Internet provider myths?

[joe360]

What is the difference between the different internet types (cable, DSL, fiber optic) with respect to "slowdowns" due to proximity of the "?hubs/servers" (sorry, I don't know too much about this topic). I've called both major companies in Canada (Rogers and Bell) and asked the same question in which they accuse each other of these slowdowns but not their own company. Also is every internet type susceptible to these slowdowns due to high user load in the neighborhood (i.e peak times)?

 

[john3850]

Money or how much you are you willing to pay for a good plan would be the most important or first question.
The more you pay the faster your system will be.
Go to http://www.dslreports.com/
Most of recent ISP reviews and speeds will be listed there.

 

[KingFatty]

Yeah I bet it is more helpful to check reports from users in your area that subscribe to the different services.

The myths or particular type/architecture perhaps are too abstract to even matter anymore? I guess any company could throttle the users during times of big use, so they don't actually hit the physical limits of the architecture, to where it's almost irrelevant now days? I guess I mean that there are business/profit reasons to artificially limit each user, perhaps through pricing and bandwidth tiers, such that nobody is being limited due to architecture/type, but instead due to profit maximization and artificially slowing down people to make sure they fit nicely in their price tier.

 

[Sattern]

I'd suggest looking to see reviews of what other people have.

Generally, the more you pay the more you get.

You get what you pay for, especially with internet, if you want big speeds you pay a bit more but in my opinion it is more than worth it.

 

[JackMDS]

This is a question that can not be asked and answer in a simplistic general way.

The best way to go about it is to research first what is available in your location, then analyze and compare the services with people that are in the same location with similar needs.

As an example in my location there is only Verizon DSL and TWC Cable.

The service of both is terrible. However of of the two TWC has much faster download.

 

[RadiclDreamer]

Of the two major service types, DSL and cable there are a few big differences.

DSL has major distance limitations and loses speed quickly over relatively short distances. Cable while on a shared architecture tends to not have any ill effects due to the emergence of Docsis 2 and 3.

In my many years of IT experience I have almost always seen cable outperform DSL

 

[easp]

All "Internet" access involves shared infrastructure at almost every step. When it comes to "the last mile," with traditional DSL, you have a dedicated line to the central office, but thats it. Fiber to the Node, you have dedicated access to the neighborhood node, whereas cable is basically shared all the way to your cable modem.

Because shared infrastructure is always involved, the important issue is the network engineering and capacity planning. At this late date, if you are suffering from frequent congestion that is obviously tied to the last mile, then the provider is either doing a shitty job with managing their network, or the standards they are managing to are horrible. I am sure that you won't find a provider that will admit to either of those things.

I stuck with DSL for a long time because of better price transparency, and, at least historically, higher standards for network engineering. I finally gave up on it though because the cable co was so far ahead while the telco seemed like it would take forever to deploy FTTN upgrades that would allow me to get faster access than the 3 Mbps up / 768kbps down that I'd been stuck with for the better part of a decade. I think the economics of modern cable-based data networks are more favorable and make it easier/cheaper for them to expand capacity and manage hotspots of congestion.