Ethernet card?

[WSUCougar]

Okay, we're finally getting DSL at home. But apparently I need an "ethernet card" for my PC. Can anyone give me a layman's version of what this animal is, and what I'm looking for? Are they all standard for PCs, or are they brand/model specific? Are they called anything else (abbreviations or somesuch)? Can I walk into CompUSA and ask for an Ethernet Card, buy it, and install it myself?

Any insights would be much appreciated.

[timmynausea]

I have no experience with dsl, but if your motherboard came with any kind of network card on it as most do these days, I'd assume you're good to go.

[jeff061]

A lot of new computers come with them built in. Basically its a large phone jack, you can look in the back of your computer for this to see if you have it.

Otherwise you can pick one up cheap at walmart or online. If you need to buy one and don't want to have to open your computer I'd buy a USB one, which you can just plug into the outside of your system.

[Blackadar]

It's a network card for a network (CAT5) cable. Hell, many mobos built in the last 3-4 years have them onboard.

If you don't have one (the opening looks like a fatter version of a telephone cord), yes, you can go to CompUSA/BB/Circuit City and ask for an ethernet card. They'll probably hook you up with a Netgear card for $29. Open up the case, plug it in, close the case...very simple.

[jeff061]

Just for reference:

http://www2.newegg.com/ProductSort/SubCategory.asp?SubCategory=27

[sterlingice]

Do you have more than 1 computer you want on the DSL?

If so, get yourself a router and usb wireless network adapters. If not, then the others above have already given you everything you need (most mobos have them built in, you can get a card for $20)

SI

[Samdari]

Yes, almost any PC built within the last two years would have ethernet built into the MB.

But, to answer the other question, if you have ever put any kind of card into any kind of slot, you can put in an ethernet card. If not, but are somewhat mechanically inclined, you can probably do it. Other words to look for on the box would be NIC (network interface card) or 10/100.

Osprey Suck!

[timmynausea]

Yes, almost any PC built within the last two years would have ethernet built into the MB.

But, to answer the other question, if you have ever put any kind of card into any kind of slot, you can put in an ethernet card. If not, but are somewhat mechanically inclined, you can probably do it. Other words to look for on the box would be NIC (network interface card) or 10/100.

Osprey Suck!

He's right. If you have to buy one, it'll be super easy to install even if you have no experience. I've always said that a man isn't a real man until he pops open that computer case and fiddles with the stuff in there.

[BrianD]

He's right. If you have to buy one, it'll be super easy to install even if you have no experience. I've always said that a man isn't a real man until he pops open that computer case and fiddles with the stuff in there.

Of course this sometimes leads to a real man with a non-working computer.

If you have to ask about an ethernet card, I would suggest not opening your computer. Follow the instructions to see if you already have a built-in ethernet card. If not, either find someone who does this kind of thing often, or get a USB ethernet adapter. I've used USB ethernet devices, and they work well with minimal effort.

[WSUCougar]

Thanks for all the quick help so far, guys.

Yeah, I'm cool with the install aspect. I've previously swapped out RAM, a DVD drive, and graphics card on this computer.

Do you have more than 1 computer you want on the DSL?

If so, get yourself a router and usb wireless network adapters. If not, then the others above have already given you everything you need (most mobos have them built in, you can get a card for $20)
Okay, this intrigues me. I figured we'd only be able to get one PC hooked into the DSL. My wife's computer is in her office in the basement (mine is on the main floor of the house). So a router and usb wireless network adapter...sorry, I'm totally clueless on this stuff. What all is involved?

[jeff061]

Yeah, no reason to not go USB really, I was following the same line of thought Brian is.

[jeff061]

Wireless Router (http://www2.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16833124010)
Wireless adaptor (http://www2.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16833124126) this is the same as a Network Adapter (NIC, NEtwork Card), but wireless.

You buy the wireless adaptor for the laptop, the wireless or the network adaptor for your desktop. Plug the DSL modem into the router, connect the wireless cards to the wireless router(read the directions

If you get a USB version of the wireless adaptor, which i linked, then you can move in freely between laptop desktop, new computers, temporary computers, ect. This will get everything up on one internet connection.

[Blackadar]

Thanks for all the quick help so far, guys.

Yeah, I'm cool with the install aspect. I've previously swapped out RAM, a DVD drive, and graphics card on this computer.


