I'm back in the market for DSL, but the cheapest I can find usually are x-amount for x-time. I was very dissatisfied with Bellsouth DSL customer service when they kept trying to keep us on their services and raising our rates for both the phone and DSL line. Anyone know of a cheap DSL service that actually keeps their deal instead of a limited time offers?

 

Look for cable, unless you live next to the DSL station cable is faster for the same rate and not driven by usage....

But I have never seen prices that dont expire... I think its crap too, but what can you do...

 

we have the sbc/yahoo whatever it is now and it sucks hard. it is very very slow. dsl reports speed test says it is 600k. too slow.

 

Its the best service you can get from a cable company. Say want you want about cable's video and phone service. but cable internet is the way to go.

 

I have had cable modem service for a few years now-ever since the early days and at first it was so bad that I swore I would get DSL whenever it became available. However, I was never able to since the phone company has never offered it anywhere I have lived, which in itself is pretty pathetic and one reason I will probably never try it when/if it becomes available.

I have had (Charter) cable for a few years now. Overall, it is pretty reliable. I have had only one service issue that caused me to "lose it" with them. Just like the phone company though, they also like to raise prices. There's really nothing you can do about that though. They have more or less a monopoly right now, and they know it.

Unlike DSL, Cable can get slower at peak hours, since you have to share the bandwidth with other subscribers on your street. That's the way I understand it. I haven't really experienced that too often and someone may correct me if that is not exactly accurate.

 

Thats actually backwords, DSL is the one that has use based performance.. not cable... Cable isnt affected like DSL... DSL is also affected by your distance from the DSL center... Cable is not...

 

def go cable, we had verizon dsl and it sucked a lot, then we switched to comcast cable, and it rocks the house. its even faster then the internet at my college, so im pretty happy with it.

 

I have always heard that your distance from the DSL provider can make a difference-especially whether you can even get it or not. But, I have always read that Cable modem service is based on shared bandwidth in the area. I'm not trying to start an argument, but I have always read that. I know from experience during peak hours that it can slow down, but so can DSL for all I know-I've never had it.

Here's a quick Google search that talks about it:

http://www.findisp.us/info/dsl-vs-cable.php

DSL Service

Not Shared : Bandwidth is dedicated, not shared, between the user’s location and the nearest central office of your ISP.

Gaming : Too many users playing at the same time will not degrade the network.

Cable Internet

Shared : The bandwidth to your Cable ISP is shared by you and all the other Internet users in your area using same service.

Gaming : Too many users playing will reduce the network speed as it is shared.

 

About the bandwidth thing...I have found this to be true. Top speed is awesome, but it can get clumsy sometimes. In compromise though, I think cable internet is more reliable over DSL. I have had both, but only one iteration of each...Earthlink and Comcast. I was thinking about switching from Earthlink to another DSL but I feared that it's the line not the provider and I wanted my internet!!

Plus, I feel like cable is trying to play catch-up on DSL and get up to FIOS speed/dependability/dedication before it gets too widespread so they're really trying, while DSL is just falling behind. Reason? Telephone companies don't wanna spend the money putting in new cable for DSL because the phone is still working fine. Comcast on the other hand, because of the reason given above, is constantly improving and expanding, while DSL companies are going for FIOS which won't be widely available till I start wheeling in an 2030 4Runner.

 

I agree with that. I have always noticed that the phone company, at least around here, has never been aggressive about providing DSL service. What is worse, they even promoted dial-up for the longest time over DSL. That's just sad. I wouldn't even have a land line now for a home phone if my cell phone worked at my house. I have no love for the phone company.

Cable on the other hand, has been highly aggressive about expanding and staying up to date around here. I have had some service issues here and there, but I have been pretty pleased with it.

I guess what is needed is another player in the market. Hopefully, wireless/satellite will become more available to put a little pressure on both the phone and cable company.

 

Intersting, I have always read/heard the opposite... no worries... I know for sure the every cable system I have used is much faster and more reliable....

 

I have had cable for many years and before that we had DSL and I must say that overall, cable is MUCH better. This is in spite of my terrible (current) experience with Comcast (I don't feel like going on a rant about Comcast). I had Time Warner Roadrunner back in Houston and it was excellent so I say go for cable.

 

I would be the last one for big business. Except most cable companies do enter into contracts with the city to provide all schools and government building with internet and video for free. But, they also enter into a contract for basic services for the whole city. Although internet is not one of them it really doesn’t get priced to out of range. Back on point. A monopoly does help the reliability of the network. Having just one company to rely on to fix your issue or fix a network outage is a ton better. Because let me tell you telecommunications companies DO NOT like to work together. And a cable network depends on being well balanced.


And you won’t experience it to often. The reason you don’t is because most of internet traffic is busty data. All hard core users have a fiber line running right out of the node. The plant is also easy to expand and grow to allow for bandwidth demands.
That and your end point is often your slowest point. Which it doesn’t matter how fast of connection you have you going down to that speed. The cable itself can carry well into fiber speed range where two wire doesn’t come close.

 

It is cable that will get slower the more people are on the line, however i have never really seen it cause i big problem the cable company up here seems to keep it under controll. We have DSL, because the comcast cable here has VERY slow upload rates... Fast downloads but slow uploads also hard to get static IP's through Comcast. I am sticking with DSL becuase it can provide the high upload times that i need.

Also our DSL is less than $30 a month every month (with a static IP) and i could never get even the slowest cable for that much without some sort of a limited time offer.

 

most DSL systems are no different then cable except for the cable part. In both systems your not far from a fiber node. which turns you 2 wire or cable into fiber. Then just combines all bandwidth together which can max out for both companies. But, rarely does.

1. This allowed DSL to reach farther out from the Central Office.
2. This allowed cable to take care of so many customers on a Node.

 

I am using the same thing, sbc/yahoo. I've had them for a while now and never had a problem. It's plenty fast for me and I pay $15 a month.