smackdowner1
join:2006-11-22
Deering, AK
| reply to smackdowner1
Re: topic reply
I don't know what the rule is about bumping or posting a new question in this topic.
So (still relevant to satellites) how come a satellite (say .6 meters in diameter) for internet is weaker than Verizons laptop/cell phone connection? I mean the dish is meant for sending and receiving (if its two way) and a small cell phone w/ laptop is faster?
I've heard Verizons' plan goes around 200-300 ping? Way faster than an average 1400ms roundtime of WildBlue.
I apologise if this is not understandable. |
|
randyvsatus
Premium
join:2005-03-03
Monument, CO
 ·Qwest.net
| said by smackdowner1  :...I've heard Verizons' plan goes around 200-300 ping? Way faster than an average 1400ms roundtime of WildBlue. Distance to satellite = approx. 22,300 mi
Distance to cell tower = approx 1-5 mi.
--
Surfbeam ku|5000/768|1.2M |4 watt|IA 8||Qwest DSL|7168 / 896 Kbps |
|
Fox McCloud
Crazy like a fox.
join:2006-07-23
·Embarq
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
| reply to smackdowner1
in theory, a cellular broadband connection could have latency just as low as fiber, cable, and DSL (provided the tower wasn't being used by an INSANE amount of people at the same time). Sadly, the cell-towers are not optimized for internet usage, so you end up getting around 350 ms ping times with 1xRTT networks.
Luckily Sprint is upgrading all their towers (slowly) so that it's more optimized for internet usage. I'd say that this will truly be the savior of the rural people who are in the boonies, but still well within range of a cell phone tower (as is my case...where I have 5 bar coverage with Sprint, Cingular, and Verizon at my house). It will allow you to have a true broadband connection with low latency.
Supposedly their entire network is going to be upgraded with EVDO Revision A by summer to mid-summer...but we all know how well companies are at projecting things. |
|
