I concur, my DSL gave me spotty service but since I switched to cable (well over a year ago now) my systems run great.
Cable VS DSL
- Thread starter starman
- Start date
I concur, my DSL gave me spotty service but since I switched to cable (well over a year ago now) my systems run great.
Very much agree with this too, install the network card instead of using a USB interface with your cable or DSL modem, much more reliable, no performance issues.
I started with a $300/month business Road Runner. Then decided I didnt wanna spend/need the extra speed for the money...so I changed to Road Runner residential service. for $45/month. I had no problems for months until, one day, there was a problem with Road Runner and went down at the worst moment during trading. It cost me $12,000.
So is it worth paying extra $45/month for, perhaps, DSL backup? Im guessing it is. Just have to figure out how to make them work seamlessly. It would be great if, somehow, having both services can improve my speeds.
So is it worth paying extra $45/month for, perhaps, DSL backup? Im guessing it is. Just have to figure out how to make them work seamlessly. It would be great if, somehow, having both services can improve my speeds.
DSL and cable modems both offer alternatives to a T1: as others have said you can get both for much less than a T1. T1's fail occasionally just like these lower cost products - although for a price you can get service level gaurantees.
You can route in hardware or software - Windows 2000 makes this particularly easy with multiple NICs on modern certified hardware.
We have had all three solutions and all three have failed at times: we always have had back up services/routes and you can do this with the DSL/Cable service pair and a load balancing software or hardware solution.
Part of the disaster recovery plan should be what to do if all of your services fail.
You can route in hardware or software - Windows 2000 makes this particularly easy with multiple NICs on modern certified hardware.
We have had all three solutions and all three have failed at times: we always have had back up services/routes and you can do this with the DSL/Cable service pair and a load balancing software or hardware solution.
Part of the disaster recovery plan should be what to do if all of your services fail.
Originally posted by corvus
Another alternative is to use both. Cable or DSL both go for around $50/month here. I'm considering getting both for redundancy and routing purposes, and getting a router that load-balances between them (and as a consequence, handles failures transparently). The router I'm looking, nexland 800 (review here http://www.overclockersclub.com/nexland.shtml), should be fairly easy for anyone with experience with the most popular router/firewall device out there, the Linksys BEFSR41.
Using this load-balancer, I should be able to get upwards of 3 Mbs by combining the two...pretty cool. *And* have multiple routes since my cable ISP and my dsl ISP use completely different backbones. Sometimes there's fewer hops to a server on one vs the other.
But more specific to your question, cable and dsl are fairly identical to most users. What really matters in my book is the backbone that the provider is connected to and how great their customer service and technicians are in keeping the network up. I've been using AT&T here in Seattle for over a year now, and have had no failures and decent performance. Despite my personal tendency to expect poor quality from mass-market providers of anything, I have to say that everyone I know who's had them has been fairly happy, including myself. For now. This is in stark contrast to Qwest DSL, about whom I have heard numerous negative stories. When I finish my upcoming move, I'm likely going to get (er, add) dsl through a smaller, local company I like, with better backbone connections and more liberal bandwidth/server policies.
I wish that router had a back-up dial-up port. Can't go wrong with three backups, right?
sounds impressive.
I just read the review of the Nextland router that allows using DSL and cable as backup while load balancing the 2 services. This router is the perfect answer to my problem for daytrading..or so I thought. There were many posts about how it freezes and such. Seems there are plenty of problems with this item.... Have you found any other brand - Linksys maybe - that does the same thing??? I would be greatly interested.
There is another cheaper method of hardware load balancing from the followng:
http://www.cpx.com/proddetail_b.asp?c=Broadband Routers&e=49
This product, you actually have to buy 2 (but each only costs about $60 - $70) but it has a fucntion which allows load balancing AND a backup feature in case one of your connection fails. I wonder if other company's routers do this??
http://www.cpx.com/proddetail_b.asp?c=Broadband Routers&e=49
This product, you actually have to buy 2 (but each only costs about $60 - $70) but it has a fucntion which allows load balancing AND a backup feature in case one of your connection fails. I wonder if other company's routers do this??
