dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
   
spc
story category
Speakeasy Gets Naked
Set to launch 'Onelink' service
by qworster 07:00PM Thursday Jul 01 2004 Tipped by Karl Bode See Profile
Speakeasy will next week announce a new nationwide "naked DSL" product - or dry DSL on a dedicated loop that doesn't require a local voice component. Dubbed OneLink DSL, the service will be nationally available for users who are attracted to the idea of ditching their landline to go VoIP or cell only.

Starting at $55.95 a month for a 1.5Mbps/256kbps connection, the company claims they're the first in the nation to offer nationwide dedicated-loop ADSL, though Lightning Bolt Technologies made a similar claim earlier this month. Ironically providers seem to have gone from dedicated loop delivery, to line-sharing, and back toward dry DSL to suit market demand and regulatory market conditions.

We assume the new service will take users back to the days of requiring a "truck roll", or custom installation appointment. With line-sharing agreements, independent providers like Speakeasy could simply install service on a shared incumbent pair via Covad, and mail the customers their modem. Hopefully users won't be returned to the days where clumsy CLEC/ILEC cooperation resulted in delays and miscalculations that made "three stooges" films resemble neurosurgery.

"We hear often from many consumers and businesses that they are tired of being tied to the phone company and are seeking superior service and new creative options from the broadband industry," says Speakeasy President and CEO Bruce Chatterley.

"In fact, in a recent customer survey we learned that more than 30% of our existing customers use a cell phone as their primary voice line. These customers have a telephone line solely to get DSL service from Speakeasy. We have listened to these customers and are very excited to be the first national provider of this new product."

Speakeasy hopes to appeal to those users looking to flee their local bell by announcing their own VoIP service this summer, which they hope to bundle with the OneLink service. While the 1.5Mbps/256kbps will be the only package available at first, the company will eventually deliver 1.5Mbps/768kbps, 6Mbps/768kbps on dedicated pairs as well.

view:
topics flat nest 

DarkElf

join:2002-06-03
Topeka, KS

Yeah, right.

$55.95 a month? Yeah, right.

[sarcasm]

People will be running to get this service.

[/sarcasm]

USAOwnz
RIP dadkins
Premium
join:2003-11-15
P.R.C.

Re: Yeah, right.

Meh Speakeasy isn't exactly the best provider, in terms of cost.

Quip
Premium
join:2003-03-18
Riverside, CT
kudos:1
said by DarkElf:
$55.95 a month? Yeah, right.

[sarcasm]

People will be running to get this service.

[/sarcasm]

Depends on how much that telephone line costs you, if it costs $30/mo it's like getting $25/mo DSL.
Eek2121

join:2002-10-12
Newton, NJ

Re: Yeah, right.

erm, right now i pay $80.81 for dsl and unlimited long distance phone service. The dsl is only $29.99/mo for 1.5/384. Technically i could downgrade to a $7.00 toll line and still have the 29.99/mo offer. Speakeasy doesn't work with vz anyways.

DarkElf

join:2002-06-03
Topeka, KS

1 edit
Yeah, but for Naked DSL? Why would you be paying the use of the telephone line with the DSL if its is being provided without the voice component. Or am I missing something here?

$55.95 a month seems unreasonable to me. Maybe because I only pay $39 for my cable service.

Oh well.

djdanska
Rudie32
Premium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
San Diego, CA
kudos:4

Re: Yeah, right.

Unreasonable since i pay $52.95 for 4300/384. LoL

Voyager2K2

join:2001-10-04
Wayne, PA

Re: Yeah, right.

said by djdanska:
Unreasonable since i pay $52.95 for 4300/384. LoL

Yeah right.
Just don't use that blazing speed too much or you are gonna be forced back to dial-up. LOL
LooseCannon8

join:2001-05-14
San Luis Obispo, CA
This is a good deal. If your land line costs just over $20 and your DSL is like 30, then thats 50 plus all of the fees and that phone company throws on then it would prob be a bit cheaper.
Phil Karn2

join:2004-06-14
San Diego, CA
I recently switched to Speakeasy even though it's twice as expensive as my previous broadband provider (Road Runner).

