Contour Enthusiasts Group Archives Forums Branches California How can I obtain high speed internet without a phone line?

I'm tired of only being able to get online at work. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!!

I don't want a regualar phone line (I have a cell phone) and I want DSL. The problem is that the main carrier in my area requires a regular phone line to hook it up. They don't offer cable internet in my area. I'm in roseville. Suggestions?

satellite?

that ****'s gotta be expensive

-jason

yeah satelite, i do think they are getting a little bit cheaper though. Not sure how much though.

Most sattelite-based Internet service requires that you have a phone-line, as the sattelite dish can only download (with most services) and not upload, so you still need the phone-line to upload data (Clicking on a link, sending email, etc).

Try Sprint Broadband, see if they have service in your area. Purely wireless. Otherwise bite the bullet and get a DSL line. You don't have to have a telephone line active in order to receive DSL, you just have to make sure there is a line in the house that they can hook up the DSL to (If you're getting SDSL or ADSL where an installer comes out to hook it up). The phone company will need to come out to connect the circuit on your house to the DSL provider though. But you don't need a telephone number or account with PacBell to get it. (Or you shouldn't.)

AT&T Broadband Internet requires no phone line and it is cheaper and faster than DSL. Check for availability in your area. I have it and it rocks!

Cable is not always faster than ADSL, but should be faster than DSL (there are very large discepencies between the two coasts with regards to Cable vs. DSL speeds). Both beat the hell out of Satellite with respect to ping (connect turnaround time), but pale in comparison to sat. in throughput (raw transfer speed). You will see a large advantage to Cable/DSL over satellite if you do mostly web-browsing.

Please keep in mind, just to be able to talk about this in such terms requires HUGE generalizations.

What I can tell you is that DSL will probably run through PacBell, which is a very bad thing. PacBell blows donkeys (sorry fur swearin, but is true).

AT&T is not as good as @HOME was, but is close. If you can get cable installed, you are probably better off doing just that. They will install cable internet in your house (likely for free) and many have reported recieving free basic cable tv afterwards. Cable generally doesn't require you to pay install fees or sign a term-agreement. DSL usually requires both.

They are, for the most part, similar in rates (about $40/month, less if you buy the DSL/cable modem instead of leasing it). Cable does get to charge additional fees (franchise fee, state tax fee, and a few others that will up your bill 10-15 a month).

Note that if you get a DSL provider other than PacBell, they are still using PacBell's phone lines and you are now at the mercy of both your provider and PacBell (not a good thing).

I have had only minor problems with AT&T, but have friends that had DSL installed by CruzIO (Santa Cruz area), but not running for 3 months and PacBell charged them (most of their DSL bill was PacBell's service charge through CruzIO and CruzIO was the reason they weren't up and running in the 1st place).

Overall, if you only have one choice for sat/cable/DSL, get it if you really want it. You will likely have a high fee and a low speed if this is so. (DSL is slow and expensive if you are far from a phone switch; cable is slow if everyone in your neighborhood is on at the same time - same goes for satellite).

I have a client in LosGatos who had no other option than satellite. Sunday nights he is slower than a 28.8 modem in download speed and is hardly bearable). He is too far from the phone switch to get DSL and cable service isn't offered where he is. He pays $80/month+ for service that gets no better than DSL and can get worse than a $5/month 56k modem.

All about how bad you wat it.

Hope this helps.

Oh yah - and I referred to ADSL. DSL - Synchronous Digital Subscriber Line; ADSL - Asynchronous Digital Subscriber Line. DSL - equal up and download hardware speed max (that's what they say - you still can't upload past 12kB/sec, no matter what they say). ADSL allots more speed for your download (and incidentally doesn't take away from your upload...). In other words, you will get maybe 200kB/sec download with DSL and 400kB/sec with ADSL (max speeds - these are RARE). Most DSL today is ADSL. That is why ADSL can compare to cable speed (cable ~400kB/sec).

If you think you are buying something like 1 meg/sec you are confused and so is the marketing company selling the DSL. They are selling you 1Megabit of download and you think you are gonna get 1 MegaByte of download. (8 bits to a byte, so you will get roughly 1/8 of what they claim.

How much do you want to spend? For a few hundred per month, you could get a fractional T1. Of course, you could always get the DSL service and not hook up a phone.

--Matt

Ok.

Thanks for all the replies, esp Rubberduck. I live in an apartment in roseville. After reading this, I tried the following:

I called Surewest (roseville telephone) and they told me that unless I had an ACTIVE phone line I would not be able to get DSL.

After that I called the company that I was told would originally set up the DSL for the apartment complex, Quiknet. They tried to set me up and came out to hook it up, but it didn't work either because A. I'm too far from switch or B. The guy nextdoor has DSL and it messes up my tone. Basically, it didn't work. The install guy told me that Surewest would probably work.

Then I called AT&T and asked about cable. Sounded awesome, but then they told me they don't offer it in my area. When I asked the rep for her personal opinion on when it would become available, she said probably never because there is already DSL in the area and the ISP companies don't like to compete against each other (read: they don't like to be competitive).

So I'm SOL unless I decide to get a phone line (which may not work even then because of my neighbor) or AT&T decides to put in cable internet in my area (highly unlikely).

This sort of thing makes you want to move.

The crappiest part about this is that cable companies are backed by encyclopedias of Federal legislation barring anyone from competing against them. At least from using "cable" lines.

DSL shouldn't mess up your tone. If you are getting problems, talk to your neighbor and have his DSL service send him a little device that prevents his voice phones from interrupting his DSL. Then just rip it out of his phone jack and put it in yours.

Dunno what else to say. I live a mile away from Apple's R&D campus, two major HP campuses and the heart of Silicon Valley, but we were among the last of the major metropolitan areas to get widespread cable (and DSL is still lacking). Go figure. I would have had the fastest internet in the world (for the money) if the cable companies had installed the technology when they had it (my former boss has had cable internet for 7 years! 900kB/sec is impressive when it's in your house it beats the fractional T1 at your house.)

I read that the next generation of adults will factor in internet access and their internet connection as a major factor in deciding wheere to live. Freaky, huh?

HAHAHAH, you live by my corporate office!
That place sucks
Sam - I have the same problem with my apartment complex....every company I have been through says it is unavailable