dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
3
share rss forum feed


Pesimist

join:2007-07-09
Valley, AL
reply to bobvick

Re: [Exede] Exede and DSL

Exede would be a disappointment compared to DSL, consider latency issues. Suggest you look for wireless carriers (Verizon, ATT, etc.) before going with Excede.


DrStrangLov

join:2012-03-28

said by Pesimist:

Exede would be a disappointment compared to DSL

Contrary to a myth, all DSLs are not equal in quality, speed, and latency.

Unless a DSL provider has state of the art equipment, YMMV, depending upon their infrastructure, and your distance to central office.

There have been a number of law suits against DSL providers with inferior service being the focus of the law suit.

DSL providers, the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly is the reality.

silbaco
Premium
join:2009-08-03
USA

I wouldn't say it is a myth. That's simply how DSL works. When comparing 4mbps DSL to Exede, there really isn't much of a comparison. The DSL will have a much lower latency.

The only time DSL latency is really out of your normal 25-80ms is when congestion is present or when you are really far out and interleaving and possibly extender technologies (such as Go Digital) are in use. Despite what it appears on this website, congestion to the point of service being degraded on DSL is relativity rare. Interleaving and extender technologies don't really add that much latency to a service, especially when compared to satellite.


DrStrangLov

join:2012-03-28

said by silbaco:

I wouldn't say it is a myth.

One "satisfied" DSL customer says, "I've had days when I got faster connections after fishing out my old RJ-11 patch cord and going back to DUN via 56k modem -- can you believe days of
23 Kb/s on DSL? and 43 Kb/s by old-fashioned 56k data modem?"

"I guess that's how come at&t wound up settling in that DSL class action --"
»www.DSLSpeedSettlement.com

"AT&T DSL Speed Settlement award payments for eligible recipients are scheduled to appear as a bill credit or for delivery via a mailed check by September 30, 2012. Payments were calculated according to the terms of the Settlement as approved by the Court. "

only time DSL latency is really out of your normal 25-80ms is when congestion is present...

See above picture...

Btw, my brother had DSL, and then switched to Comcast, cause DSL sucked.

silbaco
Premium
join:2009-08-03
USA

The At&t lawsuit had to do with A&t provisioning speeds below what customers were paying for, making it impossible to ever achieve the rates customers were paying for. It has very little to do with the actual performance of DSL.

That speedtest is not normal DSL. And yes, DSL will suck compared to Comcast. The technology is simply not comparable unless you have VDSL, which even then won't be comparable because At&t does not allow you to utilize it to the full potential. VDSL2 can move 100mbps in the field and in theory can move 100mbps, both ways.



dbirdman
Premium,MVM
join:2003-07-07
usa
kudos:5
reply to DrStrangLov

DrStrangLov, your posts probably only sound impressive if the person reading has never had a DSL line.

I have had PacBell/SBC/AT&T DSL most of the time since 1995. I had a 1Mbps line that grew to a 3Mbps line from 1995 to 2003, then moved to a location where all I could get was 256Kbps. Since I had satellite also (mounted on my bus, which is always in my yard when I'm home, so I could WiFi it in) I dropped the DSL at that time. Less than a year later, a tenant of ours on the same property got DSL, and it was 6Mbps! So I got one of those and have had it ever since. I never get 6Mbps, but I get ~5Mbps on every, repeat every, test I've run in the past 8 years. Upload between 500Kbps and 700Kbps, somewhat variable. Ping always, repeat always, under 30ms to locations in the SF Bay area, where my DSL connects to the backbone (~280 miles). Pings to locations further away have normal distance-related additional times.

Since then I've added an equally consistent 6Mbps DSL line in my business, 8 miles away. Our T-1 there, with its 16ms consistent ping to the backbone is snappier, but the DSL works as advertised. The only times my DSL has been out my T-1 has also been out, as has the local Cable company's internet service because they all leave on the same fiber.

