🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <Roq45.9$5j2.2296@news.pacbell.net>, dano45@spamcop.net (Dano) 
writes...
> In article <MPG.13b02a4f13cb5d43989c65@207.126.101.100>, 
> See_email_@ddress_below.This_one_is.invalid (Philip J. Koenig) wrote:

> >I think it's pretty clear that there's much less 
> >infrastructure gotchas amongst cable subscribers than
> >there is amongst potential DSL users.  The cable companies
> >already know that every subscriber can get a decent signal
> >up through ~800 Mhz (since if they didn't they wouldn't get
> >all the channels) whereas with POTS lines there are all 
> >sorts of unknown crappy wires hanging out of people's houses.
> 
> In my experience as a very early adopter of PacBell (Southwest Bell, SBC 
> or whatever they're calling themselves this week) that companies 
> problems are not with their POTS infrastructure but with their server 
> configuration and management, and especially with their technical 
> support.
> 
> Early on, their POP and SMTP servers were down several times per day, 
> their news servers were down almost that often, and their http servers 
> were down occasionally. About the only bright point in their service was 
> the DSL signal itself, which in my region never went down. 


Pacbell Internet as an ISP is so bad, that it is absolutely no
surprise that their ISP problems are more frequent than the
DSL connectivity problems.  This in no way implies that the
DSL problems are nonexistent or even infrequent -- it's just
that their ISP services are horrendous.

  

-- 
Philip J. Koenig         The Electric Kahuna Organization       [anti-spammed]
----------------Computers & Communications for the New Millennium-------------
* To send email, remove numbers and spaces:  pjkunet64 @  ekahuna27 . com    *
*                                                                            *
* Simple answers are for simple minds.  Try a new way of looking at things.  *