dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
36
share rss forum feed

MASantangelo
Premium
join:2004-07-19
Pittstown, NJ
reply to iansltx

Re: I'll beat the 3/768 dead horse

3/768 for what? Your average household of 2 adults and 2 children?

What about my college apartment, consisting of 8 college students (including myself). 3/768 is not nearly enough. Cablevision has been supposedly providing us 30/5 (supposedly because, well, at any given moment we get 3/1 due to 'node saturation') and I can tell you: It is NOT enough.


Duramax08
To The Moon
Premium
join:2008-08-03
San Antonio, TX
Its better then dial up right? The transition from dial up to 3/768 would be a miracle for alot of people. It might not make you happy but im sure it will make a household with 2 adults and 2 children happy. Im grateful with my 1 mbps down and 40kbps up. Would I love something faster, You bet your ass I would but atleast im out of that dial up hellhole no one wants to be in.
--
Would like a landline but wireless will work for now.

patcat88

join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1
said by Duramax08:

Its better then dial up right? The transition from dial up to 3/768 would be a miracle for alot of people. It might not make you happy but im sure it will make a household with 2 adults and 2 children happy. Im grateful with my 1 mbps down and 40kbps up. Would I love something faster, You bet your ass I would but atleast im out of that dial up hellhole no one wants to be in.
Look, even your not on dialup. Nobody is. Anyone who really needs web access and is stuck on dialup has gotten wildblue by now. Its slow, but youtube and microsoft updates is somewhat usable now. With a contract, the equipment is basically free. Today's dialup is satellite, 3G and DSL less so.


Cheese
Premium
join:2003-10-26
Naples, FL
kudos:1
said by patcat88:

said by Duramax08:

Its better then dial up right? The transition from dial up to 3/768 would be a miracle for alot of people. It might not make you happy but im sure it will make a household with 2 adults and 2 children happy. Im grateful with my 1 mbps down and 40kbps up. Would I love something faster, You bet your ass I would but atleast im out of that dial up hellhole no one wants to be in.
Look, even your not on dialup. Nobody is. Anyone who really needs web access and is stuck on dialup has gotten wildblue by now. Its slow, but youtube and microsoft updates is somewhat usable now. With a contract, the equipment is basically free. Today's dialup is satellite, 3G and DSL less so.
Nobody is on dialup? I am sure those millions still on AOL would beg to differ.

patcat88

join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1
said by Cheese:

Nobody is on dialup? I am sure those millions still on AOL would beg to differ.
Either they subscribe to AOL and don't use the dialup portion anymore, or they don't use the public internet, or the public internet is optional in their life, and they would drop it on a dime for financial reasons if they had to.


Duramax08
To The Moon
Premium
join:2008-08-03
San Antonio, TX
reply to patcat88
I was on dial up for years and didnt want to deal with the crap of satellite internet. Satellite internet (for example) is for people in the sticks miles and miles away from society . Not for people less then a mile away from san antonio city limits.
--
Would like a landline but wireless will work for now.


Mike
Premium,Mod
join:2000-09-17
Pittsburgh, PA
kudos:1

1 recommendation

reply to Cheese
I have fios... 3/768 is dial up to me.


CaptainRR
Premium
join:2006-04-21
Blue Rock, OH
reply to patcat88
All I have is dialup at my house and no cellular and I can do Microsoft updates and other things on a 19.2k dial connection. I just start the downloads at night and go to bed and when I get up the next morning walla! good to go. Updates finished.


CylonRed
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-06
Bloom County

1 edit
reply to patcat88
Tell that to my father - he is on dialup and there are MANY more who are.

He has no options and he bought the house he is at many years before broadband was even available.

iansltx

join:2007-02-19
Austin, TX
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·Verizon Online DSL
reply to MASantangelo
Sounds like you're on 3/1

I'm not saying that 3/768 will do everything you can possibly desire for a ton of people on one connection. But it's a decent "family sized" internet connection as long as your router is smart enough (router, not network) to prioritize surfing and video watching over BitTorrent that Johnny's running in his room.

iansltx

join:2007-02-19
Austin, TX
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·Verizon Online DSL
reply to patcat88
Have you used satellite? Having used both dialu and satellite there are times when dialup is actually FASTER than sat. Latency is actually less than 200ms with a decent dialup connection...sat is 4-10x that. Also, sat internet starts at $50 per month (WB's $40 promo currently going on doesn't count for much...it'll be gone soon enough and your average cost for the length of the required two-year contract is $45). Your garden-variety DSL/cable services run $30-$40 for a standard tier last I checked.

As for equipment costs, they might be "practically" free (aka $6 per month for 24 months, or $140ish overall) but installation is over $100 most of the time (WB's current special for shipping + installation is $125).

