• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Cable or Satellite or DSL?

A

Akaz1976

Platinum Member
Especially does any one know how good (fast+reliable+consistent) satellite service is? they are claiming 3.5MPS maximum speed but that really doesnt mean much does it? i got cable but its not as reliable as i would like (tho i got no problems with speed so far).

Any comments?
 
DSL is your best bet... especially if you play multiplayer games, the pings in satellite connection suck!
 
Get satellite as a last resort.....satellite is download only, have to have 56k modem to upload.
If you have an option why don't ya try DSL?
 
Well, I'd give the satellite a try ONLY if it's that newer 2 way stuff. Other than that go DSL. I'll soon have it and I love it already (have set it up for others)
 
There's a couple companies starting to offer two way satellite. I think DirectPC is releasing theirs around the beginning of November (if it's not out now).

Huges Networking is working on a two way satellite that will do 40Mb up and 800Kb down. That's a little ways off (year or so).

The latency is the thing that kills the satellite. Even moving at the speed of sound, it takes a little while (relatively speaking) for the data to hit the satellite and then come back down to earth. As cable & DSL become more widespread, satellite service will be what the people in the boonies are forced to use. And they won't be playing games online due to the latency.
 
Go for DSL. I wish I could get it. The only chance I have is satellite where I live, and after checking out gilat/starband at radioshack I decided to try direcpc. Radioshack wanted $1000 for the two way satellite system, so I played with their demo system, and believe me, it was slowwwww. I have heard very bad things about direcpc (check the newsgroup), but I decided to try it anyway. I'm desperate. Now I'm just waiting for UPS to get it here. Lag is supposed to be very bad, but I do a lot of downloading and not much online gaming. As of now I am using multilinked 56k modems and connect at 94.6. I also have 4 systems hooked up to this connection. I am hoping for ~30 to ~40K downloads through direcpc and I will use my multilinked modems for the uplink until direcpc goes two way.
 
Freeway - I am a poor soul who's only higher bandwidth needs could be met via DirecPC because of my locale . On a good server early in the morning (5 am) you will see MUCH better than 30 - 40 k downloads . Using Download Accelerator early in the morning I recently dowloaded an 88 meg file from ZDNET and averaged 160 k . I have a few screen grabs if you are interested.
 

The latency of a geosynch'd satellite is going to be well over 800ms on a two-way link. In fact, my best guess is that it will be over 1s. So two-way satellite sounds neat, but I don't think it can compete with either DSL or cable. The speed of the signals is the speed of light in a near vaccuum.

As to whether DSL or cable it depends entirely on where you live. Here in Fort Collins, CO, I can say with complete confidence that current cable is WAY better than DSL. (DSL is ~800kbps down 400kbps up, while cable is ~2Mbps down and ~800kbps up - and I work with a bunch of techies - trust me, we have a lot of data points on our bandwidth graph). Uptime is about the same for both (about 1 day of downtime per 3 months), and latency is approximately the same for both as well. Most of my coworkers are switching from DSL to cable.

In a couple of years, we should fibre to the curb (FTTC) or fibre to the neighborhood (FTTN) which should blow both DSL and cable out of the water. My neighborhood is wired for FTTN currently (which I always think is strange because we can't get DSL because we aren't on a copper network). I'm not why we can't take advantage of this, but I've heard it's a politcal issue (FCC).
 
FTTN, as you call it, is used to deliver phone service to remote areas or new housing developments, etc. It's cheaper than building a new CO and works just as good. With only a remote office, there is no way to deploy DSL...simple as that. Eventually they'll find a way to do it. My city is wired with fibre EVERYWHERE...but not for home use. It'll be a while for fibre to be used for residential service, so technologies that use existing communication infrastructure will have to do (DSL, cable).
 
Cable is on cable lines for your TV so it is blazing fast. But it is shared and goes down alot more than DSL. But it is readily availible to almost anywhere.

DSL is on copper lines so the max throughput is much lesser than cable. Much more stabler than cable and ping is low for all those gamers. It is not readily availible. Usually where they stop offering DSL is around 17,000' from the CO.

Satellite is fast download but you upload using a modem. The ping is sky rocket high too! This is availible in every nook and cranny I believe?


IMHO, cable is the best. Why would all us ISO scene and Warez scene people use it? The connection almost never dies for me. Ping is 200 or less. Its perfect for me. I get consistant 3mbps downloads and 384k uploads. I never get any of that "Shared" bandwith slowdown.
 
Urbantechie: The low-grade DSL that is offered to residential consumers is nowhere near the technology's capability. It can go as high as 8-10 Mb/s, but it's hard to get. Some phone companies are piloting projects with 8Mb DSL that delivers phone, TV, and internet. It's a new technology which is still getting better. Give it a few years, and you'll see some amazing stuff coming from DSL tech.
 
Two points: DSL is shared just like cable is shared, except DSL is shared at the DSLAM much like a star topology in a way, whereas cable is shared directly like a bus topology. Also cable runs over copper lines correct?
 
Robotnik: Highs-speed DSL only runs extremely short distances. It will a useful addition, but there's no way that someone who is two or three miles out from the CO is going to be able to take advantage of 8Mbps DSL without an infrastructure improvement. I've also heard (DSLReports.Com forum) that FTTN is capable of delivering a system similar to DSL using current technology but that it's tied up in politics within the telecom industry and regulation from the Feds.

Cable runs on coax - which is often made from copper.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top