|
|
#11
07-15-2005, 12:17 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: how does having DSL and cable at the same time work?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] And by the way, why would you keep your cable if you had DSL? [/ QUOTE ] 1. Cable is faster than DSL. 2. Redundancy The suggested router is a good "business" investment if your looking for 0 downtime. [/ QUOTE ] Mkay if say so (cable here in Sweden refers to cable modem witch are usually 512k/128k and DLS often refers to ADSL (the most common DSL) witch is 8mbit/1mbit here), but still it won't give 0 downtime. The SNG WILL be interupted no matter what. 
|
|
#12
07-15-2005, 01:41 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: how does having DSL and cable at the same time work?
DSL in the US is usually no more than 768k downstream for your average home connection. Cable (comcast at least) is now offering 6-8megabit downstream (though the upstream will probably still suck balls). Cable is faster here, unless you pay out the ass for your DSL.
Freakin
|
|
#13
07-15-2005, 01:52 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: how does having DSL and cable at the same time work?
[ QUOTE ]
DSL in the US is usually no more than 768k downstream for your average home connection. [/ QUOTE ] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] wha??? Maybe if you live in FrozenAss Alaska - do you work for the cable company or something? Mike
|
|
#14
07-15-2005, 02:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: how does having DSL and cable at the same time work?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] DSL in the US is usually no more than 768k downstream for your average home connection. [/ QUOTE ] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] wha??? Maybe if you live in FrozenAss Alaska - do you work for the cable company or something? Mike [/ QUOTE ] Sometimes I feel "blessed" about having had 10mbit LAN connection since 2001, when I move I make sure there is a good 10mbit there first. Had 512/128kbit cable modem for a few years before that. I go crazy if I don't have a good internet connection.
|
|
#16
07-15-2005, 03:08 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: how does having DSL and cable at the same time work?
[ QUOTE ]
DSL in the US is usually no more than 768k downstream for your average home connection. [/ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] 768-1.5 is a standard speed for $40-50 home service in seattle area for DSL. [/ QUOTE ] So now we're up to 1.5M? Maybe 3M+ next? And best as I recall Seattle's town limits do not reach across the U.S. meaning you don't speak for "your average home connection" any more than I do. I'm not trying to be shitty about it but it really chaps my frijolies when cable company propaganda gets tossed around in the public square as fact. Next thing you know somebody's going to say get rid of satellite TV because of "rain fade" and "that hideous dish stuck on my house". I'm no phone company stooge but IMO DSL is unquestionably a better value than cable - everyone already has a phone line; I don't need to buy mimimum cable service or rent boxes to have DSL. I pay $29 for 1.5M DSL AND ISP. And it's very likely that price is coming down. DSL is fast enough for 99% of what people do at a lower cost (with the exception apparently of Seattle). It's unquestionably more reliable. It's unquestionably not prone to peak-hour congestion. Cable is fine if that's all you got; cable is fine if that's your preference. But don't try to tell ppl cable is a cheap rocket ship and DSL is a rusty overpriced VW. Not only is it a gross distortion but I'm guessing you may not have the experience to make that characterization for anywhere except Seattle, WA. Mike
|
|
#17
07-15-2005, 03:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: how does having DSL and cable at the same time work?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] DSL in the US is usually no more than 768k downstream for your average home connection. [/ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] 768-1.5 is a standard speed for $40-50 home service in seattle area for DSL. [/ QUOTE ] So now we're up to 1.5M? Maybe 3M+ next? And best as I recall Seattle's town limits do not reach across the U.S. meaning you don't speak for "your average home connection" any more than I do. I'm not trying to be shitty about it but it really chaps my frijolies when cable company propaganda gets tossed around in the public square as fact. Next thing you know somebody's going to say get rid of satellite TV because of "rain fade" and "that hideous dish stuck on my house". I'm no phone company stooge but IMO DSL is unquestionably a better value than cable - everyone already has a phone line; I don't need to buy mimimum cable service or rent boxes to have DSL. I pay $29 for 1.5M DSL AND ISP. And it's very likely that price is coming down. DSL is fast enough for 99% of what people do at a lower cost (with the exception apparently of Seattle). It's unquestionably more reliable. It's unquestionably not prone to peak-hour congestion. Cable is fine if that's all you got; cable is fine if that's your preference. But don't try to tell ppl cable is a cheap rocket ship and DSL is a rusty overpriced VW. Not only is it a gross distortion but I'm guessing you may not have the experience to make that characterization for anywhere except Seattle, WA. Mike [/ QUOTE ] in Aurora CO, dsl is $44.99/mo for upto 5mbps and cable is $48.99 for 6mbps so, the better value here is cable (although not by much) pretty comparable, but here's what really matters to me... dsl isn't available in my area and I don't exactly live in the middle of nowhere.
