Another interesting article on Cable vs. DSL:
*****************
Cable vs. DSL: Which one will get you
on the Internet faster?
"Please don't make me go back," my wife pleaded
with me. "Everything has changed. The old way
just will not do any more."
I had not expected Cecile to give up her
high-speed Internet connection on her Macintosh
without a fight. But I was unprepared for the panic
in her voice and fear in her eyes at the suggestion
that she would have to go back to dialing up via her modem every
time she wanted to get onto the Internet.
Giving up high-speed, always-on Internet access, once you've
tasted it, has that kind of effect. It's like asking someone to stop
driving. Or to go back to washing clothes by hand.
No more World Wide Wait.
No more busy dial tones.
No more tying up the phone line to get online.
No more getting cut off by the Internet service provider for
lack of activity. (In Cecile's case, her dial-up ISP was
cutting her off if she so much as got up to answer the door.)
No more setting mental limits on what you do with the Net.
Searches that once took minutes suddenly take seconds.
Plug-ins that took too long before zap right onto your
computer. Sound, images, video - they all pop onto your
screen like an MTV video.
Few things today are as transformational as high-speed Net
access. The leap is greater than from LPs to music CDs. It beats
even high-definition TV.
But what about the cost - $20 or so more a month, I ask Cecile.
Are you sure you don't want to go back to dial-up? Her
expression tells me I'm misguided even to bring up the issue.
Two kinds of access
For the past four weeks, Cecile has been using the @home
Internet service through TCI cable access. Because I already had
high-speed access through DSL, or digital subscriber line, from
US West, I told the cable company to connect Cecile's Power
Mac 7300 on a test account. That way, I could compare the two
at the same time - and see how high-speed access affected
Cecile, a non-techie who uses a computer as a tool, not a hobby.
Our North Seattle home has the rare distinction of qualifying for
two kinds of fast Net access.
We have had DSL since last September. Cable arrived just last
month. West Seattle and a few other Puget Sound areas also offer
both types of service (with DSL being supplied in some instances
by GTE or a third party such as Covad, catering mainly to
business, rather than US West).
But overlap is generally pretty rare. Less than 1 percent of the
nation today has multiple options for high-speed access.
Eventually, that is expected to change. Besides major telephone
companies, cable companies and third parties, satellite providers
are expected to toss their hats into the ring, too.
Competition may bring prices down from the current level, which
averages $40 to $60 a month depending on the level of service
and local rate structures.
So how do DSL and cable connections compare? After about a
month of testing the two in our home, I came to some conclusions
that surprised me. First and foremost was: Speed difference is not
the issue I expected it to be.
On a rated throughput basis, cable modems and DSL far
outperform 56 kilobits per second, the standard way to dial up to
the Internet. Tests show a 10-to-30 times improvement in
download speeds.
In theory, cable should be faster than DSL as well. Cable
throughput is rated up to 10 megabits per second, where DSL
tops out at around 7 megabits per second. And most DSL access
is at minimum levels, around 256Kbps.
But because of the way cable works, sharing its resources in
neighborhood hubs, and because the Internet itself is wildly
unpredictable in delivery speeds, cable modems tend to deliver
well under 1Mbps.
Cable's fluctuations
Our household discovered cable's fluctuations early. When first
installed, the cable modem actually ran slower than Cecile's
dial-up service. The next day, TCI's technicians checked
everything out, uncovering no problems.
The first two days were excruciatingly slow. But then, like magic,
the logjam began to loosen. Over the next four or five days,
service crept up gradually to fast-lane levels. In the ensuing
weeks, it remained there, although still well below the 1Mbps
rating.
TCI offered the explanation that the system was still new in my
neighborhood. Cable gets faster as the system caches - or stores
in memory for quick access - the Web sites its users typically visit.
As the system became familiar with our home's usage patterns, its
speed increased.
DSL does not suffer from the shared-resources pitfall. Speed
levels are set by how much users are willing to pay.
DSL has its own set of limitations. Costs escalate dramatically as
rated throughput increases. The minimum rate, 256Kbps, is well
under the advertised throughput of a cable modem but costs
more.
Then there is the Internet itself, as well as speed differences in
browser software and computer performance, including graphics.
A slow Internet server will bring any connection to a crawl. Your
computer's ability to handle plug-ins, complex layouts, video and
sound also will affect your sense of speed.
After working with both systems, I concluded that at a certain
level, fast is fast. The Web blazes satisfactorily on either system;
neither disappoints, even at levels well below the rated
throughput.
I conducted a highly unscientific test with Cecile where we both
typed in a series of the same URLs. We pressed the "Enter" key
at the same time and waited for pages to display. In all cases,
DSL performed faster than cable. DSL particularly was faster, by
a factor of 33 to 100 percent, on sites that Cecile had never
visited before (and the cable system may not have cached).
Our real-life test did mirror results printed in the March 23 issue
of PC Magazine, which found "the ADSL connection ranged from
50 to more than 100 percent faster" in a series of tests.
Just to show that YMMV (your mileage may vary), however, the
April 30 edition of PC Magazine concluded "cable-modem
services generally outperformed DSL and satellite connections" on
a standardized set of throughput tests. Go figure.
