Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/19/2017 7:27:10 PM
Posted: 10/3/2002 9:04:54 AM EDT
I can get a dsl connection thru verizon for $27. I'm currently paying $45 for cable (Road Runner). Can you guys tell me the pros and cons of cable and dsl. I've been happy with cable so it'll take alot to get me to switch.
Link Posted: 10/3/2002 9:24:40 AM EDT
I also have RR (Cincinnati Time Warner) and have been very happy with it since it came out about 3+ years ago here. DSL typically have differnt price/speed levels and offers a consistant speed in both upload and download. While I have not had DSL servvice, I understand that there can be issues regarding maintaining a constant connection from your PC or home router becuase of various logon requirements. You have your own pipe to the ISP and are not sharing it with anyone. Cable is much more oriented to faster download speeds (which is what most people are doing most of the time) and typically is faster than DSL on the download side for equal or less money. But it can be slower on the upload (depending on speed level you chose to pay for with DSL) and in theroy, you are on a local LAN with others in your area/nieghborhood..based on however the Cable ISP chooses to segment thier service area. I like RR and have foound it to be very reliable and cost effective compared to DSL users in my area. I could get a faster service with DSL if I got the top end level of servive, but its 3x the price and one person rarely needs that level of speed consistantly. Thats more suited to small offices sharing the connection. Email or IM me if you want more info. [url] dslreports.com [/url] has a good user based review of various cable and dsl isp's as well as speed tests, performance tips, and great user forums.
Link Posted: 10/3/2002 9:33:27 AM EDT
Depends on your neighborhood/local provider. I had cable modem with Road Runner for years and was very happy with it until the speed just dropped one day and never came back. Than I went to DSL and am pretty happy with that. You really can't tell unless you try both and run speed comparisons. The main difference I have found is in using multiple computers for internet access. With cable, all I had to do was get a hub and just add the other computers to share the line. But with DSL I had to get a special dsl router in order to have more than one computer access the internet at a time. If you are happy and the money saving is not an issue than no reason to change.
Link Posted: 10/3/2002 9:37:39 AM EDT
Link Posted: 10/3/2002 9:40:10 AM EDT
Let me guess, Hellraiser, you've been using South Western Bell for your DSL, right? With QWest DSL in Denver, Colo., all we needed to share the connection was a Cisco 675 or 678 router (the DSL 'modem') and a cheap-ass Linksys hub. With the SBC DSL, it's a miracle it works at all, and sharing the internet connection can only be done using the stupid Windows Internet Connection Sharing.
Link Posted: 10/3/2002 9:54:13 AM EDT
I also have the Linksys BEFW11S4 wireless/4 port router/hub/firewall and its awesome. Great addition to a home office or just for the security the hardware firewall offers. And the covienence of the wireless is awesome. I am on my laptop in my kitchen watching foxnews and reading ar15.com. What more could I ask for? LOL
Link Posted: 10/3/2002 9:55:20 AM EDT
In my neck of the woods, Cable will yield higher speeds then DSL. But DSL is always one speed, all the time. Cable can really flucuate speed wise. They end up being the same price wise, so usually cable is the way to go. The only reason I haven't switched to cable is my DSL provider which is my ISP messed up and I haven't been charged for an ISP in over a year! So I pay $32 a month for 768kb download and a 128 upload.
Link Posted: 10/3/2002 10:24:04 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/3/2002 10:26:28 AM EDT by ken_mays]
I got cable about four years ago and it started out pretty fast. It took forever to get somebody out to fix it when it broke (like a couple weeks) but when it ran, it ran fast. Then over the next two years it got slower and slower until it wasn't much faster than dialup. When I moved I got DSL, and it has been more stable, if not particularly faster. It all depends on how far you are from the telco central office. I had a USB external DSL modem (sucked!), then got an internal one (a lot better), and finally about a year ago I bought a Cayman 3220-H DSL router/hub, which has been great. Edited to say: Oh yeah: cable networks seem to be a lot more susceptible to hacking. The last 6 months or so I had it, my firewall would record at least four hack attempts per day. Since I got DSL, I go weeks at a time without any attempts.
Link Posted: 10/3/2002 10:25:26 AM EDT
I pretty much have the same thing to say about cable vs dsl: dsl is a direct pipe while cable is a big fat shared pipe. The bandwidth available through cable varies, depending on the traffic created by the other people on your segment. It is possible, but rare, that you'll have bandwidth problems with cable. A friend of mine (had cable)was doing some heavy peer to peer file sharing and hosting a couple of game servers from his house, and the cable company had him stop it because he was using constantly using way more bandwith than a regular user should've been using. That in turn affected his neighbor's connections. He said they put a cap on how much he could use at a time, but it's more than reasonable for him, his wife, and 3 kids to be online at the same time. If he wants to host games, he'll need to rent space at the ISP.
Link Posted: 10/3/2002 10:29:40 AM EDT
Neither is specifically better than the other. What matters is the service provided locally by them. Someone in another state could tell you that their AT&T service is great, but for you it could suck. It all depends on local service. Try to find out which one has more customers. That's generally an indication of the better service.
