 
Bit
Premium
join:2009-02-19
00000 | Sure, so long as they have 1 customer ...charge $5000/mo for it or have a 100KB monthly cap. | |
|
me1212
join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO
 ·VOIPo
| What good is up to 18m if you cannot use it? I had WB and it was on MAYBE 4 hours a day and from 6am to 12pm on saturday and then off till monday! What kinda of cap will it have? On their 512 connection the cap I had was too small. I hope they do not get one cent of the stimulus money! They do not deserve it! Give it to MWISPs like millenicom, they have no cap and much better lag than WB. Or give it to FWISPs, they are even better a lot of the time. | |
|
 | 
Transmaster
Don't Blame Me I Voted For Bill and Opus
join:2001-06-20
Cheyenne, WY | Re: What good is up to 18m if you cannot use it? So this is what Dishnet Work is featuring. Noticed the ad's this last weekend. | |
|
| hottboiinnc
ME
join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH | What is Millenicom going to do with the money? they don't have any network at all. Everything is resold. I also called them about getting service with them and found their "CSR" to be a little rude along with the rest of the staff. | |
|
| | me1212
join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO | Re: What good is up to 18m if you cannot use it? So they can pay att and t-mobile for the ability to re-sell their stuff too.
I would rather it ALL go to REAL ISPs, (small)local internet originated, not tel/cablecos pretending to be ISPs. | |
|
| | | hottboiinnc
ME
join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH
 ·Time Warner Cable
·buckeye cable
| Re: What good is up to 18m if you cannot use it? TM is very picky on who resells and ATT is as well. Also Millenicom only resells VZ.
But resellers are NOT anyway a "real" ISP. They're just someone who piggy backs on someone else, and doesn't want to build out their own network to really do anything.
Also if it wasn't for Cable companies and the CLEC telco's we we'd still be for the most part stuck on dial-up and ISDN.
@Home was the first Cable ISP and the fastest ISP at the time. | |
|
| | | | me1212
join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO | Re: What good is up to 18m if you cannot use it? I know resellers are not "real" ISPs.
"Also if it wasn't for Cable companies and the CLEC telco's we we'd still be for the most part stuck on dial-up and ISDN" I know, but times change. | |
|
| | | | | hottboiinnc
ME
join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH
·Time Warner Cable
·buckeye cable
| Re: What good is up to 18m if you cannot use it? Times do change but not with all Cable or Telcos. Look at Cablevision they offer kick ass speeds and always have. Even after the @Home days. Comcast and are the only ones that down graded the speeds. RoadRunner was born then as well.
Cablevision should be given money to expand their services. Especially if they want to expand out side of their current service area. Buckeye Cablesystem has great products as well, prices maybe a little high but you always obtain your speeds,with a new DOCSIS network being built out now.
I think that if all of the providers used the same ISP just like they did with @home everything would be better. Keep the ISP separate from the Operator and all would work out fine.
Maybe re-create @Home and @Work | |
|
| | | | | | me1212
join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO | Re: What good is up to 18m if you cannot use it? That might work. I have heard cablevision is good they r working on 100m. | |
|
| | | | | | | hottboiinnc
ME
join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH | Re: What good is up to 18m if you cannot use it? Cablevision is always head of the curve so that doesn't surprise me at all.
does anyone on here remember the old at home domain? home.com wasn't it? | |
|
| |
| | me1212
join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO | Re: What good is up to 18m if you cannot use it? I know their FAP is what hurts them. I mean their caps are like TW level. | |
|
|
| me1212
join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO
1 edit | Re: 1500/256 has 17 GB down cap & 5 GB up cap Yeah, but if they can get fixed wireless or millenicom(they re-sell sprint/verizon mobile internet with no cap) then WB ain't so great. | |
|
| | fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| Re: 1500/256 has 17 GB down cap & 5 GB up cap Yea, but, there will always be exceptions. Your response to TK's post is just the same as "Yea, but if you can get cable or DSL then WB ain't so great."
For people that have no alternative but dialup, and even in some spots dial-up is still essentially 28.8kbps, then WB isn't bad.
