On Sun, 28 Sep 2008 21:24:53 -0500, AZ Nomad
wrote:

On Sat, 27 Sep 2008 09:55:09 -0700, Josh wrote:
On Fri, 26 Sep 2008 13:36:34 -0500, AZ Nomad
wrote:

I generally agree. DSL and cable run neck in neck with cable
typically two to three times as fast for downloading and one forth as
fast for uploads.
...
Nowadays DSL can do 900-1200KB/s; my cable does 2-3.5MB/s.

DSL "can do" much higher than that. In my area, AT&T offers 1.5MB/s,
3.0MB/s, and 6.0MB/s (we have the latter and get around 5.0MB/s
consistently), and I believe there are higher speed offerings in some
areas either now or planned in the future. Which tiers are available
does depend on how far you are from the DSLAM, which might be in a box
down the street or in a central office.

Sure you're not confusing Mb/s with MB/s?

Why yes, I am; sorry about that. I'd like to say it was a single slip
of the shift key, since I design computer chips for a living
(integrated graphics controllers, not networking components,
fortunately :-), and use *B/s more often than *b/s, but then I did it
3 more times, so it's just a plain old error.

All of the above are Mb/s (Megabits per second). I won't even get
into the debate about whether they should be mebibits (Mib) instead.
:-)

Josh