Broadband

[redstar2000]

Well, here's my situation.

I have a dial-up connection and a 56k modem...that usually runs at 49.3k. I have an "accelerator" installed...which compresses text and graphics to speed up downloads.

Anytime I have the option to specify low graphics or no graphics, I use it.

Everything still takes too damn long.

Here's what I notice with distressing frequency. I click on a link. My browser sits there with its thumb up its ass for several seconds, then ventures a little arrow to the isp, which responds briefly...then wait some more until my browser sends another arrow...then wait some more while little arrows appear and disappear...and suddenly both little arrows come on at once and in a second or two the page appears.

In other words, broadband seems to me to be hardly worth the extra money when it seems to be the delays in establishing a working pathway rather than the actual time downloading that is the real problem.

Do people who have broadband have this problem?

Informed advice appreciated.

[Anarchist Freedom]

yah get broadband! its awsome i love it you could post more on che lives too

[ComradeRobertRiley]

my modem runs at 640.0 KPS

[Exploited Class]

I would suggest that anybody that has the option to upgrade to broadband from 56K dialup should. They have some pretty cheap packages out there for low end that is still going to be a significant and very noticable difference to 56K.

No matter how great the bandwidth, if your computer is pretty old like Pentium 233/266 or before, things are still going to be slow, like watching live video, listening to webcasts..ect. Also if you currently have issues with your computer , like spyware, a virus, not defragging, programs in the background running and sending data over the internet without you knowing it, bad or slow DNS server.... these things are still going to effect you and slow you down. One spyware/virus can make webpages take forever to come up, as it sends what you are doing, going on the web back to another server.

If you have a decent computer, a good ISP which most of them are marginally good at this point, you take good care of your computer and maintain it properly, then I'd say you will benefit greatly from having broadband.

Also it allows you to download 100 meg archive videos of newsreel made in 40's or speeches in the 50's or political debates, listen to high quality radio all over the world, download large programs that you couldn't before. Download 2 hour long books on tape in just a few minutes.

I suggest cable modems to all standard users, many ports are blocked at the ISP, they generally are a lot cheaper than DSL, and the upstream is getting better on them all the time.

If somebody spends more than 1 hour a day on the internet (not just checking email but surfing and posting and such) then I think they need broadband of some type.

If you decide to get one let me help you if you want RS2000, I use to work with this stuff all the time at 3Com and can help you maybe pick out a cheap firewall and such, and what are good packages to go with when on a budget.

[commie kg]

Upgrade to broadband, as long as you can get DSL or Cable. I have DirecWay satellite broadband, and it has it's quirks. It didn't just cost an arm and a leg to install, I had to throw in my soul, too.

But if you're going to be online alot, and don't want to tie up your phone, get broadband.

[Marxist in Nebraska]

I recommend upgrading from 56k...

Dialup sucks. Period.

I do most of my internet surfing from the network of my college computer lab or from the library at the University of Nebraska. Why? Because it is so much faster! I do not know exactly what the speed is--I have heard it is T-1 or better... I have also been on a cable modem, and that is far better than dialup as well--and it doesn't tie up the phone line.

[Goldfinger]

I used to have ISDN, that was utter carp. Now I can't imagine not having broadband. It's definately worth it.

[Invader Zim]

Originally posted by redstar2000@Oct 7 2003, 07:49 PM
Well, here's my situation.

I have a dial-up connection and a 56k modem...that usually runs at 49.3k. I have an "accelerator" installed...which compresses text and graphics to speed up downloads.

Anytime I have the option to specify low graphics or no graphics, I use it.

Everything still takes too damn long.

Here's what I notice with distressing frequency. I click on a link. My browser sits there with its thumb up its ass for several seconds, then ventures a little arrow to the isp, which responds briefly...then wait some more until my browser sends another arrow...then wait some more while little arrows appear and disappear...and suddenly both little arrows come on at once and in a second or two the page appears.

In other words, broadband seems to me to be hardly worth the extra money when it seems to be the delays in establishing a working pathway rather than the actual time downloading that is the real problem.

Do people who have broadband have this problem?

Informed advice appreciated.

It depends on what you really want to use it for. If you just wish to browse the web and visit forums such as this, then a 56K like the ones me and you use are fine, but if you ever actually want to download anything above a few MB's long then unless you upgrade, you are looking (possibly) at several hours of downloading where as a broadband connection will take mabe 5 minutes.

If you were to get a broadband connection such as ADSL or Cable (get ADSL so much better, and can be upgraded) then your speed problems would be solved, those I know who have broadband very rarley have any delays loading pages at all, and if you wish to exploit the vast amouts of music, games (perhaps not that one), films, useful software then IMO broadband is a must, it is also barley more in terms of cost that ISDN, which is a 64K connection (if you have 2 lines connected 128K).

Unfortunatly I live in a relitivly isolated village, and the bastard BT, wont connect our village unless they get more demand, and as the vast majority of people in my village are OAP's who wouldn't no where to begin with the net, I think its likley im going to have to survive in a broadband free existance.

[Invader Zim]

Originally posted by redstarshining+Oct 14 2003, 08:02 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (redstarshining @ Oct 14 2003, 08:02 PM)

Goldfinger

@Oct 14 2003, 06:43 PM
I used to have ISDN, that was utter carp. Now I can&#39;t imagine not having broadband. It&#39;s definately worth it.

well, in most cases ISDN has a slightly better latency than most other kinds of broadband, but it&#39;s slow and in most places way too expensive.

Here in Germany an ISDN flatrate actually costs more than an ADSL flatrate [/b]

ISDN isnt broadband...