To me, it's well worth it. It's faster in both directions. It's more reliable. I get four static IP addresses. I can run servers without constantly looking over my shoulder. I can share bandwidth with my neighbors. No ports or protocols are ever blocked. And I get a reasonably clueful support staff when something breaks. After dealing with Road Runner almost since they started, Speakeasy is a breath of fresh air.

DracoFelis
Premium
join:2003-06-15
said by DarkElf:
$55.95 a month? Yeah, right.
Actually that could be a very good deal in some cases!

For example, I pay that much per month for my DSL (which is also 1.5meg/256k), and I'm required to keep my POTS line (with CenturyTel) to qualify (and the POTS line itself is around $25)! If this becomes an option in my area, I might consider dropping POTS, and just go with VoIP totally (I'm already using VoIP for LD). And what about my dad's place? His only current BroadBand option, is cable modem service (at almost that much per month), with a minuscule "hard limit" of 3GB/month of data (and 2 cents per megabyte after that)! This Speakeasy service is "unlimited" as long as you are "using it reasonably" (i.e. you don't use up all your month's bandwidth, simply downloading a Linux install CD set).

And remember, "naked DSL" is likely to be a little more expensive (maybe an extra $5-$15 per month) than more traditional "line sharing", as you don't have the POTS service paying for part of the wire. The cable companies do the same, by charging a little more if you order "cable internet" without also paying for "cable TV". IMHO this is all well and good, because this helps keep the services profitable, while still giving consumers options. If someone doesn't like paying a little more for "naked DSL", they still have the option to buy a POTS phone + DSL bundle (or cable TV + cable internet bundle) somewhere.
RothPC

join:2003-12-04
Jerseyville, IL

Re: Yeah, right. It IS a good deal...

Yea, this is a GREAT deal in a lot of peoples cases.

I've got DSL with Citizens Communications (i.e. Frontiernet.net)

I've had it since Jan, 2003. For the first 9 months, I actually only paid 1 month of service and got the other 8 months credited back in full, month by month. Reasons: I'll tell ya.

1) DSL service, 1.0/128 (400kbit/62kbit doesn't quite meet the statement)
2) Bad DSLAM (Authentication service) --> half the time the stupid DSLAM was down for some unknown reason.
3) In Illinois, Close to Granite City. --> Routed me to authenticate (PPPoA) upto Rochester, New York. Isn't there a better way to route the authentication?
I.e. Ping times were upwards of 1800ms most times.
4) Multiple ranges of IP addresses were not resolving to the DNS. i.e. -> You get a speed, sync, and connection. However You do not get an IP address, which you can not surf the net without an IP "Address".
5) Frontiernet.net STILL has problems (Don't go there)
6) I'm paying $49.99 for Frontiernet.net Right now.
7) I informed them of a problem early February of 2003, and They said it was on my end, not theirs. (Typical, eh?) Months later, I get the response after calling in 40 something times for trouble tickets with them, and to this date, They are STILL working to resolve the problems. NOTE: Frontier, You need people who know what your doing. ESPECIALLY TECH Specialists!

7 DSL, rather DEDICATED aDSL is great if you think about it in these terms: aDSL normally is "asynchronous" meaning that the more upload you use, the less download you have available. Also, it means that you are on a shared network.

Another thing. ISPs always oversell their bandwidth for an area, because they never expect everyone to be on at the same time. This allows for greater sales to the ISP (not just frontiernet) and more clients. YET, it can potentially cause more problems in the case that there is online in that area, more than the ISP area can handle.

DEDICATED aDSL is also asynchronous (hence the "a" in the aDSL, but is MUCH better than the type I am referring to, which is a shared connection (Virtual DSL in a sense).

