On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 02:24:30 GMT John Navas wrote: | On 26 Aug 2006 17:53:35 GMT, snipped-for-privacy@ipal.net wrote in | : | |>On Sat, 26 Aug 2006 05:04:26 GMT John Navas wrote: |>| On 26 Aug 2006 04:26:59 GMT, snipped-for-privacy@ipal.net wrote in |>| : |>| |>|>On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 20:22:30 GMT John Navas wrote: |>|>| On 25 Aug 2006 17:17:37 GMT, snipped-for-privacy@ipal.net wrote in |>|>| : | |>|>|>If you have sufficient speed to keep up with whatever burst rate you |>|>|>get from Comcast, then the answer is no. But do keep in mind that |>|>|>cable is more "bursty" than something like DSL. You can get a lot of |>|>|>speed at once, then not much at all another time while one or more |>|>|>of your neighbors are pulling down a big web page, or MP3, or movie. |>|>| |>|>| With all due respect, that's simply not true. |>|>
|>|>This from someone that thinks VPN is necessary to access the internet? |>|>And you didn't even specify what if several pieces of information you |>|>believed was not true. Oh wait, I know, you think it's all not true. |>| |>| To be clear, since you're playing dense, the Comcast nonsense. |>
|>It's shared access. That would be much like 2 different users using the |>same access point on the same channel. So sometimes you can get all the |>bandwidth, and sometimes not (not usually happens around evening when |>most home users are surfing, downloading, sharing, etc). | | With all due respect, that's simply not true. Comcast generally has | sufficient capacity to deliver the specified consumer speed.
That's simply not true. Comcast is one of the most oversubscribed ISPs around. I see the speed drop below IDSN rates very very frequently. My brother, who has this service, is considering going back to DSL, now. At least with DSL, the speed was fairly consistent. That's why I've chosen to go with DSL, despite the fact that I need to do rewiring to make it work (I could have cable now, but that's not what I want to do).