AT&T DSL vs. Comcast Cable

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

I am currently using AT&T dial-up, so everyone out their probably can
understand my desire for high-speed. I have been trying to decide on what
high-speed to go with. Both AT&T DSL and Comcast Cable have the potential
for 3 Mbps download for the package I am looking at. The cable option has
upload potential of 256 vs. DSL 384 kbps. I live in an apartment on a
street full of apartments.

Does anyone currently use either of the above providers and can shed some
light on if one choice is better than the other? Good and bad stories for
either would be very much appreciated? The old argument of DSL vs. Cable
is also welcomed.

Thanks for taking the time to share!

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

I am using Comcast Cable and I have been extremely happy with it, no
problems at all, fast uploads and downloads and right now I wouldn't switch
for any reason. I haven't heard any horror stories but I am waiting to see
what kind of negative feedback you might get regarding Comcast. I have had
it for 3 months now.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

Go for whichever is cheapest because trust me, you will
be satisfied with either one.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

Mark,
Good Points of Comcast in the Ann Arbor/Ypsilanti MI area:

1. Price has only increased from $39.99/mo to $42.99/mo (w/TV cable service) since 2000. But the bandwidth has grown to 3MB from below 1MB since 2000. With a router, you can have several PC's connected to internet, and service does not seemed to be impaired.

2. Cable Modem rental has been on the average of $5.00/mo, for the same period. And they have been reliable about upgrading/replacing modem when unit failed. If you purchase own cable modem make sure it compatible with their system, I believe they use RCA units here. Your local BestBuy or CompUSA should have the right info on that.

3. Able to use wired/wireless router(s) on their system, so only need one IP address from them. So you free up your phone line, and can have several PC's connected to internet, at the same time.

Bad Points of Comcast in the Ann Arbor/Ypsilanti MI area:

1. If you don't subscribe to their Cable TV service (use satellite dish, instead), the standalone service will cost more. And if the cable is not already installed to your apt, there may be a charge for this. If you using the TV service, then you can just use a splitter and come off the same line for your internet service.

2. If you use non MSNews newsgroups, Comcast in my area has contracted with GigaNews to provide only 1GB worth of downloads per month. If you are an avid collector of binary files, you will need to subscribe to a premium service from GigaNews, or a third party company. You should connect directly to the MSNews server, since it's free. Some Comcast areas may still have unlimited newsgroup access.

3. Local community cable boards, set the rates for cable and internet access. So you will need to keep an eye on them.

4. Your PC will still need a 56K Modem, if you plan to use its FAX function. To Fax, over cable you will need to connect to a third party company, for a fee, and they will send it from there.

--

Add MS to your News Reader: news://msnews.microsoft.com
Rich/rerat

(RRR News) <message rule>
<<Previous Text Snipped to Save Bandwidth When Appropriate>>

"Mark Williams" <MWilliams@att.net> wrote in message news:Ec7Bd.1195739$Gx4.610337@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
I am currently using AT&T dial-up, so everyone out their probably can
understand my desire for high-speed. I have been trying to decide on what
high-speed to go with. Both AT&T DSL and Comcast Cable have the potential
for 3 Mbps download for the package I am looking at. The cable option has
upload potential of 256 vs. DSL 384 kbps. I live in an apartment on a
street full of apartments.

Does anyone currently use either of the above providers and can shed some
light on if one choice is better than the other? Good and bad stories for
either would be very much appreciated? The old argument of DSL vs. Cable
is also welcomed.

Thanks for taking the time to share!

"Glenda P." <glendanow2000REMOVE@THESEhotmail.com> wrote in message news:%23YyTeMx7EHA.3756@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
I am using Comcast Cable and I have been extremely happy with it, no
problems at all, fast uploads and downloads and right now I wouldn't switch
for any reason. I haven't heard any horror stories but I am waiting to see
what kind of negative feedback you might get regarding Comcast. I have had
it for 3 months now.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

I had Comcast several years ago.
At that time Excite was the Newsgroup provider.
Giganews is now the provider.
I went to DSL for about two and a half years because Comcast had become
undependable.
That lasted a few months.
My son has had comcast for two years now without any problems.
I just switched back last night.
Speed is much faster than when I left.also very noticeably faster than
verizon DSL.