Okay, this intrigues me. I figured we'd only be able to get one PC hooked into the DSL. My wife's computer is in her office in the basement (mine is on the main floor of the house). So a router and usb wireless network adapter...sorry, I'm totally clueless on this stuff. What all is involved?

1. I used to install DSL. I hate it. DSL has major limitations. Roadrunner 4tehwin.

2. I have wireless Roadrunner. It's pretty good. They give you a wireless router and a couple USB wireless adapter (it looks like a security dongle). You just plug in the wireless adapter, run the install program and off you go. It's damned simple. Now I have two PCs set up with Internet and a 3rd (my work laptop) that I take home occasionally. I can be working on my patio while enjoying the sunshine. If your local DSL shop has a wireless package, grab it. I pay $10 more for the wireless (multi-PC) RR package over the standard $29.95. It's neat and I didn't have to buy the equipment.

[sterlingice]

Thanks for all the quick help so far, guys.

Yeah, I'm cool with the install aspect. I've previously swapped out RAM, a DVD drive, and graphics card on this computer.
Then this would be easy- ethernet cards are arguably the easiest install of anything on a computer. Slap it in, let windows detect. Go.

Okay, this intrigues me. I figured we'd only be able to get one PC hooked into the DSL. My wife's computer is in her office in the basement (mine is on the main floor of the house). So a router and usb wireless network adapter...sorry, I'm totally clueless on this stuff. What all is involved?
This gets a bit more involved. You snag a 802.11g router (since they cost the same as a 802.11b router) and then a pair of usb adapters- about $100 total if you shop around, and then you can have both computers on the same network connection.

The install is a bit more complicated, tho, since you have to get everything working on the same page. For that reason, I recommend getting everything from one company (Linksys, DLink, Netgear, whatever) and just follow the instructions to the letter. I've seen a lot of people get mixed stuff working, myself included, but it's easier with the same stuff. Plus, then you'll need to secure your system (a simple WEP or WPA setup should do unless you're dealing in really secure info).

So, in other words, it's more complicated and more expensive but quite doable. There are a few threads on the board already about it.

SI

[Samdari]

I pay $10 more for the wireless (multi-PC) RR package over the standard $29.95. It's neat and I didn't have to buy the equipment.

I don't get this, it seems like such a ripoff to me. Once the DSL or cable modem is working inside your home, you can hook it to a router and share the connection for free. Why would you pay an extra $10 a month?

[jeff061]

DSL does not suck, it all depends 100% on the carrier. I had Adelphia cable in New Hampshire, SUCKED. Have Snet DSL now and its been great. The only limitations on DSL compared to Cable is speed, but they are both so fast that you'll never notice unless you are a heavy downloader. In which case some cable companies will cut you off since you share the line with your geographic region, where with DSL your line is just for you.

[Blackadar]

I don't get this, it seems like such a ripoff to me. Once the DSL or cable modem is working inside your home, you can hook it to a router and share the connection for free. Why would you pay an extra $10 a month?

I didn't have to buy the wireless router or the wireless USB cards. That's why.

I save money up front, pay more over time...

[BrianD]

Wireless Router (http://www2.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16833124010)
Wireless adaptor (http://www2.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16833124126) this is the same as a Network Adapter (NIC, NEtwork Card), but wireless.

You buy the wireless adaptor for the laptop, the wireless or the network adaptor for your desktop. Plug the DSL modem into the router, connect the wireless cards to the wireless router(read the directions

If you get a USB version of the wireless adaptor, which i linked, then you can move in freely between laptop desktop, new computers, temporary computers, ect. This will get everything up on one internet connection.

Peronsally, I'd go with
Router (http://www2.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16833122016)
Wireless Adapter (http://www2.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16833122107)

I like the NetGear equipment and have used them in a few places.

[jeff061]

Yeah, your losing money though after less than a year. But if they set it all up for you, provide support and you don't have to worry about it, thats what you are paying for.

[jeff061]

Netgear's fine, ever since Cisco bought out Linksys I've been a big fan, Netgear would be my second choice.

[Samdari]

I didn't have to buy the wireless router or the wireless USB cards. That's why.

I save money up front, pay more over time...

I guess. I am more of a pay up front to avoid monthly charges kind of guy. I don't understand the people on AVS forum who complain they cannot rent equipment from DirecTV.

