I have three receivers and had always understood it was a requirement for all receivers to be connected to a phone line and if not connected an audit was likely. To avoid the pain I keep my receivers connected, however, if its no longer a requirement I could save 20 odd bucks a month by getting rid of the landline that I only maintain for this purpose.
Perhaps the Dirt team could make a definitive statement on the landline requirement?
I have three receivers and had always understood it was a requirement for all receivers to be connected to a phone line and if not connected an audit was likely. To avoid the pain I keep my receivers connected, however, if its no longer a requirement I could save 20 odd bucks a month by getting rid of the landline that I only maintain for this purpose.
Perhaps the Dirt team could make a definitive statement on the landline requirement?
Do people still suffer DSL???Landline not needed if you have dsl connected to the receivers.
Do people still suffer DSL???![]()
When the alternative is comcast or Uverse...yes.Do people still suffer DSL???![]()
I have three receivers and had always understood it was a requirement for all receivers to be connected to a phone line and if not connected an audit was likely. To avoid the pain I keep my receivers connected, however, if its no longer a requirement I could save 20 odd bucks a month by getting rid of the landline that I only maintain for this purpose.
Perhaps the Dirt team could make a definitive statement on the landline requirement?
When the alternative is comcast or Uverse...yes.
When the alternative is comcast or Uverse...yes.
When the alternative is comcast or Uverse...yes.
I for one can attest to U-verse (Internet only) being FAR better than typical DSL.