| Aboo? Why the hell would anyone want that?
"Uh, I want to go faster, but not too much faster."
I guess it might be people like my father who believe its easier to get viruses with faster connections.
--
Team [ASA] |
|
 quantaPremium
join:2002-05-07
Toronto, ON | Simple, it's a gateway drug. It's for people who really can't afford anything more, and are resistant to change. It's for the AOLers.
By giving them always-on broadband connection, they may suddenly release how cooler the Internet is with broadband, and start looking into the higher priced, faster tiers...
--
Happy customer of TOROON08CGO | Silentblue.net
Canadian DSL Troubleshooting and Why Can't I Get It? FAQs |
|
 DrTCPYours trulyPremium,ExMod 1999-04
join:1999-11-09
Round Rock, TX
1 edit | reply to rtcpenguin
64/64 is a great option at $20 for those that want to transition from dial-up...
- Downstream is a tad faster than dial-up (wrt 56kbps model)
- Upstream is a lot faster than dial-up
- Low latency. Better internet experience...
- Always on. No need to wait for connection when you want to check something.
- No worry about getting a call while online or eliminate second line |
|
 Vamp5c077Premium
join:2003-01-28
MD
kudos:1 | reply to rtcpenguin
yeah that totally sucks, that isn't even considered broadband, that isn't really much faster than dialup.. 64k is only like 8kb/s
--
:: My current desktop :: |
|
| reply to DrTCP
exactly. There are many people who are price sensitive and they aren't all "aol users".
There are rapidly diminishing returns with speed.
The low latency is a radical change for gamers.
Most people on dial-up are NOT getting the theoretical maximum of a 56k modem so the speed is more likely a 50%-100% jump, which would move normal net activities like browsing from the frustrating to the mostly satisfying.
One then has freedom to even ditch one's main phone line and go wireless.
No tedium as with call-setup.
Only real disadvantage in comparison to higher speed is large file downloads and higher quality streaming.
You get, lets say, 80% of the advantages of broadband at little additional cost over dial-up. These types of things are a great deal for many people.
I do think the ideal would be 128 for $20, but I'm probably nit-picking. |
|
Vamp5c077Premium
join:2003-01-28
MD
kudos:1 | not exactly true about the gaming ... 64kbps is probably to low for the high player games, it would consume the entire pipe.
--
:: My current desktop :: |
|
 Andrew JPremium
join:2001-11-09
Lancaster, PA | reply to rtcpenguin
OMG that's only for people who can't make up their mind. All the hassles of broadband with none of the benefits! |
|
| reply to Vamp
said by Vamp:
yeah that totally sucks, that isn't even considered broadband, that isn't really much faster than dialup.. 64k is only like 8kb/s
Broadband has nothing whatsoever to do with speed.
If it's cable internet, it's broadband. |
|
| oh really? whats so 'broad' about 64k? and why do we have the term 'narrowband'?
the word's got EVERYTHING to do with speed.
and this plan's pathetic when the bells offer dsl for about the same price as this provider's 128k POS. |
|
Vamp5c077Premium
join:2003-01-28
MD
kudos:1 | reply to reaver221
yes I know the main thing that makes it broadband is the always on side of it ... but in my book it is NOT broadband because it is to slow to view broadband content (streams).
--
:: My current desktop :: |
|
DrTCPYours trulyPremium,ExMod 1999-04
join:1999-11-09
Round Rock, TX | said by Vamp:
yes I know the main thing that makes it broadband is the always on side of it ... but in my book it is NOT broadband because it is to slow to view broadband content (streams).
Yeah, calling it broadband is probably not a good idea but nevertheless it is a service that will be embraced by many if offered. You might not use it but I see no problem giving users some more options.
A lot of the activities done by average user would be more enjoyable with respect to dial-up.
A lot of people are happy just with email, web, shopping, banking, online tax preperation, etc. IM, and occasional song downloads. This constitute over 90% of internet activities that does not demand bandwidth. They are actually happy to go out and do something else then sitting behind the computer most of the day.
Even average internet usage for most geeks are not that high as they think. Really high bandwidth content is not readily available or costly at this moment... |
|
1 edit | reply to gilseed
said by gilseed:
oh really? whats so 'broad' about 64k? and why do we have the term 'narrowband'?
Well, I suppose there are two different ways to look at it.
I consider it to be broadband because it uses shared transmission media - CATV, which also carries cable TV.
OTOH, there are various definitions of 'narrowband', like less than 28.8k, less than 56k, less than or equal to 64k, voice-grade or lower (how fast is that?), less than a T1 line (!?), and so on.
So I don't know. Matter of opinion, I guess.
edit: Just to clarify, I was thinking broadband vs baseband ... different sort of idea.  |
|
 bklynitePremium
join:2001-03-18
Brooklyn, NY | reply to Vamp
It's plenty fast. Very very few games right now require more than 20 kbps upload and 50 kbps download, which this service provides. The real benefit comes in the ping times which should greatly improve and allow people to have more fun in online games.
--
W-Train.com Webmaster | »www.bklynite.com | I ♥ NY |
|
|
|
| reply to DrTCP
No 128k down/64k up is a great replacement for dialup at 20 bucks a month. 64/64 is perfect at 10 dollars a month. Rogers is just trying to pull a scam. |
|
 KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
 ·AT&T DSL Service
| reply to rtcpenguin
I can think why this is useful.
It gets the people who don't want to spend more or cant afford more to switch from dial-up to a single connection.
For example I know a guy who has one newer PC and 2 older ones. His teenage daughter has one in her room, he has one in his office area, and their newer machine is a "general use" machine that anyone can use.
They are not big internet users; News, IM, a little email, some online bill pay, etc etc
Currently, all three machines have dial-up modems. They all have their own cellphones, but they keep a landline for the computers. Problem is, only one can be on at a time.
I've mentioned before to them networking, and they think it sounds interesting, but when I start talking about DSL or cable Internet they are like "Nah, we don't use it a lot... we don't need to spend $40 a month on it."
This type of plan would work for this family. Sure, it's not the fastest connection, but it would be dedicated, eliminate the dial up (they could even drop the line altogether).
--
"Regulatory capitalism is when companies invest in lawyers, lobbyists, and politicians, instead of plant, people, and customer service." - former FCC Chairman William Kennard (A real FCC Chairman, unlike the current Corporate Spokesperson in the job!) |
|
DrTCPYours trulyPremium,ExMod 1999-04
join:1999-11-09
Round Rock, TX | reply to insomniac84
said by insomniac84:
No 128k down/64k up is a great replacement for dialup at 20 bucks a month. 64/64 is perfect at 10 dollars a month. Rogers is just trying to pull a scam.
It is still great replacement considering you get significantly more upstream, a tad more downstream, lower latency and always on connection.
Typically with a 56kbps modem, regulatory bodies only allow speeds up to 53kbps. Even that is very very rare. Typically you get somewhere around 40-48kbps. 64kbps will be about 25% more in reality.
On the upstream the connection is usually around 24-28kbps (128-166% more).
Remember there are also savings from dial-up connection charges or if there was second line, it is totally eliminated.
So, for a dial-up user with a second line switching to 64/64 always on connection might even save some money.... |
|