Dedicated, you are on your very own circuit, directly connected to the ISP. You do not have to go through a 'shared network" on the ISP and share a "pipe" with the others in the area.
So if the case above comes into play, You are NOT affected by it one bit. There are a few other reasons for it as well. But Hell yea. I'm gonna get it in about 4 months.

Speakeasy, I hope you live up to what you claim.

p.s. Does anyone know if it is 1.5 MINIMUM and 256 minimum? or is that the MAX? And does it include TCP overhead transfer and the maximum actual THROUGHPUT is 1.5/256? Anyone fill me in on this info? Thanks

TJ
hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH

Re: Yeah, right. It IS a good deal...

right now they say 1.5/256 is the max but their website says other wise.

but with those speeds the max distance is like 14,950ft from the CO.

rchandra
Stargate Universe fan
Premium
join:2000-11-09
14225-2105
The "A" in "ADSL" does not stand for "asynchronous." It stands for "asymmetric," as in your downstream rate capacity is greater than that of your upstream. All DSL modulations that I'm aware of (DMT, CAP, 2B1Q) are synchronous protocols.

As for line utilization, the two rates are totally independent. Upstream for example does borrow bandwidth from downstream if volume would seem to demand it. Now it may be true that upstream or downstream usage may affect the end-to-end data rate in the opposite direction, but that is only because a higher level protocol such as TCP requires sending packets in the opposite direction (ACK packets). If the transfer process could tolerate dropped and reordered packets, it could be sent over UDP and be unidirectional.

Your assertion that the network is shared is true, from the DSLAM outwards. But at that point your PVC will contend for bandwidth (almost assuredly UBR) with all your neighbors on the ATM network.

It doesn't generally matter where you authenticate. If as you say your access method is PPPoA, your data simply travels an ATM network first before any IP is involved. It's not just authentication that is done in Rochester, it's basicallly anything usable to you (unless you fancy using ATM equipment somehow, and even then, you probably would have no way of establishing a PVC or SVC). When I had Telocity, my traffic was being carried via ATM to Philadelphia. I suppose it would make more IP sense if your IP datagrams were "injected" closer to you because there are NAPs closer to you than Rochester, so you could be using services in your area. Rochester most likely goes through NAPs in New York City, so it would simply mean you'll likely have better performance with hosts in the NYC area instead of the Chicago area.

"YET, it can potentially cause more problems in the case that there is online in that area, more than the ISP area can handle."

ummm....what? Would you like to try to rephrase that?

I don't know of a single DSL provider that advertises their bandwidth in terms of minimums. There may be guaranteed minimums, but it's generally not used in ads. And no, DSL providers rarely if ever include any protocol overheads. Some are as sleazy as to specify sync rate, and a lot (like Verizon) specify the rate at which IP can be transported (their 1.5M/384K service is set to sync at 1792/448 and has TCP transfer rates of about 1500/360...close to 1536/384). All their literature will be plastered with fine print saying this is the maximum possible, your actual rate may be less depending on loop length, wire condition, blah, blah, blah.
--
English is a difficult enough language to interpret correctly when its rules are followed, let alone when a writer chooses not to follow those rules. Blog is here
Jeopardy! replies REALLY suck!

RothPC1

@dsl1.chi.il.frontier

Re: Yeah, right. It IS a good deal...

Ok, RChandra. You're right about the "a" but it still is not synchronous.

Synchronous, if you think about a T1, is the following.

A T1 is both up and down at 1.5Mbit
I can download at FULL capacity of 1.5 and also upload at the exact same rate at FULL capacity.

aDSL, if you use the FULL 256Kbit of my DSL provider or others that I've used at friends, You will not have hardly ANY download speed (as in = 8KByte average MAX when utilizing full Upload)

So, either way. Same difference.

(Frowns about his ISP)

RothPC

RothPC1

@dsl1.chi.il.frontier

Re: Yeah, right. It IS a good deal...

Also, not to mention, Rchandra.

