GaryPen said:
BTW, speaking of specs on paper, do you also believe that Dish Customer support is top notch because they won some nonsensical JD Power award?
You GOT to be kidding??? :shocked :shocked
Seriously, since you keep talking about "specs on paper", what "paper" is it that says
"the more people in an area are using the cable ISP, speed is reduced because of shared bandwidth. This does not happen with DSL" that you state as fact??? (Hmm, maybe on all that advertising that DSL companies use against the cable co) PAPER is all that is, too - unless YOU can show me some evidence to the contrary.
OK, let's forget about the "specs on paper" - let's do a "real life" speed test. I will tell you straight up, that when I test my connection, I consistently get OVER 4mg of speed. I'll GUARANTEE you will NOT find many DSL connections that will get up there. Again, because of how DSL works, there are just TOO many variables involved to be able to get these kinds of speeds in "real life".
Now, in all fairness, I'm sure their are some cable co. that have problems too, like evidently your friend does. And I also agree that a higher speed cable modem is of little value if it's down all the time. (like my DSL was) I'll also agree that if I could NOT get a cable modem, I'd probably do DSL - that was actually the situation I was in when I first got DSL, as AT&T cable (who had the system before Insight took over) had not rewired my neighborhood. The DSL service was so crappy, I disconnected & went back to dial-up, as I was going to be moving in a month & knew cable modem was available at my new house.
I also agree that if someone only needs a moderate speed broadband connection that's cheaper, to replace dial-up, DSL is a valid alternative. But I guess my question about this is - if your DSL is SO much more reliable than your friend's cable modem, as well as being cheaper, why DOES he continue to pay more for such 2nd rate service?