[Blackadar]

DSL does not suck, it all depends 100% on the carrier. I had Adelphia cable in New Hampshire, SUCKED. Have Snet DSL now and its been great. The only limitations on DSL compared to Cable is speed, but they are both so fast that you'll never notice unless you are a heavy downloader. In which case some cable companies will cut you off since you share the line with your geographic region, where with DSL your line is just for you.

Jeff, I installed DSL. I set up telephone company C/Os for DSL. It sucks compared to cable. It does not all depend on the carrier - it depends on a ton of variables.

1. Distance from C/O (or DSLAM)
2. Load coils on the line
3. Bridge taps on the line
4. Splices on the line
5. Gauge of wire (DSL runs better off of 24 gauge than 22)
6. C/O equipment type
7. DSL router type
8. Flavor available to your premise - IDSL, SDSL, ADSL, etc.
9. Number of other DSL circuits within your wire bundle (DSL tends to bleed)
10. Local copper wire or fiber (fiber takes special equipment)

The problem is that the customer rarely knows these variables and the phone company tends not to share this information. They also don't keep great records of this info as well, so it's not uncommon to have DSL working and then have problems because some phone jockey threw a load coil on the line because your neighbor was complaining about the line not having enough volume. Now, do you really want to compare brainpans on this issue?

[jeff061]

I assure you cable has more than enough of its own variables to balance that out. Whenever anyone asks me to recommend something I tell them to do research and ask around their area, it varies.

Course it is possible Comcast has tainted me, I am not a fan, and my Adelphia connection was just down 20% of every day, even if it was the fastest connection I have ever owned.

[jeff061]

Actually, ironically, my last company had a branch office near Albany with a Road Runner business line. That was pretty horrible to. Down multiple times a month, and extended periods of time with high packet loss. On an expensive ass business line.

[Blackadar]

I assure you cable has more than enough of its own variables to balance that out.

Name them.

Can't?

Want me to?

1. Most cable networks are now fiber, so the old coax vs. fiber discussion is pretty moot. But we'll throw that one out.
2. Total customer load
3. Business vs. residential traffic mix
4. Distance from origination point at stress load levels
5. Cable wire runs/network (mainly a business-class issue, since cable wasn't historically run into business parks)
6. Router type

I'd throw in traffic plan limitations, but they're pretty rare now. I could also throw in network security as it used to be possible to "tap" into others on your fiber cable, but that's been solved as well. Simply put, cable networks are generally set up far better to carry digital traffic from the end-user than phone networks.

In fact, most of the limitations for cable traffic tends to be centered around traffic loads and whether there is network to that area. The former can be a concern, the latter is mainly a business premise issue and not a residential issue.

When you spend some time implementing networks, running erlang calculations and the like, feel free to discuss. But until you do, you're talking from a very limited personal experience standpoint and not as a traffic engineer/C/O installer/customer premise installer/Operations director (all of which I was).

[Samdari]

Also, Blackie, in a high population, high tech-aware place like suburban northern VA, where everyone has broadband, I can assure you that DSL service is better than cable. The one advantage DSL has always had over cable is that you don't share BW with your neighbors. Everyone around here who I know has cable tells me the slowdown in the evenings makes it barely faster than dialup.

Also, many of the factors you list as potential problems for DSL, how are they not potential problems for cable, or at least anologues. You are aware that splitters are capacitors and thus limit the bandwidth of cable? How many splitters does the typical cable customer's signal go through?

[jeff061]

I don't know anything about the nitty gritty. However, anyone with experience with both in many locations knows this:

There is no clear winner between DSL or Cable, it depends where you live. Fact. Not arguing this silly thing anymore.

[timmynausea]

All I know is that I have a 3mb cable connection and it is hella fast. What is the fastest you can get with DSL?

[jeff061]

1.55. I covered that earlier though.

I had 4 with Adelphia, so I do know the sweetness of a fast connection. I'm a pretty heavy downloader though, and dropping from 4 to 1.5 was not that noticeable. However if your cable connection is perfect, and has no flaws, and DSL is the same. Go with Cable, its faster. However, i suggest people find out whether this is the case or not in their area.

[BrianD]

All I know is that I have a 3mb cable connection and it is hella fast. What is the fastest you can get with DSL?

