Skip to comments.
Study: Cable speeds outpace DSL
CED Magazine ^
| 4/23/03
| Jeff Baumgartner
Posted on 04/23/2003 11:56:54 PM PDT by Pro-Bush
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-72 last
To: gswilder
I wasn't talking about up-time or service or anything like that. I was generalizing about pure performance. In choosing between Cable or DSL; if you want speed, get cable, if you need low ping get DSL.There will, of course, be people who live in areas where the reverse is true but I work for a gaming company. We host thousands of players a day (we're the primary host of America's Army) and the general rule of thumb is: players pinging under 60ms are on DSL....players over 100ms are on cable or 56k.
Whenever you see someone spike up to 500ms or more it's usually followed by a "F*cking laggy cable" or "Cable R teh sux0rs!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" chat from the player.
In four years of admining, I've never once seen a DSL player say that. Although, as you indicated, DSL players will sometimes (very rarely) lose their connection.
To: RAWGUY
yes you can download 20 megs / second off the backbone.
you must have missed the whole point of my post. I worked right downstairs from the NOC.
To: Pro-Bush
Bad data!!
I've got Qwest DSL and have tested it at 640kbps, in the Denver suburbs.
63
posted on
04/24/2003 11:30:12 AM PDT
by
G Larry
($10K gifts to John Thune before he announces!)
To: SamAdams76
Shhh... Cable is slow and you have to share your bandwidth, plus there is the security issues related to this sharing. You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.
Sam, buddy, lighten up. I said shhh...as in I don't want the good word getting out.
Humor, man, humor.
64
posted on
04/24/2003 4:40:08 PM PDT
by
PFKEY
To: PFKEY
I told you this was a sensitive subject.. ;^)
65
posted on
04/24/2003 5:07:32 PM PDT
by
Pro-Bush
(Iran/ Syria = Gulf War III)
To: PFKEY
Sorry about that. I went into "rant" mode because I heard others say the same things about cable over the past few years. And they were serious.
66
posted on
04/24/2003 5:07:45 PM PDT
by
SamAdams76
(California wine beats French wine in blind taste tests. Boycott French wine.)
To: G Larry
I just tested at 667kbps at bandwidthplace.com with earthlink.net DSL
I used to get double this speed but was betting bumped off when not using it. They obviously split the lines to add more users. Now its more reliable but a bit slower. Still fast enough for the way i use it.
67
posted on
04/24/2003 5:15:23 PM PDT
by
js1138
To: Pro-Bush
I love mine.
68
posted on
04/24/2003 5:18:31 PM PDT
by
farmfriend
( Isaiah 55:10,11)
To: Pro-Bush
Communications
2.8 megabits per second
Storage
347.7 kilobytes per second
1MB file download
2.9 seconds
Time-Warner Cable
69
posted on
04/24/2003 5:53:53 PM PDT
by
Vinnie
To: Frumious Bandersnatch
sorry about delay in answering, I work bad hours. I'm on starband, microwave transmit up to sat and recieve sat down, very fast. (no phone line)
When we moved out here it was our only comm, and it was expensive, but far less now. Cost either 200 for equip or 500 depending on the contract, at 200 about 100/mo yr, 60/mo yr, then 50., at 500, 70 yr, then 60, then 50, something like that. Plus about 100 for install, they wont let you do it. When we did it was about 700.
The address is static but I run a firewall. It is very reliable, and from test I run it is superior to almost all other systems. You can get tv at same time and it cost more of course.
Probably get more info at starband
I just logged in there, and if you decide to go with it you could email me, and if I refer you, we both would get one month free service, but I would have to have your name, email and phone number as its for friends and family.
The only downside is a good rain stops the signal, otherwise its perfect.
70
posted on
04/25/2003 12:21:15 AM PDT
by
lotus
To: Pro-Bush
Here are my results with an ADSL line:
Not bad, considering it's meant to be 1.5mb/s downstream. It costs $50 a month, which isn't bad, considering we have it on 5 computers through our home network. We're also about a quarter mile away from the SBC substation, which should produce some pretty nice speeds. Besides, cable isn't even available here for whatever reason, although Comcast is our new cable provider, and maybe they'll bring cable internet along with them.
71
posted on
04/25/2003 1:05:24 AM PDT
by
Jonez712
(I <3 America)
To: Jonez712
I think the best thing about having both cable and DSL available is the competition between services, and not one industry trying to corner the market and price gouge us all.
Speed, reliability, and pricing will come around with time and maybe even more competition. Hopefully more competition. In my present area both are crap. and still cost alot.
72
posted on
09/28/2004 4:49:23 PM PDT
by
Stewrt
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-72 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson