Internet Provider Change At Work
-
Remember that having good Internet also makes people work from home, bring in businesses and people move into a town. It can mean massive growth both in people and in tax base. It's a very obvious way to invest in the town.
-
I'm in a very rural area and I have a 50/20 connection from a Cable ISP.
-
I had 8Mb/s both directions on a mountain in the middle of nowhere over WiMAX!!
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@Minion-Queen said:
A local town near us is talking about getting Fiber town funded. So we will have to see what happens there, we are only 10 minutes from there.
Which town?
I'm surprised any town doesn't do this after it has been shown to be so wildly successful over and over again.
Geneseo
-
Wow, now I am sad that I sold my house there
-
@scottalanmiller said:
1Mb/s up is really, really rare these days. How AT&T and limited to that is beyond me. That had to be some whacky DSL service.
No, this is certainly not rare. All phone companies use DSL based technology to provide high speed internet. basic DSL maxes at 768 up.
There are millions of houses on DSL services right now.
U-Verse is just a newer version of DSL (VDSL or HDSL or DSL2 something like that) but can get higher upload speeds on the right set of lines.
-
@JaredBusch said:
@scottalanmiller said:
1Mb/s up is really, really rare these days. How AT&T and limited to that is beyond me. That had to be some whacky DSL service.
No, this is certainly not rare. All phone companies use DSL based technology to provide high speed internet. basic DSL maxes at 768 up.
There are millions of houses on DSL services right now.
U-Verse is just a newer version of DSL (VDSL or HDSL or DSL2 something like that) but can get higher upload speeds on the right set of lines.
UVerse where I have been (Dallas and Houston) was a fiber service, too. You never know what it will be until you get it installed, I think. We are on Uverse in Houston and while it sucks, our upload is at least 5Mb/s.
Basic DSL goes faster than that, though, many providers don't bother, but the technology lets it happen. If you are way, way out on the end of a line on old copper, you might be distance limited, but the DSL itself goes faster. I had faster DSL than that at home in 2003 back when cable wasn't so good in the area (in Geneseo, the town looking at fiber.)
-
I wasn't saying, though, that it was rare for people to have ~1Mb/s DSL, but that it was rare for a vendor to not offer anything faster. That people opt for slower, cheaper service I'm not denying. I see that a bit. And it makes sense. But there is a lot of money to be made in upselling Internet now. I pretty consistently see ISPs offering a means to pay them more for premium services.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
Basic DSL goes faster than that, though, many providers don't bother, but the technology lets it happen. If you are way, way out on the end of a line on old copper, you might be distance limited, but the DSL itself goes faster. I had faster DSL than that at home in 2003 back when cable wasn't so good in the area (in Geneseo, the town looking at fiber.)
No it does not. basic DSL spec was 1 mbps up. Real world lines were never that clean and the best you could do in the real world was 800 on a near perfect copper pair. Most people were lucky if the plant to their premise could support 512.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
I wasn't saying, though, that it was rare for people to have ~1Mb/s DSL, but that it was rare for a vendor to not offer anything faster. That people opt for slower, cheaper service I'm not denying. I see that a bit. And it makes sense. But there is a lot of money to be made in upselling Internet now. I pretty consistently see ISPs offering a means to pay them more for premium services.
Yes you were. You were discussing lower cost technologies than T1. From a phone company the only alternative for many people was DSL until a few years ago.
-
@JaredBusch said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Basic DSL goes faster than that, though, many providers don't bother, but the technology lets it happen. If you are way, way out on the end of a line on old copper, you might be distance limited, but the DSL itself goes faster. I had faster DSL than that at home in 2003 back when cable wasn't so good in the area (in Geneseo, the town looking at fiber.)
No it does not. basic DSL spec was 1 mbps up. Real world lines were never that clean and the best you could do in the real world was 800 on a near perfect copper pair. Most people were lucky if the plant to their premise could support 512.
Yep Basic DSL spec is very low. You gotta remember these days services sold as DSL aren't necessarily true DSL, some are fiber all the way, some are just copper from the road to the house. etc. DSL was originally very limited in both distance and speed with all cooper. We can't even get verizon DSL here even though we can phone as they didn't think it was worth the time to improve the infrastructure to support it.