Satellite service isn't meant for everyone. It's not even really there to get metro-based customers.. it's there to pick up those out of the reach of more common services. (ie: no other choice, which includes the options you're talking about) | |
|
| | | iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO | Re: 1500/256 has 17 GB down cap & 5 GB up cap Just to throw in my 2¢, WB's latency is off the charts compared with anything else I've seen. Even an overloaded WiSP conection. Dialup is downright low-latency in comparison, with pings around 200-250 ms in my experience. | |
|
| | | | Emiya
join:2006-03-30
Southington, OH | Re: 1500/256 has 17 GB down cap & 5 GB up cap Latency will always be higher on a satellite connection. It's a 23,000 mile trip each way to the bird so the speed of light is a major limiting factor. | |
|
| | | | | iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO | Re: 1500/256 has 17 GB down cap & 5 GB up cap Understood. Just throwing it out there... | |
|
| | | | | 
tim_k
Buttons, Bows, Beamer, Shadow, Kasey
Premium
join:2002-02-02
Stewartstown, PA
 ·Millenicom
 ·WildBlue
| said by Emiya  :Latency will always be higher on a satellite connection. It's a 23,000 mile trip each way to the bird so the speed of light is a major limiting factor. However, with WB's traffic shaping, pings double from what they should be. Mine were around 1200-1300 on avg. I once connected to my neighbors Hughs Sat service and pings were around 600. I could defintely see web pages come up faster.
I wonder what kind of traffic shaping tricks they'll use if you do get the 18 Mb plan. Maybe double pings again to 2400  ?
When I had WB, the caps didn't bother me, only once did I get close to 17 Gb. That's certainly better than the cap on many EVDO plans.
--
RIP my babys Buttons 1/15/94-2/9/07 & Beamer 7/24/08, Buttons, Buttons video, Beamer
| |
|
| | | | | |
| | | 
insomniac84
join:2002-01-03
Schererville, IN | Latency is higher and the value plan has an average download speed of 23.7kbps (threshold per 30 days broken down into kbps). This is really nothing great and definitely way overpriced. | |
|
| | | 
CaptainRR
Premium
join:2006-04-21
Blue Rock, OH | Like my at&t line only gets 19.2k dialup and no cell service. | |
|
| |
| 
Eat Me
join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ | Wow, right up there with Time Warner.
 | |
|
| jjeffeory
join:2002-12-04
USA
| Those caps are horrible. I have a friend who had Wild Blue because they couldn't get DSL or cable modem. They always had service problems and the caps were ridiculous. They jumped ship as soon a possible. Those caps are ridiculous for anything other than light "grandma" usage. | |
|
| | 
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
| Re: 1500/256 has 17 GB down cap & 5 GB up cap said by jjeffeory : Those caps are ridiculous for anything other than light "grandma" usage. And that statement is wrong. The caps of 17 GB down & 5 GB up would satisfy 95% of broadband users. And that group is not made up of grandmas. The 5% that have problems with those caps are VERY heavy users only.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page | |
|
| | | 
sturmvogel
Obama '08
join:2008-02-07
Houston, TX
1 edit | Re: 1500/256 has 17 GB down cap & 5 GB up cap said by TKJunkMail :said by jjeffeory : Those caps are ridiculous for anything other than light "grandma" usage. And that statement is wrong. The caps of 17 GB down & 5 GB up would satisfy 95% of broadband users. And that group is not made up of grandmas. The 5% that have problems with those caps are VERY heavy users only. In TK's world, no restrictions imposed by any* company can ever be wrong, no matter how outrageous. It is always the fault of the customer.
* - company he "invests" in, because ripping off customers is cool if making money for the shareholders. Service with a smile.
--
Obama '08. Will help resolve the terrible broadband issues we have that put us so far behind other countries. | |
|
| | | |
| | | |
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
| Re: 1500/256 has 17 GB down cap & 5 GB up cap said by elray :DSLR forums are dominated by the 5% who would exceed any such cap. You'll never convince the "power users" here that usage-sensitive, low-cost plans have their place. You'll never win an argument that telco, cableco, and wireless entities are often unprofitable selling broadband. I'm not in favor of caps. But if traffic shaping and throttling isn't allowed, I'm not sure whats left in the toolbox. I agree that the power users won't be happy. I just expect, naively no doubt, that they will recognize that they are outside the norm and admit that others find the offered plans more than adequate.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page | |
|
| | | |
sturmvogel
Obama '08
join:2008-02-07
Houston, TX
| said by elray :I'm not in favor of caps. But if traffic shaping and throttling isn't allowed, I'm not sure whats left in the toolbox. Easy. Selling truthfully what will be delivered, with no smoke and mirrors high speed numbers and hidden ridiculously low caps and calling users "abusers".
If that is only what they can afford, sure, I have no problem with that, but show in ALL advertisements the clear limits, not only the ridiculously high numbers that they know cannot be supported.