It Does matter where you authenticate. Took them over 9 months to get a DSLAM local to me, in Chicago.

Until that time, My Ping times were in the averages of 1800ms

Terrible, huh?

When they got the one in Chicago, which is still about 4 hours from me, It dropped instantaneously to about 140ms which is still rediculously high. But I can deal with it.

Anyways, *Frowns*, It could just be my ISP *Knows it is but don't want to admit it*

And yea, you are right about most of it.

FYI, RChandra: You are more knowledgeable than 99% of the IT staff at my ISP *laughs hard*

rchandra
Stargate Universe fan
Premium
join:2000-11-09
14225-2105

Re: Yeah, right. It IS a good deal...

Good God...please...understand that one, PPP is inherent to PPPoA, and two, authentication is part of PPP. You don't use a separate PVC or something for authentication, and another for your data; it all goes to/comes from the same place. It's just that auth packets have a different type identifier than IP packets. I think that technically, it's possible to send ATM cells to different places (e.g., along a different VPI/VCI), but that it's extraordinarily unlikely to make such distinctions based on PPP packet type. Heck, I've been wrong before, but I don't think so on this one.

--
English is a difficult enough language to interpret correctly when its rules are followed, let alone when a writer chooses not to follow those rules. Blog is here
Jeopardy! replies REALLY suck!

rchandra
Stargate Universe fan
Premium
join:2000-11-09
14225-2105
Look, I don't mean to sound harsh, but what you wrote about has nothing whatsoever to do with synchronicity. The opposite of an asynchronous (async) comm protocol is a synchronous protocol.

Asychronous means a start bit, the payload bits, and a stop bit. There is no requirement to send data all the time. Async lines are always clocked individually in each transmitter and receiver, and each of those clocks must be maintained within a certain frequency tolerance in order to communicate properly. The purpose of the start bit is to inform the receiving end when precisely to start looking for data on the line. It "knows" the start bit should be some certain time in duration, and after that time expires, it can start assembling the datum that's being communicated. Each bit in the data stream likewise is some fixed duration, and the clock internal to the receiver determines when each of the datum bits should be on the line. This is typically accomplished with a shift register. In part, the purpose of the stop bit is to give the receiver time to transfer the assembled contents of the shift register somewhere to prepare to receive the next datum.

Sync lines on the other hand (such as the T-1 you mention) eliminate the start and stop bits, and use various protocols (NRZ and NRZI to name two) to maintain clocking. (T-1's typically use bipolar signalling with 8 zero substitution, or B8ZS. Sync lines with too many consecutive zeroes will lose sync.) There are data, even if it's all zeroes or all SYN octets, traversing the line all the time. The receiving clocking can be derived from the bit patterns on the line. The next protocol layer up, such as frame relay or ATM, is what transports the data. I would be extremely surprised if a more learned person than I were to tell me that any DSL were async. (Heck, I've been wrong many times before, but I don't think so on this one.)

What you have not apparently been exposed to is traffic control/traffic shaping. Traffic shaping is the process of only allowing data to be transmitted at a configured rate. Traffic control is selecting datagrams from the data stream based on some criteria and reordering the transmission queue (or buffer if you like) from a configured policy. Taking your example, if you arrange for your "normal traffic" queue to be traffic shaped to slightly less than the link's capacity, and classify all your bulk traffic to be in that queue, you will then have a small amount of reserve link capacity that you can use to send the TCP ACK packets for your download. You simply select ACK packets, put them in this "reserve" queue, and ensure these smaller, "more important" packets in this reserve queue get sent ahead of your bulk traffic. This is the basic concept of how WonderShaper works using Linux traffic control (tc).

In other words, you don't have to settle for a strict queue for your IP networking. With the rise of the use of VoIP and other time-critical prototols, even home use router appliances are shipping with QoS (quality of service) or differentiated services (DiffServ) features. Things like the Sipura SPA-2000 that I have for VoIP can set these fields in the IP header to request the packets they transmit be treated with priority. As long as the slowest router in the path (most probably your own) honors that request, those packets will go out your DSL or cable modem before ones without any special QoS/DiffServ options set. Likewise, if ever there were to be an inbound queue, those packets would be transmitted on your LAN before ones without.

