Date: Sat, 6 Jul 1996 11:54:57 -0400 From: Charles Henrich <henrich@crh.cl.msu.edu> To: henry@zoo.toronto.edu, freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cable vs. ISDN Message-ID: <199607061554.LAA18849@crh.cl.msu.edu> References: <4rm15o$f5k@msunews.cl.msu.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In lists.freebsd.hardware you write:
>> >Cable has a good chance of blowing ISDN away. Much faster and cheaper. And
>> >it will be available in many places this year. More, next.
>>
>> Cable is a pain. It works only one way. If you want to send a large file
>> you still have to go slow. And, you still need to be a member of a ISP
>> as you can't write to cable, from what I've read.
>Depends on how good your local cable system is. The cable-data system
>that Rogers Cable is introducing in the Toronto area is two-way (with
>symmetrical bandwidth, amazingly enough, or at least that's the way it was
>in the prototype system).
>Incidentally, harking back to the original theme of this discussion :-),
>the hardware used for the Rogers prototype talked to the computers by
>Ethernet.
I've been using Cable networking for almost a year now here in East Lansing, MI
(TCI Cable), and its symmetrical 10Mbps, usually I get an effective throughput
rate of about 200KBytes/sec both ways.
You can keep your 11K/sec ISDN :)
-Crh
--
Charles Henrich Michigan State University henrich@msu.edu
http://pilot.msu.edu/~henrich
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199607061554.LAA18849>