Internet Provider Change At Work
-
@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.
-
@JaredBusch said:
@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.
No, I was completely unclear since small players were much faster than that. I can't believe that AT&T was so far behind the market. I was shopping for many times that speed from other players like MCI at the time.
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
1994? Sure for the specs. (but look when IPv6 was made ratified). Many places couldn't even get High speed internet until 2005-2008.
Sure, but were they rolling out old specs or more current ones when they did roll it out?
-
@JaredBusch said:
@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.
Are you sure that you were not just working with a division that was only offering consumer ADSL and was not offering business SDSL? We are talking business service here. Sure, some businesses use ADSL, maybe most, but "business class" as the ISPs sold it was typically SDSL. And it was a long time ago that they were above 1Mb/s.
-
So researching some history and according to: http://www.speedguide.net/articles/the-history-of-dsl-internet-access-1414
The earliest variation of DSL to be widely used was HDSL (High bit-rate DSL) which gave an equal amount of wideband digital transmission in both directions. HDSL technology was developed in the early 1990s, making it one of the oldest forms of DSL. It was used between the telephone company and a customer, and also within a corporate site. HDSL service provided equal bandwidth for both downloads and uploads, but required multiple phone lines to do this.
So that was higher than 1Mb/s available in the early 1990s, many years before the 1Mb/s limited ADSL was first released. The 1Mb/s limitation is not intrinsic to DSL nor is it "basic". ADSL was a later offering, it did not even exist when I was first dealing with DSL (1998ish) and ISDN replacement options. That's a specific limitation of just one DSL variriantion that was not the first one on the market or available.
-
Did you just question my honesty? What a dick move.
-
@JaredBusch said:
Did you just question my honesty? What a dick move.
I'm not even sure to what you are referring. What did I question?
-
I was wondering if you had worked for a DSL installer that was limited in scope. Were you able to install all AT&T products or only certain ones?
-
Good discussion guys! I am about to present the Cable option to management today...
-
@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.
Your times are off as well.
G.HDSL was sold by Verizon ~2002, a little earlier if I recall. I bought one because I wanted faster upload speed versus the frame relay ADSL that was prevalent in VZ West aka GTE. They also ran very hot ATM based g.lite service at the time, but I couldn't flip to it because there wasn't a DSLAM available for me to hop into. I could get close to 768K up with ADSL, G.HDSL gave me a solid 2Mbps. Of course, I was one of the beta testers in DeKalb, IL for GTE's ADSL product at the time in 1997. Holy shit it was cool to have 256Kbps/64Kbps at the time. When I moved to Dallas, I was third on the list to get GTE's ADSL in the town it rolled out to first in 1998. Guy who put it in took a day to get things right, with me testing as well on the loop.
SBC didn't bother with lots of that stuff, only for hi-cap, where they been using SDSL and/or HDSL for a long time. CLECs on the other hand in MOKAT, PacBell, and especially Ameritech, went nuts on crazy bandwidth.
-
@PSX_Defector said:
@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.
Your times are off as well.
G.HDSL was sold by Verizon ~2002, a little earlier if I recall. I bought one because I wanted faster upload speed versus the frame relay ADSL that was prevalent in VZ West aka GTE. They also ran very hot ATM based g.lite service at the time, but I couldn't flip to it because there wasn't a DSLAM available for me to hop into. I could get close to 768K up with ADSL, G.HDSL gave me a solid 2Mbps. Of course, I was one of the beta testers in DeKalb, IL for GTE's ADSL product at the time in 1997. Holy shit it was cool to have 256Kbps/64Kbps at the time. When I moved to Dallas, I was third on the list to get GTE's ADSL in the town it rolled out to first in 1998. Guy who put it in took a day to get things right, with me testing as well on the loop.
SBC didn't bother with lots of that stuff, only for hi-cap, where they been using SDSL and/or HDSL for a long time. CLECs on the other hand in MOKAT, PacBell, and especially Ameritech, went nuts on crazy bandwidth.
The alphabet soup there was just awesome - now back to your regularly scheduled OP.
-
@Dashrender said:
The alphabet soup there was just awesome - now back to your regularly scheduled OP.
Oh yes, the bells are great for that. Almost as good as the military.
Yes some limited test market stuff was available from SBC prior to 2000. It was never sold mass market for everyone. And SDSL (as @scottalanmiller mentioned) was also sold in limited capacity prior to that also.
Being a bleeding edge beta tester is an awesome thing, I was in the first beta group of people in southern Illinois to get Charter's internet service back in 1998. That poor installer walked into my house and was immediately confused by my NT4.0 server with dual 56k modems sharing out a home network (I was running some software router that I really wish I could remember the name of).
-
@JaredBusch said:
@Dashrender said:
The alphabet soup there was just awesome - now back to your regularly scheduled OP.
Oh yes, the bells are great for that. Almost as good as the military.
Yes some limited test market stuff was available from SBC prior to 2000. It was never sold mass market for everyone. And SDSL (as @scottalanmiller mentioned) was also sold in limited capacity prior to that also.
Being a bleeding edge beta tester is an awesome thing, I was in the first beta group of people in southern Illinois to get Charter's internet service back in 1998. That poor installer walked into my house and was immediately confused by my NT4.0 server with dual 56k modems sharing out a home network (I was running some software router that I really wish I could remember the name of).
Nice, I only had one modem, but it was connected to a NT 4.0 Proxy server I setup.
-
@Dashrender said:
Nice, I only had one modem, but it was connected to a NT 4.0 Proxy server I setup.
Sitting next to each other with stacks of pizza boxes (my roommate managed a dominos) and mt dew, my roommate and I flat owned people playing Starcraft on Battle.Net
-
UPDATE - Cable provider cannot bring Coax to us so we are stick with our current provider. Going to try the fiber route...
-
@garak0410 said:
UPDATE - Cable provider cannot bring Coax to us so we are stick with our current provider. Going to try the fiber route...
Can't or won't?
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
@garak0410 said:
UPDATE - Cable provider cannot bring Coax to us so we are stick with our current provider. Going to try the fiber route...
Can't or won't?
They have no plans to extend service to our location...
Even if we did pay for it... -
@garak0410 said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
@garak0410 said:
UPDATE - Cable provider cannot bring Coax to us so we are stick with our current provider. Going to try the fiber route...
Can't or won't?
They have no plans to extend service to our location...
Even if we did pay for it...A company doesn't want to make money? Odd.
