Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.dcom.xdsl > #134 > unrolled thread

Are there still a lot of DSL services?

Back to article view | Back to comp.dcom.xdsl

Contents

  Are there still a lot of DSL services? ANTant@zimage.com (Ant) - 2015-12-19 14:40 -0600
    Re: Are there still a lot of DSL services? Doug McIntyre <merlyn@dork.geeks.org> - 2015-12-20 00:21 -0600
      Re: Are there still a lot of DSL services? ANTant@zimage.com (Ant) - 2015-12-21 00:25 -0600
    Re: Are there still a lot of DSL services? "David H. Lipman" <DLipman~nospam~@Verizon.Net> - 2015-12-20 09:06 -0500
    Re: Are there still a lot of DSL services? Chainsaw Bob <865b5cd0025b5446449bdb269b2b3602_5832@example.com> - 2016-01-04 14:38 +0000
      Re: Are there still a lot of DSL services? bob prohaska <bp@www.zefox.net> - 2020-07-07 18:44 +0000
        Re: Are there still a lot of DSL services? danny burstein <dannyb@panix.com> - 2020-07-07 18:46 +0000
        Re: Are there still a lot of DSL services? ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) - 2020-07-07 15:50 -0500
          Re: Are there still a lot of DSL services? bob prohaska <bp@www.zefox.net> - 2020-07-08 01:01 +0000
            Re: Are there still a lot of DSL services? Arthur Conan Doyle <dont@bother.com> - 2020-07-07 21:44 -0500

#134 — Are there still a lot of DSL services?

Hello.

It seems like less these days since phone companies don't want them 
anymore like in my areas. :/

Thank you in advance. :)
-- 
Merry Christmas/Season's Greetings/:) Holidays & May The Force Be With U!
Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see this signature correctly.
  /\___/\   Ant(Dude) @ http://antfarm.home.dhs.org (Personal Web Site)
 / /\ /\ \                 Ant's Quality Foraged Links: http://aqfl.net
| |o   o| |
   \ _ /    Please nuke ANT if replying by e-mail privately. If credit-
    ( )     ing, then please kindly use Ant nickname and AQFL URL/link.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#135

ANTant@zimage.com (Ant) writes:
>It seems like less these days since phone companies don't want them 
>anymore like in my areas. :/

You have to define for what area of the world. I assume the US?

The telco's have pretty much shut down almost all 3rd party ISPs
DSL services due to many reasons and factors. Most of them can be
traced back to the Brand X supreme court decision or that telco's
don't play fair.

Steeling customers, providing next to unsuable ULE's to any CLEC.
No longer reselling shared line access, etc. etc.

-- 
Doug McIntyre
doug@themcintyres.us

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#137

Doug McIntyre <merlyn@dork.geeks.org> wrote:
> ANTant@zimage.com (Ant) writes:
> >It seems like less these days since phone companies don't want them 
> >anymore like in my areas. :/

> You have to define for what area of the world. I assume the US?

Yeah, sorry. USA. :)


> The telco's have pretty much shut down almost all 3rd party ISPs
> DSL services due to many reasons and factors. Most of them can be
> traced back to the Brand X supreme court decision or that telco's
> don't play fair.

> Steeling customers, providing next to unsuable ULE's to any CLEC.
> No longer reselling shared line access, etc. etc.

:(
-- 
Merry Christmas/Season's Greetings/:) Holidays & May The Force Be With U!
Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see this signature correctly.
  /\___/\   Ant(Dude) @ http://antfarm.home.dhs.org (Personal Web Site)
 / /\ /\ \                 Ant's Quality Foraged Links: http://aqfl.net
| |o   o| |
   \ _ /    Please nuke ANT if replying by e-mail privately. If credit-
    ( )     ing, then please kindly use Ant nickname and AQFL URL/link.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#136

> "Ant"  wrote in message 
> news:O42dnVeCRJhLXejLnZ2dnUU7-fOdnZ2d@earthlink.com...
>
> Hello.
>
> It seems like less these days since phone companies don't want them
> anymore like in my areas. :/
>
> Thank you in advance. :)

Yes, there is.  Both direct and indirect.

My parents can't get FiOS so they are still on Verizon ADSL.  That's a 
direct use.

An indirect use use provides VDSL.  An apartment complex receives coaxial or 
fiber based content.  In a CO of the building is a matrix of DSLAMs for each 
apartment which uses POTs wiring to the apartments.  Due to the relatively 
short distance between a building's CO and the apartment furthest away, very 
high speed DSL can be provided.  This is less expensive and easier than 
running FTTP or Coax to each apartment because the POTs is already in place.