I ordered from Circuitcity -- they have a real good deal that expires
tonight when they close ( 6PM locally) .
They advertise 2 GB from Giganews .
I got the following at the following address:
http://online.comcast.net/giganews/






Comcast High-Speed Internet service now includes free access to
newsgroups through Giganews' premium news service! Your free account
includes up to two gigabytes of downloads per month (headers are not counted
towards your 2 gigabytes). You'll have full access to discussion groups,
sound files, images, video files, and much more. In addition, this service
offers close to 50 days binary retention with a 99% completion rate. To
begin using your free newsgroups account, simply follow the steps outlined
in this FAQ to set up your news client.


Note the 2 gigabytes in the above paragraph.

Hope this helps.


"Mark Williams" <MWilliams@att.net> wrote in message
news:Ec7Bd.1195739$Gx4.610337@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> I am currently using AT&T dial-up, so everyone out their probably can
> understand my desire for high-speed. I have been trying to decide on what
> high-speed to go with. Both AT&T DSL and Comcast Cable have the
potential
> for 3 Mbps download for the package I am looking at. The cable option
has
> upload potential of 256 vs. DSL 384 kbps. I live in an apartment on a
> street full of apartments.
>
> Does anyone currently use either of the above providers and can shed some
> light on if one choice is better than the other? Good and bad stories
for
> either would be very much appreciated? The old argument of DSL vs. Cable
> is also welcomed.
>
> Thanks for taking the time to share!
>
>
>


begin 666 pixelclear.gif
K1TE&.#EA`0`!`( ``/___P```"'Y! $`````+ `````!``$```("1 $`.P``
`
end

begin 666 logo.gif
M1TE&.#EAC `<`+,/``$!`<7%Q94!`?S\_%-34S<W-ZRKJV]O;XR,C.;EY1 0
M$+M=7?'Q\=?7UR,C(____R'Y! $```\`+ ````",`!P```3_\,G1S"D.N')0
M8P-CC",C/6& $(6B. 2"),,I,😉\-+7M_Q."D'!(V!H'X6Q@&#J=B"21-UD)
MBR>&-$99*0#@E\PX8&; :#0GT4@#`I,$X>P&%PP]5..+)IB @'IN>"<!?6P$
M=6D.!WP.`3T,? `%#1,!DP$&=(H'* B*;@H-"9-O* D%H6D'>0,'HD:!0 .@
M:7Y5:*T!G'5WCI H!FF507VV:"YN"$QN,!US8:2F< .)R1Q1+6"M$PRJ@WFS
M)Z_.P=9A!@_#?4\$!IA@CS7?B]4-= B3!3(6T6][DA& 5(9!@$8*`I1*8X2=
MO!D@!B1H`J ;"D.^_M@(P:"CN'K+_^B=<< #&8$$'5-V7*B!H$-Y<'#T@26/
MQH0!!PM,9*711I-I# > `Z" D \DS(S)2Q:,'(,%4!?8E(#/EY$$:ABD0H,@
M8IDR#]K 1#%T+,@WR J \"&"P36BEFBA#(@F`2\UXFQHK2%QY JNKA(L$$!8
M@%2^&#4,56<2!9T#\$@8,!&O)<XORN RX:.6)M&!I/+>,B$Q@>G3(.B"::"/
MZXW3J-<V`W,2F0.-3 H77L#7H8P^Y< P4ZT(SET-/*YQ" /IK3H#IBA!1GF"
M58T$5IZP,<4Z#9P'`=QQ0>&9664`<5$,UFV8[[6$">@T> \)F2(%1AJ PU\9
M`;N$55%BA/\6]\7P!RM4E<4<2ZO91P9T=73#4D(/R*%+).OI)M4#DM2$#FTC
MT>#9"P5@@ $6`3J0`$VCL.. `<@D52$"V]21E'5A*0@7@^BU!H8ZZW120UH*
MK8C&;1,8P%Y[8?4!PDM9N:4+/ %4:0`5`8#C``)G(+#.%UM>HV(>!D7A0'0\
M[&,"=D+0,0J/%4SB"7A#R!G"4,]<X!U?@NEVD@0FT:-C*P&^D=<)6VEPQBA!
M$G4F-WQM9) !9>'Q5E%ED$*@-#R:1@>26C$PWX7GK4) #Q)%M0`5P2F05"VB
M>)D828%8Z(8?EXG"`Q-4;'0<`'@D1DE3#R#SIBD@O%611K96!.O_*LFD%T(#
M"J%*WPF%$H6'0P/5JNQJ%T77#3YWR'()'7A(>20""JE+E$+<A67*.P$8]-8!
M9\60@Q=H& 5(?'😀YRY1(;R5)Q%32- L;7P1E]"081!!`I='DI;M"VU&RV,U
M]BDFA)QB:<L1" S0<>HLB>&2)#%E1!?+#9Z]RR<G*MOWPJ/)&(63CJ8<Z]T-
M/B:SC,'I*057(,\Z😛/ W#0)+9(5QJPR!6X2DG0H+X(U`6L8I$$B9*(Z(+;8
MWW$87HUAE,@N!F);9$.68_OK0RU#E%U%W> 5(-X07@+M1%-E.(&%'A:4./8&
M,1#KE)4YC!!:&55&WI-$%>Q[Y0<&16[N_T;45MDK$%J9UM-KHG,(&VPJ.47#
M7I+NI?5-%$2NT >'2OK55QO=3LOMN,/^^MRZCR.\\")H\OE%D[%5!AM'H;3Y
M\-!'+_WTU,_"9A+ULH&3?U="$@!K"G50I&D=5, &2ATU<'SU[+?OOO 2K7W
M_$6$-P+"\]^!!!%)>$!C$U* 4?]J][X"&I!]V#D()LJW/7KU2">U.( *2%(+
M&KEJ!26BWUH.R,$.2@\'*J!4!^RBC1CP(PF3@5$4_E0$%G0@"O/["0$]2,,:
MBBIT5M)*9 8B`O5ESRZA"8NHJ#69N<!CAC5,8@<CA;NO?(]W4$05"IH8/"5:
..\8I8S*(6MTC#" $``#L`
`
end

