On Saturday 11 December 2004 02:48 pm, John Sechrest wrote: : There are bunches of ISP's that are able to resell Qwest : services, so you never need to deal with Qwest. You get the : reliability and stability of DSL with a user support group : which has nothing to do with Qwest. : : I recommend this, since this is the only local alternative. : local ISP's are blocked from reselling comcast. : : If you want to support the local ISP that has broad band, DSL : is the one path. : : Unless you live in an area that has a wireless ISP service.
There is wireless (wifi), and there is also satelite for broadband internet, however both were prohibitivly expensive for home use. I havnt checked in a couple years however. Jamie : : : : perdurabo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: : : % That's cool. I'll go with Comcast even if it's slightly slower : % upspeed, just because I dislike Qwest so much. : % : % /per : % : % : % On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 15:40:37 -0800 (PST), Mr O <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> : wrote: % > Inside scoop... Comcast is going to 4Mbps down, 384K up in : % > January. The "pro/family" plan for $10 more is going to 5 down : % > and 768k up. At the same time, no low cost slower plan will be : % > introduced which we've only mentioned they need 20,000 times : % > over to win even more customers. : % > : % > That be all, : % > Mr O. : % > : % > --- perdurabo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: : % > : % > > For day-to-day and uploading, I find that my Qwest 1.5dn/896up : % > > DSL is : % > > faster than my "3mbps" Comcast internet service was. I assume : % > > this : % > > probably has to do with the greater uplink bandwidth for all : % > > that : % > > ACKing. If we're talking raw download speeding for large : % > > files, : % > > though, Comcast clearly wins. In addition, their customer : % > > support is : % > > lightyears better than Qwest's. : % > > : % > > /per : % > : % > : % > __________________________________ : % > Do you Yahoo!? : % > The all-new My Yahoo! - What will yours do? : % > http://my.yahoo.com : % > _______________________________________________ : % > EUGLUG mailing list : % > [EMAIL PROTECTED] : % > http://www.euglug.org/mailman/listinfo/euglug : % > : % _______________________________________________ : % EUGLUG mailing list : % [EMAIL PROTECTED] : % http://www.euglug.org/mailman/listinfo/euglug : : ----- : John Sechrest . Helping people use : . computers and the Internet : . more effectively : . : . Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED] : . : . : http://www.peak.org/~sechrest : _______________________________________________ : EUGLUG mailing list : [EMAIL PROTECTED] : http://www.euglug.org/mailman/listinfo/euglug -- Besides, its really not worthwhile to use more than two times your physical ram in swap (except in a select few situations). The performance of the system becomes so abysmal you'd rather heat pins under your toenails while reciting Windows95 source code and staring at porn flicks of Bob Dole than actually try to type something. -- seen on c.o.l.development.system, about the size of the swap space _______________________________________________ EUGLUG mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.euglug.org/mailman/listinfo/euglug
