Do You Love DSL? → Who cares?

There is no real difference between the two. Most of what people in the mainstream talk about isn't true at all. Neither one is really "better" than the other, in a technical aspect.

It all comes down to who is providing the service, and how well they do it, and then of course price.

If people today really think one technology is better than the other, they are kidding themselves.

I can't get DSL, so who cares.
I do get cable and am very happy with that.

The DSL technology SUCKS, its distance sensitive and the biggie: the technology limit for upstream is only 896kbps!

Any transmission method is distance sensitive It doesn't matter if it's cable, DSL, fiber, wireless, etc.

Hmm too bad att only offer 768, i love to have 896kbps upload... that extra 128kbps can lower my ping even more. every bit helps

just wait until ADSL2+ and VDSL starts getting rapidly deployed; then you'll start seeing uploads of 1 meg or more.

That is old data. ADSL is rated to 1.0 Mbps Upstream and has been for over 5 Years. Your info is based on 6 to 7 years old Chipsets that were limited in the chip to 896 Kbps.

Regards,

Doctor Olds

Covad recently announced they'd be supporting ADSL2+ in some big markets. But, ADSL2+ has similar distance limitations to VDSL. The high download speeds only are effective for people with lines that are within 9000 feet from the Central Office or Remote Terminal. At 10,000 to 12,000 feet, the providers might as well just stick with ADSL if ADSL is already deployed. Also, Covad isn't offering service to people connected to remote terminals.

Project Lightspeed (U-Verse) could be seen as another way to eliminate competition by CLECs, because the U-Verse fiber nodes are not being shared with CLECs.

Overall, don't hold your breath waiting for ADSL2/ADSL2+ if you're over 9kft from a Central Office. (If you can't already get 6.0Mbps DSL service, this means you.) You're better off waiting for your big incumbent telco provider (like AT+T) to upgrade to FTTN, instead of expecting ADSL2+ to solve the anemic download speeds.

So, you see, if CLECs like Covad limit their customer base to those within 9000 feet of a CO, they're showing that they're happy to provide the download speeds, but that they aren't willing to also support higher upload or download speeds for all customers.

Covad's current offerings are 8Mbps/1Mbps, 10Mbps/1Mbps, and 15Mbps/1Mbps. They aren't offering full-rate upload because marketing would want to offer the higher upload rates in the future as an "upgrade". There currently is no competition between providers on upload rate and there probably wont be for the next few years. This is similar to why ADSL has been capable of 8Mbps/1Mbps for years now, but some of the first marketed offers only provided 384kbit/128kbit, even though the modem and telephone line today could sustain 3.0Mbps/608Kbit.

This is also why AT+T and Verizon probably aren't going to sell a full-rate fiber or VDSL Internet connection anytime soon. They want to lock out competition from using their lines by configuring the system so that everything but that 6Mbps/1Mbps that you're getting is dedicated to their video delivery infrastructure.

Makes sense? Doesn't make sense? Feel free to correct me.

luckily, I'm only about 4200 feet from the remote terminal I'm at....

If VDSL were deployed at the remote terminal, what kind of speeds could I expect?

Also, I find it disgusting that companies aren't providing the customer with the best speeds possible, simply because of *possible* future competition...