We sell a 6MB DSL connection (thought I use cable personally). You will also start seeing offers for DSL-2 and DSL-4 in various places. This is basically a bonding of multiple DSL circuits, 2 and 4, which will double or quadruple the capacity. I'm not personally familiar with this, but I know SBC is going to be making this available in a couple of months.

[sterlingice]

I'd throw in traffic plan limitations, but they're pretty rare now.

When you spend some time implementing networks, running erlang calculations and the like, feel free to discuss. But until you do, you're talking from a very limited personal experience standpoint and not as a traffic engineer/C/O installer/customer premise installer/Operations director (all of which I was).
My ISP, who is otherwise good except for this, has 6 gig bandwith limits per month :(

Erlang calculations? Do you guys just have a giant table like in the back of my networking class book? ;)

SI

[JonInMiddleGA]

And, when considering cable, you have to consider your outtage rate. With Comcast-Hooterville, that's substantial. My phone on the other hand, rarely goes out unless the power is off (which pretty much renders it a moot point).

[jeff061]

Didn't know they offered larger DSL pipes, they cost an arm and a leg? Thought there was a techincal limitation, is it over one line?

[Samdari]

All I know is that I have a 3mb cable connection and it is hella fast. What is the fastest you can get with DSL?

YOU don't have a dedicated 3mb cable connection. Everyone on your cable node shares that much (it is impossible for you to be given a dedicated amount of bandwidth). If you share this with few people, cable will undeniably be faster than DSL (fastest is about 1.5). The advantage of DSL is that the stated amount of bandwidth IS dedicated to you, and you get the same 1.5 (or 768 or 512) no matter who else on your block decides to use the internet at a given time.

[timmynausea]

YOU don't have a dedicated 3mb cable connection. Everyone on your cable node shares that much (it is impossible for you to be given a dedicated amount of bandwidth). If you share this with few people, cable will undeniably be faster than DSL (fastest is about 1.5). The advantage of DSL is that the stated amount of bandwidth IS dedicated to you, and you get the same 1.5 (or 768 or 512) no matter who else on your block decides to use the internet at a given time.
Yeah I understand that. It's usually about 2.8 mb on bandwidth tests. Good enough for me.

[Blackadar]

Also, Blackie, in a high population, high tech-aware place like suburban northern VA, where everyone has broadband, I can assure you that DSL service is better than cable. The one advantage DSL has always had over cable is that you don't share BW with your neighbors. Everyone around here who I know has cable tells me the slowdown in the evenings makes it barely faster than dialup.

Also, many of the factors you list as potential problems for DSL, how are they not potential problems for cable, or at least anologues. You are aware that splitters are capacitors and thus limit the bandwidth of cable? How many splitters does the typical cable customer's signal go through?

True. If your local cable company doesn't have enough fiber and everyone signs on, then you do run out of bandwidth as everyone shares the same "pipe". That's probably the biggest "fear" and occasional downside of cable. I didn't work No. VA (tho I used to live there) and didn't design a network up there. So if the BW is maxed, DSL is the better option. However, I'd say that the cable company up there is piss-poor. In addition, you have cable competition now in many areas up there, so there may be more than one option for cable broadband.

As for analog, almost all cable networks are run via fiber and then split off with coax to go into the customer premise. So there's very little in terms of analog service on cable, unlike DSL (which is analog all the way to the DSLAM or C/O)/. They've moved their fiber nodes closer and closer to the customer premise. Cable companies had a huge push back in the mid-90s to do this and used regulated rate hikes to go ahead and run fiber to have the capacity to offer digital services (movies on demand, broadband, HDTV). That's why you're seeing the bigger push for home VOIP coming from the cable industry and not the telecom industry.

I can probably point out dozens of specific examples where DSL > cable. But overall, cable is far better than DSL for the average residential consumer. In general, it's the same cost with less technical headaches and greater bandwidth.

[Samdari]

I'd say that the cable company up there is piss-poor.

As do most of its customers. I have never been one, but everyone hates them. I am also unaware of any comptetion here in Fairfax county. They all have to go with Cox (suckers, as is commonly appended to their name).

In general, it's the same cost with less technical headaches and greater bandwidth.

If you have cable tv service. Here, it would cost me roughly double for cable vs DSL, and I get tv through DirecTV (I am addicted to Sunday Ticket). I pay $35 for DSL, and to get cable internet (which I looked into when Verizon was f*cking with my ability to get DSL) would have cost $40 a month for service, oh wait, that's an extra $10 since you don't subscribe to cable, and you have to rent the modem for $10 a month (I got my DSL modem free with a year contract).