It is certainly true that in some places cable can provide much faster speeds, and if I lived in one of those places I would probably have cable, but it wouldn't be because the DSL was bad, but rather not as good.
--
Motosat self-pointing dishes: 1.2-meter XF-3 on 93W, .74 meter G74 on 127W, SL-5 HD DirecTV|idirect 3100|Hughes HN7000S|Verizon UMW190 Air Card|1990 Blue Bird Wanderlodge Bus "Blue Thunder"|Author of hnFAP-Alert, PC-OPI and DSSatTool



Pesimist

join:2007-07-09
Valley, AL
Reviews:
·AT&T Southeast
·HughesNet Satell..
reply to DrStrangLov

Actually, I dropped AT&T because I wasn't as happy with AT&T's speeds but, AT&T sure beat the hell out of Satellite when it came to latency issues.

Could you please start being honest on your responses, no out dated crap, give the big picture!


DrStrangLov

join:2012-03-28

1 edit
reply to dbirdman

Click for full size
said by dbirdman:

DrStrangLov, your posts probably only sound impressive if the person reading has never had a DSL line.

Care to examine the facts what has been reported?

Measuring Broadband America

A Report on Consumer Wireline Broadband Performance in the U.S

»transition.fcc.gov/cgb/measuring···Full.pdf

PS: Move out in the sticks...and report back.

DrStrangLov

join:2012-03-28

1 edit
reply to Pesimist

said by Pesimist:

Could you please start being honest on your responses...

I cite from sources (references), but to my awareness, you have nothing to cite.

Further, DSL in the sticks may not have the performance you dream of...Exede and Hughes plan on going after customers on inferior quality DSL...both companies have stated this.

PS: See above post...remember, FCC did not go to some hick town...report is biased, mostly concerned with larger cities.

Also, remember:

Apr 24, 2012 - 5:57AM PT
The DSL death march continues….

»gigaom.com/2012/04/24/the-dsl-de···ntinues/


Pesimist

join:2007-07-09
Valley, AL

What an ass!



dbirdman
Premium,MVM
join:2003-07-07
usa
kudos:5
reply to DrStrangLov

said by DrStrangLov:

said by dbirdman:

DrStrangLov, your posts probably only sound impressive if the person reading has never had a DSL line.

Care to examine the facts what has been reported?

Did you note that I said my 6meg line ran 5megs steady? That's 83%, and it is truly sustained. Not exactly far from the 80-82% overall that AT&T tested at.

150GB per month allowance.
--
Motosat self-pointing dishes: 1.2-meter XF-3 on 93W, .74 meter G74 on 127W, SL-5 HD DirecTV|idirect 3100|Hughes HN7000S|Verizon UMW190 Air Card|1990 Blue Bird Wanderlodge Bus "Blue Thunder"|Author of hnFAP-Alert, PC-OPI and DSSatTool

DrStrangLov

join:2012-03-28

said by dbirdman:

Did you note that I said...

Go live in rural America...city folks ain't got standing on how DSL works out here.

AT&T does not fix it, no upgraded DSL equipment in smaller cities...if it works, it works.

Larger companies, like they did years ago with telephone industry, went after the big bucks. They by-passed the smaller communities, and left them to the "independents."

Money, picking the low hanging fruit in larger cities.

That's why ViaSat and Hughes plan on selling to those with inferior quality DSL.

Inferior quality DSL it exists...go ahead, move out into rural America, and feel the pain....crap service.


verizonlteda

@myvzw.com

id go without internet if my choices were satellite. latency that high you mite as well lol.



dbirdman
Premium,MVM
join:2003-07-07
usa
kudos:5
reply to DrStrangLov

said by DrStrangLov:

said by dbirdman:

Did you note that I said...

Go live in rural America...city folks ain't got standing on how DSL works out here.

You think I'm "city folk?" I must admit you gave me a good laugh. I live where we call "behind the redwood curtain." That has a lot of elements, but it particularly means limited goods and services. No cities of any consequence, very limited population over hundreds of square miles. Narrow highways that are often blocked in the three possible directions of departure by inclement weather. Often the highest gas prices in the 48 states except for Death Valley.

