🚀 go-pugleaf

> DSL fans at work har-har over my pathetic little shared-bandwidth cable
> modem. They turn green when I tell them I'm getting 5 Mbps downloads (over
> two modems) and static IPs. It costs me $50/month.
> 
> A friend of mine pays $69/month for 768 Kbps down and 128 Kbps up. His
> "always on" circuit times out every few minutes (even in mid-download),
> forcing him to do a PPPoE redial that sometimes doesn't connect. When he
> gets on-line, his throughput to the Internet only approaches 768 Kbps
> weekdays at 4 AM. At all other times, he hovers between 200 and 500 Kbps.
> Meanwhile, I'm over here in the DSL ghetto (too far from the CO) and I get
> consistent 2.5 Mbps downloads from external sites, any time of day.
> 
> I know not everybody has such success with cable modems. I went through
> months of hell before it worked properly, but it was worth it. I longed for
> DSL until friends and co-workers got it and shared their stories with me. To
> the person, they're paying more money for, at best, 1/3rd of my throughput.
> 
> So they can have DSL. I'm quite happy limping along with my nasty little
> shared-bandwidth toy.
> 
> Unless you've got telco fiber-to-the-curb, DSL's superiority over cable is a
> myth. I guess that's why the vast majority of U.S. broadband users are on
> cable.

   Just wait until more of your neighbors get cable service.  You'll no
longer be getting 5Mbps downloads.

					Bill