Layman. -- David Michael Curry (Dave) <d...@ysarro.com>
On 13 March, 2014 6:38:00 PM CDT, Aemilianus Kehler <zew...@gmail.com> wrote: >I agree with Chris. Since he went all technical, I'll go with lame man >terms. > >From all my experience with both, I have never had a good experience >with MTS... Ever!! > >While with shaw I have got great solid reliable connections. And when I >went over their workmanship it was as expected cheap and fast... >However I was able to completely rewire the setup, document and >photograph it all.. I called customer service to complain and they >provided apologies and a free PVR. So I love Shaw! > >Done > >Cheers!! > >> On Mar 12, 2014, at 7:05 PM, chris kluka <asd...@asdlkf.net> wrote: >> >> The simple answer is that either ISP *can* suck at times, because >they are both huge ISP's and they both have crap service departments. >> >> You can get lucky and get good service from either, and you can get >lucky and get good equipment from either, but you can't make the >blanket generalization that shaw or mts or voi or les.net or any of the >other ISP's in winnipeg are the best. >> >> Generally speaking, Shaw has a better class of internet service. They >have more peers, and bigger pipes than anyone else. They have a larger >installed user base, and cable (DOCSIS v3) is capable of FAR greater >bandwidth than any class of DSL in use in the city is capable of. (if >you order >= 100Mbps internet service from shaw, you will get a Cisco >device, which is a 4-port NAT/router and bridge in one device. It's >capable of up to 250Mbps, but they won't turn NAT off on this device). >If you order shaw >= 100Mbps and want NAT turned off (you just want a >cable modem), they will give you a Motorola DOCSIS 3.0 device instead, >which is far superior, but requires that you purchase your own >NAT/Router (I'd recommend the ASUS RT-56NU, as it can do almost >1000Mbps LAN/WAN routing). >> >> If you order shaw < 100Mbps service, they will give you DOCSIS 2.0 >grade equipment, which is the gear that currently has the "congestion >in my neighbourhood" issue. If you get a DOCSIS v3 modem, you won't >have a neighbourhood congestion issue. there are 16x as many channels >available in DOCSIS 3.0 so yea. >> >> >> >> With MTS, either it works, or it doesn't. You will have fairly >consistant service, but that service will be (probably) slower (raw >throughput) and laggier (higher latancy) than shaw. >> >> >> Basically, if you can get shaw, and your service is good (your >cabling infrastructure is not damaged to the house), you will probably >have the best experience with shaw. >> >> If your COAX cabling is damaged with shaw, you'll have to failover to >MTS, unless you are too far from a distribution point (generally, only >good to about 2 miles from one of their distribution points. Beyond 2 >miles, you won't get more than about 10Mbps and the signal might drop >out from time to time with the weather). >> >> >> >> Interestingly, cellular 4G internet is becoming a somewhat feasible >alternative. We still don't have access to any kind of unlimited data >transfer package, so if you need to do anything more than basic email >checking and browsing the web, you will tear through your 3GB/month >data transfer limit quite quickly; However, once plans become >available, the cellular towers are in place in some of the city to get >up to 35 Mbps down, 19Mbps up on rogers 4G. (tested with a Sony Experia >Z Ultra). >> >> >> >> If you want the best possible experience, order Shaw, and order >something from their "new" pricing tiers (i.e. 100Mbps per month), and >get them to turn off NAT (tell them you want bridging mode *ONLY*. This >will cause them to give you one of the new Motorola modems, with DOCSIS >3.0 service. Then, get yourself a good router (check out >http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/lanwan/router-charts/view for a list of >the best performing routers). Make sure it has a high-ish LAN/WAN >routing capability, and a high-ish number of TCP connections. >> >> Have Shaw install your modem as close as possible to your upstream >tap (don't make them install it in your living room, get them to >install it in your breaker box. Run CAT-5e or CAT-6 cable from your >modem to your router to get your router where you want it to be. The >length of CAT5/6 won't affect your connection at all. Extra unnecessary >consumer-grade COAX can. >> >> >> As it was mentioned by Colin Stanners, MTS gives out 2Wire routers, >which *CAN NOT* be placed into briding mode. The only way to get around >their forced NAT is to put another device into a DMZ. Even so, this is >questionable. Avoid the 2Wire boxes if you can. >> >> >>> On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 2:24 PM, <cstann...