See lartc.org for more details on traffic shaping. I believe that's also where I read about the contributed WonderShaper script.
--
English is a difficult enough language to interpret correctly when its rules are followed, let alone when a writer chooses not to follow those rules. Blog is here
Jeopardy! replies REALLY suck!
stridr69

join:2003-05-19
San Luis Obispo, CA

Re: Yeah, right.

Hate to burst your bubble there, but Charter Pipeline no longer charges the $10.00 extra if you don't subscribe to their TV service. $39.95 is all you pay for 3Mb/256Kb per month. Other cable Co's are doing the same thing as well..

nixen
Rockin' the Boxen
Premium
join:2002-10-04
Alexandria, VA
said by DarkElf:
$55.95 a month? Yeah, right.

[sarcasm]

People will be running to get this service.

[/sarcasm]

Depends on whether this is the same as many of their other services: multiple static IPs and a ToS that guarantees that you can run servers on a residential service (e.g., their OSDN service comes with 8 IPs). In other words, if this is something like a SOHO service. If so, and you're someone that looks for that type of service, it's a bargain - still dirt cheap compared to other dedicated line solutions (T-1, SDSL, etc.).

-tom
--
"There are 10 types of people in the world... those who understand binary and those who don't."
"That's only 2 types of people, moron"
Cybertoad

join:2001-11-08
Houston, TX
ROFL ... $55.95 ???

For less than that price you can buy both the
voice phone line AND the DSL from SBC.

Great idea gone terribly wrong here. LOL

jtudor
Xm 60's On 6 Freak
Premium,MVM
join:2002-12-07
Morganton, NC
Big Fat Hairy Deal (for most of us anyway)!

Speakeasy is only available in major cities, and did not seem to be considering new markets the last I heard.

This news is of no use to most of us regrettably.

I wish I could get Speakeasy, lineshare or dry pair, either one would do.
--
Best of luck

"Do, or Do not, there is no try!" Yoda

dsh

@clb1.dsl.speakeasy.n
Speakeasy has always cost more than other providers. And I am happy to pay it. The saying "you get what you pay for" is really true with Speakeasy. Their customer service, support, and policies are the best I have seen in the industry.

netwire
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Shelby, NC
kudos:1

Sounds great!

I'm all for this, look how much cash you could save. Get naked dsl, and no more must you dish out big bucks to the telco - just get a nice voip provider and your all set. I hope they will offer this service in my area, as compared to what I'm paying now for voice and data services this is a bargain!
--
Warm Regards,
KI4GEQ
StanaPhone Support

Home Page | Sign Up | Download StanaPhone

toby
Troy Mcclure

join:2001-11-13
Seattle, WA

not a bargin really

For these speeds with SBC its $27 per month for the DSL, plus $20 for the line, plus tax = less than $55.

You might aswell get DSL and a phone line from SBC, and never plug your phone line in.

AWS
Long Time Gone

join:2000-07-01
Joliet, IL

Re: not a bargin really

They are not the first to offer this. Lightning Bolt Technology announced they offered it last week.

»NEW ADSL option, without voice service
--
If I can't do it today, I'll figure it out by tomorrow.

jap
Premium
join:2003-08-10
038xx

Re: not a bargin really

Umm, the article contains the same statement & link. If you go to LBT's webpage you'll see the 2 ADSL-shared packages only offer 128k up (they say "K" - but I'm sure they mean "k"). It costs 110$ start-up if you successfully self-install, 310$ if you don't. The dedicated ADSL is 1.5mbps/384k @ 65$/mo & 220$ startup. Does anyone find these offerings tempting? Even in my limited choice, overpriced market I have 3000/256 from Adelphia for 58$ @ -228$ startup due to 20$/mo for 6mos promo. I'm looking forward to the details on Speakeasy's offering.