As a transmission line, speed is a function of distance.  The further away 
one is to the CO, the slower the speed.  So the inverse is true and that's 
why VDSL is an indirect method used in apartment complexes.

-- 
Dave
Multi-AV Scanning Tool - http://multi-av.thespykiller.co.uk
http://www.pctipp.ch/downloads/dl/35905.asp 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#138

replying to Ant , Chainsaw Bob wrote:
I'm still using DSL, with a max download speed of 6 Mbps.  AT&T provides the
wire and central equipment to EarthLink, and EarthLink provides the product to
me.  Had it for years!  Very pleased with it.  Faster would be nice, but
distance to the CO is an issue, and I'm not willing to pay cable rates.  We
can watch live video feeds at our current speed.

Friend of mine has it too, but with a 1.5 Mbps feed.

Bob


-- 
posted via
http://forums.cabling-design.com/xdsl/are-there-still-a-lot-of-dsl-services-5118-.htm 
using  Cabling-Design's Web, RSS and Social Media Interface to
comp.dcom.xdsl and other  telecom  groups

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#142

Just curious, is anybody still reading this newsgroup? 

Thanks,

bob prohaska

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#143

In <re2fqk$mp1$1@dont-email.me> bob prohaska <bp@www.zefox.net> writes:

>Just curious, is anybody still reading this newsgroup? 

>Thanks,

>bob prohaska

<raises hand>

-- 
_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
		     dannyb@panix.com 
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#144

bob prohaska <bp@www.zefox.net> wrote:
> Just curious, is anybody still reading this newsgroup? 

Yes, Bob. ;)
-- 
Life is so crazy! ..!.. *isms, sins, hates, (d)evil, illnesses (e.g., COVID-19/2019-nCoV/SARS-CoV-2), deaths, heat waves, fires, out(r)ages, unlucky #4, 2020, greeds, etc.
Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see this signature correctly.
  /\___/\:( Ant(Dude) @ http://aqfl.net & http://antfarm.home.dhs.org /
 / /\ /\ \ http://antfarm.ma.cx. Please nuke ANT if replying by e-mail.
| |o   o| |
   \ _ /
    ( )

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#145

Ant <ant@zimage.comant> wrote:
> bob prohaska <bp@www.zefox.net> wrote:
>> Just curious, is anybody still reading this newsgroup? 
> 
> Yes, Bob. ;)

Excellent, we have what will pass for a quorum in this venerable institution 8-)

A couple years ago AT&T decided I couldn't have DSL over my POTS line, so I switched
to a local reseller (who still uses ATT copper). The total cost was about a wash
(~$90/mo) and the service package slightly better. The reseller (known as Omsoft.com)
employed a company called Sonic Telecom, for apparently both voice and IP connectivity.

Back in April the reseller warned me they were raising prices for IP service by $10.
Then, out of the blue, in July the price for voice service went up by $20. The reseller
claimed this was the work of Sonic Telecom, Sonic Telecom claims it's the doing of the
reseller. Since it's a voice service, the reseller says "take it to the public utilities
commission". 

At first I was somewhat steamed, but going over the bill, it appears that voice charges
now come to about $45/mo including unlimited domestic long distance (which I seldom use).
6 Mb/s DSL plus eight static IPs come to about $80/mo.

The question is: Does this seem unreasonable? Perhaps more to the point, is there an
obviously better way to obtain comparable service? I want to keep the POTS line, on
the thesis that "lowest tech is best" so long as it does the job. POTS does, for me.

One other thing: Does anybody know of a _readable_ description of how the onholy troika
(copper-owner, reseller and long-distance carrier) are harnessed to one another?
 
Thanks for reading, and any ideas!

bob prohaska

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#146

bob prohaska <bp@www.zefox.net> wrote:

>At first I was somewhat steamed, but going over the bill, it appears that voice charges
>now come to about $45/mo including unlimited domestic long distance (which I seldom use).
>6 Mb/s DSL plus eight static IPs come to about $80/mo.
>
>The question is: Does this seem unreasonable? Perhaps more to the point, is there an
>obviously better way to obtain comparable service? I want to keep the POTS line, on
>the thesis that "lowest tech is best" so long as it does the job. POTS does, for me.


Traditional wireline POTS is going the way of the dodo bird. At least one of the
major telcos has filed for bankruptcy and the rest are jacking up prices as fast
as state PUCs will allow. $45 does not sound too bad, but it's only going up.

Your DSL service OTOH is a right ripoff. It doesn't even qualify as high speed
internet under federal standards. Most cablecos offer internet voice bundles.
You might check what is available by you - and you can keep your existing phone
number.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.dcom.xdsl

csiph-web