[conspire] suggestions for web based email

[Rick Moen]

OK, I'll give you one for free.

> What do I get for putting in the time and (if the claims don't hold
> water)  poking holes in your factual claims?  Because otherwise, I am
> not sure I care whether your claim about Chicago and Milwaukee is
> correct or not.

AT&T Uverse offers aDSL in Chicagoland for $50/month for 10 Mbps
download speeds with 1TB of data prepaid per month.  (Additional 50GB
blocks are $10 each.)

AT&T Uverse offers aDSL in Chicagoland for $50/month for 5 Mbps
download speeds with 1TB of data prepaid per month.  (Additional 50GB
blocks are $10 each.)  This is their cheapest, lousiest offer.
Personally, I would not willingly do business with AT&T for Internet
connectivity, if there were a better option (which fortunately I have).

Cited rates were for an invented street address adjacent to Wrigley
Field typed into https://www.att.com/shop/unified/availability.html.  
(Just call me Jake Blues.)  I mention this pursuant to the #1 warning I
posted upthread, that I'll cite yet again:

  Discussions of relative merits of ISPs tend to devolve into noise for
  a number of reasons:  1. It's difficult to take into account locality
  dependence (what's available depends greatly on where you are), and most
  commenters don't even try.

Pursuant to that, I am specifically _not_ claiming, not being a friggin'
moron, that the above two commercial offerings, or any other theoretical
offering, is available at arbitrary addresses vaguely called 'Chicago',
which as I'm sure you know often aren't actually even in that city, upon
examination of specifics.

Pursuant -further- to that, it's just not my job to find DSL offerings
that are available to, let alone amenable to, you, or your family, or
your friends in Chicago or anywhere else.  So, before you complain about
any of this:  I don't care.  I _really_ don't want to hear it.  I'm
basically amusing myself looking up the theoretical problem as stated.

$50/month work out to $300 for six months, slightly less than what I
am paying Raw Bandwidth Communications -- ignoring many differences
about which I Really Don't Care for baseline rough-comparsion purposes.
Said differences include static IP allocation.

I'll guesstime that with a static netblock, those AT&T offers would
still be in -- pun intended -- the ballpark.

And with that, I'm done.  Want to claim there's no price-comparable DSL
in Chicago?  You're provably mistaken.  Want to move the goalposts and
substitute pickier requirements?  Sorry, no, thanks for playing, and
please move along.