We as a society should not be getting used to be lied to and take that as a normal business practice.
--
Obama '08. Will help resolve the terrible broadband issues we have that put us so far behind other countries. | |
|
| | | | | me1212
join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO
1 edit | Re: 1500/256 has 17 GB down cap & 5 GB up cap You got a point.
I mean seriously, why cannot they not just tell us the truth, they want to skrew us as much as they can for as much as they can. | |
|
| | | jay_rm
join:2002-04-12
Netville
·Fox Valley Internet
·ViaTalk
1 edit | said by TKJunkMail :said by jjeffeory : Those caps are ridiculous for anything other than light "grandma" usage. And that statement is wrong. The caps of 17 GB down & 5 GB up would satisfy 95% of broadband users. And that group is not made up of grandmas. The 5% that have problems with those caps are VERY heavy users only. I actually have to agree...
My household has four people on-line (each with their own machine), two of which are 20-ish females. There are always multiple machines being used. I also run my own mail server, a web server and have multiple VoIP lines. Bottom line, we use the net a lot.
Our average use (right from my wireless ISP's logs) is ~7-10GB down and ~3-4 GB up PER MONTH. Shocking !
No, we don't watch on-line movies, ect (but you probably couldn't do that on sat anyway). A 17/5 cap would probably be acceptable, if required.
(edit) That said, I had sat service once (DirecWay) - it sucked the monkey - big time...
--
3500/512 5.7 GHz Motorola Canopy Wireless; FoxValley.net
'It looks just like a Telefunken U47 !' | |
|
|
| fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| Re: Great Idea! said by Mr Matt : If they get the price right and fast download speeds they might give the Cable ISP's a run for their money. Remember Direct Broadcast Satellite was the technology that stimulated the lethargic, indifferent, Cable Television Industry to introduce Digital Cable Service. Why settle for 55 Channels of crap when you can receive 200 Channels of crap via satellite for the same price. My brother in law chose Direct TV rather than settle for AT&T Cables poor service in 1998, even though cable tv was included in the homeowners association fee. The guests got AT&T Cable in their bedrooms. How does that relate to Broadband satellite? did I miss something? | |
|
| 
gimme5
join:2002-12-23
Kissimmee, FL
| said by Mr Matt : If they get the price right and fast download speeds they might give the Cable ISP's a run for their money. No way. If I could get 1Gbps with satellite, I'd still keep my 7mbps cable HSI service. It's all about the latency, you know? | |
|
|
| 
Simba7
join:2003-03-24
Billings, MT
| Re: I think funds should absolutely go to satelite broadband I still think Satellite Broadband sucks..
..but the older equipment would make sense for small rural towns. I lived in a tiny town (Broadus, MT) and there is no way to get a return for the latest DOCSIS gear. But if they were able to purchase used DOCSIS1 or 2 gear for next to nothing, then it'd give them an incentive to offer it.
Not to mention, it would benefit the environment. Remember the Recycling motto.. Reuse, Reduce, Recycle. We're using the "Reuse" portion and preventing e-waste by reusing old equipment.
Why do you think I operate a small DC out of my garage from PPro to Xeon servers that were "too old" to be usable? Throw Linux or *BSD on 'em and watch 'em fly. You'd be amazed what a Pentium Pro can do with Linux on it.
--
Bresnan 15M/1M|MyWS[P4HT@4.01GHz,2GB RAM,2x1TB HDDs,WinXP]|WifeWS[P4@2.4GHz,1GB RAM,60GB HDD,WinXP]|Router[2xP3@1GHz,640MB RAM,18GB HDD,Allied Telesyn AT-2560FX,Kingston KNE100TX,2xDigital DE504,Compaq NC3131,iPro/1000DP,Blitz BWI715,Gentoo Linux] | |
|
morbo
Complete Your Transaction
join:2002-01-22
00000
clubs: | prediction: blimp broadband returns! if the government is handing out money for broadband, i expect blimp broadband to return for a piece of that handout. any technology is viable if you give it enough of our taxes! | |
|
| |
hottboiinnc
ME
join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH | Sprint Broadband Direct. With all this money going to broadband why doesn't anyone start a service like Sprint's old Broadband Direct service they slowly got rid of? I'm sure they have the equipment still up and would be willing to sell it. | |
|
DoubleK
Doublek
join:2003-03-04
Beloit, WI
clubs:
 ·AT&T Midwest
·Charter Pipeline
| Here is a thought! I understand the complexity and cost of rolling fiber out to everyone's homes but how about building the 21st century information "interstate" much like my grandfather helped build the 20th century interstate?