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

On Fri, 31 Dec 2004 09:37:31 -0500, I wish I knew wrote:

> I ordered from Circuitcity -- they have a real good deal that expires
> tonight when they close ( 6PM locally) .
> They advertise 2 GB from Giganews .
> I got the following at the following address:
> http://online.comcast.net/giganews/

Thanks for the info. When I signed on it was only 1GB and wasn't aware that
they've increased the limit.

--
Sharon F
MS-MVP ~ Windows Shell/User

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

"Sharon F" wrote:

> On Fri, 31 Dec 2004 09:37:31 -0500, I wish I knew wrote:
>
> > I ordered from Circuitcity -- they have a real good deal that expires
> > tonight when they close ( 6PM locally) .
> > They advertise 2 GB from Giganews .
> > I got the following at the following address:
> > http://online.comcast.net/giganews/
>
> Thanks for the info. When I signed on it was only 1GB and wasn't aware that
> they've increased the limit.
>
> --
> Sharon F
> MS-MVP ~ Windows Shell/User
>
Our Computer Club has 29 computers connected through one router/firewall to
a Cox Cable 512 MB service. I have heard no one complain about speed. Don't
buy faster than you need.
Enjoy!

 

[vms]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

I've had comcast for over 2 years. I don't have a choice as DSL isn't
available here. Occasionally the service goes down, but it is rare. Most
times if I have a problem I can fix it at home by resetting the modem. I'm
happy with the service, just not the price.

"Mark Williams" wrote:

> I am currently using AT&T dial-up, so everyone out their probably can
> understand my desire for high-speed. I have been trying to decide on what
> high-speed to go with. Both AT&T DSL and Comcast Cable have the potential
> for 3 Mbps download for the package I am looking at. The cable option has
> upload potential of 256 vs. DSL 384 kbps. I live in an apartment on a
> street full of apartments.
>
> Does anyone currently use either of the above providers and can shed some
> light on if one choice is better than the other? Good and bad stories for
> either would be very much appreciated? The old argument of DSL vs. Cable
> is also welcomed.
>
> Thanks for taking the time to share!
>
>
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

DSL does not compare to Broadband. Show me a link where AT&T DSL is claiming
a 3Mbps download speed. That is just impossible. DSL has a max of 1.5Mbps
DOWNLOAD and 384Kbps UPLOAD

RD


"Mark Williams" <MWilliams@att.net> wrote in message
news:Ec7Bd.1195739$Gx4.610337@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>I am currently using AT&T dial-up, so everyone out their probably can
> understand my desire for high-speed. I have been trying to decide on what
> high-speed to go with. Both AT&T DSL and Comcast Cable have the
> potential
> for 3 Mbps download for the package I am looking at. The cable option
> has
> upload potential of 256 vs. DSL 384 kbps. I live in an apartment on a
> street full of apartments.
>
> Does anyone currently use either of the above providers and can shed some
> light on if one choice is better than the other? Good and bad stories
> for
> either would be very much appreciated? The old argument of DSL vs. Cable
> is also welcomed.
>
> Thanks for taking the time to share!
>
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

In news:%23rQYBI57EHA.2676@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl,
Randy D <earthuser@hotmail.com> typed:

> DSL does not compare to Broadband. Show me a link where AT&T
> DSL is
> claiming a 3Mbps download speed. That is just impossible. DSL
> has a
> max of 1.5Mbps DOWNLOAD and 384Kbps UPLOAD


First of all, you can't talk about DSL vs. "Broadband," because
DSL is a *kind* of Broadband.

