Cable or DSL??

aggiejason

aggiejason

Chillin' on Route 66
Joined
Jun 9, 2004
Messages
527
Help! I have a choice between Cox Cable Internet or SBC DSL service. I'm not sure which one is faster and/or better? any ideas?
Thanks
J
 
Cable is usually faster, DSL cant be run over fiber optics as far as I know.
 
Can't speak about DSL, but I've had cable for about two years with excellent reliability and performance. The cable company keeps upgrading me, so I'm now getting download speeds in the 300kbs+ range.

I get excellent pings for online gaming.
 
Well, I certainly don't know much about computers, so take this with a shaker of salt. From what I understand, cable download speeds beat DSL, but cable upload speeds are much, much lower. Reliability is also an issue, though it probably varies by provider and area. I've never had personal DSL service, only cable. AT&T was replaced by ComCast about a year ago in my area, and both have fairly mediocre service. At times service will go out for as long as two days. Every time the cats climb all over the power cords by the computer it interrupts cable modem operation also (this is a hardware issue- bumping the cords upsets the modem), and it'll take between five minutes and two hours for the modem to start working again. Every time this happens I'm tempted to tell ComCast to piss off and just get another phone line, but the modem always eventually works.

I'm sure someone more knowledgable will be able to help you more.

Jeremy

The essence of true wilderness is big mammals that can eat you.
-Ed Abbey
 
Thanks for the input guys. I thought cable might be faster. I've heard that we have to have digital cable in order to get cable internet, but I haven't been able to find that on Cox's website. All we really need is expanded basic. Keep 'em coming!
 
JR42 said:
Every time the cats climb all over the power cords by the computer it interrupts cable modem operation also (this is a hardware issue- bumping the cords upsets the modem), and it'll take between five minutes and two hours for the modem to start working again. Every time this happens I'm tempted to tell ComCast to piss off and just get another phone line, but the modem always eventually works.
Click to expand...

Have comcast replace the modem with a different model. We had an RCA modem that did this all the time, it was a badly designed power cord connection. No problems since we got a webstar model.
 
I personally haven't tried DSL, but for the last 1 and 1/2 years I've been doing the Cable thing. Can't beat it as far as I'm concerned. Downloads are at least 20X faster than dial up. As far as staying connected. once you fail to connect, CS will give you the basics on how to fix it yourself. Unless there's a area wide disruption, I can usually handle the problem within five minutes. Here in NJ, I have Patriot Media (aka patmedia.net), they are also my cable company, and they have been upgrading continuously. We recently got HD cable, which makes a world of difference in the Home Theater realm.

Sign up and check it out - it couldn't hurt!

Ken
 
There's very little difference in speed between the two. DSL used to be a lot faster, but cable companies have been making great strides and the two are near identical.

However, there are some significant limitations for residential Cable Modem service. Cable is a shared network, unlike DSL which offers a dedicated line for each user. When too many users in one neighborhood try to share the same cable, performance can suffer dramatically and even grind to a halt as users compete for the limited resources one cable can afford.

However, poor conditioning of some local loops and distance problems plague DSL providers, so it's a toss up.

I use cable, and love love love it. I've also had DSL, and ISDN and had problems with both. The problems were minor, but I found that the help desk support for those products was very poor.
 
I had DSL for 2 years and loved it, I connected at 768k. It was reliable and nearly never went down.

I moved a year ago and am now on cable. I connect at 3000k. It is reliable and hardly ever goes down. Same reliability as DSL, but 4x faster. Its awesome.:)
 
Gonna move this to Gadgets & Gear.
 
What Danielle said about Cable Modem is true. You are a member of a LAN based on your local service area. Since each area is different in terms of users, high concentration of users will degrade service levels.

DSL on the other hand is nothing more than a fractional T1 delivered via copper from the Central Office. Interesting fact is that, even though the line is dedicated to the user, the network port it's connected to is also a LAN enviornment. However, unlike Cable Modem's tendency to slow because of congestion, DSL's are usually not as congested at the LAN level. The carriers tend to not cram as many users into a segment as would the Cable company.

Speed-wise, a couple of considerations needs to be taken. 1) Distance. DSL are limited by how far you are from the CO (max is 3 miles); Cable modems are not. 2) How many connections between you can the CO. In most households, it's at least 4 (house jack, to the can for the street up on the pole, to the manhole for the can, to the main distribution frame) before it reaches the CO. At each point, signal degrades a bit. The same with coax, except that coax is a thicker cable, which leads to.. 3) Wiring. Coax is much thicker than copper pair that delivers phone service. So it does have the ability to carry much higher bandwidth. In the CO world, T3's (that's 28 T1's) are generally carried via BNC connectors (coax).

From having to support a multitude of users who use both for remote VPN access back to the office, I can say without a doubt that Cable Modems have been the most reliable. DSL can have higher performance levels, but because of the necessary cabling to deliver service, are more prone to interference from weather than Cable.

However, if you are a Network Manager, DSL's are your friends because they tend to not be on some pre-defined network that hampers your VPN configuration that's common with Cable Modem service......
 
It's true that Cable can slow down with more users. But even during peak time, I doubt it'll ever slow down below the level of the fastest DSL. In my experience though, I've never seen anything like that.

When cable came to Tucson, I was one of the lucky few that tested it out. Got free cable for nearly a year. Since I was the only one in my hub that had cable, it was nice and fast. When it was released to the public, I never noticed any loss of speed. In fact, it got faster. Speed for me is more limited by the server I'm downloading from, rather than my own speed potential.

This is Cox by the way. Comcast services other areas of town here, but I don't know anything about them.

I honestly can't see any reason to use DSL if you can get Cox, unless you're pinching pennies. Even then, if you have a cell phone, you can get rid of your land line entirely, which'll save more money anyway.
 
Cable, specifically Comcast, is trying to limit your sharing of the connection. The newer modems coming out attempt to allow only one PC connection, and then charge extra for sharing out to other PCs in the home.

Savvy users will find this simple to bypass.

Comcast will simply cut you off if you exceed your bandwidth. No automatic limitation as is available with DSL No explanation, no warnings, (see slashdot).

Cable has a long history of monitoring use and then selling that data to advertisers.

So, if by better you mean performance, then cable has its merits. If by better you mean a respectful relationship with the customer, cable sucks canal water.

Phil
 
It sounds like ComCast sucks, not cable. I'm on Time-Warner Road Runner cable and have had no problems. I run 3 computers behind a firewall, all connecting to the cable modem via switch. I've had no connection problems, no bandwidth limitation issues, and no warnings of any kind. It rocks.
 
Both are good when the providers are compentent. Both suck when the providers suck or are shifty. Go with whatever has the best price and reputation in your area. I currently use DSL because I can get it for $29.99 after employee discount AND it has a better rep than the local cable providers (people around here HAVE experienced slowdowns because of neighborhood usage).
 
The Screensavers guys agree that it's all in the provider. We have Charter here in the St. Louis area, and so far (aside from price increases) the service has been excellent.
 
Planterz said:
But even during peak time, I doubt it'll ever slow down below the level of the fastest DSL. In my experience though, I've never seen anything like that.
Click to expand...
You would be surprised. I've done enough network testing with Sniffers to know what the bandwidth ceilings are. While Cable modem are consistently the most reliable, they also the lowest consistent lower bandwidth results. These results, of course, applies only to the New York City area for both Cable and DSL.
 
I'm a cable guy, and cable is faster but DSL is cheaper. If yuo don't need top speed and would rather save 20 bucks a month get DSL if not go with the cable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top