how-to block ads
|
 hottboiinnc
ME
join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH | Should be FIber When SureWest took over your provider they said it was FTTH. You may want to recheck that. | |
| | | | | hottboiinnc
ME
join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH | Re: Should be FIber interesting because you reviewed them as a company that they took over. | |
| | | | | | | | | hottboiinnc
ME
join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH
 ·Time Warner Cable
·buckeye cable
| Re: Should be FIber Again. the company you have reviewed: Surewest WAS actually Everest as even your links above say that. And you should read this:
Are you making enhancements in Kansas City now that SureWest has acquired the company?
On the network side in Kansas City, we plan to add 2,000 new residential homes on the hybrid fiber-coax network while creating a fiber-to-the-home (FTTH) network starting with a release of 8,000 FTTH homes in 2008 that will deliver enhanced bandwidth capabilities on the network to improve our data and video products.
They're HFC network in areas but also FTTH which Surewest is known for.
You're actually provider is NEVER SureWest until recently. It was a local company. SureWest just bought them.
Which does NOT make SureWest your 3rd provider/option just because they bought someone else. Also you don't count Telco's U-Crap as an "option". | |
| | | | | | 
jadebangle
Premium
join:2007-05-22
Olathe, KS
 ·SureWest Internet
·AT&T Yahoo
·Comcast
| Re: Should be FIber said by hottboiinnc  :Again. the company you have reviewed: Surewest WAS actually Everest as even your links above say that. And you should read this: Are you making enhancements in Kansas City now that SureWest has acquired the company? On the network side in Kansas City, we plan to add 2,000 new residential homes on the hybrid fiber-coax network while creating a fiber-to-the-home (FTTH) network starting with a release of 8,000 FTTH homes in 2008 that will deliver enhanced bandwidth capabilities on the network to improve our data and video products. They're HFC network in areas but also FTTH which Surewest is known for. You're actually provider is NEVER SureWest until recently. It was a local company. SureWest just bought them. Which does NOT make SureWest your 3rd provider/option just because they bought someone else. Also you don't count Telco's U-Crap as an "option". surewest is my 3rd provider that provide telephone, tv and fiber internet
They were nonexistent not long ago
I still have att and comcast
I can have all three now lol but its costly 
everestkc aka everest kansas city is not my previous provider
everest was bought out or taken over by surewest due to how successful they are in california area
everest is a cable tv and copper based internet company that has never served in my location, they serve only in kansas city which is like 150 miles away
so yes I am correct I am still with ATT and Comcast
surewest is now my 3rd provider
End of story. | |
| | | | | fredwilson12
join:2005-04-20
Sacramento, CA
| Full Duplex ethernet is 200/200 in both direction
Full duplex ethernet is still 100mbps in each direction. The concept of full duplex (vs. half duplex) does not increase the amount of bandwidth available, but just allows the bandwidth to travel in each direction at the same time. Effectively, you can be transferring data @ 100Mbps between hosts in both directions (i.e. uploading and downloading) at the same time. So collectively you can get 200Mbps if you add both the uploading and downloading, but it is not 200Mbps each way. | |
|
jadebangle
Premium
join:2007-05-22
Olathe, KS
·SureWest Internet
·AT&T Yahoo
·Comcast
|  I will stick with 10mbit for awhile unless of course I win..
I can get 50mbps but I cannot shell out 191.99 a month
53.99 a month is all I can spare for now
So sorry about those speed craving maniac on DSLR
When it comes to brags rights I believe I have not that rights yet unless I can get the best speed now and have no problems paying 191.99 a month...
I consume quite a bit of bandwidth
at 3 or 6mbps on DSL I assure you that 500-750gb a month is the norm for me LOL
The reason why its harder to consume more bandwidth on DSL and Cable is because the upload are only a fraction of what your download are... say 6mbit/1mbit, 5mbit,384k, 3mbit,512k
This mean that if you upload a long time at 384k, 512k,1mbit,2mbit you would not consume any more then symmetrical connection say 384k/384k, 512k/512k, 1mbit,1mbit
Since most activity on internet is peer to peer a symmetrical connection is best used...
asymmetrical are not better or practical in a sense it is infact a gimmick
false advertisement of speed such as 6mbit/1mbit is not 6mbps! its bogus... and misleading for the average user
10mbit/1mbit or 10mbit/10mbit
definitely the latter because you can do more with symmetrical then asymetrical because if you do a lot of uploading then the 10mbit/1mbit isn't any better then 1mbit/1mbit. It is sad but true. facts proven that asymmetrical are lousy for most application and for those who just don't upload much or at all 
6.0/1.0 or 6.0/6.0
I know that some folks will say that even 10/1 is better then 6/6 but let's compare similar speed rather then different one causing confusion
60/1 or 60/60 we all know that symmetrical blows asymmetrical out of the water everytime if compared statistically
25/1 or 25/25
conclusion: asymmetrical = obsolete, next to useless for peer to peer activity such as file sharing and other intensive apps
If you're one of those user called a kid you wouldn't notice anything different because all you do is watch youtube all day and nothing else. a sad sad truth but but I am just giving you the facts
| |
| | | |
| Forums » comments on review of SureWest Internet |
|
