Technicalities of cable high-speed internet access

[Conan Kelly]

Hello all,

I've heard that cable high-speed internet access is shared. If I went this route, I could be sharing my connection with my neighbors, thus slowing my connection. I've also heard that providers WILL NOT tell you how many households are on you segment.

In Phoenix, AZ, Cox Communications offers 4 levels/tiers of high speed internet access. My question is, would I share my connection with my all my neighbors who(m) subscribe to *ANY* level/tier of service, or would I share it with just the ones who(m) subscribe to the same level/tier of service that I subscribe to?

Also, since cable companies will not disclose how many households are on my segment, how many households could be on my segment? 100? More? Less?

Thanks for any help anyone can provide,

Conan

[Todd H.]

"Conan Kelly" <CTBarbarinNOSPAM@msnNOSPAM.comNOSPAM> writes:

> Hello all,
>
> I've heard that cable high-speed internet access is shared.

Yes the segment in your local neighborhood is shared media. If your
segment is overloaded and the provider isn't provisioning new channels
to respond to that, then your experience will not be a good one.

Ultimately though, all bandwidth is shared--just a matter of where
the aggregation occurs. For DSL, you get a dedicated line back to the
switch, but then you're at the mercy of the upstream pipe from there.
In cable modems, the aggregation just happens a bit closer to your
house.

>If I went this route, I could be sharing my connection with my
>neighbors, thus slowing my connection. I've also heard that
>providers WILL NOT tell you how many households are on you segment.

It's true.

> In Phoenix, AZ, Cox Communications offers 4 levels/tiers of high
> speed internet access. My question is, would I share my connection
> with my all my neighbors who(m) subscribe to *ANY* level/tier of
> service, or would I share it with just the ones who(m) subscribe to
> the same level/tier of service that I subscribe to?

> Also, since cable companies will not disclose how many households
> are on my segment, how many households could be on my segment? 100?
> More? Less?


I'm not sure I'd drive myself too nuts about the details. Talk to
your neighbors who have the service you're considering and see how
happy they are with it, maybe even ask to take a test drive and see
what sort of numbers they're getting from a speedtest site like
speakeasy.net/speedtest or broadbandreports.com


That said I've had cable modems now for ... oh hell about 9 years now,
and never has the DSL sales scare tactic of "cable is shared
bandwidth!" been an issue for me, and I've always had a faster pipe
that the DSL subscribers near me. Fios will change that of course.
:-)

If your neighbors are happy with the provider, you'll most likely be
happy.

Best Regards,
--
Todd H.
http://www.toddh.net/

[Elmo P. Shagnasty]

In article <6f5Yi.1230$if6.278@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
"Conan Kelly" <CTBarbarinNOSPAM@msnNOSPAM.comNOSPAM> wrote:

> I've heard that cable high-speed internet access is shared.

dude, ALL internet access is shared.

What, did you think you had an exclusive point to point connection with
that remote web site, with your packets going over one set of wires like
a switched telephone connection? With no one else sharing those same
wires and that same web site?



> If I went this route, I could be sharing my connection with my neighbors,
> thus slowing my connection.

You will ALWAYS be sharing your connection. Nothing is dedicated. It
all comes down to how well your provider manages the traffic.

I presume you're talking DSL as an alternative. Well, do you think your
DSL connection isn't shared? Sure it is! You don't have dedicated
links to remote web sites.

It all comes down to where the connection is shared and how big the
pipes are and how well they're managed at the point of sharing. So what
if you have a single pair of wires going to the phone company central
office? That central office is where all your neighbors' lines come
together with your line. You are SHARING that point of contact with the
outside world.

How big that point of contact is, determines how fast/reliable your
connection to the net is.

It's ALL shared, no matter what. And any technology, be it cable or
DSL, can be managed well for its users or managed poorly.

[Conan Kelly]

Thanks ******* for being such a ******** and BRAIN-DEAD MORON.

Todd H was smart enough to understand what I was asking and answered in an
intelligent and polite manner.

Todd H, thanks for your help. Sorry I didn't respond earlier.

Elmo P. Shagnasty, G_ F_CK Y__RS_LF (wanna buy a vowel?)




