Purchasing home internet access

[DaveC426913]

I can't believe I'm actually asking this. I guess my brain has pushed these old details out in favour of new stuff.

My son plans to sign up for internet service for his new place.
I currently use Iristel DSL (which I think is just repackaged Bell DSL), and have been for the past decade or so. But I also have a couple of webhost accounts, which means my setup is more complicated than what he needs.

He'll need the DSL into his home and the modem to hook up to his phone line. That's the Iristel.

Bujt does he ALSO need to sign up for an ISP to get email?

See, I use Iristel as my phone line provider, but my email is myusername@pathcom.com - pathcom is my ISP. I don't think there is a such thing as myusername@iristel.ca.I guess many ISPs offer both services - service provider and email accounts and webhosting. Maybe Iristel is one of the few that do not.

 

[jedishrfu]

So basically he gets online and then gets an email at say gmail.com

I think people used to get email from the ISP but nowadays people use the ISP to get online and have their email on some other provider. I also think ISPs probably want to get out of the business if they haven't already of hosting user content that they have to maintain and protect from hackers.

 

[DaveC426913]

Right, right. He's got a Gmail account.
OK, it's comin' back to me.
So, he doesn't need a host, just the ISP.

Thanks.

 

[jtbell]

I think people used to get email from the ISP but nowadays people use the ISP to get online and have their email on some other provider.

Another possibility is that the ISP contracts to another provider for email service. My ISP (in the US) is AT&T. They gave me an att.net email address that is actually served by Yahoo! Mail, with the same user inteface and similar size limit and features to Yahoo's own paid e-mail accounts for individual customers.

 

[mathman]

If you use gmail.com for e-mail then you will not have to change if you switch ISP.

 

[Evo]

Does he have cable tv? If he does and can get cable internet, it's MUCH faster than DSL.

 

[russ_watters]

Does he have cable tv? If he does and can get cable internet, it's MUCH faster than DSL.

"DSL" is a bit of an archaic term for internet that comes from the phone company (Comcast just likes to keep saying it because it confuses people). Mine's Verizon FIOS, which is fiber optic and very fast. I'm not sure the old style 512k DSL still exists anymore.

 

[DaveC426913]

To me, DSL is simply synonymous with 'phone line'.

My modem is plugged into my land line, not my cable.

 

[Borek]

DSL is not a single technology, rather many technologies are called this way (how do you call it, "umbrella term"?). Many different speeds, and many different variants, ADSL being one of them. I am on 12/s Mbit ADSL line, my ISP offers up to 80 Mbit/s.

 

[russ_watters]

Right. For me, it comes into my house via fiber optic cable, where a piece of Verizon hardware on the wall in my garage turns it into both cable/data and phone service. I have the slowest speed data connection they offer: 25 Mbits/sec...and don't use the phone service. At that base speed, the upgrade choices don't really even matter to me.

 

[Evo]

Here DSL is still on the old phone lines and not very fast, Verizon FIOS is different. I have Cable and it's 50Mb down.

 

[rcgldr]

I have cox cable, which includes up to 10 email accounts, but the issue with this is if you ever switch ISP's (perhaps due to a move), then those email accounts no longer work, so it's probably best to use an independent source for email accounts.

 

[DaveC426913]

I appear to be getting my internets on the backs of dinosaurs. My pipe tops out at 5Mb. Guess it's been a while since I've looked at the packages...

 

[jtbell]

on the backs of dinosaurs

In our case it must be trilobites. Our download speed is a whopping 0.75 Mbps. I signed up for AT&T's "DSL Lite" six years ago when they were offering it for $15 per month. For the sort of stuff we do at home, we figured it wasn't worth it to go to $30 for 3 Mbps. Since then, they've raised the price to $25 per month, and 3 Mbps is now $35, I think.

A while ago, they were mailing us invitations almost every week to upgrade to uVerse, but that seems to have stopped for now. We've resisted doing that because the fiber-optic line doesn't keep our (landline) phone powered when the power goes out, which happens a few times per year.

We get our TV the old-fashioned way with an antenna, so we're not eager to get our Internet from the cable company (Charter).

 

[DaveC426913]

We get our TV the old-fashioned way with an antenna

My wife brings this up every few months. She figures we'll get almost as many channels and we won't have to pay the cable guys their outrageous prices.

Me, I don't want yet another system that I have to tweak, babysit and keep on top of. Esp. hate it since I'm the one who gets to fix it when anything goes splah.

 

[vela]

Does he have cable tv? If he does and can get cable internet, it's MUCH faster than DSL.

Cable often has faster speeds, but it comes with a correspondingly higher price. I switched to DSL because it offered lower price points with fast-enough speeds for me.

A while ago, they were mailing us invitations almost every week to upgrade to uVerse, but that seems to have stopped for now. We've resisted doing that because the fiber-optic line doesn't keep our (landline) phone powered when the power goes out, which happens a few times per year.

I switched from DSL to Uverse awhile back because it turned out it was a little cheaper for much better phone service and comparable internet speeds. (Plus at the time, AT&T was offering all sorts of incentives to sign up, so the six months of service was essentially free.) The AT&T equipment includes a UPS which keeps the modem/router powered during power outages and will power a phone that gets its power from the phone line.

 

[DaveC426913]

I reiterate: reducing the flow by either restricting inflow/outflow or by reducing voltage/amperage is very hard on motors that aren't designed for it.

A simple and harmless way of reducing flow without reducing your pump life is to simply let a percent of the outflow return to the inflow. Really, this is a better way.

Often the pumps incorporate this internally. But that would be dependent on the pump.
But here's a generic example, which is independent of the pump type.