-
@JaredBusch said:
@scottalanmiller said:
I wasn't saying, though, that it was rare for people to have ~1Mb/s DSL, but that it was rare for a vendor to not offer anything faster. That people opt for slower, cheaper service I'm not denying. I see that a bit. And it makes sense. But there is a lot of money to be made in upselling Internet now. I pretty consistently see ISPs offering a means to pay them more for premium services.
Yes you were. You were discussing lower cost technologies than T1. From a phone company the only alternative for many people was DSL until a few years ago.
Yes but DSL since 2000 at least was offered far higher than 1Mb/s. Running original ADSL from the 1990s is not, I thought, a common top end option. The worst ISP I know, Frontier, was offering SDSL, HDSL and other options by the first years of the 2000s. AT&T UVerse DSL is places I've seen it do the same. DSL has not limited people to speeds near 1Mb/s for a very long time. I was looking at 20Mb/s and faster DSL options (that I could not afford) in 2001.
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
Yep Basic DSL spec is very low.
It's the original ANSI ADSL spec that is super low. The IDSL, SDSL, HDSL and other early specs were mostly much faster, except IDSL which was just ISDN equivalent over DSL.
-
And remember the time period that we are talking, HDSL, for example, had products on the market in 1993 and was ratified in 1994 and was up to 2Mb/s up. That's a long time ago.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
Yes but DSL since 2000 at least was offered far higher than 1Mb/s. Running original ADSL from the 1990s is not, I thought, a common top end option. The worst ISP I know, Frontier, was offering SDSL, HDSL and other options by the first years of the 2000s. AT&T UVerse DSL is places I've seen it do the same. DSL has not limited people to speeds near 1Mb/s for a very long time. I was looking at 20Mb/s and faster DSL options (that I could not afford) in 2001.
This is completely untrue. I happened to have worked from 2000 through 2007 for the division of AT&T (was not AT&T in the beginning) that installed DSL.
I can tell you for a fact that the best service available was NOT 1mbps up.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
And remember the time period that we are talking, HDSL, for example, had products on the market in 1993 and was ratified in 1994 and was up to 2Mb/s up. That's a long time ago.
Those services were NOT on the market anywhere in 2000. Let alone in 1994.
-
@JaredBusch said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Yes but DSL since 2000 at least was offered far higher than 1Mb/s. Running original ADSL from the 1990s is not, I thought, a common top end option. The worst ISP I know, Frontier, was offering SDSL, HDSL and other options by the first years of the 2000s. AT&T UVerse DSL is places I've seen it do the same. DSL has not limited people to speeds near 1Mb/s for a very long time. I was looking at 20Mb/s and faster DSL options (that I could not afford) in 2001.
This is completely untrue. I happened to have worked from 2000 through 2007 for the division of AT&T (was not AT&T in the beginning) that installed DSL.
I can tell you for a fact that the best service available was NOT 1mbps up.
It was better or worse?
-
1994? Sure for the specs. (but look when IPv6 was made ratified). Many places couldn't even get High speed internet until 2005-2008.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@JaredBusch said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Yes but DSL since 2000 at least was offered far higher than 1Mb/s. Running original ADSL from the 1990s is not, I thought, a common top end option. The worst ISP I know, Frontier, was offering SDSL, HDSL and other options by the first years of the 2000s. AT&T UVerse DSL is places I've seen it do the same. DSL has not limited people to speeds near 1Mb/s for a very long time. I was looking at 20Mb/s and faster DSL options (that I could not afford) in 2001.
This is completely untrue. I happened to have worked from 2000 through 2007 for the division of AT&T (was not AT&T in the beginning) that installed DSL.
I can tell you for a fact that the best service available was NOT 1mbps up.
It was better or worse?
Don't be an intentional ass. My statement is very clear that the best service was not better.
-
@JaredBusch said:
@scottalanmiller said:
And remember the time period that we are talking, HDSL, for example, had products on the market in 1993 and was ratified in 1994 and was up to 2Mb/s up. That's a long time ago.
Those services were NOT on the market anywhere in 2000. Let alone in 1994.
That's straight from wikipedia. When I was studying this stuff for certification in the late 1990s these were all technologies that we had to know a little about and were not new at the time, although many were being rolled out only commonly then.
The 1Mb/s ADSL server was 1998. The faster than 1Mb/s ADSL was 1999. That's spec ratification.
NTG was running much faster SDSL for hosting services by 2003. That I know absolutely for sure. It was the only time that we used DSL internally and it was relatively faster for the time.
