PDA

View Full Version : Re: Comcast vs. Verizon DSL


Clark W. Griswold, Jr.
July 21st 03, 03:11 AM
"Pat" > wrote:

> That being said, I sure wish my 138Kbps up speed was faster. Maybe it will never be compared to
>cable but anything is possible.

It's certainly possible, but are you willing to pay for it?

What you need to understand is that the phone companies are making bucket loads
of money off an older digital service they sell for $$$$/month to businesses.
(It's commonly referred to as a T-1 line, but that's a bit out of date).

If Telco were to let businesses drop all those T-1 lines, they'd be in a major
world of hurt, revenue wise. So, they somewhat artificially constrain the uplink
speeds, knowing that most business want symmetrical at a minimum, and even more
uplink bandwidth if they get a lot of customer use (ie web server or FTP
server).

(Somewhat artificial because the more common RADSL service is designed to have
asymmetrical speeds, but certainly more uplink than is commonly provisioned.)

Cable companies followed along for two reasons: One is that they engineered the
bandwidth of their system assuming the majority of people wanted to "surf" and
thus download. They are also looking at addressable PPV apps and other TV like
services. Ty as hard as they like, they can't get over that "We'll feed you what
we want you to get" mentality. The other reason is to protect their business
class internet service revenue, which sells similar speeds but no restrictions
on servers, VPNs, etc., at a much higher price.

If you do want higher uplink speeds on DSL, check into what SDSL costs... Many
communities also have thriving wireless broadband. It's priced for businesses
though - the monthly rates usually start around $150. Cheap compared to that
T-1...

David H. Lipman
July 21st 03, 03:29 AM
Pat:

That's Comcast's introductory price for NEW users. After that period the price
jumps right back up. And if you are not a Cable TV customer, the price is even
higher.

All things being equal, you also need to compare the end user agreements.
Verizon allows VPN connections to corp. LANs. Comcast doesn't. There is some
debate about this one, Verizon also allows non-commercial personal servers.
Comcast does not.

Dave

David H. Lipman
July 21st 03, 03:35 AM
Clark:

A couple of comments.

Reverse ADSL is NOT that common. SDSL is more common and ADSL is even more
common that SDSL.

As for the asymmetric aspect of the provisioning, it is a well documented fact
that the majority of intranet and internet access is PULL not PUSH. That means
the majority of network accesses are downloads and less are uploads. Asymmetric
connections fits this model well. The exception are servers. They are the
opposite and RADSL and SDSL are apropos for this condition.

Dave

"Clark W. Griswold, Jr." > wrote in message
...
| "Pat" > wrote:
|
| > That being said, I sure wish my 138Kbps up speed was faster. Maybe it will
never be compared to
| >cable but anything is possible.
|
| It's certainly possible, but are you willing to pay for it?
|
| What you need to understand is that the phone companies are making bucket loads
| of money off an older digital service they sell for $$$$/month to businesses.
| (It's commonly referred to as a T-1 line, but that's a bit out of date).
|
| If Telco were to let businesses drop all those T-1 lines, they'd be in a major
| world of hurt, revenue wise. So, they somewhat artificially constrain the
uplink
| speeds, knowing that most business want symmetrical at a minimum, and even more
| uplink bandwidth if they get a lot of customer use (ie web server or FTP
| server).
|
| (Somewhat artificial because the more common RADSL service is designed to have
| asymmetrical speeds, but certainly more uplink than is commonly provisioned.)
|
| Cable companies followed along for two reasons: One is that they engineered the
| bandwidth of their system assuming the majority of people wanted to "surf" and
| thus download. They are also looking at addressable PPV apps and other TV like
| services. Ty as hard as they like, they can't get over that "We'll feed you
what
| we want you to get" mentality. The other reason is to protect their business
| class internet service revenue, which sells similar speeds but no restrictions
| on servers, VPNs, etc., at a much higher price.
|
| If you do want higher uplink speeds on DSL, check into what SDSL costs... Many
| communities also have thriving wireless broadband. It's priced for businesses
| though - the monthly rates usually start around $150. Cheap compared to that
| T-1...

the real TOMMY Tutalidge
July 21st 03, 04:16 AM
AT&T capped their internet service and went tits up.

