Should I go Business Cable or DSL?

P

Protoform-X

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 30, 2002
Messages
1,203
I'm going to start hosting my own servers out of my home and I need to change from my current Internet package to get static IP addresses, unblocked ports, and unlimited bandwidth usage. Here's the two options I'm looking at:

Qwest Connect Ultimate+ VDSL2
Downstream: 40Mb
Upstream: 20Mb
Ports blocked: None
Static IP: $5.99/m or pack of 8 for $14.99/m
Cost: $120/m
Contract: No

Cox Home Business Cable
Downstram: 15Mb
Upstream: 1.5Mb
Ports blocked: None
Static IP: $5.99/m per IP
Cost: $99/m
Contract: 1 Year

The Qwest package is technically a residential package, but nothing is blocked. Since I'm not running a business I wont be breaking the EULA anyway. I'm personally leaning towards the Qwest DSL due to the massive upload speed. I'd love to have that power for my FTP server. What do you guys think?
 
Cable doesn't seem to have anything going for it, at least as long as Qwest aren't jerks about running services, which is almost always mentioned as something you 'can't' do on a residential connection.
 
i see it this way, 20 bucks more a month for double the download, and 10x the upload, i would take the qwest in a heartbeat.
 
Are these servers for your own use only or are you hosting clients on them? For your use I would say the Qwest service would be the best based upon provided information. I would contact them and see if they have a business class service. That way you're up on the up and up. You won't find your service cut off one day due to "abuse" (ie major data transfer).

If you're hosting servers, services, web sites, etc for others then I would highly suggest a dedicated server or server colocation at a data center. Dedicated servers can be had for as low cost as $50.00 (or even lower!) per month. Server colocation routinely starts off at about $60.00 for a 1U spot (usually comes with 200-1000 gb of data transfer every month). If you're interested in this route I would head over to webhostingtalk.com and start doing some browsing.
 
Striker109 said:
If you're hosting servers, services, web sites, etc for others then I would highly suggest a dedicated server or server colocation at a data center. Dedicated servers can be had for as low cost as $50.00 (or even lower!) per month. Server colocation routinely starts off at about $60.00 for a 1U spot (usually comes with 200-1000 gb of data transfer every month). If you're interested in this route I would head over to webhostingtalk.com and start doing some browsing.
Click to expand...

I'll second this but suggest a VPS rather than an el-cheapo dedicated server. You get the hardware reliability of proper server hardware and a lower price. Unless you need a ton of disk space it's much better value at the low end.
 
The servers are for my own use. Hosting my tools, remote access, VPN, etc. I called Qwest to make sure running servers for my personal use wouldn't be a problem. They said that if I start using more than a few hundred gigs of upload a month that I'll need to switch to a business contract, otherwise I should be fine.

I've never used DSL personally. Are there any drawbacks compared to cable? Should latency be similar?
 
Protoform-X said:
I've never used DSL personally. Are there any drawbacks compared to cable? Should latency be similar?
Click to expand...

Latency is often a hair lower. Usually cable has the advantage with bandwidth, including upload. Looks like Qwest is probably pushing a fiber package to obtain those speeds.
 
DSL's biggest disadvantges are its limited range and traditionally slower speeds, though with recent 'fiber to the curb' deployments it (amazingly considering how shit the POTS copper is) is again competitive. IME it does tend to be somewhat flakier, but other than that if you get a stable connection and have the bandwidth you need it's great.
 
Personally, I've found the DSL installs that I've worked with to be less hassle than the cable installs I've dealt with in the past. Cable does generally seem to be faster, and DSL's availability is limited by physical location, but my parents' DSL has been great for the past few years, with only a couple short outages. I've had no issues at all with my 6Mb DSL for the ~8 months I've had it. They've really been "set it and forget it" installs.
 
DSL sucks for the plain fact it uses the old POTS system... Rain and all that other nonsense in that antiquidated system comes down pretty easily.

Better than dial up or wireless but not much else.
 
OP, go for the DSL line from quest. $20 more a month is worth it if you plan on really utilizing the bandwidth they give you :cool:

TechieSooner said:
DSL sucks for the plain fact it uses the old POTS system... Rain and all that other nonsense in that antiquidated system comes down pretty easily.

Better than dial up or wireless but not much else.
Click to expand...
While I agree to a certain extent. I wouldn't say that "DSL sucks". some areas have better cabling practices and even fiber instead of POTS copper lines.
Also lets not forget that "DSL" is a very broad term used for quite a few different technologies available.
wikipedia to the rescue:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Subscriber_Line
 
I would personally go with the DSL for the upload and the 8 static for 14.99. I admit that in my experience cable tends to be slightly faster when its working at non peak hours but, I've had more luck with DSL as far as a consistent connection goes, probably because it isn't a shared medium. I would be really interested in seeing DSL pushed over Fibre to the curb.
 
Ordering the DSL right now. I'll let you guys know how the whole experience goes. Keeping my cable until I know its working well. :)
 
Enjoy the speed man...I'm envious...over here in south eastern CT fiber hasn't made much headway yet. So it's either <6 meg DSL, or 16 meg Comcast.
 
I would make sure the EULA does not state you cannot host any servers.

just because you're not running a business from your home, does NOT mean you aren't breaking the EULA, if the EULA does state you cannot run any servers accessible from the 'net.

Of course, if the the EULA does not specifically state you cannot run any sort of server, then I'd definitely go for the Qwest.
 
The EULA states that you MAY run servers as long as the bandwidth used is not "excessive." I'm not sure how you came to the conclusion that I was guessing at what the EULA said and not reading it. :rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top