 dbirdmanPremium,MVM
join:2003-07-07
usa
kudos:5 | reply to DrStrangLov
Re: [Exede] Exede and DSL 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 |
|
1 edit | 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. |
|
|
|
dbirdmanPremium,MVM
join:2003-07-07
usa
kudos:5 | 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 |
|
| 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. |
|
| id go without internet if my choices were satellite. latency that high you mite as well lol. |
|
dbirdmanPremium,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 |
|
| 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 |
|
| 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. |
|
| 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. |
|
| 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. |
|