Pat wrote:

> It wasn't long ago that I thought Verizon DSL was doomed. ATT Broadband was
> blowing it away. They both cost around $50/mo. I always felt the price point
> for Broadband to take off was under $30. Then, Verizon must have hired a
> real marketing guru. Suddenly, what was once a TIP and RING company,
> Verizon, was looking like a real contemporary Broadband ISP provider. I was
> still dubious. I finally caved in when I got Verizon for $29.95/mo with the
> Freedom Plan (Local + Long Distance). Shortly before, Comcast was rigid with
> offering Internet access along with Cable TV for around $55/mo. Now that I
> have Verizon, I just got a Comcast offer in the mail for $29.95/mo that will
> last 6 months and I didn't read the fine print after that. I had already
> signed up for Verizon.
>
> CIRCUIT CITY TEST:
>
> Walked into Circuit City and ran DSL Report's Speed Test on Comcast. It was
> around 250Kbps Down Load.
>
> HOME TEST WITH DSL:
>
> Same Speed Test with my DSL and I'm getting close to 1.5Mbps. I called
> Verizon and asked them how far I am from the Central Office. The rep said
> its the closest one she's ever checked for a user. I'm slightly under 7440
> feet away.
>
> So far, I am totally happy with going Verizon DSL. This is not an
> endorsement for all DSL or a negative for all cable. It just surprised the
> hell out of me that DSL was faster than Comcast. That being said, I sure
> wish my 138Kbps up speed was faster. Maybe it will never be compared to
> cable but anything is possible.

Pat
July 21st 03, 04:07 PM
New copper. The quality of the cable makes a big difference.

"the real TOMMY Tutalidge" > wrote in message
...
> Not bad considering you are quite far from the central office.
>
> Pat wrote:
>
> > It wasn't long ago that I thought Verizon DSL was doomed. ATT Broadband
was
> > blowing it away. They both cost around $50/mo. I always felt the price
point
> > for Broadband to take off was under $30. Then, Verizon must have hired a
> > real marketing guru. Suddenly, what was once a TIP and RING company,
> > Verizon, was looking like a real contemporary Broadband ISP provider. I
was
> > still dubious. I finally caved in when I got Verizon for $29.95/mo with
the
> > Freedom Plan (Local + Long Distance). Shortly before, Comcast was rigid
with
> > offering Internet access along with Cable TV for around $55/mo. Now that
I
> > have Verizon, I just got a Comcast offer in the mail for $29.95/mo that
will
> > last 6 months and I didn't read the fine print after that. I had already
> > signed up for Verizon.
> >
> > CIRCUIT CITY TEST:
> >
> > Walked into Circuit City and ran DSL Report's Speed Test on Comcast. It
was
> > around 250Kbps Down Load.
> >
> > HOME TEST WITH DSL:
> >
> > Same Speed Test with my DSL and I'm getting close to 1.5Mbps. I called
> > Verizon and asked them how far I am from the Central Office. The rep
said
> > its the closest one she's ever checked for a user. I'm slightly under
7440
> > feet away.
> >
> > So far, I am totally happy with going Verizon DSL. This is not an
> > endorsement for all DSL or a negative for all cable. It just surprised
the
> > hell out of me that DSL was faster than Comcast. That being said, I sure
> > wish my 138Kbps up speed was faster. Maybe it will never be compared to
> > cable but anything is possible.
>

Jack Adams
July 24th 03, 03:53 PM
My $0.02 worth. One data point.
I "had" subscribed to COMCAST cable modem
service since February of this year. Availability and Robustness
of service along with price were my considerations. In the 3 months
that I subscribed at the "introductory" rate, I experienced 5 service
outages which ranged from a few hours to 4 days!
All COMCAST problems with either their outside plant or the
CMTS, AAA server, etc. ad nauseam.
When COMCAST raised my price jumped up to $45/mo, as if by magic,
Verizon announced that my home could now have ADSL thanks to a
DSLAM being installed in the RSM CEV a mile from our home.
For a month, I subscribed to both services and switched my home
LAN between them fairly frequently. My metric was my wife's opinion
about how she felt her access and response times were. Purely subjective
but none the less valid. Frankly she noticed no difference at all, even
when
I told her what access was active at the time.