Bottom line: At autobahn speeds, shades of difference hardly
matter.
Instead, the factors that will differentiate the two services (as well
as satellite or other high-speed suppliers) may come down to
more mundane issues: cost, ease of installation and use, flexibility,
related services and incentives, and the all-important support line.
As it stands today, pricing is definitely in cable's favor. My home
DSL line costs $40 a month. But that does not include Internet
access. For that I need to sign up with an Internet service
provider that supports DSL (many in the Puget Sound region do -
check out the Personal Technology section's recent rundown of
ISPs).
Typically, fast Internet access is going to cost $20 or more a
month extra over a dial-up account. DSL (from US West) also
costs more as the throughput speed increases: 512 kbps costs
$65 a month, 768 kbps $80 a month. That is as fast as home
service goes in our area. If 1Mbps were available, it would cost
$125 a month, and 7Mbps would run $875 a month.
Installation also costs more with DSL. There is a $110 setup fee
even if you install the network card and modem yourself. If you
have a technician do it for you, it costs $145 more. Although the
network card is included with installation, the modem costs $69.
Cable costs $150 for installation, which includes the card and
modem.
Cable costs $40 a month, but includes the ISP. That's the big
drawback, though: You cannot choose your own ISP. Cable
comes with @home Internet service.
For around $10 a month more, you can get content access to
America Online as though you were an AOL subscriber. Other
ISPs can offer similar content packages, according to TCI. But
none does yet, and whether some will remains a question mark.
In our case, Cecile's previous dial-up ISP account was costing us
$23.75 a month. Going to cable, then, would cost only around
$16 a month more - a great deal, considering the speed increases
and convenience factor.
The accessibility issue
Accessibility is another issue for cable. In the coming two years,
cable connections are expected to ramp up more quickly than
DSL. But by 2002, twice as many DSL installations are forecast
as cable. This is partly because telephone wires are more
available, particularly in business areas.
High density, as you might get in a downtown sector or
Internet-heavy neighborhood, slows cable performance. Last fall
cable-modem users in the San Francisco Bay Area protested a
slowdown in service. More than 500 customers in the Fremont
area threatened a class-action suit, according to an article in the
San Francisco Chronicle.
TCI discovered that some users were running Web servers out of
their homes, dragging down access speeds for their neighbors.
Once limitations were placed on what home users could do with
their accounts, the problem went away, an @home spokesperson
said.
But the slowdown did expose cable's weakness.
Today, the phone company offers better service and support than
cable. When US West began installing DSL last summer, support
was dismal. Technicians knew little about the system. Phone
support also was poor.
But US West has gradually improved service, to the point where
calling tech support recently has resulted in waits of less than 5
minutes. And when I did get a warm body, the technician in most
cases knew what he or she was talking about.
US West and GTE (which supplies DSL to Eastside and outlying
areas) say new installations will take eight to 10 working days. So
far, the two providers do not offer DSL in the same area, although
with deregulation they are free to do so.
Cable, on the other hand, still seems to be learning the high-speed
ropes. Installation of Cecile's modem took an hour and a half, and
required two technicians - one to install the cable cord and
another to configure her computer.
With practice, cable should take no longer than DSL to install, a
maximum of 30 minutes. Both systems would like installation to
become easy enough for computer users to do it themselves,
saving the hassle and cost of service calls.
Cable support also lags. Calls are answered readily enough, but
support personnel do not seem familiar enough with the system to
give practical help. I found myself calling other cable-modem
users instead of TCI for help.
Internet services, the kind of thing ISPs readily offer, may be
more readily available through DSL connections than via cable.
Several ISPs, who typically offer Web site hosting and e-mail
enhancements, offer DSL throughput. But so far independent
ISPs are unavailable on cable.
For users who want high speed and maximum flexibility, an
independent ISP that supports DSL is the way to go, although the
cost may be slightly to significantly higher.
In the long run, Web and other telecommunications products and
services - not speed - may distinguish fast Net suppliers from one
another. Cable companies may begin tossing in voice telephone
service or discount premium TV channels as a way of attracting
customers. The phone company may do all-in-one SOHO (small
office/home office) packages that include attractively priced voice,
data and Internet services.
@home's sophisticated home page for cable subscribers is an
attempt to win "eyeballs," with mixed results. It has striking
graphics and a wide array of links and services, in the tradition of
a Web portal like AOL or Yahoo!
But the interface is entirely different from the standard browser
interface used by Internet Explorer and Netscape Navigator. The
result: You have to learn how to do things differently on the
@home site, a real nuisance, especially to experienced Web
users.
US West offers a portal-style approach through
uswest.net . It's a start, and uses standard Web
browsing, but lacks the sophistication of @home, AOL,
msn.com, Yahoo! and other portals.
In terms of marketing and service potential, both DSL and cable
access seem in their infancy. For now, speed and "always on" are
the compelling reasons to go with fast Internet access. Be
forewarned: Once one member of your household gets it,
everyone from the spouse on down to the gamers will crave to
follow. We all have the greed for speed.
seattletimes.com |