It is true that AT&T finally got fiber in here a few years ago (single run), but for many years we were piped out by microwave over 150 miles of mountains, and my 6 meg DSL (and T-1) date back to several years of that era.
--
Motosat self-pointing dishes: 1.2-meter XF-3 on 93W, .74 meter G74 on 127W, SL-5 HD DirecTV|idirect 3100|Hughes HN7000S|Verizon UMW190 Air Card|1990 Blue Bird Wanderlodge Bus "Blue Thunder"|Author of hnFAP-Alert, PC-OPI and DSSatTool

chances14

join:2010-03-03
Michigan
reply to DrStrangLov

quote:
Other than DAP Bucket, Exede works just fine, for a non gamer.
latency affects more than just gamers. https web pages load like dial up. and there is always the odd website or program that you may use that won't load or work properly due to the high latency.

quote:
ViaSat's CEO has indicated Exede will not be overstuffed, as in intentional overstuffing
a CEO's word is about as trustworthy as a politician on capital hill.

quote:
Contrary to a myth, all DSLs are not equal in quality, speed, and latency.

Unless a DSL provider has state of the art equipment, YMMV, depending upon their infrastructure, and your distance to central office.

There have been a number of law suits against DSL providers with inferior service being the focus of the law suit.

DSL providers, the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly is the reality.
there have also been a number of lawsuits against satellite providers. There are always going to be a minority of people who have terrible service with any provider.

DrStrangLov

join:2012-03-28

said by chances14:

latency affects more than just gamers

Unless one has used Exede, they would be cluesless on this topic, when gamers are excluded.

And yes, HTTPS page load is slow on WISPs with WiMax, but in reality, most all users are not visiting HTTPS sites all the time. I use 3 mbps down WiMax (WISP) at work, and https sites take about same time to load as on Exede.

Latency is not an issue for most all users, having much faster download speeds brings about a time trade-off. A low latency DSL with much slower speed will not load faster when compared to satellite with high download speed.

I've cited literature before, but there are sites that take several seconds to load with low latency DSL, but with Exede, their servers can catch much faster and deliver content much quicker on non https pages.

Do the research, satellite can kick butt with 12 mbps plus download speeds when compared to much lower DSL speeds.

silbaco
Premium
join:2009-08-03
USA

said by DrStrangLov:

said by chances14:

latency affects more than just gamers

Unless one has used Exede, they would be cluesless on this topic, when gamers are excluded.

And yes, HTTPS page load is slow on WISPs with WiMax, but in reality, most all users are not visiting HTTPS sites all the time. I use 3 mbps down WiMax (WISP) at work, and https sites take about same time to load as on Exede.

Latency is not an issue for most all users, having much faster download speeds brings about a time trade-off. A low latency DSL with much slower speed will not load faster when compared to satellite with high download speed.

I've cited literature before, but there are sites that take several seconds to load with low latency DSL, but with Exede, their servers can catch much faster and deliver content much quicker on non https pages.

Do the research, satellite can kick butt with 12 mbps plus download speeds when compared to much lower DSL speeds.

You must have a bad wimax connection.

Speed can play a roll, but above 5mbps I would say it is hardly noticeable. A low latency 5mbps DSL connection will blow any satellite other than O3B out of the water. Caching or not. When it comes to https, there is no comparison.

said by bobvick:

I called CenturyLink today, I am getting a second DSL connection, up to 10 Mbps (probably will be 4.0, unless the tech that comes out discovers the lines are in a good enough quality for a faster provision), for $29 per month, NO contract like Exede would have been, and the data limit is 250GB per month. I am going to try a SysWAN Duolinks SW24 dual WAN router for load balancing with my current 4.0 setup, maybe this will do what I was wanting in the first place which is not so much a lot more speed (although that would be nice) but less congestion on my home network.

Hope it works for you. That would be great if it were actually 10mbps. How soon will it be in?

