Verizon Fios (Fiber-to-the-Premises) Internet (Cheap??)

[Advent Systems]

Tim,
Thanks for the leads.  After running the tests a few times I was 
averaging 1299 kbps/up and 351kbps/down.  Adelphia must have improved 
their speed over the last few years because at the above speeds my 
connection "seems" as fast or faster then my adelphia connection was.   
I agree with you that when my connection was working it was fast but my 
problem was getting way too many "page not available" screens.  I never 
(well...) get that with the dsl.

Thanks again,
Bob Randal
adventsystems at verizon.net


Timothy J. Finucane wrote:

>Try http://www.broadbandreports.com/stest
>
>I get between 1.5 mbps and 2.5mbps. I've had it as high as 3 mbps. Your
>speed may vary depending on how many people are using it in your area,
>and sometimes time of day.
>
>DSL can be as fast as the 1.5mbps if you are very close to the
>origination point of the signal. The further you get from that point the
>slower your speed, so experience can very from one household to the
>next.
>
>On the flip side, Adelphia's network (and customer service) can be a
>real pain in the arse when using a DSL/Cable router. At least that is my
>experience anyway. But when it's working it's the best connection I've
>ever had.
>
>Tim
>
>
>
>
>On Tue, 2004-07-27 at 18:32, Advent Systems wrote:
>  
>
>>Hi Tim,
>>Are there different "levels" of service available from Adelphia, and how 
>>would we measure the actual performance of the service being delivered 
>>to our computers by the different vendors?   I tried adelphia for 12-16 
>>months using there "standard offer" (about $70/mo.) and the dsl from 
>>verzion I have now seems twice as fast.  I know  saying "twice" as fast 
>>is meaningless,  it's just that overall when trying to get stuff done it 
>>seems with verizon dsl I'm done in half the time.(not to mention 
>>$35.00/mo). 
>>
>>Bob Randal
>>adventsystems at verizon.net
>>Timothy J. Finucane wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>DSL is available to me, and I have tried it from several companies,
>>>including Verizon. Unfortunately it does not even come close to the
>>>3mbps speed I get from Adelphia.
>>>
>>>Tim
>>>
>>>On Tue, 2004-07-20 at 18:13, Advent Systems wrote:
>>> 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>Timothy J. Finucane wrote:
>>>>
>>>>   
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>Good points, but I think the average user's needs are growing at a very
>>>>>fast pace. There is obviously a hug market for delivery of music, and I
>>>>>don't just mean kazza theft. I mean things like iTunes, which has
>>>>>exploded right out of the gate. Unless there are some tremendous
>>>>>developments in compression technology, these downloads are likely to
>>>>>remain fairly large. And music is something that is of interest to the
>>>>>average user. And the streaming video from the parts of the internet we
>>>>>need not mention already pushes the limits of the current bandwidth.
>>>>>
>>>>>Also, I still can't quite classify Verizon's new offering as "Overkill"
>>>>>because the $35 package (the one most people will buy) is only 2-5 mbps.
>>>>>I currently get 3mbps on my Adelphia cable modem. That sounds pretty
>>>>>close to the same service. And the average user of broadband services is
>>>>>on cable, not DSL. Though I'm sure that is only because of the 3 mile
>>>>>technical limit with DSL.
>>>>>
>>>>>In addition, they are starting the roll out in Texas, and expecting more
>>>>>expansion after that. they are predicting 1 million homes tied to fiber
>>>>>by the end of the year. That's a small number compared to the number of
>>>>>homes in the US. By the time they get here, things could have clearly
>>>>>changed that will require larger bandwidth.
>>>>>
>>>>>Tim
>>>>>
>>>>>On Tue, 2004-07-20 at 12:48, Ronald Maggio wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>     
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>>>In response to the following, you are correct about
>>>>>>progress/innovation, but my comment was about the average end user,
>>>>>>student and home/small business. Do we really need it? It is fine for
>>>>>>those that truly have a need of such resources. Now think a minute,
>>>>>>regardless of your computing skills or needs do you really think that
>>>>>>the average end user which is the gross marketed target really needs
>>>>>>all this and more.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Your speaking from where you see it, as your needs as a computer
>>>>>>professional might surpass the current available resources available
>>>>>>to you. The industry will produce progress/innovation to be marketed,
>>>>>>yet does anyone really think it is for the consumers, or is it
>>>>>>for corporate industry. People will always want the latest and the
>>>>>>greatest as long as they have money to burn, and corporations are
>>>>>>ready willing and able to exploit their egos. We all know that the
