If the choice was yours?

chernobyl

I will assume lots of you guys have researched broadband (and felt as jealous a fuk with the guys who have genuine speed), what option would you go for?
512k cable @£;40 a month
512k/256k DSL @40 a month

Dustaz

DSL.
Firstly, if a rival company offered cheaper rates or anything, It would be easier to switch DSL providers than switch formats of connections.
Secondly, As far as i remember reading, DSL suffers less shared bandwith problems.

Of course neither will be showing up soon

[This message has been edited by Dustaz (edited 11-05-2001).]

dahamsta

DSL

Joe22

DSL, because from my understanding
dsl is better on the uploads then the downloads, while cable is the other way around.
DSL is not shared bandwhitch, which means you dont need to worry about the guy next door being a porn freak.
DSL will be more available then cable,(if llu goes to plain)

and finally you say 256k up for dsl, while cable here is 128k up.
i would pay more for the extra uploading speed

chernobyl

Im sorry, i should have specified ADSL.

chernobyl

qutoe from joe22 "dsl is better on the uploads then the downloads"

Im sorry, i should have specified ADSL.

Joe22

still, having talked to allot of people with adsl, on the same speed, allot say they uploaded quicker on adsl then cable, im sure this isnt writen in stone.

one thing, afew people hae said to me they get better ping on cable then adsl.
Is this true anyone

dahamsta

> DSL, because from my understanding
>
Good start, made me laugh. As usual, you've had trouble stringing a sentence together for the rest of your post, but I'll try and pull it together.

> dsl is better on the uploads then the
> downloads, while cable is the other way
> around.
>
Wrong. DSL is faster down than up. Cable is usually the same, but the difference is more pronounced. It depends heavily on the cable operators equipment though.

> DSL is not shared bandwhitch, which means
> you dont need to worry about the guy next
> door being a porn freak.
>
Wrong. It's more to do with bandwidth into the exchange than the technology itself, but there's still a bottleneck with xDSL.

Joe22

dahamsta your tell me that adsl is shared bandwhitch?
thats is shared the same way as cable?
all bandwhitch is shared at the exchange,
thats so obvious its painfull to think you posted it

me thinks you just want to start a fight

and as for the uploads/download, fogive me but ill take the owrd off someone with adsl offer your crap anyday

Gerry

I reckon you would need loads of upload bandwidth joe, to run your web hosting company, and for streaming your computer and english tutorials.

chernobyl

ADSL bandwidth is shared @ the DSLAM right at your exchange.
Bandwidth to the exchange should be Fiber Optic or some clone of it.
Its up to the Telco as to how many ppl get plugged into each DSLAM (ie) what would be on modem.."the user to modem ratio"

Dustaz

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Gerry:
I reckon you would need loads of upload bandwidth joe, to run your web hosting company, and for streaming your computer and english tutorials. </font>

Joe22

yea that what i said, bandwidth is shared at the exchange with adsl, so, thats the same with most broadband.the point i was making is cable isnt done the same way.

and gerry i might host a t bird overclocking website, maybe then you will learn something

Dotsie~tmp

Theres just no way Joe22 can be a real poster and not a pi$$ take. If he was i have some strange mental images of what he might be like. A 10 yr old hammering away on daddys keybord? Some country bumpkin who had one too many hurleys to the head maybe.

---

Dotsie
ICQ: 44472574
www.dotsies.com
dotsie@dotsies.com

chernobyl

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by joe22:

I reckon you would need loads of upload bandwidth joe, to run your web hosting company, and for streaming your computer and english tutorials. </font>

[/QUOTE]
Outward facing webservers are never really allowed on DSL and as their may only be 1 provider in the near future or even ever, i would not fuk with the rulez.

Stephen

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Joe22:
and gerry i might host a t bird overclocking website, maybe then you will learn something </font>

Why not just host it at a real webhost ffs?

"maybe then you will learn something" - hahaha.

Joe22

i get a buzz out of all this, if you guy havent realised i dont give a **** about anything anyone of you says then your not as smart as you think.
its only a ubb board.

Joe22

Stephen gerry is the one who started to talk about hosting stuff, not me

dahamsta

> dahamsta your tell me that adsl is shared
> bandwhitch?
>
No, not "bandwhich" Joe22, BANDWIDTH. Ok, go over and ask the man in the white coat for your braincell and pay attention...