Second, my DSL connection just tested upload speed of 817 kbps at
www.dslreports.com/speedtests , significantly more than you claim
it can do.

Third, Cable connections are sensitive to how many users in your
neighbirhood are using the service at once. Even if the rated
maximum of cable service is higher than that of DSL, it doesn't
always outperform it. Especially during peak hours, it's not
uncommon for DSL to outperform cable.

Fourth, particularly for uploading, DSL often outperforms cable.
I have a friend who recnetly switched from cable to DSL, because
he uploads a lot. He's very happy with the change because his
performance is better.

Finally, DSL comes in several varieties. One type is VDSL.
Although, it's not available everywhere, where it is available,
it's much faster than either regular DSL or cable--it goes to
52Mbps download and 16Mbps upload.

See the chart at http://computer.howstuffworks.com/vdsl3.htm
comparing the various types of DSL and their speeds. Note that
there are several types that can outperform cable, even at its
best.

True, not everyone can get all these DSL technologies. But it's
nevertheless false to claim that DSL is always slower than cable.

--
Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
Please reply to the newsgroup

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

Ken,

First of all VDSL is not available to just anyone. That's like saying I'm
getting a OC48 line to my house. Ain't happening. Remember the original
poster lives in an apartment on a street full of apartments.

Second most home users are interested in download speed not upload speed.
You just can't get 3Mbps down from DSL (home user) and even if you could 99%
couldn't afford the cost. No one is going to offer 52 down and 16 up for
cheap money.

If given the choice between DSL and Cable the choice is clear in almost
every situation. In very rare cases DSL would be a better option, and almost
never for a typical home user.

The typical home user is going to do no better than 1.5 down and 384 up with
DSL.

With my Comcast connection I never get less than 2.5 down and that's on a
bad day, and is usually around 2.8 down.

My opinion is that dollar for dollar, byte for byte, in almost every
instance.........Cable is the clear choice.


RD



"Ken Blake" <kblake@this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote in message
news:uYp4wk57EHA.824@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> In news:%23rQYBI57EHA.2676@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl,
> Randy D <earthuser@hotmail.com> typed:
>
>> DSL does not compare to Broadband. Show me a link where AT&T DSL is
>> claiming a 3Mbps download speed. That is just impossible. DSL has a
>> max of 1.5Mbps DOWNLOAD and 384Kbps UPLOAD
>
>
> First of all, you can't talk about DSL vs. "Broadband," because DSL is a
> *kind* of Broadband.
>
> Second, my DSL connection just tested upload speed of 817 kbps at
> www.dslreports.com/speedtests , significantly more than you claim it can
> do.
>
> Third, Cable connections are sensitive to how many users in your
> neighbirhood are using the service at once. Even if the rated maximum of
> cable service is higher than that of DSL, it doesn't always outperform it.
> Especially during peak hours, it's not uncommon for DSL to outperform
> cable.
>
> Fourth, particularly for uploading, DSL often outperforms cable. I have a
> friend who recnetly switched from cable to DSL, because he uploads a lot.
> He's very happy with the change because his performance is better.
>
> Finally, DSL comes in several varieties. One type is VDSL. Although, it's
> not available everywhere, where it is available, it's much faster than
> either regular DSL or cable--it goes to 52Mbps download and 16Mbps
> upload.
>
> See the chart at http://computer.howstuffworks.com/vdsl3.htm comparing the
> various types of DSL and their speeds. Note that there are several types
> that can outperform cable, even at its best.
>
> True, not everyone can get all these DSL technologies. But it's
> nevertheless false to claim that DSL is always slower than cable.
>
> --
> Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
> Please reply to the newsgroup
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

The comments you made in this message are by and large
reasonable. As you point out, it largely depends on your
circumstances, what you can afford, and what's available in your
area.

But this reasonable message is very different from your original
message, where you brashly stated, largely incorrectly, "DSL does
not compare to Broadband. Show me a link where AT&T DSL is
claiming a 3Mbps download speed. That is just impossible. DSL has
a max of 1.5Mbps DOWNLOAD and 384Kbps UPLOAD."

