internet service

[cause4alarm 7]

I'm thinking about saving some money on my cable bill by downgrading my internet connection from 5 Mbps to 1.5 Mbps or 768 kbps. Does anybody have any experience with these speeds?

My computer is already pretty old and I really only use it for emails and web browsing, so I'm guessing that it's not really putting such a high speed connection to best use anyway.

[D aka speck 0]

The biggest problem I've seen with lower bandwidth are upload speeds. Some e-mail attachments don't go through because of server timeouts. There's also a small percentage of websites that won't load for the same reason. You get what you pay for, but I guess it's pointless if you don't use what you get :)

[Alias81 0]

Either of those would be fine for those 2 things, I remember on my Windows 95 having 14kbps or something and I could go downstairs, feed the dog and still have quiet a wait until pages loaded up.

[DDude26 0]

I'm thinking about saving some money on my cable bill by downgrading my internet connection from 5 Mbps to 1.5 Mbps or 768 kbps. Does anybody have any experience with these speeds?

My grandparents has DSL and gets 1.5 Mbps and I can bear it as I can get what i need fast. However at home, I have Verizon Fios that goes up to 20 mbps and is really cheap.

[cause4alarm 7]

My grandparents has DSL and gets 1.5 Mbps and I can bear it as I can get what i need fast. However at home, I have Verizon Fios that goes up to 20 mbps and is really cheap.

How much money?

[Vapor 0]

I'm thinking about saving some money on my cable bill by downgrading my internet connection from 5 Mbps to 1.5 Mbps or 768 kbps. Does anybody have any experience with these speeds?

My computer is already pretty old and I really only use it for emails and web browsing, so I'm guessing that it's not really putting such a high speed connection to best use anyway.

For browsing and sending email, you should be fine. If you download a lot of video, I would stick with a higher bandwidth. As said in a previous post, your upload speed with be severly throatled back, most likely around 128 kbps, which is very poor. See if a fiberoptic service is avalible in your area. Fiber Optic services can ofer more bandwidth at lower prices. If you are in the US, check out FIOS

http://www.verizonfios.com/?ref=verizon

[cause4alarm 7]

I'm seeing prices starting at $40/month for FiOS. Is that right?

[Vapor 0]

Yes, I guess it is. I thought they offered a 2.5 down package for around 20 bucks, but I guess that was either ixnayed or I must have read it incorrectly.

http://www22.verizon.com/content/consumerf...+and+prices.htm

[DDude26 0]

vapor got it right but there's many discounts if you buy other stuff like tv or phone. BUT you gotta to make sure you check that you have fios in your area and is live. if not then it'll be a while. where do you live?

also in some areas fios have speeds of 10mbps down/5mbps up, 20/5, and 30/5 not 5/2, 15/2, and 30/2. it all depends on where you live.

[cause4alarm 7]

Like Vapor, I'm also in Manhattan. Unfortunately, it looks like FiOS isn't available to me.

I'm currently considering DSL. Any suggestions there?

Also, does anybody have anything to say about satellite TV, relative to cable TV?

[D aka speck 0]

DSL is actually faster than lower speed cable. At least in my area it is.

[Vapor 0]

DSL is actually faster than lower speed cable. At least in my area it is.

It is all dependent on the service in your area. In theory, Cable has the potential to be faster vs a digital subscriber line. These days the telcom companies figure that they can suck more money out of you promising "faster" speeds at higher prices. In relality, these speeds were always there, now you are just paying more for the same service. Even though you can pay less for lower bandwidth, they are making much more off of the people paying almost double for the same speeds as before. They offer several packages offering speeds UP TO certain levels of bandwidth, and when they do not deliver that bandwidth they say that it is advertised "up to" not "at" that specific bandwidth.

Also many ISPs are practicing what is called "packet (or traffic) shaping". All digital content is sent in packets of data. So all content to and from the internet is sent in packets of data. ISPs have the ablity to "shape" packets, this means they can totally lock out certian content (which many isps have), severly throttle down speeds to certain content like P2P, video, and the scariest one, sites they do not agree with or support. So for instance, if Verizon wanted to start a search engine, they can block access or throttle access to google. If google is being very slow, who would want to use it?

Net Neutrality MANNNNNNNNNNNNNN

[JR Boucicaut 3804]

DSL speeds also depend on how close you live to the central office. The closer, the better. There are sites that list the COs in your neighborhood.

[Vapor 0]

And with cable the speed is shared, so the more people ont he network, the slower your connection will be. This is why sometimes at peak times you notice slower speeds. It is not always noticeable, but it can effect preformance.

[JR Boucicaut 3804]

I've used both and no way I could deal with DSL.

[cause4alarm 7]

I've used both and no way I could deal with DSL.

Why's that?

[Chadd 916]

I prefer DSL to a crowded cable node

[JR Boucicaut 3804]

I guess I've been fortunate enough never to experience a crowded cable node. I've never had a lag in the 6 years I've been using cable. My dad cancelled it and got DSL and when I went back to Orlando I just couldn't deal.