Is this claim true, or not?

[Bill Cavalieri]

Its all right and wrong.

DSL, your bandwidth to the co (last mile) is not shared.
Cable, last mile shared, encrypted between cable mode and node, that was 
another myth used by dsl companys (they said you could spy on other 
cable users).

DSL, once your to the co, your bandwidth is shared just like rest of the 
internet
Cable, ditto

Cable can  carry 50+ megs of bandwith per channel dedicated to internet 
in a node, if a node starts to fill up, then can use another channel, 
and now bandwidth problem goes away.

So the your area can get slow if they have to many cable customers is 
not a technology issue, but a customer service issue (monitoring to make 
sure channel is not full).  And at that cable has many more subscribers 
than dsl, so where is the wide spread bandwidth problems 
(www.dslreports.com)?

So what has beeen said is true, go with what you like, dsl/cable, its 
all internet.  I use cable, I had some bad times with covad and swb in 
dallas (undocumented bridges made dsl install take months, i was 6,000 
feet from co so the had to make dsl work), but other people have had 
problems with cable installs.

Moral of the story, order who has the best deal in your area, if unhappy 
with service switch.

Welcome to the free market.

-Bill

Seth Dimbert wrote:

>Hmm... This is exactly the kind of Witnessing and Debate I hoped to avoid.
>To sum up the responses I've received so far:
>
>Richard: Pro DSL, unless cable is cheaper.
>Michael: Pro cable, because it's faster.
>Lowell: Gets a certain speed downstream, but didn't say which kind of
>service he uses.
>
>So, we've got a split vote, and no one has yet dealt with the question I
>asked (though Richard did, a little). That's not to belittle the input you
>guys gave - thanks! - but I want a more technical answer.
>
>You see, if you call a DSL provider, they will tell you that cable slows
>down as more and more people in a neighborhood get it. I've heard that for a
>long time. TWC counters this, on their website, with the information I
>quoted about how "the scalable features of Time Warner Cable's hybrid fiber
>coax (HFC) design" yields "nearly-infinite growth capacity."
>
>I'd like to know it, technically, what TWC is claiming makes any sense. Is
>it FUD mumbo-jumbo, or is it sound?
>
>I currently use DSL and know that they provide faster service than I'm
>getting; I'm as far from the CO as they will allow... Every time I call, the
>tech is surprised that I can connect at all. All of the Cable ads (Everest
>and TWC) claim higher speeds, so they are attractive. But I want to know if
>the clogging is a real issue or not.
>
>PLEASE: let's not let this become a debate of TWC vs. Everest or such
>things... Can anyone give me the straight dope?
>
>
>-SD
>
>On 1/19/03 2:21 PM, "Richard Meeker" <rmeeker at kc.rr.com> wrote:
>
>  
>
>>You may see more on the download, but the upload capability has a tendency
>>to be pretty slow - the equivalent to a 56Kbps to 128Kbps frame relay.  From
>>a good fast site, I usually see around 200Kbps.
>>
>>DSL has really improved over the past 3 years when compared with cable.
>>Unless you absolutely need to goto cable, or cable is cheaper - stick with
>>what you have right now.
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: owner-kclug at marauder.illiana.net
>>[mailto:owner-kclug at marauder.illiana.net]On Behalf Of Seth Dimbert
>>Sent: Sunday, January 19, 2003 1:24 PM
>>To: KcLUG
>>Subject: Is this claim true, or not?
>>
>>
>>    
>>
>>>From Time Warner (Road Runner)'s website:
>>>      
>>>
>>Question:
>>Will my cable Internet connection slow down as more users take the service?
>>
>>Answer:
>>No. Our competitors would like you to think so. Because of the scalable
>>features of Time Warner Cable's hybrid fiber coax (HFC) design, we have
>>nearly-infinite growth capacity. Today, our high-speed Internet services use
>>just 6 megahertz of our 750 megahertz coax plant. In addition, we are only
>>using 1600 fibers of the 4800 fiber optic lines we have run throughout
>>Kansas City - the rest is "dark," awaiting future needs. Click here for more
>>information.
>>
>>
>>So? What's the deal? Is it true, or not? I'm currently using DSL and getting
>>162 kbp download and 105 kbp upload. TWC tells me that they will give me
>>speeds higher than this. Once and for all, is it true?
>>
>>-SD
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>    
>>
>
>
>
>
>  
>