Re: 896kbps? in http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r20945882 en Wed, 09 Dec 2009 11:46:11 EDT Wed, 09 Dec 2009 11:46:11 EDT Re: 896kbps? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20966718 veldy :
said by Guspaz See Profile :

By any chance is that 896kbit upstream rate advertised as the actual throughput rather than the sync rate? Because after ATM and other overhead is taken into account, the actual throughput on 1088kbit upstream isn't all that far off from 896kbit.
896Kbps is the rate before overhead, which is about 15% about 780Kbs give or take. I think I was usually seeing the low 80Kbps range. It is simply not enough.

Annex M (and L) are only available, by my understanding, if the phone line they are running the DSL on does not have a voice number running on it at the same time. In other words, it uses the voice spectrum to increase the upstream bandwidth.

My current line is "naked DSL", meaning there is no voice attached to it [I use VOIP] and I think the only way I can stay with QWest [they have me on a trial plan at the moment, so I can afford to bounce between QWest and Comcast for competitive trial] so I don't see any reason why they aren't advertising the faster upload speeds [maybe for a fee if they have to install a new pair] ... but to compete, they need to do MUCH better than what they are doing on the upload side.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20966718 Mon, 18 Aug 2008 00:30:13 EDT Re: 896kbps? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20955611 ptrowski :
said by deviationer See Profile :

very true. Any gamer is better off getting something that is NOT DSL.

In fact that 15-20ms latency penalty is with all DSL flavors and providers.
My gaming with DSL is much more stable than my friend's that both have Comcast. Their speeds are higher, but I host so there is not any lag.
--
"A religious war is like children fighting over who has the strongest imaginary friend."

Have you been touched by his noodly appendage? »www.venganza.org]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20955611 Fri, 15 Aug 2008 13:17:16 EDT Re: 896kbps? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20951260 fiberguy : Thanks Judge Judy!

Please feel free to pass over my posts - since you don't read them anyway. You spend more time trying to tell me how I communicate instead of dealing with the topic at hand. This is typical of people who have nothing to offer.

I won't respond to your posts anymore.. don't bother.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20951260 Thu, 14 Aug 2008 15:54:08 EDT Re: 896kbps? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20950362 anon : Let's just gloss over the fact that your topic discussed Qwest's marketing and how they're on their last legs because Comcast and Cox is wiping the land with Qwest. :uhh: You're known to bend things to suite your argument.

I find it funny that you can't hold a discussion without acting high and mighty and usually restoring to some form of personal attacks. It's classic text book case of substance lacking. Ironic you accuse others of tactics that you're well known for playing yourself. You work in Comcast's management, right?

Good night. You're not worth the time.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20950362 Thu, 14 Aug 2008 13:06:07 EDT Re: 896kbps? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20948799 Guspaz : Indeed. Bell Canada's standard service is 7mbit down, 1088kbit up. They use the same upstream on their 10 and 16 megabit services. At THAT point, it's a technological limitation.

However, an addition to the spec (ADSL2+) supports up to 3.5 megabits per second upstream if the equipment supports annex M. (my modem does, for example), although this becomes a bit distance constrained. This is helped by deploying remote DSLAMs closer to the customer premises.

By any chance is that 896kbit upstream rate advertised as the actual throughput rather than the sync rate? Because after ATM and other overhead is taken into account, the actual throughput on 1088kbit upstream isn't all that far off from 896kbit.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20948799 Thu, 14 Aug 2008 06:46:02 EDT Re: 896kbps? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20948795 Guspaz : Sorry, no. The penalty is based on the distance between your DSLAM and your ISP's closest PoP, and your upstream and downstream speeds. Non-interleaved DSL connections can easily provide 6-7ms on the first hop or less. The DSL or Cable factor should not be the primary thing on a gamers' mind when choosing an ISP. More important, for example, would be the ISP's connectivity. This is probably moot if you only play on servers in the city you live in, but if you play against people from other cities, the better connected your ISP is, the less latency you're likely to suffer.