LBDSL
Lightning Bolt

join:2002-01-07
Auburn Hills, MI
Hey guys,

I figured I would jump in and answer some basic questions.

First, we did launch this already nationwide, so Speakeasy is NOT the first

As far as cost goes, and speed. We will never be able to compete price wise with the ILEC's (SBC, Qwest, Verizon, Bellsouth) because they own the copper.

In some parts of the US, you can't get a dial tone for under $20, I have even heard as high as $30, But some areas you can get it for $10, so it varies.

Now with Line share you add DSL on top of that $40-on up.

You are already over the $50-$60 Dry ADSL price. So to some it is worth the cost. Others it may not.

Other people want NOTHING to do with the ILEC, and either have no Land line, or use a 3rd party for voice, this is where dry ADSL comes in handy.

AS people have stated, some will like it, some won't, that is what options are here for
--
Lightning Bolt Technologies

Hall
Premium,MVM
join:2000-04-28
Germantown, OH
kudos:2

Re: not a bargin really

Maybe Speakeasy spends more money advertising here at DSLR... I recall you posting the message about this. As it's posted in this story, "made a similar claim earlier this month", it would seem they don't believe you actually could provide it (yet).

Sefirato
Turambar, Master of Fate
Premium
join:2002-05-08
Anchorage, AK
And I pay 27.95 per month for 3000/256 from Adelphia. And that's just for the cable internet - I don't have their cable TV service at all. I'm glad I got Adelphia instead of Speakeasy / anything with DSL.

jap
Premium
join:2003-08-10
038xx

1 edit

Re: not a bargin really

said by Sefirato:
And I pay 27.95 per month for 3000/256 from Adelphia. And that's just for the cable internet
Damn, now that's a spread, eh? I'm same service (Adelphia @ 3k/256 ISP-only) at 57.95 - more than double your cost. Wow.

RadioDoc
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
La Grange, IL
kudos:2
Reviews:
·AT&T Midwest
Let's see now...(opening phone bill).

POTS line:      $17.71 (total with fees and taxes)
1536/384 DSL: $31.43 (including "FUSF")
------
TOTAL $49.14

I have the functionality of the POTS line if I choose to use it.

Speakeasy's "Naked Emperor DSL": $56 for 1536/256 before taxes and whatever fees they will end up charging.

Doesn't seem like much more than marketing hype. Expensive marketing hype. For that price you can get 3000/384 from SBC and others and still have the POTS line to use...
neftv

join:2000-10-01
Broomall, PA

Dry DSL

What's the point?? If you end up having to pay for the line with increased cost within DSL Vs having a pots line. Now if the prices stated included a reasonable local/long distance VoIP service that's another story.
edelite

join:2004-05-24
US

Hmmm....

I agree with the general consensus of this forum: Dry-pair isn't worth that much!!! Lower the price to like $30-40 bucks and maybe some people will jump on. I personally would jump on if it was $40/mo cause then I could port my number to a VoIP and get free from those stupid telephone companies.

The real question is WHERE DID THEY GET DRY-PAIR FROM!!?!? (the Telephone companies obviously) but the last time I checked, Verizon wasn't offering Dry-Pair DSL (even though their Press Releases and interviews contradicted that).
cbrain

join:2000-05-21
Silver Spring, MD
Reviews:
·DIRECTV
·Future Nine Corp..
·DSL EXTREME
·Verizon FiOS
·Google Voice
·Comcast

What will I do with the money I save!

I just ordered an economy phone line so I could go back to DSL. Verizon 1.5/384 DSL = $29.95, misc. fees about $3 and line without outgoing calls $13 - totaling $46. Just think of what I can do with the savings!

On the other hand in '99 I paid around $70 a month for Covad 1.5/384 DSL on a "naked line" and it was almost perfect for 2 years.

