DSL VS. Cable

I'm working with both DSL and Cable this weekend. I thought that I wanted to move to DSL to cut cost in my workshop. I have MCI the Neighborhood DSL. The cable is Comcast.

The speed of the DSL test on Broadcastreports.com is significantly superior but the ability to download long update downloads from Microsoft is far superior on the cable.

Any thoughts? Anyone had a similar experience? I would like to save $15.00 a month, but most of my need for broadband is for downloading updates for machines coming through the workshop.

Both connections were wonderfully easy to set-up. The DSL didn't have any PPPoE to worry about. I have yet in 6 test been able to download a complete long download from microsoft update. This cable modem is very profecient for this.

Am I missing anything? Thanks in advance!

 

euphonius--It sounds like your DSL service is cutting you off after a certain amount of "inactivity ", and that they view downloading as "inactivity ". Or maybe your dialup setting in Control Panel|Internet Options|Connections|Settings|Advanced has a check in "Disconnect if idle...." Have you discussed the cutoff with the DSL supplier?
However, are we comparing similar costs when it comes to speed? I am surprised that your DSL download speed is higher than your cable download speed. That makes me think you either have a very high level of DSL service or that your cable connection/settings are not optimized. You should get download speeds of at least 1500kbps from Comcast. Normal DSL is only about one tenth to one fifth of that. For speed in the 1500kbps range DSL should be much more expensive than Comcast.
And while the speed tests are interesting, the actual speed when you download a file is the real test of speed. How do actual download speed compare?
P.S. Concerning optimizing the speed of downloads, I am sure you have seen the speed optimization website at http://www.dslreports.com/tweaks

 

I just tested my connection speed again. At this time of night the download speed was outstanding. My upload speed wasn't impressive.

Maybe the poor speed test results earlier could have been because of the shared bandwidth of a cable connection or more likely because of the windows update downloads I was doing on computer I was updating. Your points about the speed of the two connections has helped me put things in focus.

I have not talked to the DSL supplier. I'm not sure if it's worth it. Now that you have mentioned it, I may give that a try. I double checked the local idle settings, I didn't see anything there. I'm using the same local settings between both providers.

I have used DSLREPORTS for my testing and tweaking my settings. I'm getting great reviews from the tweak tests.

I think you are right and thanks for putting it out there for me see. The most important thing for my situation is the speed at which I can update computers or download files. I'll do some more testing, but right now Cable seems to be the best answer for $15 more a month.

Your comments have been very helpful. Thanks for your insights!

 

euphonius--Thanks for posting back. Glad to hear some of my comments may have helped.
I am still surprised that DSL at similar speed to cable is cheaper. Have you tried measuring the speed on the same actual file download?
Are you getting speeds in the range of at least 1500kbps (200KBps) from cable? As you can see TonyT is getting double that, but it varies by location. I used to get that before Comcast took over here. Now they have capped the bandwidth where I live. However, the upside to that is that the speeds are more uniform throughout the day. If you live where a lot of people are on the same cable line, speed can suffer when everyone is on line. DSL does not have that disadvantage, but it hardly ever is faster than cable for the same price.
(Where I live, DSL speeds are usually only about 20-25% of cable at the same price level.)