ISP technical comparison - Cable vs. ADSL
 

Im looking into the possibility of changing ISPs. Please note that this is for ISP service in Buenos Aires, Argentina - so unfortunately all those great providers available to you guys in the States are out of the question for me.... ;)

However, Im sure that I will be able to make the best choice if I get a couple of questions answered by you techies here.... so please bear with me and thanks to all in advance for you help with this... :D ^

At this point, Im debating on whether its best to have ADSL or Cable. The advertisments the big ADSL providers here are throwing around to the public say that ADSL service at 256kb is equivalent to Cable Modem ISPs that offer 512kb. When you grill the sales staff, they say that this is so because Cable Modem service suffers from those temporary 'micro-cuts' (I dont know the English term for this, in Spanish they are called "micro cortes") that happen all the time... I understand these micro cuts are temporary suspension in the download/upload process that seem to happen a lot with Cable Modem internet connections.... bla bla bla. In any event, the ADSL folks say that their service doesnt have this problem and that therefore their service delivery is the best. Does this make sense?

I currently have the 512KB service from a Cable Company, which is "OK"..... meaning Im not very happy, but in terms of bang per buck and overall performance, Im still doing OK. At this point, since Im also a cable subscriber with this company, I get a break in the price of the ISP service.

However, since Im such an intensive internet user, I am willing to pay more for better service, but I want to make sure it will be a noticable difference.

Bottom line-- is ADSL the way to go, or are the sales people here not telling me something that I should know about using my phone lines for this? I already know that I will have an incremental cost because my phone company will want a piece of the action, but, apart from the $$$ aspect, what else do I need to know?

many thanks!!!
Gaucho

Since ADSL is through a telephone line, it is slower and less reliable. It provides speeds of 386kbps, 768kbps, 1.5mbps, and sometimes even 3mbps (all download speeds). Cable is becoming a big breakthru because so many people are ditching their landlines and heading to VoIP. Cable is available in 3.0mbps, 4.0mbps, and even 5.0mbps speeds (all download speeds). Cable can range from $42.95 to $99.95. ADSL can range from $19.99 to $49.99. I believe that Cable is more reliable and faster.

How much are u paying for 512kbps Cable?


Michael

This is an odd statement. Which went out more recently, your cable or your phone service?

I pay for 256 DSL, I get 1.2 megs usually. I know people on the same service a few tonw over who get 256 and that's it. All depends, same thing with cable. If you pay for one speed, that may be all you get, or you may get more.

Cable of course has much faster uploads, my upload speed is like dial up speed.

Reliability is more a function of the provider then if it's on telephone line or a cable line, speak with your neighbors to see how the area companies do. I know my DSL is up way more then cable is in this area, it's one of the reasons I've stuck with it for so many years.

I use ADSL in Australia. The line speed is 512 up/1.5 down. (In Australia the speed choice are 256/512/1.5) I've found it to be far more reliable than my cable connection in the US. The cable speed also seems to fluctuate while the ASDL seems more constant.

I don't think 256k is fast enough - especially if you're going to be downloading large files.

Cable will indeed fluctuate based upon local demand, since users share the distribution system. With DSL, it's just the copper from your phone jack to the DSLAM.

LOL... A post full of inacuracies.

I've had 8 and 21Mbit on DSL with no problems.

As for reliable, there is no technical reason either is more or less reliable than the other. With DSL you at least have a single point of faliure on the telco side, whereas cable needs masses of muxes and amplifiers out in the field.

Thanks for the input........ but, can we get back on topic please? :D Are you guys saying that ADSL is more or less reliable than Cable...?

Which is where DSL users "share the distribution system", resulting in the same "fluctuations". Engineered correctly, either will get you the speed committed to. Chose based on price and service/support.

As a datapoint, my 3Mbps cable regularly measures at 3.7-3.9 any hour/any day.

Nope. Both are equally reliable. The proof of the pudding is in the reliability of the customer service, technicians etc...

I have had cable for 2 years that hasn't been down ONCE, and I have a DSL line that was installed in 1999 that hasn't been down once either.

When properly installed both technologies are both just as reliable.

I've had DSL since 2000, and I've been extremely happy with it. I think I can count on one hand the number of times it has been unavailable. I'm getting speeds of 3500 down and 350 up. Whether or not it is right for you ultimately depends on what packages are available and how much you are willing to pay for it.

Do you plan on downloading a lot of "media" files? :D

I'm calling BS on this. I've used DSL and cable, and I've found in my situation, the DSL to be much more reliable. This may have something to do with the particular providers I've used. My DSL is 3 megabit down and 512k up, so your bandwidth comparisons aren't really fair, either.

One of the benefits I found in DSL is that compared to cable, the latency is *much* lower. Bandwidth is nice, but other than download large files, one of the things that makes high-speed feel fast is the low latency. I would hesistate to even call "speed" the speed, what you've called "speed" is actually "bandwidth"... I would argue that the latency is the "speed."

Compare it to a highway: you can have 50 lanes in one direction, and move a lot of capacity down a stretch of highway, but the latency is the difference between driving at 50 MPH and 70 MPH.

Chris

gotta agree here
 

yeah, i gotta stongly agree here, both cable and dsl in my experience are equally reliable. My DSL has never been down, cable was indeed out once. Satellite TV never went down though.

Some other points to note here, are download and upload speeds. Cable wins with higher upload speeds, DSL is often highly limited in upload speeds unless you are paying for a premium or business plan. If you are going to run a server, or send lots of huge files, fotos, attachements frequently, then go cable.

Another point about cable is, distribution. DSL is one to one, Cable is a distribution. Historically, if you were on a street with a lot of other cable internet users, or for example in manhatten with a number of other users in your appartment, all those others users would help to reduce your overall bandwidth. Now, does one really NEED 2.0Mb or more for most internet, no. But, there were indeed times on weekends and at night when I could notice the slow down and when checked could verify that it was much slower than normal.

Final point about geographic support. From my experience in Ecuador and Chile, telecoms there might have put better equipment in place more recently than have the cable companies. Satellite TV has been such a compelling service in some parts of SA that the cable companies have not made all the latest improvements yet.

Your telco might be better able to offer the service and customer service in the long run that the cableco. Just my quess