Re: Cable vs DSL
- From: "Joel K. 'Jay' Furr" <jayfurr@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 17 Mar 2006 05:11:14 -0800
Sean S wrote:
Cable has more bandwidth than DSL but it's shared. If everyone in your
neighborhood is downloading pron, your pron will take a long time to
download. With DSL you have less potential bandwidth but you aren't
sharing it.
Or so I've heard. Neither is available where I live. I'm using
cellular for my broadband.
DSL is dependant on distance from the terminal. Further you are, less
bandwidth ya got. For some big city folk, this aint an issue, for smaller
town folks, it can be a big issue.
I live in a damn small town in the ultimate small town state. I've got
download speeds nearing 4 megs per second on my DSL.
http://www.gmavt.net/announcements/index.shtml#31
There's no way in frickin' hell I'd go with our local cable provider
for ANYTHING, be it TV or broadband service. When we first moved into
our house everything above channel 40 on our cable system came in all
fuzzy -- and the only explanation for why the channels below that were
crystal clear and all the channels above that were garbage was "well,
we probably need to tear up your lawn and lay in all new cabling, we
have no other idea." And as far as broadband goes, they oversold
broadband so heavily throughout Vermont that dial-up modems were often
faster and the cable company got prosecuted, I believe, for fraud and
wound up being served with a legal injunction to stop signing up new
customers, etc. etc.. Yes, you guessed it, it was Adelphia.
With our local telco providing broadband and our TV coming in via Dish
Network, we have absolutely no service related complaints at ALL.
.
- References:
- Cable vs DSL
- From: That's DOCTOR SNAMMP to you...
- Re: Cable vs DSL
- From: xyzzy
- Re: Cable vs DSL
- From: Sean S
- Cable vs DSL
- Prev by Date: Re: Maybe He Was A Bad Guy After All
- Next by Date: Re: Maybe He Was A Bad Guy After All
- Previous by thread: Re: Cable vs DSL
- Next by thread: Re: Cable vs DSL
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|