Jun 2008 09:24:03 EDT Re: DSL vs Cable http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20680251 xxdave : In my experience it depends on the part of the country. I lived in Florida in a neighborhood where cable really sucked always outages, now I reside in New England and Comcast is the far better the choice than DSL ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20680251 Sun, 22 Jun 2008 09:12:25 EDT Re: DSL vs Cable http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20680162 Hayward : eal question is how reliable is the cable????

Fine when it works but how long is it out, when the shit hits the fan?

You with tornadoes are like we are with hurricanes... and it can be WEEKS for cable to recover, but DSL often works through and immediately after hurricannes if you don't loose your pole drop, and even then more quickly restored.
--
»haywardm.com (Hayward's Key West)
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20680162 Sun, 22 Jun 2008 08:33:57 EDT Re: DSL vs Cable http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20680037 Ryno : Apples vs Oranges]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20680037 Sun, 22 Jun 2008 06:51:56 EDT Re: DSL vs Cable http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20679616 Anonymous_ : maybe 15 or 20mbps at the most]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20679616 Sun, 22 Jun 2008 01:27:26 EDT Re: DSL vs Cable http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20679441 dvd536 :
said by jadebangle See Profile :

With docsis 3.0 we're talking 152mbit/108mbit
Pretty impressive IMHO.
By using more channel, it will go up to 304mbit/108mbit
If you're NOT in a fios area, i wouldn't expect too much from cable when DOCSIS 3.0 comes about.
--
When I gez aju zavateh na nalechoo more new yonooz tonigh molinigh - Ken Lee]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20679441 Sun, 22 Jun 2008 00:24:06 EDT Re: DSL vs Cable http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20679426 dvd536 : With DSL soooo many things have to go right to get it working.
Fibre in the loop? uh-oh
no open port for you at the CO? uh-oh
Load coil? uh-oh
Bridge taps? uh-oh
going through a CLEC and there are issues(fingerpointing among the two) uh-oh
-
As far as bandwidth goes, DSL can have slowdowns too[its all shared at some point]
--
When I gez aju zavateh na nalechoo more new yonooz tonigh molinigh - Ken Lee]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20679426 Sun, 22 Jun 2008 00:20:05 EDT Re: DSL vs Cable http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20679322 Mchart : As stated, it greatly depends on the area. Up home in Chicago, Comcast is pretty bad. More so in the afternoon when all the kids get home from school and start going online. However, down where I am now in San Antonio, RR is vastly superior to my DSL service up north. It's higher bandwidth, stable, low latency, and at 30 bucks a month - I can't complain.
--
"You figured it out. All new CPU's are nothing but overclocked Pentium 1's with a few bells and whistles added, ask any ol timer whose been around."]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20679322 Sat, 21 Jun 2008 23:46:38 EDT Re: DSL vs Cable http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20679206 Doctor Four : Same here as with CylonRed See Profile. Time Warner, though faster,
has crappier service than DSL or AT&T U-Verse (the two main
alternatives). Though Verizon is expanding now in parts of
Dallas, and if their FiOS service arrives here, it will surpass
both TW and AT&T.
--
"The trouble with computers, of course, is that they are very sophisticated idiots." - Doctor Who (from Robot)
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20679206 Sat, 21 Jun 2008 23:13:21 EDT Re: DSL vs Cable http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20678988 CylonRed : If you are in my neck of the woods with TW - then DSL is by far the better option.

since you have cable tv then it is easy to add internet on it - DSL is different and will remain that way and really is no big deal.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20678988 Sat, 21 Jun 2008 22:17:37 EDT Re: DSL vs Cable http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20678919 jimbopalmer : Yes, my advice is always to send your money to the company you hate the least, the technology is less important than customer satisfaction.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20678919 Sat, 21 Jun 2008 21:57:09 EDT Re: DSL vs Cable http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20678881 shdesigns : As tschmidt See Profile said, both are fine and which is better is more about the company your are dealing with than the technology.

Here cable is unreliable even though they rewired the neighborhood with fiber, it still drops out all the time. I got rid of it and went DSL/DirectTV and have no more problems.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20678881 Sat, 21 Jun 2008 21:50:11 EDT Re: DSL vs Cable http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20678817 tschmidt : Both Cable DOCSIS and DSL are clever engineering designs that added data to network designed for a different purpose.

Cable is a shared medium so adding a customer to cable is much easier as DSL requires the Telco to modify Central Office wiring. It also means everyone on a given node shares the available bandwidth. Whereas DSL is not shared until it hits the DSLAM.

Customer satisfaction has more to do with ISP business practices then underlying technology.

If you are happy with Cable Internet access that is great. As for me I'll stick with DSL and hope to get Fiber to the Premise (FTTP) some day.

/tom]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20678817 Sat, 21 Jun 2008 21:37:49 EDT DSL vs Cable http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20678698 jadebangle : I use to be a fanboy of dsl but today my opinion is completely changed after using cable for the first time since cable was introduced. As soon as I signup for cable from comcast I was surfing instantly. Why can't they do this on DSL?
I'm on promotion rates 19.95 for 1 year surfing at 6/1 or 750kb/sec, 125kb/sec
This blows my elite speed away which is 600kb/sec, 75kb/sec
I'm paying less and getting more speed for it.
I am beginning to realize that dsl is a poor man's version of cable with no potential due to ancient technology using copper wire that are so small that you need a microscope to be able to see the copper wire.
They need to do away with DSL and many many people who have cable or fios is gonna put them out of business.
I have use cellphone and pay only 40 a month
Its convenient so I'm actually saving money by cancelling my landline, and dsl recently about 3 weeks ago.
Cable is as widely available as dsl, the coaxial line have a much greater distance so 95 percent of cable subscriber are able to upgrade to any speed available.
Cable really gives fios a run for it's money.
With docsis 3.0 we're talking 152mbit/108mbit
Pretty impressive IMHO.
By using more channel, it will go up to 304mbit/108mbit
I have been feeding the dsl monopoly since 2001, I have never subscribed to cable service even thought was able to get it. I bought into the hypes of dsl being not shared, dedicated line, never runs out of bandwidth use as much as you like.
landline needs to be scraped and replace with something better such as cat5, capable of 1gbps 10 times faster then 100mbit standard ethernet.
DSL being obsolete will be around for as long as consumer do not have a better alternative.
What's keeping the landline monopoly alive? They make a lot of money off it. Their are people who needs to use their landline to make international call which makes them a lot of money. DSL shouldn't exist, it exist because of greed and a desperation for something faster then dialup.

Because the speed of dsl is far less then cable users
Its seems like dsl have more bandwidth.
The majority of dsl user are on 384kbps, 768kbps, 1536kbps
You can subscribe to many more users and without notice of network slowdown or congestion. That's what someone need to take into account when saying DSL has more bandwidth, more stable speed, never slows down.
That's like saying 384kbps is smoother then 6mbit
just because the slowdown isn't noticeable

]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20678698 Sat, 21 Jun 2008 21:07:34 EDT