"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
news:elmop-52ADDE.22200606112007@nntp1.usenetserver.com...
> In article <6f5Yi.1230$if6.278@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
> "Conan Kelly" <CTBarbarinNOSPAM@msnNOSPAM.comNOSPAM> wrote:
>
>> I've heard that cable high-speed internet access is shared.
>
> dude, ALL internet access is shared.
>
> What, did you think you had an exclusive point to point connection with
> that remote web site, with your packets going over one set of wires like
> a switched telephone connection? With no one else sharing those same
> wires and that same web site?
>
>
>
>> If I went this route, I could be sharing my connection with my neighbors,
>> thus slowing my connection.
>
> You will ALWAYS be sharing your connection. Nothing is dedicated. It
> all comes down to how well your provider manages the traffic.
>
> I presume you're talking DSL as an alternative. Well, do you think your
> DSL connection isn't shared? Sure it is! You don't have dedicated
> links to remote web sites.
>
> It all comes down to where the connection is shared and how big the
> pipes are and how well they're managed at the point of sharing. So what
> if you have a single pair of wires going to the phone company central
> office? That central office is where all your neighbors' lines come
> together with your line. You are SHARING that point of contact with the
> outside world.
>
> How big that point of contact is, determines how fast/reliable your
> connection to the net is.
>
> It's ALL shared, no matter what. And any technology, be it cable or
> DSL, can be managed well for its users or managed poorly.
>

[Elmo P. Shagnasty]

That's funny. Todd and I said the exact same things.

And upon re-reading what I wrote, I find exactly nothing to support your
contention that I was "being such a ******** and a brain dead moron".
Neither would anyone else.

The point is, this bit about "oh, DSL isn't shared, but cable is" has
been going around forever now. It's time to put that idea to rest. A
badly managed DSL service is just as bad as a badly managed cable
service.



In article <bFnYi.3806$if6.1291@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
"Conan Kelly" <CTBarbarinNOSPAM@msnNOSPAM.comNOSPAM> wrote:

> Thanks ******* for being such a ******** and BRAIN-DEAD MORON.
>
> Todd H was smart enough to understand what I was asking and answered in an
> intelligent and polite manner.
>
> Todd H, thanks for your help. Sorry I didn't respond earlier.
>
> Elmo P. Shagnasty, G_ F_CK Y__RS_LF (wanna buy a vowel?)
>
>
>
>
> "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
> news:elmop-52ADDE.22200606112007@nntp1.usenetserver.com...
> > In article <6f5Yi.1230$if6.278@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
> > "Conan Kelly" <CTBarbarinNOSPAM@msnNOSPAM.comNOSPAM> wrote:
> >
> >> I've heard that cable high-speed internet access is shared.
> >
> > dude, ALL internet access is shared.
> >
> > What, did you think you had an exclusive point to point connection with
> > that remote web site, with your packets going over one set of wires like
> > a switched telephone connection? With no one else sharing those same
> > wires and that same web site?
> >
> >
> >
> >> If I went this route, I could be sharing my connection with my neighbors,
> >> thus slowing my connection.
> >
> > You will ALWAYS be sharing your connection. Nothing is dedicated. It
> > all comes down to how well your provider manages the traffic.
> >
> > I presume you're talking DSL as an alternative. Well, do you think your
> > DSL connection isn't shared? Sure it is! You don't have dedicated
> > links to remote web sites.
> >
> > It all comes down to where the connection is shared and how big the
> > pipes are and how well they're managed at the point of sharing. So what
> > if you have a single pair of wires going to the phone company central
> > office? That central office is where all your neighbors' lines come
> > together with your line. You are SHARING that point of contact with the
> > outside world.
> >
> > How big that point of contact is, determines how fast/reliable your
> > connection to the net is.
> >
> > It's ALL shared, no matter what. And any technology, be it cable or
> > DSL, can be managed well for its users or managed poorly.
> >

[Todd H.]

"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> writes:

> That's funny. Todd and I said the exact same things.

I didn't open with the word "Dude" though. :-)

--
Todd H.
http://www.toddh.net/

[eol@eol.net]

On Thu, 08 Nov 2007 06:06:25 -0500, "Elmo P. Shagnasty"
<elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote:

>That's funny. Todd and I said the exact same things.
>
>And upon re-reading what I wrote, I find exactly nothing to support your
>contention that I was "being such a ******** and a brain dead moron".
>Neither would anyone else.

bullshit, your reply was condescending and offensive and if you can't
figure out why from the tone of your reply, see a psychologist.
"What, did you think you had an exclusive point to point connection
with that remote web site, with your packets going over one set of
wires like a switched telephone connection? With no one else sharing
those same wires and that same web site?"
You come off an arrogant egocentric hooray henry.