Obviously, geographical distances are insurmountable, but the more upstream providers an ISP has, the more likely you are to get a more direct route.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20948795 Thu, 14 Aug 2008 06:41:31 EDT Re: 896kbps? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20948632 fiberguy : RIF - Reading is fundamental...

said by fiberguy See Profile :

If ANY of the providers use marketing as a service, it's Qwest. They tried to compete with Comcast's digital voice by all the sudden one day putting out ads that said "Qwest digital phone".. and then all the sudden it's "Qwest Fiber Internet"... This is one time I will honestly say that Qwest is on it's last leg.. it can't continue to survive in the markets it does.. many of them have either Comcast or Cox as competitors and they're both wiping the land with Qwest.
Further, learn the difference, here, regarding the difference between a registered and an anonymous account.

You bore me.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20948632 Thu, 14 Aug 2008 04:11:52 EDT Re: 896kbps? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20946253 anon : Unless your real name is Fiber (Cable) Guy, you're just as anonymous as the rest of us.

Perhaps you should review your own post because your topic was not simply about digital phone:

said by fiberguy See Profile :

If ANY of the providers use marketing as a service, it's Qwest. They tried to compete with Comcast's digital voice by all the sudden one day putting out ads that said "Qwest digital phone".. and then all the sudden it's "Qwest Fiber Internet"... This is one time I will honestly say that Qwest is on it's last leg.. it can't continue to survive in the markets it does.. many of them have either Comcast or Cox as competitors and they're both wiping the land with Qwest.
You claim that someone doesn't know about Comcast's tactics is ludicrous, arrogant and shows how you simply spout of about how you think you know better, and how you think everyone else who has a differ opinion is wrong and needs to read a long rant from you.

Apparently, it's OK for you to blast someone posting as an Anonymous by claiming that they are simply trolling and should be working at bridge. You are a hypocrite by deflecting off the subject yourself. You prove you cannot argue unless you get personal and make such childish comments. Using a page from your book, it implies you have less substance yourself.

It still stands that you are very full of yourself.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20946253 Wed, 13 Aug 2008 17:44:07 EDT Re: 896kbps? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20945882 cyclone_z :
said by fiberguy See Profile :

said by fibercableboy :

said by fiberguy See Profile :

If ANY of the providers use marketing as a service, it's Qwest. They tried to compete with Comcast's digital voice by all the sudden one day putting out ads that said "Qwest digital phone".. and then all the sudden it's "Qwest Fiber Internet"... This is one time I will honestly say that Qwest is on it's last leg.. it can't continue to survive in the markets it does.. many of them have either Comcast or Cox as competitors and they're both wiping the land with Qwest.
Qwest has been on it's last leg for years. Nothing new. Qwest doesn't exactly have the best territory of them all, having to serve many small communities where cable companies tend to not invest themselves in. BTW, technically, Qwest's phone has been digital for quite some time. Don't tell me that Comcast's own tactics are any better or less dirty.
I am well aware of the territory issue.. but still, they have cities like Seattle, Denver, the Twin Cities metro (certainly not a small city) and then Des Moines, Phoenix.. they may have small cities, but they too have very large ones.

As for their "digital phone" defense.. don't even try that with me. Just because you have something digital about 23,000 feet away and then send it out analog over the lines doesn't make it digital. With that reasoning, cable TV has been digital for quite some time!

Comcast's "own tactics" to which you know nothing of, is true digital phone. The phone terminates at your home in digital form. With digital phone, there was an RSU on the side of the house that put the service on the house wire and an RiSU inside apartments that did the same thing. With digital voice, it terminates inside the home, even closer, often to a cordless phone, in digital form.

Sorry, but that argument, which has been had, is old, tired, and never going to pass.
I'd rather have reliable than digital. My parents lost power (as well as thousands of other people) for 48 hours after an ice storm last year. Funny thing about that copper telephone service. It worked the entire time. I was able to call my mother, who was home by herself, and check to see if she was ok. (Sure, she has a cell phone, but sometimes she forgets to charge it, and then I can't reach her.) The neighbor's cable phone service, by contrast, was out immediately. Now let's see, which would I rather have? The reliability or the digital thing. Hmm... tough choice there. The storm was so bad that it knocked out power to Qwest's CO, but they have backup batteries and generators, so the phones kept on working. I'll take reliable. You can wank it to your digital phone service.