I really don't agree with the "less technical headaches" thing though. Cable is delivered via coax, and DSL through twisted pair cable. They are extremely similar delivery mediums, with similar attenuation, resistance to noise and EMI. For the "less technical headaches" cable tv and internet are unavailable to the typical customer FAR more often than phone and DSL.

[Blackadar]

Actually, both Cox and Comcast service Fairfax County. Neither has a non-exclusive contract and so competition is very possible. I'd suggest you shop around - you may have choices you didn't realize.

Didn't Comcast buy Erols? Or was that Cox?

As for the delivery mechanism, the fiber tends to be much closer to the customer premise than the plain copper wire of DSL. Delivery method to the customer premise isn't that important - network backbone is. And when cable can run on an optical fiber ring network configuration - the uptime of cable can be far greater as compared to DSL. So the fiber is closer to the customer premise AND can be on a redundant ring, whereas with DSL you're pretty limited until you get to the C/O.

BTW, unless you're right next to the C/O or DSLAM, you'll never see 1.544 from a SDSL or ADSL circuit. The attenuation of a copper DSL circuit in a typical network configuration is far worse than a cable line. Of course, both types of services still tend to artifically "cap" bandwidth, but those caps are rising and the potential for cable is far greater than DSL.

I can safely say I have spent days trying to track down particular DSL problems, only to find out someone threw an undocumented bridge tap or load coil on a circuit. DSL is a great lab product - I can put it in a lab and get it to work every time - but something happens when it gets put on the street. Or when one too many DSLs get put on a copper bundle and "bleed" on each other, canceling each other out. Let me tell you, trying to find that is a bitch.

Again, you're really at the mercy of your local providers. I can provide horror stories for each type of service - DSL, cable, T-1s, etc. But there is no doubt in my mind which service will generally be superior for the residential consumer.

[Samdari]

Actually, both Cox and Comcast service Fairfax County. Neither has a non-exclusive contract and so competition is very possible. I'd suggest you shop around - you may have choices you didn't realize.

Didn't Comcast buy Erols? Or was that Cox?

As for the delivery mechanism, the fiber tends to be much closer to the customer premise than the plain copper wire of DSL. Delivery method to the customer premise isn't that important - network backbone is. And when cable can run on an optical fiber ring network configuration - the uptime of cable can be far greater as compared to DSL. So the fiber is closer to the customer premise AND can be on a redundant ring, whereas with DSL you're pretty limited until you get to the C/O.

BTW, unless you're right next to the C/O or DSLAM, you'll never see 1.544 from a SDSL or ADSL circuit. The attenuation of a copper DSL circuit in a typical network configuration is far worse than a cable line. Of course, both types of services still tend to artifically "cap" bandwidth, but those caps are rising and the potential for cable is far greater than DSL.

I can safely say I have spent days trying to track down particular DSL problems, only to find out someone threw an undocumented bridge tap or load coil on a circuit. DSL is a great lab product - I can put it in a lab and get it to work every time - but something happens when it gets put on the street. Or when one too many DSLs get put on a copper bundle and "bleed" on each other, canceling each other out. Let me tell you, trying to find that is a bitch.

Again, you're really at the mercy of your local providers. I can provide horror stories for each type of service - DSL, cable, T-1s, etc. But there is no doubt in my mind which service will generally be superior for the residential consumer.

I think I see why DSL is so good here. You cannot drive 2 miles without running into another Verizon CO. Basically, every potential customer here is "quite close to the CO"

"The attenuation of a copper DSL circuit in a typical network configuration is far worse than a cable line" This is simply not true. Attenuation over copper wire is attenuation over copper wire. The only reason it is packaged differently is for resistance to noise and interference from other sources. In order to have DSL, there must be twisted pair wiring from the CO all the way to the customer's home (unless the local provider really is selling a shitty product). Twisted pair is not quite as good as coax in terms of noise/EMI rejection, but it is close.

Comcast cable is most definitely NOT available in Fairfax County. Cox does have a non-exclusive franchise, and Comcast was issued one as well, but it has expired, and they only ever delievered service to one small area (Reston) and are now only negotiating to renew their franchise for that area. Cox is, and has been for a long time, the only cable option for the majority of the county.