If your original message had been more like this one, I probably
wouldn't even have replied.

--
Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
Please reply to the newsgroup


In news:uaCeGP67EHA.3616@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl,
Randy D <earthuser@hotmail.com> typed:

> Ken,
>
> First of all VDSL is not available to just anyone. That's like
> saying
> I'm getting a OC48 line to my house. Ain't happening. Remember
> the
> original poster lives in an apartment on a street full of
> apartments.
>
> Second most home users are interested in download speed not
> upload
> speed. You just can't get 3Mbps down from DSL (home user) and
> even if
> you could 99% couldn't afford the cost. No one is going to
> offer 52
> down and 16 up for cheap money.
>
> If given the choice between DSL and Cable the choice is clear
> in
> almost every situation. In very rare cases DSL would be a
> better
> option, and almost never for a typical home user.
>
> The typical home user is going to do no better than 1.5 down
> and 384
> up with DSL.
>
> With my Comcast connection I never get less than 2.5 down and
> that's
> on a bad day, and is usually around 2.8 down.
>
> My opinion is that dollar for dollar, byte for byte, in almost
> every
> instance.........Cable is the clear choice.
>
>
> RD
>
>
>
> "Ken Blake" <kblake@this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote in message
> news:uYp4wk57EHA.824@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>> In news:%23rQYBI57EHA.2676@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl,
>> Randy D <earthuser@hotmail.com> typed:
>>
>>> DSL does not compare to Broadband. Show me a link where AT&T
>>> DSL is
>>> claiming a 3Mbps download speed. That is just impossible. DSL
>>> has a
>>> max of 1.5Mbps DOWNLOAD and 384Kbps UPLOAD
>>
>>
>> First of all, you can't talk about DSL vs. "Broadband,"
>> because DSL
>> is a *kind* of Broadband.
>>
>> Second, my DSL connection just tested upload speed of 817 kbps
>> at
>> www.dslreports.com/speedtests , significantly more than you
>> claim it
>> can do.
>>
>> Third, Cable connections are sensitive to how many users in
>> your
>> neighbirhood are using the service at once. Even if the rated
>> maximum of cable service is higher than that of DSL, it
>> doesn't
>> always outperform it. Especially during peak hours, it's not
>> uncommon for DSL to outperform cable.
>>
>> Fourth, particularly for uploading, DSL often outperforms
>> cable. I
>> have a friend who recnetly switched from cable to DSL, because
>> he
>> uploads a lot. He's very happy with the change because his
>> performance is better.
>> Finally, DSL comes in several varieties. One type is VDSL.
>> Although,
>> it's not available everywhere, where it is available, it's
>> much
>> faster than either regular DSL or cable--it goes to 52Mbps
>> download
>> and 16Mbps upload.
>>
>> See the chart at http://computer.howstuffworks.com/vdsl3.htm
>> comparing the various types of DSL and their speeds. Note that
>> there
>> are several types that can outperform cable, even at its best.
>>
>> True, not everyone can get all these DSL technologies. But
>> it's
>> nevertheless false to claim that DSL is always slower than
>> cable.
>>
>> --
>> Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
>> Please reply to the newsgroup

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

Here are the links...

http://www.usa.att.com/dsl/about/compare.jsp

http://www.usa.att.com/dsl/plans/preferred.jsp


"Randy D" <earthuser@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23rQYBI57EHA.2676@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> DSL does not compare to Broadband. Show me a link where AT&T DSL is
> claiming a 3Mbps download speed. That is just impossible. DSL has a max of
> 1.5Mbps DOWNLOAD and 384Kbps UPLOAD
>
> RD
>
>
> "Mark Williams" <MWilliams@att.net> wrote in message
> news:Ec7Bd.1195739$Gx4.610337@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>>I am currently using AT&T dial-up, so everyone out their probably can
>> understand my desire for high-speed. I have been trying to decide on
>> what
>> high-speed to go with. Both AT&T DSL and Comcast Cable have the
>> potential
>> for 3 Mbps download for the package I am looking at. The cable option
>> has
>> upload potential of 256 vs. DSL 384 kbps. I live in an apartment on a
>> street full of apartments.
>>
>> Does anyone currently use either of the above providers and can shed some
>> light on if one choice is better than the other? Good and bad stories
>> for
>> either would be very much appreciated? The old argument of DSL vs.
>> Cable
>> is also welcomed.
>>
>> Thanks for taking the time to share!
>>
>>
>>
>
>