As chernobyl correctly stated, the bandwidth is shared at the DSLAM in the exchange. He slipped up at the end though, because with DSL it's not the user to modem ratio, but the user to DSLAM ratio, because the users have to go through DSL modems at the exchange to get to the DSLAM. Following me? No, I didn't think you would, so here's a picture to make it easier for you:

http://www.cid.alcatel.com/resources/graphics/7300/a7300pots.gif

> thats is shared the same way as cable?
>
In a different way, yes, it is.

> all bandwhitch is shared at the exchange,
> thats so obvious its painfull to think you
> posted it
>
Probably, but I was bearing in mind my comment was directed at the village idiot.

> me thinks you just want to start a fight
>
I don't fight with simpletons.

> and as for the uploads/download, fogive me
> but ill take the owrd off someone with
> adsl offer your crap anyday
>
Well, if the person with ADSL has the same brain capacity as you, I'm amazed he's able to turn his computer on. (Pity you can't figure out how to turn yours off.) Anyway, no need to take my word for it when you can consult the authoritative source:

http://www.adsl.com/general_tutorial.html

Please refer to the section entitled "ADSL -- Asymmetric Digital Subscriber Line":

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">As its name implies, ADSL transmits an asymmetric data stream, with much more going downstream to the subscriber and much less coming back.</font>

chernobyl

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by dahamsta:

He slipped up at the end though, because with DSL it's not the user to modem ratio, but the user to DSLAM ratio, because the users have to go through DSL modems at the exchange to get to the DSLAM.

</font>

thanks for the info, i though our "fat pipes" went direct to the DSLAM.
what an achievment..i learned something new today

Joe22

actually the person i was talking to has full rate adsl, 2mbps/.5mbps and hes been useing adsl since it start were he is about 6 years ago. so you think you know something about adsl, talk to this man.

quote:
As its name implies, ADSL transmits an asymmetric data stream, with much more going downstream to the subscriber and much less coming back.

yes this is ture, that wasnt my point though.

128k up adsl and 128k up cable,

the dsl will hold the 128k up allot more constant then the cable will. therefore you can upload faster
all that link was saying is you can get higher speeds of uploads off cable then adsl
but when all is leavel adsl will beat cable

[This message has been edited by Joe22 (edited 11-05-2001).]

po0k

back to the actual questioon..I'd go with DSL.
Cable is mainly only available in the urban areas. It's allready carrying TV. The bandwidth won't ever be fully available, and it will be sahred with a hell of a lot more people then ADSL out the country bit.
Obviously this only applies if u don't live in a tower block
AFAIK DSL bandwidth is shared, but whether or not subscribers are given their own 'Channel' of 512/256 to play with or if the bandwidth is shared around between the neighbours is a different question...
It would be nice if it was though..
Wat would be really handy is if u were explicitly guaranteed a minimum bandwidth at ALL times. SAy 128 down, 64 up. Sound for games.but maybe that would only encourage the telcos to skimp on the bandwitdh they put down to teh DSLAMS.....
John.

---

No-one ever suspects the Duck
He who must die, must die in the dark even though he sells candles

po0k

too right.

---

No-one ever suspects the Duck
He who must die, must die in the dark even though he sells candles

Gerry

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Joe22:
i get a buzz out of all this, if you guy havent realised i dont give a **** about anything anyone of you says then your not as smart as you think.
its only a ubb board.

</font>

How utterly pathetic. **** off and stop wasting everyones time.

dahamsta

> Originally posted by some spa:
>
> yes this is ture, that wasnt my point
> though.
>
I beg to differ Joe22, it was your point, and you were wrong. When you're an adult you'll be able to understand the difference between right and wrong. For now, why not put your hand on the hob to see what happens?

> Originally posted by [FCA]SyxPak:
>
> Cable is mainly only available in the
> urban areas.
>
Of course, but unfortunately because of the laws of economics, the same will be true for xDSL. It's just not commercially viable to make it available /outside/ urban areas. The government are trying to tackle this but as usual they're doing it bass-ackwards, with rural broadband development initiatives in place before the broadband itself is in place. They really need to think about different consultants.

> Wat would be really handy is if u were
> explicitly guaranteed a minimum bandwidth
> at ALL times.
>
It would be fantastic, but again it's just not going to happen. QOS (Quality Of Service) and Joe Soap just don't go together, again because of commercial viability. It's roughly equivalent to the user-to-modem ratio on analog links. A pipe dream unfortunately, but I'm the same as yourself - always been a dreamer.