It's a good start. Give them some time to get it right.

•••
SpeedJunky0

join:2001-08-14
Glen Cove, NY

Nickel and Dimed!

I'm currently a Speakeasy's 1.5/768 DSL customer with local service through Verizon...

I called today to ask about ditching Verizon and use their naked service and they told me that there is an additional $6 a month charge not to mention $99 installation fee.

If you do the math your not saving anything and in fact your paying more money if you chose to use a VOIP carrier like vonage...

•••
russotto

join:2000-10-05
West Orange, NJ

Sure, lineshare is cheaper....

But how long will it be available in your area? The FCC set the lineshare requirement to be phased out within the next few years. Some of the ILECs will probably continue it, but the CLECs and ISPs need a backup plan available.

skullz5

join:2002-06-17
Clayton, NJ

Re: Sure, lineshare is cheaper....

Sounds good here too, since I currently have Vonage and no LAN line, and since comcast can been a pain sometimes. I am always willing to try something new and this may be it.
redadidas89

join:2003-11-17
Romeoville, IL

Hmm....Just a thought

Alright, someone clear this up for me...DSL was invented for the sole purpose of using fast internet, while leaving your phone open to ring. To me, naked DSL seams to be defeating the purpose of DSL, by limiting your service to only internet. Do the math, my cousins SBC phone and DSL bill is roughly $50+taxes,fees,etc. Naked DSL, just for internet alone, $55+taxes,fees,ets. Now, you have to go find yourself a decent cell or VOIP provider. In the long run you're stuck with something more than $50, and you don't have the reliability of good old POTS, what are you going to do when your DSL service goes out, how are you going to make the service call with your VOIP? To me, they need to bring the prices down before anyone should get this. If you want plain internet without phone companies involved, get cable...usually faster, more bang for your buck, and higher nation-wide availability...
chubirka

join:2000-09-30
Washington, DC

Dry DSL for me

I had been using Verizon for phone/DSL for a few years, but then I had to move.... They screwed up my phone AND DSL order, even turning off my DSL early. Without going into great detail, I refuse to go back to them due to their incompetence. So I got cable and VoIP, but the inconsistent, poor upload speed of cable is annoying and affects my call quality occasionally. So I'm going with "dry DSL". The cost is going to be about the same as my Verizon bill, maybe a little cheaper, and the VoIP package I have doesn't charge me extra for a good international plan. Besides, high-speed cable connections go for about $45.00 in my area and they do NOT offer static IPs.
joel07022002

join:2002-07-11
Lansing, MI

The "loop" is the cost.

The reason why the price stinks is because the ILEC or incumbant carier is still going to charge them $24 for a DSL qualified loop. The markup on this product is actually not bad, but remember they have to buy the loops from Ma Bell, and the hoar is not getting any cheaper anytime soon.

Honestly the only reason i would spring on a product like this is for 6Mbps/768Kbps, but that's just me. Perfectly happy with cable which has no "Loop" charge at this current moment.
coolridge_us

join:2004-04-05
Doylestown, PA

It's ordered

I just ordered this service for the Philadelphia area. Hopefully it will let me bypass some of the lousy connection issues in the area and get a real service that doesn't get hung-up when everyone else (read verizon) starts sucking wind.

I'll post a review of the installation (god help me) and the service turn up when it happens. For the record I ordered their 1.5M/768k service. They do charge a $99 installation fee and $99 for the equipment which will be rebated on the next month's bill.
crashdamage1

join:2004-09-01
Granville, NY

speakeasy still might beat direcway

since dsl and cable is not offered in my area, the only broadband i can get now is satellite. it may technically be "broadband", but the lag effect of the latency renders browsing to feel like dial up., yes, i can download files faster, but i sure would like faster upload speeds than 859/62....

Ram Man

@12.153.x.x

interesting ....

This actually sounds interesting to me. Sounds like I might be in the minority though. Can anybody ballpark how many subs they have total?