>
>The point is, this bit about "oh, DSL isn't shared, but cable is" has
>been going around forever now. It's time to put that idea to rest. A
>badly managed DSL service is just as bad as a badly managed cable
>service.
>
>
>
>In article <bFnYi.3806$if6.1291@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
> "Conan Kelly" <CTBarbarinNOSPAM@msnNOSPAM.comNOSPAM> wrote:
>
>> Thanks ******* for being such a ******** and BRAIN-DEAD MORON.
>>
>> Todd H was smart enough to understand what I was asking and answered in an
>> intelligent and polite manner.
>>
>> Todd H, thanks for your help. Sorry I didn't respond earlier.
>>
>> Elmo P. Shagnasty, G_ F_CK Y__RS_LF (wanna buy a vowel?)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
>> news:elmop-52ADDE.22200606112007@nntp1.usenetserver.com...
>> > In article <6f5Yi.1230$if6.278@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
>> > "Conan Kelly" <CTBarbarinNOSPAM@msnNOSPAM.comNOSPAM> wrote:
>> >
>> >> I've heard that cable high-speed internet access is shared.
>> >
>> > dude, ALL internet access is shared.
>> >
>> > What, did you think you had an exclusive point to point connection with
>> > that remote web site, with your packets going over one set of wires like
>> > a switched telephone connection? With no one else sharing those same
>> > wires and that same web site?
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >> If I went this route, I could be sharing my connection with my neighbors,
>> >> thus slowing my connection.
>> >
>> > You will ALWAYS be sharing your connection. Nothing is dedicated. It
>> > all comes down to how well your provider manages the traffic.
>> >
>> > I presume you're talking DSL as an alternative. Well, do you think your
>> > DSL connection isn't shared? Sure it is! You don't have dedicated
>> > links to remote web sites.
>> >
>> > It all comes down to where the connection is shared and how big the
>> > pipes are and how well they're managed at the point of sharing. So what
>> > if you have a single pair of wires going to the phone company central
>> > office? That central office is where all your neighbors' lines come
>> > together with your line. You are SHARING that point of contact with the
>> > outside world.
>> >
>> > How big that point of contact is, determines how fast/reliable your
>> > connection to the net is.
>> >
>> > It's ALL shared, no matter what. And any technology, be it cable or
>> > DSL, can be managed well for its users or managed poorly.
>> >

[Conan Kelly]

eol,

Thank you.

I'm glad that I'm not the only one that read that as offensive and
condescending.

Thanks again,

Conan
<eol@eol.net> wrote in message
news:bhd6j390as6ji8s22k3vp17kchbmgsdo4f@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 08 Nov 2007 06:06:25 -0500, "Elmo P. Shagnasty"
> <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote:
>
>>That's funny. Todd and I said the exact same things.
>>
>>And upon re-reading what I wrote, I find exactly nothing to support your
>>contention that I was "being such a ******** and a brain dead moron".
>>Neither would anyone else.
>
> bullshit, your reply was condescending and offensive and if you can't
> figure out why from the tone of your reply, see a psychologist.
> "What, did you think you had an exclusive point to point connection
> with that remote web site, with your packets going over one set of
> wires like a switched telephone connection? With no one else sharing
> those same wires and that same web site?"
> You come off an arrogant egocentric hooray henry.
>
>>
>>The point is, this bit about "oh, DSL isn't shared, but cable is" has
>>been going around forever now. It's time to put that idea to rest. A
>>badly managed DSL service is just as bad as a badly managed cable
>>service.
>>
>>
>>
>>In article <bFnYi.3806$if6.1291@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
>> "Conan Kelly" <CTBarbarinNOSPAM@msnNOSPAM.comNOSPAM> wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks ******* for being such a ******** and BRAIN-DEAD MORON.
>>>
>>> Todd H was smart enough to understand what I was asking and answered in
>>> an
>>> intelligent and polite manner.
>>>
>>> Todd H, thanks for your help. Sorry I didn't respond earlier.
>>>
>>> Elmo P. Shagnasty, G_ F_CK Y__RS_LF (wanna buy a vowel?)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
>>> news:elmop-52ADDE.22200606112007@nntp1.usenetserver.com...
>>> > In article <6f5Yi.1230$if6.278@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
>>> > "Conan Kelly" <CTBarbarinNOSPAM@msnNOSPAM.comNOSPAM> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> I've heard that cable high-speed internet access is shared.
>>> >
>>> > dude, ALL internet access is shared.
>>> >
>>> > What, did you think you had an exclusive point to point connection
>>> > with
>>> > that remote web site, with your packets going over one set of wires
>>> > like
>>> > a switched telephone connection? With no one else sharing those same
>>> > wires and that same web site?
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >> If I went this route, I could be sharing my connection with my
>>> >> neighbors,
>>> >> thus slowing my connection.
>>> >
>>> > You will ALWAYS be sharing your connection. Nothing is dedicated. It
>>> > all comes down to how well your provider manages the traffic.
>>> >
>>> > I presume you're talking DSL as an alternative. Well, do you think
>>> > your
>>> > DSL connection isn't shared? Sure it is! You don't have dedicated
>>> > links to remote web sites.
>>> >
>>> > It all comes down to where the connection is shared and how big the
>>> > pipes are and how well they're managed at the point of sharing. So
>>> > what
>>> > if you have a single pair of wires going to the phone company central
>>> > office? That central office is where all your neighbors' lines come
>>> > together with your line. You are SHARING that point of contact with
>>> > the
>>> > outside world.
>>> >
>>> > How big that point of contact is, determines how fast/reliable your
>>> > connection to the net is.
>>> >
>>> > It's ALL shared, no matter what. And any technology, be it cable or
>>> > DSL, can be managed well for its users or managed poorly.
>>> >

