is SBC/YAHOO DSL good casue its only like 14.95 a month

any input on this

 

i don't recommend them. it depends on what you do online. if you download things, you will be very unhappy with yahoo dsl. if you just surf the web, it's pretty much just as good as cable. with comcast i've gotten as much as 3mb/sec download..i've never broken 100kbs/sec with dsl

 

I just got rid of my comcast last month in favor of SBC Dsl, and quite frankly I couldn't be happier. I have the $29 package, and consistantly download at 300kb a second. I had the base package for a couple weeks, even then I was getting about 125kb a second. I play online games like Battlefield Vietnam, Medal of Honor and such, and actually have a slightly lower ping than when I did with cable.

 

I got the $19.95 a month yahooo/sbc dsl deal, right before this offer came out, and works fine. I recomend that you let your computer detect the port in order to avoid downloading all the yahoo/sbc useless software.

Good luck!

 

SBC/Yahoo Dsl has a new offer, well you kind of know about it. There's the original 19.95 and 29.95 which is 1.5 and 3.0 downstream. The new price adjustments are 14.95 and 24.95 now, but you have to talk to their retention department to ask for the new prices. In addition it will renew your 1 year commitment deal. So it starts over again.

 

DSL's performance varies GREATLY based on traffic..you live in an urban city (it doesn't get much more urban than LA county), ask local people about their DSL service, you probably won't get very good feedback...i've used DSL in cities (including LA) and in the cuts, and while some places it is close to cable's performance, other places it was literally not much better than dial-up. cable's performance also changes based on traffic but not nearly as much as DSL

 

Actually, inasmuch as DSL is on a "dedicated" line, subscriber population density plays no real part in bandwidth restrictions. Now, it being an urban area, especially an older, established area such as L.A., more than likely what you were experiencing was crappy, older telephone infrastructure. With the probable exception of more gentrified areas, inner-city urban areas tend to have more of a reliance upon ancient bundled copper underground cables. It's VERY expensive to upgrade cabling when you have to rip up a few hundred miles of road and re-pave. New growth areas, such as the outer suburbs, being newer, of course, have newer, better infrastructure.

In truth, you're more likely to experience greater variances with cable-model than DSL. ESPECIALLY if you're living in an apartment complex. You see, everybody in a complex, or a neighborhood, for instance, share a finite amount of giga-bandwidth. Each limited by your modems throughput as it's upper limit. If, for example, your modem limits your bandwidth to 10Mbps (to keep teh numbers round-ish), an your "area" shares 1 gig (1024Mbps) at the switch (rread: the cable company), and, 200 people are on line ALL AT THE SAME TIME, you won't "see" anywhere near 10Mbps. Roughly half that, at any given moment.

Those are over simplifications, of course, but they're basically troo... sorta-kinda...

Those who work in a cube-farm know what I'm talking about. Ever notice how your secret **** surfing tends to go quicker early in the morning, at lunchtime, and late in teh evening when there are fewer people populating your company's bandwidth? Same phenomena as with cable-modem, on a smaller scale.