 Vamp5c077Premium
join:2003-01-28
MD
kudos:1 | reply to rtcpenguin
Re: Aboo? 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 :: |
|
| 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.  |
|
|
|