[Conan Kelly]

Todd,

Thanks again,

Conan



"Todd H." <comphelp@toddh.net> wrote in message
news:84lk98hijb.fsf@ripco.com...
> "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> writes:
>
>> That's funny. Todd and I said the exact same things.
>
> I didn't open with the word "Dude" though. :-)
>
> --
> Todd H.
> http://www.toddh.net/

[$Bill]

eol@eol.net wrote:
>
> bullshit, your reply was condescending and offensive and if you can't
> figure out why from the tone of your reply, see a psychologist.
> "What, did you think you had an exclusive point to point connection
> with that remote web site, with your packets going over one set of
> wires like a switched telephone connection? With no one else sharing
> those same wires and that same web site?"
> You come off an arrogant egocentric hooray henry.

I'm not sure about condescending, but I saw nothing offensive in his
post. This is usenet guys, try less reading between the lines and
more trying to understand what has been said from a technical point
of view. You need to develop a bit thicker skin instead of taking
everyone so personally.

[Elmo P. Shagnasty]

In article <bhd6j390as6ji8s22k3vp17kchbmgsdo4f@4ax.com>, eol@eol.net
wrote:

> >And upon re-reading what I wrote, I find exactly nothing to support your
> >contention that I was "being such a ******** and a brain dead moron".
> >Neither would anyone else.
>
> bullshit, your reply was condescending and offensive

If you took it that way, then you need to think about not taking things
so personally.

[Gary]

"Conan Kelly" <CTBarbarinNOSPAM@msnNOSPAM.comNOSPAM> wrote in message
news:xLGYi.6479$if6.4932@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
> I'm glad that I'm not the only one that read that as offensive and
> condescending.

I thought Elmo's reply was fine, if not even humorous. But that's how
Usenet is, people read different things into an author's intent.

You, however, left nothing to the imagination. By resorting to name calling
and offensive language, you made it clear that can't participate in
reasonable discourse.

So, you're either thin skinned or a troll. In either case, you've proven
you have little to contribute while Elmo has proven to have interesting
things to say.

Have a nice day.

-Gary

[Conan Kelly]

Gary,

You may have thought it was fine because it wasn't a response to YOUR
question. Maybe if someone talked to you like you were a stupid moron, it
would bother you.

I consider myself a smart educated person in general. But there is some
things that I know absolutely nothing about and I am trying to educate
myself so I can make the best decision possible. I come to these groups to
learn from people who know and I would like to be treated with respect.

Todd H knew exactly what I was talking about and gave an informative and
respectful response.

Elmo P Shagnasty, on the other hand, took me waaaay too literal. He may
know a great deal about all forms of internet connections, how bits & bytes
travel around the world, and the whole telecommunications/IT industry. He
may also be an expert in many areas of life, this country, the world, the
universe.......but it appears to me that he is extremely proud of how much
he knows and he wants to make sure everyone else knows just how much he
knows. And it seems like he is annoyed by people who don't know as much as
he does.

I came here to get educated and I don't like being talked to like I'm a
****ing dip ****:

> dude, ALL internet access is shared.
>
> What, did you think you had an exclusive point to point connection with
> that remote web site, with your packets going over one set of wires like
> a switched telephone connection? With no one else sharing those same
> wires and that same web site?

That translates to: "Hey, you ****ing retard! Don't you KNOW that ALL
internet access is SHARED, just like EVERYONE else in the WORLD!!! DUH!!!"

And, I'm sure that is exactly what he was thinking when he wrote that.

Everything else he wrote was in the exact same tone and implied the exact
same thing.

I don't like being spoken to like I'm stupid. He pissed me off and I let
him know. Some people here agree with me, and some people feel there was
nothing wrong with his reply....so be it.

