"Art Tostaine, Jr." wrote: > > DSL is better since you don't share, but it is often hard to get installed, >and many people (like in California) were shut off with > less than a weeks notice because their carrier went out of business. > > Cable is a fine alternative for home users where DSL is not available. Not in Tulsa. I have T-1 at work and cable at home. I have 25 employees. A number of them started on DSL and went to Cable, they all love cable and would never consider going back to DSL. 'The DSL isn't shared' lie is a marketing lie. It is completely untrue. All internet access is shared, that's why it's the internet. Cable acccess is faster and more reliable, and the fact that the signals are shared at the neighborhood level rather than a mile away at the phone exchange means nothing. Nada. Zip. What matters most, beyond the initial speed where cable is far better, is the upstream bandwidth the service provider has. So far in this area, it's cable by far. And if the feds would remove the artificial barriers to home phone service, you phone service would come over your cable also, and be better quality and probably cheaper to boot. Brad Jensen -- Brad Jensen email@example.com President Electronic Storage Corporation Tulsa OK USA 918-664-7276 LaserVault Report Retrieval & Data Mining www.Laservault.com www.eufrates.com - Add distance learning to your site with easy course preparation
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.