Thought: lay all the main trunks down and let municipalities have access to it when they sell bonds or what have you or give access to parties with a private interest in access, ie gas stations and such.
This way you are using the federal muscle to shed these cross country pipes that only 5 major players own and control? Give what money is left over to municipalities as low interest development loans.
OH YEAH! We don't have lobbyists on our side seeking the same future we hope for otherwise we would have 100 new nuclear power plants and my elderly neighbors could afford their power and light bills. | |
|
|
See 6 replies to this post |
|
Opticwonders
Premium
join:2009-03-31
united state
·Metrocast Communic..
·Comcast
| All is good until they oversell Wildblue was perfectly fine until they oversold their network. They simply have more customers than they can technologically handle.
On another note -- WOW! 18mbps. Sounds better than some local cable providers, too bad the latency still stinks. | |
|
carralo
join:2005-06-10
Granite Falls, WA
·WildBlue
| Whats 18Mbps if the latency is 10 seconds I mean all the down pipe in the world isn't going to fix the cluster F of DAMA and the latency they introduced. HTTPS is so slow it brings back the days of start the load of website go make coffee, let the dog out and by the time the dog's done with his business the site page might be ready for you.
At current latency is 1500ms whats it going to be for this 10000ms.
Yes I have WB propak and it is better than dialup and that is questionable at times. | |
|
|
Opticwonders
Premium
join:2009-03-31
united state
·Metrocast Communic..
·Comcast
| Re: Whats 18Mbps if the latency is 10 seconds Think about this -- when you request a website, that request is sent from your house 22,000 miles to the satellite in space then sent 22,000 miles back down to an internet gateway where the site is sent 22,000 miles from the gateway to the satellite and then from the satellite 22,000 miles back to your home.
That's 88,000 miles in 2 to 3 seconds. Yes -- that kind of latency is horrible for VoIP, gaming, etc.. but amazing considering the distance it travels. | |
|
| | carralo
join:2005-06-10
Granite Falls, WA
·WildBlue
| Re: Whats 18Mbps if the latency is 10 seconds I'm compleatly aware of what has to happen with the signal. And I was with Wildblue back when the latency was 650ms-775ms and then 13 months later they introduced DAMA so they could overload the network and pushed the latency to 1500ms avg.
--
WildBlue Pro-Pack ● Beam 12, Riverside ● WRT54GSV4 ● Windows XP Pro | |
|
| | | 
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| Re: Whats 18Mbps if the latency is 10 seconds said by carralo :I'm compleatly aware of what has to happen with the signal. And I was with Wildblue back when the latency was 650ms-775ms and then 13 months later they introduced DAMA so they could overload the network and pushed the latency to 1500ms avg. well you will never get lateceny under 500 ms. That's just phsyics. the only way you could lowe it is to bring the satelites closer to earth but then that means having to have many many more satelites | |
|
| | | | zeddlar
join:2007-04-09
Jay, OK
| Re: Whats 18Mbps if the latency is 10 seconds Actualy the limit is around 450 but 500 is a good real world minimum but Carralo is right, I had wildblue as well from their start up until they used DAMA restrictions to limit gaming on their network and then the pings went from always being under 800ms to never being under 1500ms so I dropped them and went back to Hughes and got the buissness plan with a 2 watt transmitter and went for over a year with them with pings never over 800 but now they have oversold my satt. and my pings have went up here as well.
--
HughesNet small buissness $99 package / AMC9,83west/990Mhz./.98 dish/2 watt radio/HN7000s modem/ 4 computers on a linksy's wired network | |
|
Robotics
See You On The Dark Side
Premium
join:2003-10-23
Louisa, VA | Dont make me laugh Satellite in my book for the consumer, is only good for grabbing signals for the TV's out there...and nothing else. | |
|
Hpower
Roflmao
join:2000-06-08
Glendale, CA
·Charter Pipeline
1 edit | FAIL lol satellite...fail. I remember playing online games with my friends satellite connection. Was playing a first person shooter game. I shot, went and had lunch, and the bullet then finally came out of the gun thanks to the 500000000 latency.
--
The Internet is about to go down....it is actually. | |
|
Island Jeff
join:2005-07-18
·WildBlue
·TDS
| satellite, cellular, and the future As a wildblue customer, I don't see the point of this demonstration at all as it seems extremely improbable at this point that we will see actual plans available at this speed. Why not just show a DS3 line or a Gigabit connection also not available in the real world in rural locations at prices people can afford?
