Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

MikeD · May 5, 2007, 09:23 AM

I remember when DSL was better and that's what we currently have but we were thinking that we won't have an account with Ameritech when we move in a month since we primarily use our cell phones instead. Just looking over at the comcast site though, I'm seeing internet costing almost $50 a month!!! and I know that the dsl is way less than that!! What do you guys recommend?

ghporter · May 5, 2007, 10:39 AM

I like DSL for a number of reasons. The biggest is that you don't share a distribution leg with your neighborhood, so if there's a slowdown, it's because of the Internet, not your neighbor's kid downloading the entire discography of his latest favorite group.

If I'm not mistaken Ameritech has been subsumed by "the new" AT&T-I've been using SWB/SBC/SBC-Yahoo/AT&T DSL since I guess 1999, and I've been very pleased with it. Do your homework and know what you're talking about when you call them, and you'll do fine.

It also doesn't hurt to have a basic wireline phone package; I use mine primarily for taking messages when we're away because it cuts down on interruptions caused by calls on my cell. It's not terribly expensive, either.

amazing · May 5, 2007, 11:21 AM

I think what you're saying is that in the new neighborhood, you're either going to have DSL + landline (but you'll be mainly using mobiles) or Comcast. Would I be right in assuming that DSL + landline costs as much as Comcast?

I use Comcast + mobile, and it's much faster than baseline DSL. I just went to speedtest.net and it's 4977 down and 360 up. It's not always that fast, but it's consistently better than my buddy's DSL.

MikeD · May 5, 2007, 12:32 PM

Okay, I'll look into it. I figured it may be cheaper to get internet from comcast just because we are getting cable too... But then I think it was starting at $50 a month!! And since we use our cells the most which we pay $50 for one and $70 for another, we can lessen our bills.

Mike

Mrjinglesusa · May 5, 2007, 01:15 PM

I would recommend cable if you want high speed. Just checked mine as well and got 4,391 kb/s (down) and 2,011 kb/s (up) (wireless using Airport Extreme). When I had DSL, it was never that fast (sorry, don't have the data). I can really tell the difference, even when just browsing web sites.

Also, something else to keep in mind, if you are going to connect to your work network (VPN, etc.) to work from home, some business networks won't let you use DSL. My employer told me that DSL cannot handle the bandwidth required by our work at home program so I had to switch to cable. I'm really happy with it...

post_break · May 5, 2007, 01:32 PM

We pay 14.99 a month for 1.5 down and 384 up from SBC/AT&T/Yahoo/whatevertheirnameisnow. After 3 years of loyal service we are going to cable because it is just as expensive at this point. Going up to 7.0 down and 512 up.

amazing · May 5, 2007, 01:58 PM

Mike: there are discounts if you get both broadband and cableTV--comcast offers all sorts of deals as well as installation and equipment discounts, especially if you sign up for both at once. Just keep fishing for deals. Sometimes you get better deals through places like Best Buy or CompUSA or Circuit City.

Keep in mind that you can use Skype for some of your contacts. It's $30 for an entire year of free phone calls to Canada and the US, or 2.1 cents/min without. Might be cheaper than using mobile minutes.

voiceofra · May 5, 2007, 05:08 PM

DSL, though it is your line and your line only, speed is completely dependent on your distance from the Central Office (not really an 'office', usually a room full of switches and hubs, etc), poor line quality and/or age of the lines all play a part.
You could be right across the street from the CO, but because the way the lines are laid down, your speed could be that of dial up . That was the case in one apartment complex I lived in.
They do NOT guarantee the speeds they advertise because of those factors
Cable, shared bandwidth with others on the hub, but cable companies tend to be very generous with the pipe.

macintologist · May 5, 2007, 10:39 PM

You really don't need anything more than 512k down/128k up. All that matters is that your connection is always on. Just get the cheapest possible broadband internet.

frdmfghtr · May 5, 2007, 11:40 PM

Originally Posted by post_break

We pay 14.99 a month for 1.5 down and 384 up from SBC/AT&T/Yahoo/whatevertheirnameisnow. After 3 years of loyal service we are going to cable because it is just as expensive at this point. Going up to 7.0 down and 512 up.

$14.99/month for that? That sounds dirt cheap to me! How did you manage to get cable that cheaply?

dj_frankle · May 6, 2007, 02:11 AM

I am with Optus here in Australia and they have taken away the speed ratings from their dsl service. I originally signed up for a 1.5/256 plan 18 months ago and I now get 6.5 Mbps day in day out with no extra charge, and Optus are currently updating all of the exchanges to ADSL2+ which will give give you a theoretical 20.0 Mbps maximum. Once they update the exchange in your area they are sending customers a new ADSL2 modem as well FOC (so I have been told). So I guess here in Australia either cable (with around 10 Mbps) or DSL will do roughly the same.

