DSL, Cable modem or Satelite?

Which of the three is most effective when it comes to daytrading? My style is one of speed, looking for quick access to the markets. It seems to me that cable would be most advantageous since it can send as much as 10Mbps of data downstream. The downside is however that it becomes slower when other users are on your same line. But can cable become slower than the maximum 384kbps that DSL offers? Any help from experience would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,
Thunderbolt

 

Satellite will give you delayed data, not shure exactly how much delayed, around 0.5 - 1 second would be my best guess, so if you are scalping futures, be careful with that one. Also, always have an analog modem turned on, ready to connect to the backup ISP. DSL, Cable do fail at the most inapropriate moments. Murphy's Law I guess...

Jaba

 

This has been previously discussed on this board. Check this link: http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?threadid=3501

 

Satellite would be the laggard of the 3 options. I'd say the choice is really between Cable and DSL. However, it really depends on your area and what is offered. I say this, because not all areas offer the same type of service in either category. I've heard just as many horror stories about both cable and dsl. I've also heard rave reviews between both options as well.

In general DSL will be slower than Cable when you compare top end speeds. However, in real world performance, it really don't make much difference as both will get the job done nicely. Heck I know a lot of folks with 56K modem connections and they have no problems what so ever, as quotes do not take that much bandwidth at all. Unless of course you are sucking down hundreds and hundreds of quotes.

I'm on a Cable connection myself. I currently can download at 3.2Mb/s and upload at 512Kb/s. My ping times are generally around 30ms depending on the site I'm pinging. As far as other people using the same node as me and slowing me down, well that just hasn't happened at all here. I've had this connection for over 1 year now and I know other people around me have the same as well, and I have never had any speed problems. I can obtain the 3.2Mb/s at any time night or day. However, this is my situation only. Not all areas will be the same.

The DSL offered in my area maxes out @ 1.5Mb/s and actually costs more than my cable.

If you want a little bit more reliability (or so I've heard) and are willing to pay $500 to $1500 per month, then go with the T1 line. With a full T1 you will be able to download and upload at a max speed of 1.5Mb/s. You will not get a speed advantage over Cable here, except on the uploads. Top end DSL lines will also keep up with the T1 as far as download speeds goes. The extra money, which is quite a bit, considering both Cable and DSL can usually be had for around $50/month, will only get you a little more reliability. Not really worth it, unless your Cable or DSL are constantly going down in your area.

Now if you really want overkill then there is a T3 option which will get you the 10Mb/s up and down. However, it can cost several thousand per month.


If you have both DSL and Cable in your area, then just give either one a try and see what you think. You can always cancel your service and go with the other if you so choose later on. I'd try Cable first though, however I'm biased.


Hope that helps,

2-B

 

I had dsl thru speakeasy, one of the better providers that is still in business. Then I installed cable and cable wins hands down. Cable is much faster, more reliable and less expensive. Also, dsl companies try to lock you in for longer terms due to to higher operating costs. DSL is dependant on the structure, quality and distance from your local telephone company. Speakeasy is still trying to charge me for service they did not provide because I cancelled before an entire year of service. Many DSL companies have gone out of business, and the remaining ones are on very shaky ground.

--arky

 

This issue is not as simple as comparing speeds and prices. If it were that easy, cable would be the choice. In my experience, you really need to hook them both up and use them side by side. The real world problems you encounter will involve bogged down routers on the route to the data company's servers, and there is not much you can do about that except use another data company or switch to DSL if you are on cable. QCharts is good because they have server farms scattered around the country. If one is slow you cna switch to another. RealTick and AT apparently come from Chicago and I have had problems with each at times because of bad routers at the chicago gateway.

 

I am in a small town near Boise Idaho. I have both cable and dsl (just in case). While the cable looks better on paper, I actually have better luck with the dsl most of the time. The speed is constant, and it is generally quite reliable. I use one hook-up for my quotes and charts, and the other for TWS. I have all of the software set up on both of my computers so that if one connection goes down, I can just start up the needed program on the other computer. It leaves me short of monitor space until the other connection comes up, but I think I have only had to do this once in the last few months since I got the DSL. It's nice to have the back up when you need it. At this point, if I had to choose one, I would go with DSL. I am sure that location and local providers have a LOT to do with which is better in actual use.

 

After comparing Adelphia cable and Verizon DSL in the Burlington, Vermont area I am dumping the cable. Advertised speed means nothing to these providers - they are not providing any sort of guarantee. My cable advertises over 1 mbps, while the DSL advertises 768 kbps. After several months of running them side-by-side and using ping plotter to track performance under various apps the DSL wins hands down. With several universities near me, the cable sharing issue is significant as my cable speed, which always sucks wind in the 400k area, really crashes in the evening when all the kids are on Kazaa, and can go as low as 180k. Worse than speed is the packet loss issue. I've seen much more packet loss on the cable line, and in general up to 50% more hops to get where I'm going than the DSL takes. My DSL speeds are consistently 500 kpbs down/ 100kbps up and often faster. All this said, your results will vary with location and carrier so proceed skeptically but this may be applicable to others in the New England area and elsewhere. Don't do Sat unless you have to, the latency is bad.

 

Eldredge,

We are from the same neck of the woods. (Nampa myself)

Did you use cable when it was @home or since it became Cableone? It was nice before cableone took over because they didn't cap the speed, and it was cheaper.

It's good to hear a favorable opinion of DSL in case I need another option...