As far as DSL goes, the DSL they can get isn't as fast as cable -- well maybe it is during peak usage hours -- hahaha! But it's sure a hell of a lot cheaper. They don't subscribe to cable TV, and Internet without cable is over $60 here from the cable co. For that price they get reliable local and long distance phone service, and reliable DSL. In fact, it's so reliable it's been out one day in the 3+ years they've had it -- over 99.9% reliable. That's great for me because that means they don't call me up and ask me to troubleshoot it for them.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20945882 Wed, 13 Aug 2008 16:33:49 EDT Re: 896kbps? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20945416 fiberguy : Sorry to tell you, Mr Anon, but the TOPIC in my post was about digital phone.. are you trying to come in and change the topic and context of what I was talking about? If so, next time, please let me know.. it might help, Johnny Bravo.. :uhh:

Do you have any idea just how effective the "yea, but.." argument is? It reminds me something like this:

Mother: "Timmy, you can't have ice cream because you didn't finish your vegetables...!"

Timmy: "Yea... but Steve didn't eat his!!!"

So, deflecting the issue away from the conversation point being made with something someone else may or may not have done is doing simply means you have no legit argument of your own.

And, the next time you want to worry about something someone else says on BBR, get an account and put yourself on record.. otherwise, with posts like yours, all you're doing is trolling.

Be gone.. don't you have a bridge to ask riddles at?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20945416 Wed, 13 Aug 2008 15:14:34 EDT Re: 896kbps? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20945385 tad2020 : The two nearest VRADs around me I've found fallowing the path of the telephone lines haven't been serviced by Edison for power yet. The first one is over 3000ft just walking down the street, the telephone lines snake around and take the long way there. The second one is 4000ft away if you fly to it. Their might be closer VRADs than those, but since my lines come of that pole in my back yard directly, I believe I'm limited to the nearest one to them. It looks like they shot for just covering the condo development on the previous block like they did for DSL. Theirs only 35 homes on my block and it fingers out from nearby city, surrounded by a park, a storm drain overflow/park and a large hill, and butts up on the border of the unincorporated area between the next city.

It doesn't looking good.

The uverse installation in the area seem to be at a stand still. I haven't seen any AT&T works at any of the VRADs since mid July. I drive by a dozen everyday all I different stages including pouring the pad. It looks like their installing another generator at their CO in Tustin, but I don't see why that would cause the delays.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20945385 Wed, 13 Aug 2008 15:08:59 EDT Re: 896kbps? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20945118 djrobx : My ADSL had gateway pings of 7ms.
Cable varied from 6-10ms.
My U-verse VDSL is 21-24ms.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20945118 Wed, 13 Aug 2008 14:16:08 EDT Re: 896kbps? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20945026 djrobx : In SoCal, the lowest U-Verse internet package, Express, is 1500 down, 1000 up for $25 per month. Pro 3000/1000 = $30, Elite 6000/1000 = $35, Max 10000/1500 = $55.

Not sure where you got 768kbps from. The only VRAD that will matter in terms of you getting service is one that's less than 3000 wire feet from you. Their service databases do get screwed up, but if it shows available you can always try.

I think at this time if you want "internet only" you have to order Max and it comes with an install charge. People have found it better to try out the TV and then cancel that portion, and they've been able to keep the interenet portion. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20945026 Wed, 13 Aug 2008 13:59:39 EDT Re: 896kbps? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20944863 tad2020 : Southern California. AT&T is still installing the uverse equipment and I've only seen one vrad of the 20 or so I see on my way to work that's looks finished, so I question when they say it's already available in the area. I doubt if they'll actually service my block at all, they never did for dsl.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20944863 Wed, 13 Aug 2008 13:29:02 EDT Re: 896kbps? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20944012 deviationer : very true. Any gamer is better off getting something that is NOT DSL.

In fact that 15-20ms latency penalty is with all DSL flavors and providers.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20944012 Wed, 13 Aug 2008 11:08:34 EDT Re: 896kbps? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20942661 anon :
said by fiberguy See Profile :



Comcast's "own tactics" to which you know nothing of, is true digital phone. The phone terminates at your home in digital form. With digital phone, there was an RSU on the side of the house that put the service on the house wire and an RiSU inside apartments that did the same thing. With digital voice, it terminates inside the home, even closer, often to a cordless phone, in digital form.

Sorry, but that argument, which has been had, is old, tired, and never going to pass.
Since when can you tell someone that they don't know anything about Comcast's tactics? I read just fine, thanks. Comcast certainly plays just as dirty, or dirtier, than Qwest. You'd realize this if didn't have a clear bias, Jack Cafferty.

No one asked about or disputed Comcast's digital phone service. Are you trying to sell something?