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> DOCSIS vs DSL doesn't really matter when either deployment can be >done with great or newer equipment or 10-year old or crappy equipment. >Not to mention network design differences... >>> >>> MTS provides questionably reliable 2wire routers with their VDSL2 >service which will never let you get a real IP on a good router, so I >recommend never using their service unless you get the old (under >7mbit?) DSL and use your own router. >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Kevin <m...@iamkevin.ca> >>> Sender: discuss-bounces@lists.skullspace.caDate: Wed, 12 Mar 2014 >14:12:50 >>> To: <discuss@lists.skullspace.ca> >>> Reply-To: discuss@lists.skullspace.ca >>> Subject: [SkullSpace-Discuss] ISP Preferences: Shaw vs MTS >>> >>> Hello everyone, >>> >>> I am sorry to bring up such a nonsensical ISP battle thread here, >but >>> lately the MTS connection I've been using where I am living. My >>> landlord is nice enough to pay for the Internet and include it in >the >>> rent, so I really can't switch over even if I wanted to... >>> >>> When I normally have the choice of ISP, I normally go with Shaw >>> Cablesystems. To me it personally makes more sense that a coaxial >>> cable can carry bandwidth better than a twisted pair. Not entirely >>> sure how true that statement is, but to me, it seems right. >Whenever I >>> had Shaw, I never had to deal with broken connections, lag, and >other >>> nonsense that I've been struggling with over the past weeks. There >are >>> actually times where I just stop using the MTS connection and tether >>> through my smartphone to get a more reliable connection. I find >that >>> odd, that a cellular network connection is more reliable than a >>> landline connection. >>> >>> A few examples of issues I've been experiencing lately on MTS: >broken >>> SSH connections, webpages sometimes just don't load at all, and the >>> connection breaks so badly that my plasma Gmail widget crashes my >>> entire desktop. I'm still on an older version of KDE4, so I assume >>> when a connection breaks on newer version, it won't bring down all >of >>> plasma. >>> >>> Anyways, when I was on Shaw, or even my Telus cellular connection, >I >>> don't experience all of these headaches mentioned above. I want to >>> know if you had any similar experiences with any of the local ISPs. >>> >>> I also wouldn't mind a nice break down on each service in terms of >>> how one can potentially be more reliable than the other. I've heard >>> some interesting things about ADSL and how someone in the >neighborhood >>> can basically slow down the entire area, and heard that with >>> Cablesystems this isn't the case, and it's more of how far you are >from >>> the so-called "head office". I'd rather get some proper education >on >>> how both of these systems work, rather than relying on possible >>> misinformation I learned before. >>> >>> An interesting thought for a class to be held at the space, would >be >>> education on how ISP works in general, and compare ADSL to Cable >>> without all the marketing bullshit. I am sure there are people at >this >>> space whom work for either MTS or Shaw, and having them at such a >>> presentation would be a nice idea, perhaps both to get a better >>> perspective. >>> >>> -- >>> Kevin <m...@iamkevin.ca> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> SkullSpace Discuss Mailing List >>> Help: http://www.skullspace.ca/wiki/index.php/Mailing_List#Discuss >>> Archive: https://groups.google.com/group/skullspace-discuss-archive/ >>> _______________________________________________ >>> SkullSpace Discuss Mailing List >>> Help: http://www.skullspace.ca/wiki/index.php/Mailing_List#Discuss >>> Archive: https://groups.google.com/group/skullspace-discuss-archive/ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> SkullSpace Discuss Mailing List >> Help: http://www.skullspace.ca/wiki/index.php/Mailing_List#Discuss >> Archive: https://groups.google.com/group/skullspace-discuss-archive/ > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >_______________________________________________ >SkullSpace Discuss Mailing List >Help: http://www.skullspace.ca/wiki/index.php/Mailing_List#Discuss >Archive: https://groups.google.com/group/skullspace-discuss-archive/
_______________________________________________ SkullSpace Discuss Mailing List Help: http://www.skullspace.ca/wiki/index.php/Mailing_List#Discuss Archive: https://groups.google.com/group/skullspace-discuss-archive/
