Satellite Internet vs. ISDN

[Stacy A]

I recently read that for those in rural areas that are broadband "impaired" or "challenged", ISDN is an option. I honestly never really knew about ISDN and don't know much about it, but from what I've read, it sounds like it could be a viable option for those of us that can't get anything other than dial-up or satellite internet. Can someone fill me in on the pros and cons of ISDN vs. satellite internet?

 

[Stargazer]

I found out the price of ISDN and it was a bit more expensive than satellite internet. I think they told me like $120-200 per month and it is only 128K.

 

[kdarcangelis870]

I found out the price of ISDN and it was a bit more expensive than satellite internet. I think they told me like $120-200 per month and it is only 128K.

And the telco or independent isp usually charges an hourly rate on top of that too. I would go with satellite. For 60 bucks a month, you get unlimited internet access from Hughesnet at 700k/128k speeds.

 

[HCI]

And the telco or independent isp usually charges an hourly rate on top of that too. I would go with satellite. For 60 bucks a month, you get unlimited internet access from Hughesnet at 700k/128k speeds.

Not completely unlimited. This is the problem with people selling Hughes. They do have a FAP
http://go.gethughesnet.com/HUGHES/R...iraccess&Container=com.webridge.entity.Entity[OID[BD8BE0839F414B4FB7CDDCA10EFA5369]]

 

[alientransmitter]

Satellite

Satellite is better

 

[rad]

I found out the price of ISDN and it was a bit more expensive than satellite internet. I think they told me like $120-200 per month and it is only 128K.

FYI, to get the 128Kbps speeds you need to be able to connect to an ISP that can support bonding of the ISDN calls. You get two 64Kbps bearer channels and to get the 128Kbps you need to place two calls. Some ISP do this for part of the month charge, others will charge extra when connecting at 128Kbps. And don't forget your ILEC might charge for two calls to the ISP when doing this.

If what your planning to do requires a low latency connection then I'd go with ISDN, if not I think satellite might be better, but I've never used it my self.

 

[Stargazer]

Satellite is faster and cheaper but there is a limit on the downloading. If ISDN was like $50 a month or less then that would not be too bad if that is all that you had to pay including ISP charges and so forth.

 

[Stacy A]

If what your planning to do requires a low latency connection then I'd go with ISDN, if not I think satellite might be better, but I've never used it my self.

It's not what I'm "planning to do", but rather, what I'm forced to do in order to get a faster internet connection. Here, where I live, there is no high speed solution. WildBlue finally started offering service less than 6 months ago, and now they are not taking any new customers - right when I can sign up. HughesNet or Direcway, whatever they are are very expensive compared to WB. I get so f---ing angry when I stop and think about how much money is sitting out here in the rural areas and not a single person or company seems to have a clue about how to mine the gold. I though WB was the answer, but apparently they are so freaking shortsighted that they only had enough satellite space to sign up a few hundred people. All I want is a high speed internet connection. Is that so much to ask?

 

[rad]

Stacy, I feel your pain. In my former job one of the things I did was help our work at home staff find broadband providers. What I found was that SBC areas were usually the worst for finding service if you weren't in the cities, Texas and Arkansas were especially bad. I know you probably have but have you checked to see if there are any land based wireless networks in your area? I know I had a couple folks in Texas get service via that method and they were happy with it, just not with the antenna up on the roof.

 

[Stacy A]

There is actually a guy in the area that has a wi-fi network, but he is absolutely useless. I contacted him in March to let him know I was interested, along with two other homes in close proximity to my house. He came out and did a signal check and told me that I needed a 70 foot tower in order to get high enough to get a line of sight to his tower. He said he would set up a hotspot so that all three homes could work from it. I said fine, give me a written estimate of what it will cost and break it down to what all three of us would have to chip in for and what each of us would need to pay individually. I didn't hear from the guy for three months, so I called him back. I got the "Man, I've been so busy!" story and he still couldn't give me an estimate of what it would cost, other than to say the tower would be $100 per foot. He did tell me I could go ahead and locate where I wanted the tower and dig a 2x2x4 hole for the tower anchor and purchase 24 bags of cement so that the guy with the tower erecting business would take less time. I'm not about to start on anything unless I have a good ballpark figure of what I'm about to have to spend on this project. I just said forget it. The guy is all talk and no work. He said he would e-mail me the specs on guying the tower, but he never did.

 

[Stargazer]

And he will probably use that expense that you put in the tower to profit off of it sending that signal to many other people at your expense. This is starting to sound like the guy in my area that I was wanting to get signal here. There are probably dozens of people around here that would take the service especially if they could get the phone service unlimited for $25 per month.