Oh yes, during this last month COMCAST was off the air for over a day!
Last week, I uncerimoniously dropped by the local COMCAST outlet
and dropped the subscription.

"Pat" > wrote in message
...
> It wasn't long ago that I thought Verizon DSL was doomed. ATT Broadband
was
> blowing it away. They both cost around $50/mo. I always felt the price
point
> for Broadband to take off was under $30. Then, Verizon must have hired a
> real marketing guru. Suddenly, what was once a TIP and RING company,
> Verizon, was looking like a real contemporary Broadband ISP provider. I
was
> still dubious. I finally caved in when I got Verizon for $29.95/mo with
the
> Freedom Plan (Local + Long Distance). Shortly before, Comcast was rigid
with
> offering Internet access along with Cable TV for around $55/mo. Now that I
> have Verizon, I just got a Comcast offer in the mail for $29.95/mo that
will
> last 6 months and I didn't read the fine print after that. I had already
> signed up for Verizon.
<snip>

Pat
July 24th 03, 10:42 PM
Its a shame that cable has not maintained their edge. I would have gone
Comcast if I felt the service warranted a subscription. So far, Verizon has
satisfied my needs.


"Jack Adams" > wrote in message
...
> My $0.02 worth. One data point.
> I "had" subscribed to COMCAST cable modem
> service since February of this year. Availability and Robustness
> of service along with price were my considerations. In the 3 months
> that I subscribed at the "introductory" rate, I experienced 5 service
> outages which ranged from a few hours to 4 days!
> All COMCAST problems with either their outside plant or the
> CMTS, AAA server, etc. ad nauseam.
> When COMCAST raised my price jumped up to $45/mo, as if by magic,
> Verizon announced that my home could now have ADSL thanks to a
> DSLAM being installed in the RSM CEV a mile from our home.
> For a month, I subscribed to both services and switched my home
> LAN between them fairly frequently. My metric was my wife's opinion
> about how she felt her access and response times were. Purely subjective
> but none the less valid. Frankly she noticed no difference at all, even
> when
> I told her what access was active at the time.
>
> Oh yes, during this last month COMCAST was off the air for over a day!
> Last week, I uncerimoniously dropped by the local COMCAST outlet
> and dropped the subscription.
>
> "Pat" > wrote in message
> ...
> > It wasn't long ago that I thought Verizon DSL was doomed. ATT Broadband
> was
> > blowing it away. They both cost around $50/mo. I always felt the price
> point
> > for Broadband to take off was under $30. Then, Verizon must have hired a
> > real marketing guru. Suddenly, what was once a TIP and RING company,
> > Verizon, was looking like a real contemporary Broadband ISP provider. I
> was
> > still dubious. I finally caved in when I got Verizon for $29.95/mo with
> the
> > Freedom Plan (Local + Long Distance). Shortly before, Comcast was rigid
> with
> > offering Internet access along with Cable TV for around $55/mo. Now that
I
> > have Verizon, I just got a Comcast offer in the mail for $29.95/mo that
> will
> > last 6 months and I didn't read the fine print after that. I had already
> > signed up for Verizon.
> <snip>
>
>

David H. Lipman
July 25th 03, 11:30 PM
That's just the way businesses work. Hell, on the 4th of July weekend my bank decided to
put new shingles on the roof. This caused the whole bank area to blocked off and the ATM
shutdown. Of course I had to travel to another branch with an ATM otherwise I would have
been charged by a different bank for withdrawing my money through their ATM.

Dave

David H. Lipman
July 26th 03, 02:10 AM
I beg to differ...

The 4th of July "is" prime time banking. That is when most people, like me, withdraw cash
to spend on a holiday. Close the bank - OK. but to shut down the ATM as well - No.

But I too consider this to be "bad businesses practice" as well as what you proclaim from
your ISP. This is how business likes to treat us, their customers, their subscribers and
ultimately the ones who pay their salaries. You almost have to expect crappie service such
that when it happens, you are not surprised by it.

Dave



"'nuther Bob" > wrote in message
| I don't agree that good businesses work that way. Your bank was
| smart enough to do major repairs during a time when they expected
| minimal (no) business. Comcast choose to shut down an entire town
| during prime time. There is a difference.
|
| Bob
| >
|

Google