DrStrangLov

join:2012-03-28

said by silbaco:

Speed can play a roll, but above 5mbps I would say it is hardly noticeable. A low latency 5mbps DSL connection

Many DSL users don't have 5 mbps plus connections, that's the rub.

Look at FCC's data above in the picture....when running around one mbps DSL, satellite will kick butt on many web pages...that's my point.

Like I stated, exclude gamers, and most folks would not have an issue with Exede; latency is not a big issue...its the download speed.

bobvick
Premium
join:2008-04-01
Brilliant, AL
Reviews:
·exede by ViaSat
reply to silbaco

said by silbaco:

Hope it works for you. That would be great if it were actually 10mbps. How soon will it be in?

They could have came today and put it in, but I am out of town, so it will be next Friday before the local tech comes out. I wish I could get them to replace the line that comes in to the network interface from the telephone pole about 200ft away from my house. I am the only residence that the pole serves. I think that years ago when the cable was laid (1987) they used a lot of extra because evidently who ever laid the cable got paid by the foot. It would be nice if the lines could be clean enough to get more than the 4.0, but I bet that is the limit as it stands now.

DrStrangLov

join:2012-03-28
reply to dbirdman

said by dbirdman:

DrStrangLov, your posts probably only sound impressive if the person reading has never had a DSL line.

DSL Takes a Beating in Latest J.D. Power Study
DSL Lines Failing to Meet Modern Household Speed Demands

»DSL Takes a Beating in Latest J.D. Power Study

silbaco
Premium
join:2009-08-03
USA

said by DrStrangLov:

said by dbirdman:

DrStrangLov, your posts probably only sound impressive if the person reading has never had a DSL line.

DSL Takes a Beating in Latest J.D. Power Study
DSL Lines Failing to Meet Modern Household Speed Demands

»DSL Takes a Beating in Latest J.D. Power Study

Now let's see what a J.D. Power study has to say about satellite. My guess is it would go from "takes a beating" to "are you for real?"

You can keep talking up satellite and there is not doubt that Exede and Gen4 are both a significant improvement compared to previous generations of satellite. But the fact of the matter is that very few of these unhappy people with DSL are lining up to get Exede or Gen4 like the sat companies want.

You keep saying latency doesn't matter unless you game. Well let's take a step back right there. The vast majority of the US has at least 1 gamer in the household. That makes any form of DSL look appealing compared to satellite. There are people with DSL that have a high latency during peak, but they are pretty rare. Compare that to the fact that every person on satellite has a very high latency.

Then let's look at the caps. If you are one of the ~24mil US households that subscribes to Netflix, or use Hulu, HBO Go, Amazon Instant Video, BBC iPlayer, etc., you are not going to want satellite if you have a choice. Even 1mbps DSL will deliver you videos using those services. Of if you have people in the house that use youtube or Pandora or Spotify for hours a day, you are not going to want satellite.

If you are one of the people that doesn't use videos, music, games, VPNs, heavy file downloads, etc., you are almost certainly going to still take DSL. Why? Because it is going to be cheaper. Often times a lot cheaper. If you have a choice for broadband other than satellite, the vast majority of people are going to take it.

DrStrangLov

join:2012-03-28

said by silbaco:

If you have a choice for broadband other than satellite, the vast majority of people are going to take it.

Conditional Remark - "choice for broadband."

Low quality DSL does not fit into that definition...but newest satellite birds do these days.

silbaco
Premium
join:2009-08-03
USA

said by DrStrangLov:

said by silbaco:

If you have a choice for broadband other than satellite, the vast majority of people are going to take it.

Conditional Remark - "choice for broadband."

Low quality DSL does not fit into that definition...but newest satellite birds do these days.

They don't fit into the FCC definition. The next update to the definition could very possibly count out satellite and all DSL other than VDSL entirely. Possibly a real upload requirement too. The FCC is getting desperate to look like they are doing something. Pretty much no one believes they are doing anything at all. So I would not be shocked if the FCC raised the bar by a large margin the next time around. Try to prove themselves.