|reply to funny0 |
Re: Cable vs. DSL - which to choose?
The forums posts here are a lousy source to gather whether a service is good not. It's like asking any ISP to tell them how many calls they got to tech support complaining and judging soley on that. You only call tech support or post a thread mainly when you have a problem. There are very few threads with "Thanks for the service TekSavvy!"
I forget which poster it was that mentioned that % of people with issues or downed services can stay the same as the company grows but the number grows. Assume 10% of 10k customers years and years ago, that's 1000 with complaints, now 100k, 10 000, 1 million, thats 100 000. It can seem like a provider is plagued with problems but really it isn't. You can also see that that 10% seems pretty high at million, 100 000 people with open tickets or issues is a pretty high number.
The reviews section may be a better way to judge (all though still not the best source) since people sign up to post both good and bad experiences.
Experiences also vary widely by city and neighborhoods.
I also would not call cable internet service crippled, although DSL on paper is better, Bell has not done any better and keeping up with upgrades both their IP network and copper infrastructure that they're not really any better than Rogers or any other cableco in terms of stabiity and reliabiility. I've both in the past 17 years and I never suffered issues with either in London, other than Rogers will offer me speeds 10x or more faster than what Bell offers in most suburbs. Can only get Fibe 15 and 25 in the core of London and around it on major artery roads.
I'll give you static IP addressing but this more niche than the power users that need use their connection heavily. I get by fine with DynDNS.
Just like the cable issue threads you mentioned, the forum is littered with people experiencing issues on DSL as well.
For me, DSL's fatal flaw really is price...by which I mean real-world price.
Even if, on paper, DSL 25/10 and cable 32/3 were the same price...say, $50...there's a huge difference in monthly costs.
Add on dry loop and forced rental fees, and the real price for DSL in this case is closer to $65, while cable really is $50. If you amortize the cost of a cable modem over 2-3 years, it adds only about $3 a month, so $65 vs. $53.
Now, if DSL really was the same price...the EXACT same, in real terms..I do see advantages over cable, particularly in a world where Rogers controls the local nodes.