Let's see how you react when you seek answers and someone talks to you like
your an imbecile.

And, No. I'm not a troll by nature, but when something gets me fired up,
I'm gonna put my 2 cents in. He pissed me off, I let him know, and people
started talking. I don't know the exact definition of a troll, but if I'm
thinking correctly, if I were a troll, I would be responding a lot more, be
a lot more winded (yes....kinda like I'm being here), and I would be trying
to piss off everyone.......even those who agree with me. But then....when
you think about it....your post got me to respond like this......maybe you
are the troll......hmmmmm.

....
....
....

dammit, for got what else I wanted to say (plus, I've spent way too much
time on this and I need to get back to work).





"Gary" <fake-email-address@bogus.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:gUYYi.8179$Cc.2612@trndny09...
> "Conan Kelly" <CTBarbarinNOSPAM@msnNOSPAM.comNOSPAM> wrote in message
> news:xLGYi.6479$if6.4932@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>>
>> I'm glad that I'm not the only one that read that as offensive and
>> condescending.
>
> I thought Elmo's reply was fine, if not even humorous. But that's how
> Usenet is, people read different things into an author's intent.
>
> You, however, left nothing to the imagination. By resorting to name
> calling and offensive language, you made it clear that can't participate
> in reasonable discourse.
>
> So, you're either thin skinned or a troll. In either case, you've proven
> you have little to contribute while Elmo has proven to have interesting
> things to say.
>
> Have a nice day.
>
> -Gary
>
>
>
>

[Elmo P. Shagnasty]

In article <bE1Zi.9622$if6.8480@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
"Conan Kelly" <CTBarbarinNOSPAM@msnNOSPAM.comNOSPAM> wrote:

> Elmo P Shagnasty, on the other hand, took me waaaay too literal. He may
> know a great deal about all forms of internet connections, how bits & bytes
> travel around the world, and the whole telecommunications/IT industry. He
> may also be an expert in many areas of life, this country, the world, the
> universe.......but it appears to me that he is extremely proud of how much
> he knows and he wants to make sure everyone else knows just how much he
> knows. And it seems like he is annoyed by people who don't know as much as
> he does.

It seems to me that you took my humor waaaaaaaaay wrong.

But, what the hell. That's your prerogative.

I'd hate to be your co-worker.

[Elmo P. Shagnasty]

In article <bE1Zi.9622$if6.8480@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
"Conan Kelly" <CTBarbarinNOSPAM@msnNOSPAM.comNOSPAM> wrote:

> I came here to get educated and I don't like being talked to like I'm a
> ****ing dip ****:
>
> > dude, ALL internet access is shared.
> >
> > What, did you think you had an exclusive point to point connection with
> > that remote web site, with your packets going over one set of wires like
> > a switched telephone connection? With no one else sharing those same
> > wires and that same web site?
>
> That translates to: "Hey, you ****ing retard! Don't you KNOW that ALL
> internet access is SHARED, just like EVERYONE else in the WORLD!!! DUH!!!"

no, YOU interpreted it that way.

Of course, at that point you either already knew what I was saying, or
you didn't...and if you already knew what I was saying, and you weren't
a "retard" who "didn't know", then...

[Gary]

"Conan Kelly" <CTBarbarinNOSPAM@msnNOSPAM.comNOSPAM> wrote in message
news:bE1Zi.9622$if6.8480@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
> You may have thought it was fine because it wasn't a response to YOUR
> question. Maybe if someone talked to you like you were a stupid moron, it
> would bother you.

On Usenet? Nah. You have to expect that people will misunderstand you and
respond in ways you don't anticipate. If you can't do that, you don't
belong here.

Further, resulting to insults and crass language simply because you
misunderstood somebody else's humor reflects poorly on you, not them.

I'm curious, do you work in customer support for Comcast?

-Gary

[Henry]

Erm ... I think you're 'leading with your chin' -- or whatever that
boxing metaphor is.

Conan Kelly <CTBarbarinNOSPAM@msnNOSPAM.comNOSPAM> wrote:

> like ... a stupid moron...

As opposed to, what, a genius moron?

> I consider myself a smart educated person in general.

No doubt you do.

> But there is some things...

There is ... things. OK, right. Educated.

> Elmo P Shagnasty, on the other hand, took me waaaay too literal.

Literally. I'm afraid you need the adverbial form here, oh educated one.

> Let's see how you react when you seek answers and someone talks to you like
> your an imbecile.

Your? YOUR??? ha ha ha

Usenet can be a hard place. ha ha ha

cheers,

Henry