>>>>>>vast computers sold are targeted for end users to email, web browse,
>>>>>>gaming, and let us not forget the parts on the web that make the most
>>>>>>money! I need not mention.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>So in conclusion, my comment "fast enough & Overkill" are valid points
>>>>>>as long as the technology used as of now by end users can keep up
>>>>>>with the Internet, but as trends make todays technology out of date
>>>>>>the market will always have a guaranty of more revenue through the
>>>>>>pocketbooks of the consumers. 
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Ron Maggio
>>>>>>
>>>>>>      "Fast Enough" will always be relative to current needs. As
>>>>>>      more, and
>>>>>>      higher quality, content feeds come online more bandwidth will
>>>>>>      be needed.
>>>>>>      I can still remember people telling me that 56k was all you
>>>>>>      would ever
>>>>>>      need. Then came streaming video, and to get a good quality
>>>>>>      feed you
>>>>>>      really needed to get broadband. "Fast Enough" assumes that
>>>>>>      there will
>>>>>>      not be any progress/innovation in multimedia formats or
>>>>>>      content
>>>>>>      distribution. 
>>>>>>      
>>>>>>      So, for the long term outlook it is hardly overkill. Is it
>>>>>>      overkill to
>>>>>>      have a 200GB hard drive? Maybe it is today, but in 2-3 more
>>>>>>      years it
>>>>>>      won't. We, as a society, are putting more data online
>>>>>>      everyday, and with
>>>>>>      that comes more need for bandwidth and storage.
>>>>>>      
>>>>>>      Also, Verizon is talking about using the same feed to create
>>>>>>      its own
>>>>>>      cable network. This just might break the cable monopolies that
>>>>>>      currently
>>>>>>      exist in! each city. After all, your only choices right now
>>>>>>      are satellite
>>>>>>      or cable if you want more content than is on public airwaves.
>>>>>>      This would
>>>>>>      also drive the need for bandwidth.
>>>>>>      
>>>>>>      The downside to this is that they are talking about making
>>>>>>      access to the
>>>>>>      fiber lines closed, unlike the current phone lines. They argue
>>>>>>      that this
>>>>>>      is required because the current cable companies have closed
>>>>>>      access.
>>>>>>      Personally, I would prefer it if BOTH the phone company and
>>>>>>      cable
>>>>>>      company were required to have open access. This would be
>>>>>>      better for the
>>>>>>      consumer in terms of competition and innovation. If the
>>>>>>      cable/phone
>>>>>>      companies have closed access they can then regulate what can
>>>>>>      and what
>>>>>>      cannot be put on the network, thus killing the end-toend
>>>>>>      concept that
>>>>>>      the internet was created on. Innovation would then be
>>>>>>      regulated by those
>>>>>>      companies as well. Anyone remember the time when AT&T
>>>>>>      regulated what
>>>>>>      could and what could not be attached to their phone lines?
>>>>>>      
>>>>>>      Some o! ther alternatives to access may become available as
>>>>>>      well, like
>>>>>>      this one:
>>>>>>      http://www.cbc.ca/story/science/national/2004/07/16/anik040716.html.
>>>>>>      Granted, it's a bit more expensive, but that may change as
>>>>>>      more
>>>>>>      companies put up similar satellites.
>>>>>>      
>>>>>>      The more competition and innovation, the better.
>>>>>>      
>>>>>>      Tim
>>>>>>      
>>>>>>      On Tue, 2004-07-20 at 01:54, Ronald Maggio wrote:
>>>>>>      > Over kill, unless your running a business big time and
>>>>>>      really need the
>>>>>>      > bandwidth and the speed it gives you, or are into
>>>>>>      interactive gaming
>>>>>>      > over the Internet in a big way!
>>>>>>      > 
>>>>>>      > I have ADSL through Verizon at $34.95 a month, and its fast
>>>>>>      enough for
>>>>>>      > the average user. ie: Student, Home to mid size Business,
>>>>>>      and so on. 
>>>>>>      > 
>>>>>>      > Ron
>>>>>>      > 
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>______________________________________________________________________
>>>>>>Do you Yahoo!?
>>>>>>Vote for the stars of Yahoo!'s next ad campaign!
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>
>>>>>>       
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>Tim,
>>>>Just to let you know, I have been waiting for broadband access in my 
>>>>area for years (I'm 5 miles from my central office) but a few months ago 
>>>>they installed new equipment where I was able to have dsl installed in 
>>>>my home.   I'm in lancaster and am not sure if It' a town-to-town thing 
>>>>but  it may be worth calling verizon up to see if it's now available in 
>>>>your area.
>>>>
>>>>Bob Randal
>>>>   
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>adventsystems at verizon.net
>>> 
>>>
>>>      
>>>