Viscer
join:2005-07-25
Sandy, OR | I used it for a few years..Here is my take I didn't have any other choice. A poster above mentioned it, but my copper lines are 50 years old...I was lucky to get 28.8. I could get a fractional T1 line running at 118k or so, but it would cost me 200/month for the phone company and 200/month for the isp.
I'd have to go have lunch just to download a windows update or a driver for my video card. I played games...I could never patch. I always had to rent a cheap motel room to patch (don't tell my wife!)
They say 800-1200ms pings. Its far worse than this. If I just "pinged" a site, I might get 800-1200, but if I'm actually doing anything especially gaming, its more like 1500-2500 pings. Some games would work...Like wow, while others like DDO just make you stand there. If there is any character interaction (like pvp) tough luck.
The FAP was crazy. I could use it before, when it dropped you to dialup speeds for 4 hours...I'd just patch a game or large service pack over a 48h period, but with the new change, they kill your connection...you get zero service for 24h.
I had service with them for a bit over a year and had some problems connecting one day. The service guy said they would have to send someone out at 125$ to figure it out but it looked like it was my dw6000 modem...so just upgrade. I upgraded, signed another 15m contract and still had the problem. They then told me I'd still have to pay 125$ to get the guy to come out because my exterior hardware wasn't under warranty anymore.
I have since changed to Verizon EVDO and mounted an antennae on my roof, I barely get reception, but its less of a headache than the sat.
I respect all those that will say, well you chose to live out there. There are folks that wouldn't move because of internet...and that's cool. I just wish the fractional t1's were a little more reasonable....118k for 400/month? I'm not sure what I'm missing with how that bandwidth works out. |
|
| reply to Viscer
Re: I used it for a few years..Here is my take »www.onelasvegas.com/wireless/OR.html
Wireless ISPs in Oregon |
|
|
|
1 edit | reply to Viscer
wow I used to use HughesNet back when it was called Direcway. If you wen't over FAP you could get fullspeed back in like 2 hours.
24 hours? Thats ridiculous. They need to put more sattelites in the air, or make the sattelites bigger and carry more routers, and then offer a non-fap account for like 300 dollars a month or something.
And as far as the latency... Isn't it really just beams of light? Does it take a whole second for a beam of light to travel right outside our atmosphere and back?
Either way it's still amazing technology and I'm sure it will improve over time. |
|
 DrModemPremium
join:2006-10-19
USA
kudos:1 | reply to Viscer
Re: I used it for a few years..Here is my take try ISDN its about 118k and its alot cheaper. Just be careful if your in a Verizon area... |
|
| reply to nuclei2v5x
Re: wow It's radio beams, rather than light, but they suffer the same basic limitations. To be in a geosynchronous orbit, always in the same place relative to the sky, a satellite has to sit about 22,500 miles out in what's called the Clarke Belt (after Arthur C. Clarke, who originally proposed using geosync satellites for communication relays). To get that distance at the speed of light takes about 120 milliseconds, and then another 120 ms back to Earth. Double it again for the return trip. That's 480 ms bare minimum round trip, to which you add the latency from the network ops center to the target server and back, as well as all the network hardware it needs to run through at the NOC. Bottom line is that 600 ms is considered a minimum latency for satellite of that kind. Of course, that doesn't excuse when ping times go to 1000 or more, which is just bad performance on the part of the ISP.
There was talk years ago about using low-orbit satellites for broadband, which would shave the latency down to basically landline times. But because these satellites were constantly moving, you'd need to build at least 40 of them to provide continuous coverage, and that would require a large initial investment. |
|