[WSUCougar]

BTW, unless you're right next to the C/O or DSLAM, you'll never see 1.544 from a SDSL or ADSL circuit. The attenuation of a copper DSL circuit in a typical network configuration is far worse than a cable line. Of course, both types of services still tend to artifically "cap" bandwidth, but those caps are rising and the potential for cable is far greater than DSL.
Don't ya love it when Blackie talks technical and dirty? :D

[Samdari]

BTW, unless you're right next to the C/O or DSLAM, you'll never see 1.544 from a SDSL or ADSL circuit. The attenuation of a copper DSL circuit in a typical network configuration is far worse than a cable line. Of course, both types of services still tend to artifically "cap" bandwidth, but those caps are rising and the potential for cable is far greater than DSL.

Well, I also would not worry too much about the potential for caps on B/W over copper wires. Fiber-to-home is coming, making the question of whether the phone or cable company can deliver better internet a very easy proposition.

[Blackadar]

Isn't Reston still in Fairfax County? :) I remember having Comcast at home when I lived there. I think what you mean is that Comcast isn't widely available in Fairfax County. Also, doesn't RCN offer services as well after they purchased Erols?

I remember when Erols was a betamax tape rental store.

How the heck do you think you can get upwards of 4 megs on standard cable vs. a max of 1.544 on DSL (which is T-1 speed)? When you consider the average distance from the customer premise to the C/O vs. customer premise to the nearest cable fiber mode, you tend to realize that as a whole cable > DSL. You may be basing your experience on an atypical market, but I'm speaking globably (or at least continental USA). No. VA has had tremendous growth since 1980 and therefore has a newer telephone network, a very high population density, a wealthier and more IT-savvy populace than much of the country. Those factors, combined with a shitty cable company, may cause DSL > cable in Fairfax County.

Go to someplace like Winston-Salem, NC (pop. 175k, so it's not BFE), where you can easily be 3-5 miles from the nearest C/O with wire that's 30-50 years old vs. a new fiber cable network and you're talking a much different story.

[Blackadar]

Well, I also would not worry too much about the potential for caps on B/W over copper wires. Fiber-to-home is coming, making the question of whether the phone or cable company can deliver better internet a very easy proposition.

Fiber-to-the-home is already here in many newer (generally) upscale communities. I see cable companies having a greater advantage vs. phone. Cable companies supply VOIP, whereas phone companies generally have no competiting products for TV. I expect to see some mergers or serious joint-marketing between satelite companies and telecom to combat the all-in-one services that cable companies can offer.

I wouldn't bet much on local LEC telecom companies right now. Their home phone services are under serious competition from cable VoIP and cellular. Their business phone services are under seige from VoIP and CLECs. Their home internet has serious cable competition. Their business internet access is under seige from CLECs and cable companies. I continue to expect major consolidation...of course, there's still the potential for electric companies to become serious players too, especially in the central and mountain states.

[sterlingice]

Fiber-to-the-home is already here in many newer (generally) upscale communities. I see cable companies having a greater advantage vs. phone. Cable companies supply VOIP, whereas phone companies generally have no competiting products for TV. I expect to see some mergers or serious joint-marketing between satelite companies and telecom to combat the all-in-one services that cable companies can offer.
Before we sell the world to VOIP, let's see how the 911 service lawsuits shake out. If they have to start reserving resources for 911 calls instead of just halfassing it as they are now, then it's not nearly as attractive as it is now. It's something that needs to be done and should have been done a while ago.

SI

[sterlingice]

Don't ya love it when Blackie talks technical and dirty? :D
I'm even prouder that I understood what he said :)

SI

[Airhog]

Personaly experience in my area puts Cox cable internet heads and shoulders above SBC DSL. My speed is like 3 times faster than DSL, and I never have seen it slow down in the evenings. Maybe Im just lucky there, but I dont think I could go back to DSL.

[WSUCougar]

My computer has one - it's called a network adapter in the reference manual. I assume it's irrelevant that it's not located next to the phone jacks? It's higher up, next to the USB ports.

[jeff061]

Yeah thats what your are looking for. The network cable will either go from the DSL Modem to that port, or from the DSL Modem to the router to that port, depending on what you decide to do.

[WSUCougar]

Thanks a bunch, Jeff.