Did you say 54Mbps? Could I get you to run a speedtest.net test and post back the linked image so we can see 54 Mbps? I just ran one and here's the 2.3 Mbps result (the site provides you a link to post your speed result on a forum.)
Posted on 05/08/2008 5:28:28 PM PDT by lightman
I live in an area which is not served by cable TV companies. That has limited the Internet access choices to either dial-up or sattelite. I currently have both, using dial-up on my MacOS9 and Hughesnet on the PCs.
I have learned that DSL has suddenly been extended to my area by Verizon. Hughesnet is costing roughly $90.00/month for less than satisfactory service because of their "Fair Access Policy" and because towering thunderheads frequently block the sattelite signal. I could get Verizon DSL for about $30.00/month--and if the in-house networking goes right, I might even be able to ditch the dial-up and second phone line for still greater savings.
But before I leap forward with what seems a no-brainer I would like to hear from those who are current or former Verizon DSL customer; especially those who have also had sattelite.
Would going to DSL be a good move?
Ping.
DSL is good. OS-X good too, btw.
I’m very happy with our AT&T bundle: High Speed Internet (average about 54 Mbps), telephone with unlimited long-distance and the new U-verse television (400 channels, some HD and a DVR) for about $110 month.
I think it would, but I don’t think you will realize a lot of money saved: I used to have AT&Tdialup and local telephone service was provided by Verizon. About 2 years ago I decided to go DSL with Verizon and keep the local phone service ... my bill is now $83-85/mo; I do not call long distance with verizon. Verizon offered an introductory rate for DSL but I think it only lasted for about 6 months. I hope this helps you decide.
I have DSL, and am very satisfied with it. However, Verizon is installing Fiber Optics soon, and I have signed up for it. DSL has different speeds, but I have the $30 Verizon subscription and speed is not a problem.
> I live in an area which is not served by cable TV companies.
Make sure about that.
There’s no “cable” (or DSL) here either, but two competing
local operators offer wireless LAN. The one we picked is
using Motorola Canopy technology. It has been more reliable
than either AT&T dialtone or REA kilowatts. The 700 Kb
level service is $35/mo.
No FAP.
Upload speed = download speed.
I have neither, but I do have dialup but if you don't want to pay $80 for dialup speeds, yeah. I've test-drove Starband and Hughes Net and neither are as fast as 56k. They're great if you want to free up the only phone line in your house, but you're not going to get a whole lot of enjoyment being penalized under their FAP's.
I had Verizon DSL and was very happy with it. Reliable, fast downloads, etc. Then my wife decided to “upgrade” us to FiOS. After months of flaky routers, Verizon finally supplied us with one that doesn’t go catatonic at least once per day
First things first:
If you want city level service out in the sticks, either pay for it by having a microwave link or T-1 line strung to your house, or expect to be disappointed.
DSL is dependent upon distance from the telco switch, satellite will always be slow because of latencies between ground and far up in space. Cable may work, but that is entirely up to your provider - many have incompatible wiring setups.
Or petition your congress critter for another subsidy for “poor rural folk”.
I switched from cable broadband to DSL when the cable charges became exorbitant. Although the nominal bandwidth is less, the perceived speed is often greater because the latency is less (usually), and FAR less than satellite. This is Verizon’s $14.95/month “for life” program (actually only until they discontinue the 768 kbps service). It’s fast enough for me.
Did you say 54Mbps? Could I get you to run a speedtest.net test and post back the linked image so we can see 54 Mbps? I just ran one and here's the 2.3 Mbps result (the site provides you a link to post your speed result on a forum.)
Do you have another link? This is what showed up: Document Not Found
Sorry, the requested document does not exist on this server.
There used to a restriction with DSL. If you lived more than one mile from the Central Office, your service was less than exemplary. If they have overcome that distance problem, DSL beats satellite hands down, especially on a rainy or snowy day (not to mention the cost). Of course, if you live within a mile of the CO, go with DSL (I would never have satellite again unless that happened to be my only choice.
I have had satellite, DSL, now cable, and find cable to be the best if available however.
Just my opinion.
My neighbor is considering going back to dial up : ( WiMax is on the way, supposedly.
I use the satellite for big downloads and a Modem for quick response. I am almost to the point of chucking the satellite service because of throttling. The satellites are over subscribed.
Here's the irony--I'm 3 miles from a busy exit of a northeast corridor Interstate. Cable lines are within a mile of my road which has 16 potential customers within 3/4 of a mile...BUT...because they would have to span a half mile with no customers in order to get to us, no deal.
I knew that there was no cable when I built out here 16 years ago...of course, back then I didn't even have a computer and the Internet wasn't on my horizon. Now 90% of my messages are email and phone voice mail has tailed off to next to none.
Unless you have an utterly incompetant DSL provider, it’s a no-brainer of a decision. For one thing, the DSL should be cheaper, and offer bigger bandwidth, for less money than your Sat company. Also, if you plan to, or *do* use any online interactive resources or games, you will see a marked decrease in “lag time”. That being, while the Sat link, can
Download and upload at a pretty good clip, once it starts transmitting, there is lag time while requests are sent up to, and back down from the sattelite. Not good when speed of interaction is key. Saty DLing a movie would go just as fast as a DSL DL, at the same speed, but in a online game, an opponant would be several moves ahead of you, before you saw his first on your screen.
But if possible, check to see if you can find out the DSL companys rep for service in other areas, before making the leap, and if all still looks good...definitely! Make the jump!
That’s the opinion of *this* DSL subscriber.
Slow, unreliable Hughes for $90/month, Reliable, faster cheaper Verizon for $30/month, hummmm tough decision, not. Now if you would just drop the Mac or load Windows on it and you would be in business.
> Would going to DSL be a good move?
Should be a lot cheaper and more reliable, and have much lower latency. If you are one of the first in your area, be patient but report all problems until they are fixed. After than it should be fine. Don’t turn off your satellite access until your DSL is working fairly well.
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.