|
|
#18
07-15-2005, 04:10 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: how does having DSL and cable at the same time work?
[ QUOTE ]
in Aurora CO, dsl is $44.99/mo for upto 5mbps and cable is $48.99 for 6mbps so, the better value here is cable (although not by much) pretty comparable, but here's what really matters to me... dsl isn't available in my area and I don't exactly live in the middle of nowhere. [/ QUOTE ] All legitimate (But cable isn't available everywhere either.) I won't quibble by saying you'd never be able to tell the difference in those two speeds anyway (and I bet perfectly satisfactory 1.5M service is substantially less than either). I used to ride and every year the new bike went 0.05s faster in the 1/4 mile than the old model - but everybody wanted the new one because it was "so fast" [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] I replied because I took exception to the statement that 'the average home connection is 768k'. It just isn't true.... Mike
|
|
#19
07-15-2005, 04:19 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: how does having DSL and cable at the same time work?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] DSL in the US is usually no more than 768k downstream for your average home connection. [/ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] 768-1.5 is a standard speed for $40-50 home service in seattle area for DSL. [/ QUOTE ] So now we're up to 1.5M? Maybe 3M+ next? And best as I recall Seattle's town limits do not reach across the U.S. meaning you don't speak for "your average home connection" any more than I do. I'm not trying to be shitty about it but it really chaps my frijolies when cable company propaganda gets tossed around in the public square as fact. Next thing you know somebody's going to say get rid of satellite TV because of "rain fade" and "that hideous dish stuck on my house". I'm no phone company stooge but IMO DSL is unquestionably a better value than cable - everyone already has a phone line; I don't need to buy mimimum cable service or rent boxes to have DSL. I pay $29 for 1.5M DSL AND ISP. And it's very likely that price is coming down. DSL is fast enough for 99% of what people do at a lower cost (with the exception apparently of Seattle). It's unquestionably more reliable. It's unquestionably not prone to peak-hour congestion. Cable is fine if that's all you got; cable is fine if that's your preference. But don't try to tell ppl cable is a cheap rocket ship and DSL is a rusty overpriced VW. Not only is it a gross distortion but I'm guessing you may not have the experience to make that characterization for anywhere except Seattle, WA. Mike [/ QUOTE ] I was speaking from my own experience, which is limited to teh seattle area. Comcast offers 6-8MB service for $45/mo (upload is probably only 384-512). Qwest offers 1.5/896 for $40/mo, and 256/256 for $27/mo. Speakeasy is 768/128 for $40, 1.5/384 for $50. Sucks for seattle, I guess, but I don't mind $45/mo for cable cause I don't have to spend an extra 10-20/mo on a phone line. I don't have to pay to rent my cable modem. I haven't noticed any peak-hour congestion since it first started becoming popular around mid-2000. I have never noticed any down time. Cable is a much better choice here, just like DSL is a much better choice in Sweden. And no, I don't work for a cable company. Freakin
|
|
#20
07-15-2005, 10:20 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: how does having DSL and cable at the same time work?
Re; Redundancy
[ QUOTE ] but still it won't give 0 downtime [/ QUOTE ] If you were 8 tabling high stakes NL and your internet connection ever went out, you would be wondering why you didn't make this investment sooner [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] With load balancing and automatic fail over, you wouldn't even notice that one connection went down.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