Sorry, but you certainly seem to be full of yourself by judging from all of yours posts on dslreports.com]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20942661 Wed, 13 Aug 2008 02:32:00 EDT Re: 896kbps? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20942637 fiberguy :
said by fibercableboy :

said by fiberguy See Profile :

If ANY of the providers use marketing as a service, it's Qwest. They tried to compete with Comcast's digital voice by all the sudden one day putting out ads that said "Qwest digital phone".. and then all the sudden it's "Qwest Fiber Internet"... This is one time I will honestly say that Qwest is on it's last leg.. it can't continue to survive in the markets it does.. many of them have either Comcast or Cox as competitors and they're both wiping the land with Qwest.
Qwest has been on it's last leg for years. Nothing new. Qwest doesn't exactly have the best territory of them all, having to serve many small communities where cable companies tend to not invest themselves in. BTW, technically, Qwest's phone has been digital for quite some time. Don't tell me that Comcast's own tactics are any better or less dirty.
I am well aware of the territory issue.. but still, they have cities like Seattle, Denver, the Twin Cities metro (certainly not a small city) and then Des Moines, Phoenix.. they may have small cities, but they too have very large ones.

As for their "digital phone" defense.. don't even try that with me. Just because you have something digital about 23,000 feet away and then send it out analog over the lines doesn't make it digital. With that reasoning, cable TV has been digital for quite some time!

Comcast's "own tactics" to which you know nothing of, is true digital phone. The phone terminates at your home in digital form. With digital phone, there was an RSU on the side of the house that put the service on the house wire and an RiSU inside apartments that did the same thing. With digital voice, it terminates inside the home, even closer, often to a cordless phone, in digital form.

Sorry, but that argument, which has been had, is old, tired, and never going to pass.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20942637 Wed, 13 Aug 2008 02:19:29 EDT Re: 896kbps? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20942066 djrobx : Really? They left ADSL2+ with the same upload limit as the original G.DMT ADSL? That's really lame if true.

-- Rob]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20942066 Tue, 12 Aug 2008 22:57:46 EDT Re: 896kbps? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20942043 djrobx : What area are you in?

-- Rob]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20942043 Tue, 12 Aug 2008 22:52:13 EDT Re: 896kbps? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20941895 Rob :
said by dvd536 See Profile :

said by Rob See Profile :

What the heck is wrong with them? 20Mbps down and a measly 896kbps up?
Technology limit. thats what happens when you're using a tired old technology such as DSL.
That doesn't make any sense. Other providers who use ADSL2 can offer 1Mbps upload. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20941895 Tue, 12 Aug 2008 22:18:11 EDT Re: 896kbps? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20941814 rantou : Thank you for that comment. I thought I was going to have to chime in and explain that it was the limit of the technology -- I have to deploy the ADSL2+ equipment for the ISP I work for and sure enough it's the limit of the technology, no getting around it with ADSL2+.

I do wish that when the ADSL2+ spec was released that it supported a bandwidth control option so that you could assign more upstream bandwidth within the data stream.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20941814 Tue, 12 Aug 2008 21:59:39 EDT Re: 896kbps? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20941679 Bink : When maximizing the download on my 7Mbps connection I generally don’t use more than 150Kbps for upstream TCP ACKs—so I imagine a full 20Mbps connection would require about 450Kbps for upstream ACKs.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20941679 Tue, 12 Aug 2008 21:31:45 EDT Re: 896kbps? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20941415 Anonymous_ : there is an 15ms to 20ms lantcy penalty with VDSL]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20941415 Tue, 12 Aug 2008 20:41:11 EDT Re: 896kbps? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20941305 dvd536 :
said by Rob See Profile :

What the heck is wrong with them? 20Mbps down and a measly 896kbps up?
Technology limit. thats what happens when you're using a tired old technology such as DSL.
--
When I gez aju zavateh na nalechoo more new yonooz tonigh molinigh - Ken Lee]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20941305 Tue, 12 Aug 2008 20:22:23 EDT Re: 896kbps? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20941159 anon :
said by fiberguy See Profile :