Link Posted: 10/3/2002 10:39:40 AM EDT
Originally Posted By go3: Neither is specifically better than the other. What matters is the service provided locally by them. Someone in another state could tell you that their AT&T service is great, but for you it could suck. It all depends on local service. Try to find out which one has more customers. That's generally an indication of the better service.
View Quote
Very good point. I was trying to say the same thing in a few words with my "in my neck of the woods" statement. I know a fellow that lives in a new neighborhood attached to an older neighborhood. He is still the only house in this new hood. He was averaging 4000kb downloads and 1000 kb uploads. How that for fast!! Another buddy in a different area, we had 5 computers sharing his cable modem playing a internet game, we all were pinging below 40ms!! Another buddy that lives up in the west hills, HIS CABLE BLOWS. Always dropping packets and sessions. Been a hassle since day one. So you never know what your going to get with cable.
Link Posted: 10/3/2002 11:01:24 AM EDT
I recently upgraded from a 56k dial-up to DSL. It's like night and day. I'm really happy with the DSL so far. Haven't had any connection problems whatsoever. I looked into cable, but strangely enough, it's not available in my area (Pittsburgh).
Link Posted: 10/3/2002 11:45:52 AM EDT
Originally Posted By 308wood: GET CABLE!!!! every time we get cloud cover all we can see on 100 channels is "searching for satellite".
View Quote
Huh? [>:/] USPC40 [img]www.ar15.com/members/albums/USPC40/line.gif[/img] [url=www.nra.org][b][red]NRA[/red][/url] [url=www.nra.org][blue]Life Member[/blue][/url] [url=www.gunowners.org][b][red]GOA[/red] [/url] [url=www.gunowners.org][blue]Life Member[/blue][/url] [url=www.saf.org][red]SAF[/red][/url] [url=www.saf.org][blue]Supporter[/blue][/url] [url=sas-aim.org][red]SAS[/red][/url] [url=sas-aim.org][blue]Supporter[/blue][/b][/url] [img]www.ar15.com/members/albums/USPC40/alabamaflag.gif[/img]
Link Posted: 10/3/2002 11:57:17 AM EDT
First, DSL doesn't get bad when it gets cloudy. It's not sattellite internet. A comparison: DSL is like having your own house with its own hot water supply. You're going to get 15 gallons of hot water per minute no matter what. You take a shower, wash your hands, etc, you know you will have 15 gallons of hot water per minute to work with. With cable, it's like living in a large apartment building with a hot water system that can supply 100 gallons of hot water per minute. This can be great when you're the only one using the hot water, or if just a few other neighbors are using hot water at the same time. What sucks is when everybody else in the apartment building decides to wash dishes or take a shower at the same time. Suddenly that 100 gallons of hot water per minute is being used by 20 people, leaving you with 5 gallons of hot water per minute. Your nice warm shower turns into a cold one. Cable can be great if you're in a small neighborhood or service loop that has few customers. If they decide to be cheap and add as many customers as they can, you will start noticing slowdowns. The kid next door downloading mp3's, the guy across the street getting streamed porn, and another person down the block downloading a pirated new release movie will all start stealing your bandwidth. No matter which one you choose, remember one thing: DON'T SIGN A CONTRACT!!!
Link Posted: 10/3/2002 12:04:31 PM EDT
Originally Posted By ken_mays: Oh yeah: cable networks seem to be a lot more susceptible to hacking. The last 6 months or so I had it, my firewall would record at least four hack attempts per day. Since I got DSL, I go weeks at a time without any attempts.
View Quote
EXACTLY. That happens ALL THE TIME. I have a buddy who has RR, and someone keeps downloading stuff from his PC and leaving little messages for him. I believe cable is easy to hack because of the fact that the IP changes only once daily. I could be wrong though.
Link Posted: 10/3/2002 12:04:48 PM EDT
[url=http://www.dslreports.com]BROADBAND REPORTS.COM[/URL](aka dslreports.com) each depends on where your at. verizon usually has 768/128 dsl, cable minimums are usually 1500/128, but more common 3000/128, but during peak hours, your lucky if you get verizon dsl speeds. I have earthlink dsl via covad/pacbell and have a 1500/384 package...I love it, works great, I dont get any speed fluctuations at all during peak hours. go to that website above that i posted and check out your options, i suggestyou go with a larger DSL provider for company stability, and it also ranks all broadband providers for your area.
Link Posted: 10/3/2002 12:21:35 PM EDT
Originally Posted By ar15_newbie:
Originally Posted By ken_mays: Oh yeah: cable networks seem to be a lot more susceptible to hacking. The last 6 months or so I had it, my firewall would record at least four hack attempts per day. Since I got DSL, I go weeks at a time without any attempts.
View Quote
EXACTLY. That happens ALL THE TIME. I have a buddy who has RR, and someone keeps downloading stuff from his PC and leaving little messages for him. I believe cable is easy to hack because of the fact that the IP changes only once daily. I could be wrong though.
