|reply to DrStrangLov |
Re: 2012 Popular Science Best of What's New Award
said by DrStrangLov:I did not say satellites shouldn't have a high latency. Of course they do. Obviously a satellite service will have a high latency. You are just determined that only affects gamers which is untrue.
Silbaco, what was design parameters of Wildblue/Exede? Was it advertised for commercial, with a faster connection than landline ISPs? Satellite will always have a longer latency than most all landline ISPs...that's physics. But, when you compare today's speed/latency with previous satellite providers, there has been an improvement.
I would like to see how well Exede works for something like I have been doing recently. The latency would definitely be an issue, but the connection would have solid speeds.
actions · 2012-Nov-18 3:19 pm · (locked)
said by silbaco:If you compared all land based ISPs to Exede (ViaSat-1 + Servers), Exede outperforms most all of them; those AcceleNet Servers are using "fingers" with some 60 mbps or so capacity, and can fetch web pages, and other web stuff extremely fast.
Obviously a satellite service will have a high latency.
In most all cases land based users are doing the fetching, and in reality, it is a slower process when compared to AcceleNet Servers.
VPN is extremely fast on Exede, its the laws of physics that slow down the process.
Exede's technology is first class state of the art...and compared to most land based ISPs, a better quality, with faster response times.
Again, its the physics, not Exede.
Exede has no plans of implementing DAMA, and in fact, is testing VOIP, and plans to offer this option for resale.
Wildblue, on the other hand, is a slower system; all your fetching was done at Gateway. Previous consumer based satellite systems are slower than Exede, PERIOD.
actions · 2012-Nov-18 8:10 pm · (locked)
When it comes to loading webpages, Exede does a pretty good job. But there are countless things that AccelNet cannot help with. VPNs might function okay on Exede, depending on what you do with them. But I know every high latency connection I have used, be it satellite or an extremely congested DSL/cable line, connecting remotely to a machine does not work so well. Especially when you do something particularly graphic intensive on the other end.
The project I am working on now and on and off for the foreseeable future performs optimally on at least 5mbps connection with a latency of ~60ms or lower. Anything that doesn't meet both of those requirements will still work, but productivity takes a hit. I don't have a connection at home that meets those requirements. It is not only noticeable, it is downright annoying.
actions · 2012-Nov-18 9:11 pm · (locked)
said by silbaco:Linux performs much better than MicroSlow...
graphic intensive on the other end...performs optimally on at least 5mbps connection with a latency of ~60ms or lower.
Chances are, many of these VPN like programs are fat bandwidth hogs that have not been dieting, like Linux does.
In other words, these programers have taken the easy path, which bloats programs, and pigs out on bandwidth.
Since programmers have no mandate to conserve bytes, then most all could care less about how much is transmitted over internet.
actions · 2012-Nov-18 11:14 pm · (locked)