If ANY of the providers use marketing as a service, it's Qwest. They tried to compete with Comcast's digital voice by all the sudden one day putting out ads that said "Qwest digital phone".. and then all the sudden it's "Qwest Fiber Internet"... This is one time I will honestly say that Qwest is on it's last leg.. it can't continue to survive in the markets it does.. many of them have either Comcast or Cox as competitors and they're both wiping the land with Qwest.
Qwest has been on it's last leg for years. Nothing new. Qwest doesn't exactly have the best territory of them all, having to serve many small communities where cable companies tend to not invest themselves in. BTW, technically, Qwest's phone has been digital for quite some time. Don't tell me that Comcast's own tactics are any better or less dirty.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20941159 Tue, 12 Aug 2008 20:19:30 EDT Re: 896kbps? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20941140 tad2020 : Your basic package does. When I checked yesterday, the base package they were offering my locale was 768 and it didn't hit 1mbps till after the $40 mark. Which is odd cause TWC now has at least 1mbps on all tiers, even the basic package, and no requirement that you must order TV service as well.

I was going to switch to uverse when they finish rolling it out here, but after hearing than they absolutely require ordering their rather crappy TV service and that their HSI is more expensive for less speed. With TWC I have their 'basic' package which is 8mpbs/1mbps for $40 w/o TV or voip. Uverse wants $45 for 6mbps/1mbps plus another $44 or more for TV. I have no idea what AT&T is thinking, it seems like they don't want any competitive advantage here.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20941140 Tue, 12 Aug 2008 19:55:29 EDT Re: 896kbps? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20940763 en102 : Hell, AT&T's basic Uverse package 1.5/1Mbps has it beat on the upload
--
Canada = Hollywood North]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20940763 Tue, 12 Aug 2008 18:32:43 EDT Re: 896kbps? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20940721 bent : 896kbps, and the mentality behind it, is why I don't, and won't, use Qwest for my residential or business services. PPPoA on my 896k up DSL? $.05/min LD on my $700/mo PRI? No thanks.

It'll suck for the Denver economy, but I wonder who's going to occupy that building downtown when these guys fail?
--
»www.lp.org/issues/family-budget

"That government is best which governs least" - Thoreau]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20940721 Tue, 12 Aug 2008 18:23:13 EDT Re: 896kbps? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20940575 tad2020 : Yeah but only on the upload and not by much, Quest has them beat with DOUBLE the download.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20940575 Tue, 12 Aug 2008 17:51:37 EDT Re: 896kbps? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20939958 Rob :
said by Doctor Four See Profile :

AT&T has them beat with their highest U-Verse tier, at
least on the upload side: it gets 10Mbps down, 1.5Mbps up.

"AT&T has them beat".. a phrase hardly ever heard! :D]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20939958 Tue, 12 Aug 2008 15:55:09 EDT Re: 896kbps? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20939951 Rob :
said by fiberguy See Profile :

If ANY of the providers use marketing as a service, it's Qwest. They tried to compete with Comcast's digital voice by all the sudden one day putting out ads that said "Qwest digital phone".. and then all the sudden it's "Qwest Fiber Internet"... This is one time I will honestly say that Qwest is on it's last leg.. it can't continue to survive in the markets it does.. many of them have either Comcast or Cox as competitors and they're both wiping the land with Qwest.
Sounds like a government bail out soon..]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20939951 Tue, 12 Aug 2008 15:54:24 EDT Re: 896kbps? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20939933 Doctor Four : AT&T has them beat with their highest U-Verse tier, at
least on the upload side: it gets 10Mbps down, 1.5Mbps up.

--
"The trouble with computers, of course, is that they are very sophisticated idiots." - Doctor Who (from Robot)
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20939933 Tue, 12 Aug 2008 15:51:08 EDT Re: 896kbps? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20939928 fiberguy : If ANY of the providers use marketing as a service, it's Qwest. They tried to compete with Comcast's digital voice by all the sudden one day putting out ads that said "Qwest digital phone".. and then all the sudden it's "Qwest Fiber Internet"... This is one time I will honestly say that Qwest is on it's last leg.. it can't continue to survive in the markets it does.. many of them have either Comcast or Cox as competitors and they're both wiping the land with Qwest.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20939928 Tue, 12 Aug 2008 15:50:33 EDT Re: 896kbps? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20939865 swhitney2003 : How much upstream is used when one is using a full 20mbps down?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20939865 Tue, 12 Aug 2008 15:37:41 EDT 896kbps? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20939859 Rob : What the heck is wrong with them? 20Mbps down and a measly 896kbps up? ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20939859 Tue, 12 Aug 2008 15:36:14 EDT