View Quote
Nonsense. Neither is easier to hack than the other. They are not hacking your connection, just your computer. Switching ISP's may reduce the amount you are exposed to because it may not be as widely scanned, but you are still as vulnerable. And your friend most likely has a trojan or some other backdoor installed. He should get an anti-virus scanner and install a firewall.
Link Posted: 10/3/2002 1:32:54 PM EDT
Originally Posted By go3:
Originally Posted By ar15_newbie:
Originally Posted By ken_mays: Oh yeah: cable networks seem to be a lot more susceptible to hacking. The last 6 months or so I had it, my firewall would record at least four hack attempts per day. Since I got DSL, I go weeks at a time without any attempts.
View Quote
EXACTLY. That happens ALL THE TIME. I have a buddy who has RR, and someone keeps downloading stuff from his PC and leaving little messages for him. I believe cable is easy to hack because of the fact that the IP changes only once daily. I could be wrong though.
View Quote
Nonsense. Neither is easier to hack than the other. They are not hacking your connection, just your computer. Switching ISP's may reduce the amount you are exposed to because it may not be as widely scanned, but you are still as vulnerable. And your friend most likely has a trojan or some other backdoor installed. He should get an anti-virus scanner and install a firewall.
View Quote
A big problem with cable is that you have all these users on the same physical segment, so they just kick off a port scanner and go to work. With DSL you're a little more isolated since each connection is point-to-point, but the hacking potential is just the same, if they can find you. It all depends on your router/firewall or PC firewall. I used BlackIce for a while but found it had some limitations. I liked ZoneAlarm better because it will also notify you of unauthorized programs trying to reach the Internet. It was great for shutting up talkative software. Oh, and when I had cable, the IP would stay the same for days on end. I think they've gotten smart now and churn IPs to discourage folks from setting up servers at home. But then, that's what DNS2Go is good for...
Link Posted: 10/3/2002 2:03:31 PM EDT
We just did a big case study on this topic in one of my CS classes. One guy in the class got cox cable internet and went from about 4 or 5 kbs up to almost 3000kbs. They are garaunteeing download speeds of 1.5mb per sec minimum. Anyways he hooked up his first system in the house by himself at next to nothing cost then he went and purchased linksys router and now has 3 different systems on 3 diff os in his house all surfing the net at blazing speeds and with the router it has the hardfirewall in addition to whatever software you have. we found in our case study cale to be more reliable, faster and easier to network through the house and we also had a rep from cox talk to our class about it and he said that in the near future they will be adding more services like paying a few extra dollars a month to boost up from basic t-1 type speed to t-3 speed and then 2 additional speeds above that probably. the only reason e found to go with dsl was if the person wants to save a few dollars a month on fee's. the guy in our case study pays $34.95 and has 3 systems on it.
Link Posted: 10/3/2002 2:45:48 PM EDT
Some people here have given some good (and correct) advice, specifically that DSL is considered a point-to-point connection to the ISP, whereas cable is a shared medium. There is no more protection from hacking through DSL than cable access. Each method will allow you to connect to the shared network (internet) by assigning a publicly accessible IP address. When you are on a cable/DSL line you obtain your IP address through the ISP. Typically your IP address is what is considered a "leased" address and expires after a preset time. The mechanism to renew the lease is part of your networking protocols (trying to stay high level here and not get too technical). DSL comes in multiple flavors. Depending on where you live, and how much you want to pay, you could get speeds of 250k to over 10mb. Cable, residential access cable to be precise, typically is between 1.5 to 3mb. The variance is based upon the fact that it is a shared medium and you are competing for available throughput with everyone in your neighborhood who uses the same cable access. The reason you can get DSL to run at much higher speeds than cable is not strictly because of the shared medium. Cable access is provided by multiplexing (splitting) the signal that comes over the cables. Two methods to multiplex the signal is by using either different frequencies for the cable TV than used for the internet connection, or by using time division multiplexing. I don't know of any cable access provider that uses time division multiplexing. So basically when you use cable you have a preset amount of signal that can be carried on the actual cable medium. The signal on that medium is split between the cable tv signal, your internet signal, and everyone else's cable/internet signal. DSL is faster because you are splitting the signal between the internet conneciton and a voice line. The requirements to transmit a voice across the line is relativly low, and this allows the carrier to grant more signal to the internet connection (again, very high level). The big problem with DSL is that it can be very hard to get, as well as hard to establish your connection. The protocols used on voice lines (typically PPOE) to encapsulate the TCP/IP traffic is different than those used for cable. Also DSL providers have a known history for suddenly going out of business. For my personal opinion, I would go cable. It's typically easier to get and set up, and the speed of 1.5 to 3mb is typically more than needed for a home connection, unless you are doing some type of hosting service.
Link Posted: 10/3/2002 3:16:01 PM EDT
yeah cable may be shared but the lowest ive ever seen mine dip was to 300kps and thats still alot faster then a 56k. but no matter what u choos get a router or some sort of software firewall.
Link Posted: 10/3/2002 5:48:19 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/3/2002 5:49:03 PM EDT by Atencio]
Most of the guys I play online games with that have cable seem to experience more packet loss versus the DSL guys. Pings on the average seem a little better with the cable.
Top Top