When they actually have satellite(s) and gateways in place and put a price and order form on the 18 Mbps plan a performance increase of an order of magnitude will be nice for rural users who have no other option (though it still won't hold a candle to low latency broadband; I hope at least they use the new capacity to get rid of the bad traffic shaping mechanisms). But until then it's like saying to the rural user "would you like to meet the most beautiful and smart lady you've ever seen" "oh, well at this point she is just a cartoon..."
quote:
Increased capacity might ease the incredibly low usage caps imposed upon customers, though upgrades obviously can do very little about miserable latency.
While I agree that satellite will never match low latency terrestrial broadband, and therefore I'd prefer the stimulus money go to low latency projects, fundamental upgrades could improve the latency greatly of the wildblue system. When wildblue first launched with unloaded satellites and gateways the latency was in the low 600 ms range from 2005 until 11 of 2006. I liked the system a lot then because things like ftp worked nice and quickly, I could type in realtime via ssh, etc (not as fast as dsl, still 5x slower, but now years later wildblue is around 18x slower to type in ssh than dsl which is noticeable.)
14-september-2005
ping -n 10 google.com
Pinging google.com [216.239.37.99] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 216.239.37.99: bytes=32 time=682ms TTL=238
Reply from 216.239.37.99: bytes=32 time=600ms TTL=238
Reply from 216.239.37.99: bytes=32 time=600ms TTL=238
Reply from 216.239.37.99: bytes=32 time=695ms TTL=238
Reply from 216.239.37.99: bytes=32 time=680ms TTL=238
Reply from 216.239.37.99: bytes=32 time=679ms TTL=238
Reply from 216.239.37.99: bytes=32 time=678ms TTL=238
Reply from 216.239.37.99: bytes=32 time=645ms TTL=238
Reply from 216.239.37.99: bytes=32 time=644ms TTL=238
Reply from 216.239.37.99: bytes=32 time=603ms TTL=238
vs Today where wildblue applies as much traffic shaping and more than the physical traffic shaping in order to make more economical use of their currently available bandwidth.
ping -n 10 google.com
Pinging google.com [209.85.171.100] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 209.85.171.100: bytes=32 time=1789ms TTL=234
Reply from 209.85.171.100: bytes=32 time=1242ms TTL=234
Reply from 209.85.171.100: bytes=32 time=1213ms TTL=234
Reply from 209.85.171.100: bytes=32 time=1258ms TTL=234
Reply from 209.85.171.100: bytes=32 time=1284ms TTL=234
Reply from 209.85.171.100: bytes=32 time=1214ms TTL=234
Reply from 209.85.171.100: bytes=32 time=1214ms TTL=234
Reply from 209.85.171.100: bytes=32 time=1252ms TTL=234
Reply from 209.85.171.100: bytes=32 time=1456ms TTL=234
Reply from 209.85.171.100: bytes=32 time=1297ms TTL=234
Ping statistics for 209.85.171.100:
Packets: Sent = 10, Received = 10, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 1213ms, Maximum = 1789ms, Average = 1321ms
quote:
In contrast, the usage caps of 5GB on 3G services seem robust by comparison, and we've slowly seen 3G operators eroding satellite broadband's already narrow market share.
I thought the 3G 5GB cap quoted above was also monthly -- is this not the case? If so, I don't see how a cellular 5 GB usage cap seems robust compared to 17 GB down + 5 GB up cap on wildblue's pro package or even the 7.5 + 2.3 on the most basic level of service (or is it robust because you can easily pay as you go and use more paying the overage fee with cellular?)
--
Very happy TDS DSL user | Wildblue in Lake Michigan | |
|
PlainFedUp
|  Goodbye soon Wildblue!
| |
|
Agent Smith
join:2008-07-07
New York | lol I feel so bad for rural people. | |
|
heatsker151
join:2007-10-14
Lebanon, PA
1 edit | Not surprised @ Denver... Denver is located ideally for all contig 48 geosynch satellites. The flat land to the south and located at an ideal angle overhead, you can probably expect "testing" to happen here, that would be unlikely to happen in say, rural Maine.
Happens to be the same reason that Comcast has its Titan Media Station located in metro Denver. Takes a pretty rare event (see March snowstorms) to interrupt satellite links. | |
|
|
|
|
WildBlue To Demonstrate 18Mbps Satellite
1500/256 has 17 GB down cap & 5 GB up cap
Great Idea!
·
Re: prediction: blimp broadband returns!