I pay AU$49.00 (so about US$40.00) and get 21GB of downloads at the above speeds (with no upload limits) per month, how does that compare to plans in the US??

ghporter · May 6, 2007, 08:51 AM

No DSL2 around here...not yet anyway. But the "big" carriers (the reconstituted, "that which doesn't quite kill you makes you MUCH stronger" AT&T is one to watch) have not been terribly picky about "controlling" bandwidth lately. My own AT&T connection gives me about 5Mbps downloads (rated at "up to" 6Mbps) and about 600kbps uploads (originally rated at "up to" 384kbps). But that's not at all bad; my phone lines are VERY new (my neighborhood is only a few years old), and the local "remote terminal" is very nearby, but there are a couple of existing "trunk" cables between there and here. Not bad at all. The list price for this package is $34.99US/month, but as an existing customer I get a nice discount.

And... AT&T is working on their "Uverse" service, which will include television over phone lines. That almost guarantees MUCH wider bandwidth capabilities. So we're making small steps toward DSL2, but the people who sell it think we're all just dying to see the next episode of "Desperate Housewives" instead of doing really interesting things online.

post_break · May 6, 2007, 10:19 AM

Originally Posted by frdmfghtr

$14.99/month for that? That sounds dirt cheap to me! How did you manage to get cable that cheaply?

Its DSL.

ghporter · May 6, 2007, 11:23 AM

Originally Posted by post_break

We pay 14.99 a month for 1.5 down and 384 up from SBC/AT&T/Yahoo/whatevertheirnameisnow. After 3 years of loyal service we are going to cable because it is just as expensive at this point. Going up to 7.0 down and 512 up.

If and when you do make the change, please post your ACTUAL measured speeds. A friend here in town has Time Warner RoadRunner service, and he does NOT get the advertised speed. It's not bad, but it fluctuates pretty greatly. This has to do with the shared distribution system used in cable; while it's not as bad as when cable Internet was first fielded, when the neighborhood is busy using their cable connections, his slows down.

Note that he bought the whole package: premium digital TV, Internet AND phone service, all through his cable connection. This is BAD. Why? "All one's eggs in one basket" is more than an old phrase. While it wouldn't be a big deal really if his TV and Internet dropped out, his phone connection is also how his alarm system (including fire alarms) is routed, there's the 911 issue, and your basic "power's out everywhere from the lightning, how are you doing?" issue. CABLE INFRASTRUCTURE IS MORE SUSCEPTIBLE TO POWER FAILURES THAN TELEPHONE INFRASTRUCTURE. The telephone system has a "battery" voltage on every single live line-and it really comes from a whopping big battery at the central office or a battery/generator combination at a remote terminal. You don't need local power for 911 calls, alarms to work or most other phone functions. I am NOT saying that cable Internet is bad, but I AM saying that depending on that RG-6 cable to be your lifeline is not a great idea. Ok, I'm done with my rant...

post_break · May 6, 2007, 11:37 AM

A buddy of mine has the 10mb package from the cable company I am switching to and he does infact get what is advertised. Yes when cable goes out so does your tv along with your phone if you have it bundled together. Does this bother me? Not really, we have cell phones if it comes down to it. I also have a friend with Time Warner and its horrible. I am going with the local cable company, Buckeye Cable. Im sure no one has heard of them considering they are northern Ohio and southern Michigan only.

peeb · May 6, 2007, 11:54 AM

Seems like a racket to me. Where I am I can only get Qwest or Comcast, and they refuse to compete on price.

ghporter · May 6, 2007, 05:50 PM

Originally Posted by post_break

A buddy of mine has the 10mb package from the cable company I am switching to and he does infact get what is advertised. Yes when cable goes out so does your tv along with your phone if you have it bundled together. Does this bother me? Not really, we have cell phones if it comes down to it. I also have a friend with Time Warner and its horrible. I am going with the local cable company, Buckeye Cable. Im sure no one has heard of them considering they are northern Ohio and southern Michigan only.

Your new cable system sounds a lot like Optimum Online-a legend in the "I'm much faster than you are" arena, mostly because they deliver. I am not familiar with Buckeye (I moved away from southern Michigan a bit before cable became "the thing," so I'm not familiar with any of the regional carriers there), but if local experience says "you actually do get what you pay for," then go for it. In my experience, Time Warner behaves as if they are the ONLY game anywhere, and that's bad for customers.

ghporter · May 6, 2007, 05:53 PM

Originally Posted by peeb

Seems like a racket to me. Where I am I can only get Qwest or Comcast, and they refuse to compete on price.

Push for a deal. Let them know (particularly Qwest) that you're willing to go for HughesNet (formerly DirectPC, DirecTV's satellite Internet carrier), and that you'll put up with the high ping times because at least THEY have reasonable prices on their packages. You could also entertain the notion of a package deal (with either). At this point, I have AT&T phone and Intenet, Cingular cell service, and DirecTV satelite-if I wanted to change to Dish Network, I could get a pretty nice package deal. I don't want to change to Dish, but I still get a fairly good deal.