DSL vs. Cable

[Dingo Jellybean]

Which do you prefer?

I've tried cable and I didn't like it. It was about the same speed as aDSL but it cost almost twice as much. I hate how Cable advertises that it's "3x faster than standard DSL". What they don't tell you in those cable commercials is that they are comparing the maximum possible download speed of cable versus the AVERAGE download speed of DSL. You'll see an asterisk next to those claims every time. I've had cable and I've had DSL, and quite frankly, DSL is just much better. I download on average about 120k/s compared with cable which got me anywhere from 100-140k/s, and usually hovered around the 100k/s range.

Now I'm not knocking cable, because DSL and Cable depends on both provider and location, as well as modem. I'm paying $30/mo for DSL, whereas I was paying about $50/mo for cable for basically the same speed and NO modem. At least with my DSL I got a modem with the service as well as virus software. But with cable, I just got service and had to pay $100 for a seperate modem for basically the same speed. Unacceptable. Comcast cable service is just crap compared to Verizon DSL...but eh.

I'm sure cable can be great and as fast as advertised, in IDEAL conditions, but I'm pretty happy with DSL and can't imagine switching to cable. Plus, I setting up DSL was much easier than cable because my coaxial cable was all the way upstairs, whereas my computer is downstairs, so that sucks, but eh.

[Kirobaito]

If I would get something, it'd be DSL. But I have neither...

[Denmark]

I use dial-up 56k modem that connects at no faster than 31.2k/s.

[RSL]

My experience is that it depends on where you live. In my home town, 256K cable connection is 45 bucks a month, where a 768K DSL connection (which I have) is also 45 bucks a month. Those are the only choices here. You'd have to be a moron to get the cable. (And there's no special discount for getting both cable TV and cable internet from them either.)

My sister lives in a bigger city and has cable. It's much faster than my 768K DSL and she's paying 35 dollars a month (because they give her a good discount for also being a cable TV subscriber.)

I've also heard (but don't know if it's correct) that cable gets slower the more subscribers there are in an area, whereas DSL maybe doesn't.

So yeah, at least here it just depends on what's offered at what price.

[Shoeberto]

There's no DSL service offered in my area, and if it were, I'd live outside of the service area. Luckily, the out-of-town area I live in doesn't get many cable customers, so I don't have to worry much about the distributed line thing.

[Maxico]

ohhhh jargon.

All I know is that soon im getting a 1mb connection, its probably dsl but I dunno.

[Yamaneko]

It depends on where you live, what provider you have and what your connection speed is. I've found that DSL has horrible upload speed compared to cable. 20-30kb per second is horrible, I think. I like having 200kbps downloads, though and not sharing the connection with someone else. They both have their advantages. In the end, download speed is more important to me.

[Casey]

9 mbps pure broad band cable beats dsl...

[metCloud]

Im very happy with my cable (Adelphia). I live out in the country...no big city here so I get very good speeds.

[Dingo Jellybean]

It depends on where you live, what provider you have and what your connection speed is. I've found that DSL has horrible upload speed compared to cable. 20-30kb per second is horrible, I think. I like having 200kbps downloads, though and not sharing the connection with someone else. They both have their advantages. In the end, download speed is more important to me.

There's different types of DSL. The most common is asymetrical DSL or aDSL for short. It's upload is half the speed of download, while sDSL is nearly 10x faster than traditional aDSL lines.

[Citizen Bleys]

Theoretically, cable is a lot faster than DSL. More like 30-40 times faster than uncapped DSL. What they don't tell you is that cable is a shared-bandwidth technology--So they find out where the local DSL provider caps your bandwidth and set their caps 3 times higher, and advertise 3x DSL's bandwidth, but conveniently neglect to mention that you only get that throughput when NOBODY ELSE is online. You get three people on your cable segment connected (and that would be all of the time--at least three), and you're down to DSL speed. Usually far below.

With DSL, you get your whole pipe, all the time. It's not shared, it's yours.

I had cable for a couple years before switching to DSL. I'll never go back.

[Erdrick Holmes]

I'm getting cable in a week or so, I didn't really wanna get DSL because from what I learned DSL is slower.

[Citizen Bleys]

As I said, that's only in theory.

In *fact*, the speed of cable and DSL both depends on a number of factors; with DSL, the closer you are to the telco's equipment, the faster you are, and with cable, it's all on how many people are online. Cable's nice if you live out in an area on the periphery of the service area where almost nobody is on your cable segment, but what happens when you live next door to four or five guys like me who are *always* downloading music and anime 24/7? With DSL, you get reliable speed, even during rush hour when everybody else is online.

[Casey]

I agree with what bleys has said. An cable is better then dsl in the city because there always has to be somebody using it, and also schools use cable, some schools do like mine, and since its shared-bandwidth technology its the way to go.

[crono_logical]

I don't think shared bandwidth is the way to go for me - I like having my connection to myself