In closing, from my LARGE amount of experience with areas where DSL doesn't reach (thank you very much Verizon...the nearby cooperative may charge $70 for 3M DSL but at least DSL is available pretty much everywhere they have phone service) there are still a surprisingly large number of folks on dialup. Sat internet is a luxury at $50+ per month plus setup fees, whereas dialup is about $10 per month. Guess what grandma gets to check her e-mail? Guess what I downloaded several GB worth of software over until my parents got tired of sharing our phone line with?

patcat88

join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1

1 edit
said by iansltx:

Have you used satellite?
As of 3 weeks ago I have.
said by iansltx:

Having used both dialu and satellite there are times when dialup is actually FASTER than sat. Latency is actually less than 200ms with a decent dialup connection...sat is 4-10x that.
Latency means nothing when the average website is 200 or 400 KBs. My thread that I am posting in is 164KB, 52KB of HTML. Satellite will be faster than dialup. I would say satellite is a slow 3G connection in its feeling, or about a 3G connection after average cell tower congestion in an urban area.
said by iansltx:

Also, sat internet starts at $50 per month (WB's $40 promo currently going on doesn't count for much...it'll be gone soon enough and your average cost for the length of the required two-year contract is $45). Your garden-variety DSL/cable services run $30-$40 for a standard tier last I checked.
Close enough, unbundled cable internet with some cable cos can go into the 60s or 70s.
said by iansltx:

As for equipment costs, they might be "practically" free (aka $6 per month for 24 months, or $140ish overall) but installation is over $100 most of the time (WB's current special for shipping + installation is $125).
So they give you a mortgage/subsidy cellphone style, its basically under $10 a month amortized.
said by iansltx:

In closing, from my LARGE amount of experience with areas where DSL doesn't reach (thank you very much Verizon...the nearby cooperative may charge $70 for 3M DSL but at least DSL is available pretty much everywhere they have phone service) there are still a surprisingly large number of folks on dialup. Sat internet is a luxury at $50+ per month plus setup fees, whereas dialup is about $10 per month. Guess what grandma gets to check her e-mail?
Shes checking email, not using the WWW. Shes not a browser. Shes the same as a credit card checker or a MUD player or IM user.
said by iansltx:

Guess what I downloaded several GB worth of software over until my parents got tired of sharing our phone line with?
But you apparently have a few spare days to wait for that to finish, if you use the connection while its downloading, extended that download into a week or 2. Some people have jobs, or will be left behind when they can't see a youtube video that was posted to review for a conference tomorrow.


NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:12
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC
reply to MASantangelo
said by MASantangelo:

What about my college apartment, consisting of 8 college students (including myself). 3/768 is not nearly enough. Cablevision has been supposedly providing us 30/5 (supposedly because, well, at any given moment we get 3/1 due to 'node saturation') and I can tell you: It is NOT enough.
True enough, but ... Split the cost of the Internet 8 ways, each contributor kicking in just $20 a month, and you could probably afford the $160 a month for a 50/5 connection. Would that be enough to sate your desire?

For some of us, though, $160 a month is just too much to bear. Knock it back to $40 a month, or so (I prefer $30 a month, but don't know if that is achievable), and I'll sign up. But no way I'll pay even $80 a month for Internet. I'll just find something else to do.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum

iansltx

join:2007-02-19
Austin, TX
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·Verizon Online DSL
reply to patcat88
Heard of TubeGrip? I have to use that to get YT videos to download sometimes over "broadband" connections due to congestion somewhere along the line (possibly at Google's servers).

As far as unbundled cable goes, you can get a basic tier for $20-$35 practically everywhere. Here TWC offers RR Standard for $40, no bundles. DSL from Verizon is $20-$43...if you can get it. So sat internet picks up price-wise where DSL/cable leave of, thus killing adoption.

As far as 3G versus satellite goes, look at any 3G reviewer who has moved from satellite. 99% of the time they'll say there's no comparison; unless you're using an overloaded network (thank you very much AT&T...second-least-predictable 3G network out there behind CricKet) your 3G experience will be miles better than satellite. About 22,000 miles better, to be exact.

As for equipment amortization, you only do that if you're a business. If you're a residential user you see the large setup fee and tend to walk away. Speaking of business users, you're right in saying that they'll go for satellite from dialup before residential users. However not all residential users are business users (far from it) and for many $10 dialup plus a $20 phone line (local only, after taxes and fees) is low enough compared to $50 per month plus that same phone line (you can't do VoIP over sat) that they aren't going to make the switch. Sat internet doesn't do double- or triple-play discounts so people will be paying $40+ more per month for it than dialup, $20+ mmore per month if they had a second phone line for internet only.

Satellite is NOT the new dialup because it's not cheap (I haven't seen a dialup plan anywhere outside of AOL above $22 per month in the last eight years or so) and it's very spendy for the initial equipment, whereas dialup might be $50 for a modem (usually more like $20). If you want to say anything is "the next dialup" it's "lite" DSL in areas that have the service for $10-$20 per month when bundled with a phone line as that service is inexpensive on both setup and monthly charges. However lite DSL isn't available beyond 15-22kfeet from the CO (depending on whether you're talking to AT&T or Windstream).

Lastly, DSLReports is a text-heavy site that has very little in the way of essential content other than the HTML page file itself. That sort of thing (a large stream of data that isn't latency sensitive) is what satellite does fairly well. However a website with multiple page elements will tend to choke more unless optimizations are made, since you get hit with a second or two of latency each time you request a page element. So elements smaller than about 20KB will come down faster over dialup than satellite. Don't get me wrong, I'll take sat any day over dialup when it comes to downloading the newest 30MB game file...as long as doing so won't put me over the transfer cap.

iansltx

join:2007-02-19
Austin, TX
kudos:2
reply to NormanS
Whereas I'd probably eat a $100 per month internet bill if FiOS came to town (I'd buy through DSLExtreme to get the $100 rate). Though I'd probably downgrade to 35/35 when it comes out...different strokes for different folks.


yolarry

join:2007-12-29
Creston, WV
Reviews:
·Frontier Communi..
·HughesNet Satell..
reply to Cheese
said by Cheese:

Nobody is on dialup? I am sure those millions still on AOL would beg to differ.
and Hughesnet
--
HN7000S 5.6.1.35 - 99 West 1370 MHz -Transmit 1 watt - .74m Dish - Pro Plan - installed October 2007 - WRT54G V6 DD-WRT V24


skuv

@rr.com
reply to patcat88
said by patcat88:

Look, even your not on dialup. Nobody is. Anyone who really needs web access and is stuck on dialup has gotten wildblue by now. Its slow, but youtube and microsoft updates is somewhat usable now. With a contract, the equipment is basically free. Today's dialup is satellite, 3G and DSL less so.
Are you joking or something? If everyone that had dialup that needed access to the web switched to satellite Internet, sat Internet providers would be some of the biggest providers out there.

They are NOT. Not even close. They aren't even bigger than major dialup providers.

Plenty of people that use the web are on dialup. They just obviously don't use YouTube or Hulu.


michieru
Premium
join:2009-07-25
Miami, FL
Reviews:
·Comcast Business..
reply to MASantangelo
Colleges normally have and pay for hard lines providing internet access to their students in dorms or the college in general.

Also if you have 8 college students more than likely downloading music, uploading videos on youtube, and watching hd movies on a free movie site all at once, then yeah, not even 30/5 will just barely handle that.

Not everyone is a college student, and 3.0/768 serves quite well for a family for web browsing, and just making everything faster in general.

If you eliminate video and music from your web experience, 3.0/768 will be sufficient for keeping your computers up to date and downloading large iso files from linux distros.

Can't wait 5-20 minutes to download an entire operating system? If not, I think you are just a spoiled brat who does not care if he or she puts half the country in more debt, just to run a fiber optic line at a cost of thousands of dollars per househould and further tax burdening the american tax payer.

The fastest line I ever had was a 10/2 from some cable company that me and room mate paid 60 dollars a month for at the time in 2008.

We both never saw the need for 10/2 and I was the one normally downloading stuff such as music off amazon (because itunes blows) and watching comedy shorts from comedy central on youtube. I live in NC right now, but I used to live in Miami, FL.

The only reason I ever saw the need for such capacity was because I ran a FTP server and ran a small business at the time, and even then I was only asking for 3.0/3.0 just because I wanted to save and download files from my FTP server back home and exchanged project data.

3.0/768 is good enough for now, and for 10 years down the road. Until html files are 3-10mb in size, I don't see it becoming a problem anytime soon, enough said.


Mike
Premium,Mod
join:2000-09-17
Pittsburgh, PA
kudos:1
technological advancement: because the hand crank was good enough


CylonRed
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-06
Bloom County
Technical advancement will go on but the cost to deploy the fastest to those hardest to reach will cost billions more than people seem to think.

Most people (general population) do nto need 20\10 - common sense and common sense that advancement WILL continue (like Internet2). Advancement will not stagnate due to gvt\military\University needs and that will always filter down to the private sector.
--
Brian

"It drops into your stomach like a Abrams's tank.... driven by Rosanne Barr..." A. Bourdain