[YKTMX]

Yes&#33; It&#39;s the one thing that makes my computer experience tolerable, and che-lives ofcourse&#33; Haha.

[Invader Zim]

Originally posted by redstarshining+Oct 14 2003, 08:49 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (redstarshining @ Oct 14 2003, 08:49 PM)

Originally posted by [email protected] 14 2003, 08:08 PM

Originally posted by [email protected] 14 2003, 08:02 PM

Goldfinger

@Oct 14 2003, 06:43 PM
I used to have ISDN, that was utter carp. Now I can&#39;t imagine not having broadband. It&#39;s definately worth it.

well, in most cases ISDN has a slightly better latency than most other kinds of broadband, but it&#39;s slow and in most places way too expensive.

Here in Germany an ISDN flatrate actually costs more than an ADSL flatrate

ISDN isnt broadband...

From Babylon Internetworking Terms Glossary:

"Broadband:
A transmission medium capable of supporting a wide range of frequencies.
It can carry multiple signals by dividing the total capacity of the medium into multiple, independent bandwidth channels, where each channel operates only on a specific range of frequencies. See also: baseband."

So, technically it is broadband. Note that you can also use ISDN over high bandwidth lines.

Anyway, I wasn&#39;t suggesting anyone to get ISDN, since over a phoneline it is, as you stated in your post above, limited to 64k/128k. I was just pointing out that it usually has a good latency/speed ratio.

If they have the cash, I always suggest people to get ADSL, which is usually a good idea, as long as you pick
the right ISP. [/b]

To be broadband the connection must be over 256K, as you know the max ISDN can be is 128K.

ISDN is also dial up, and therefor not permanantly "swiched on", which is another feature of broadband.

[Exploited Class]

Originally posted by Enigma+Oct 14 2003, 12:08 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Enigma @ Oct 14 2003, 12:08 PM)

Originally posted by [email protected] 14 2003, 08:02 PM

Goldfinger

@Oct 14 2003, 06:43 PM
I used to have ISDN, that was utter carp. Now I can&#39;t imagine not having broadband. It&#39;s definately worth it.

well, in most cases ISDN has a slightly better latency than most other kinds of broadband, but it&#39;s slow and in most places way too expensive.

Here in Germany an ISDN flatrate actually costs more than an ADSL flatrate

ISDN isnt broadband... [/b]

Me being an ISDN technician for the last 3 years I can tell you that it is Broadand. It is a lot better than Satellite Boradband and it has a lot better upload than Cable modems did for the longest time. Also it allows for greater security in it can actually dial not just to an ISP but also to a corporate HQ server. You can set a route on your ISDN router that says if I ever try to go to 192.169.100.X then auto dial to the corporate HQ but channel 2 stay on the internet. Also you can have site 1 connect to site 2 and the internet and site 2 can connect to site 3 with its remaining channel and you can create a very secure WAN of 3 sites. Also it can be set to never disconnect which 56K has real issues with, then there are the 2 phone lines that come with ISDN which a lot of buisnesses like.

You can get 1 64K channel, 2 64K channels which is popular in the US, 3 64K channels which is more popular in Europe. Then it cna go all the way up to 23 or so channels which give one a 1.44 mbit T1 like connection. Then you can throw in the BACP protocol (bandwidth Allocation Control Protocol) and pay per line use, and each channel only becomes active when a threshold is reached on a previous channel like 80% utilized. Then you only pay for when you need to use all those lines and not a flat T1 fee that you may never use from 5PM to 8AM.

The cost of ISDN is coming down in the US over the last 4 years. It use to be around 120 dollars a month for 2 line connection plus cost of each call made (nickle) and how long you used it (nickle per minute). That was horrible, now qwest and ameritech and Southernbell (not texas) have a flat 40 to 50 dollar a month fee with unlimited calls and unlimited use.

What is funny is the different packages and being tech support helping customers out. It cost to call but doesn&#39;t cost to use. Set the routers to dial out and never disconnect and to be sure make a script that ran in the background that ping the ISPs DNS server with 0 bytes of data continously. ping 155.122.11.231 - t -l 0.

And now they are releasing a new version of ISDN which they are marketing as ISDN broadband (makes all of us laugh at tech support because ISDN always was broadband but it is marketing what are you going to do) and it will cost less than normal ISDN and be as fast as DSL but it will have the same up and down. So 512/512, which if you know by DSL standards that costs a shitload, I have 786/256 and that is almost 100 a month with 3 IPs. 768/768 would cost me almost 250 dollars a month or so.

[Rastafari]

I know very little about this technological infrastructure that we human beings inhabit, so I&#39;ll make it brief (besides, If your using a 56k, the less info the better&#33.

I think it all boils down to conveniance and time. You obviously don&#39;t seem to worried about waiting, so I&#39;d weigh out other things you could do with the money as well.

That being said, having a DSL is quite nice.

[Goldfinger]

Originally posted by Exploited Class@Oct 14 2003, 11:52 PM
Me being an ISDN technician for the last 3 years I can tell you that it is Broadand. It is a lot better than Satellite Boradband and it has a lot better upload than Cable modems did for the longest time. Also it allows for greater security in it can actually dial not just to an ISP but also to a corporate HQ server. You can set a route on your ISDN router that says if I ever try to go to 192.169.100.X then auto dial to the corporate HQ but channel 2 stay on the internet. Also you can have site 1 connect to site 2 and the internet and site 2 can connect to site 3 with its remaining channel and you can create a very secure WAN of 3 sites. Also it can be set to never disconnect which 56K has real issues with, then there are the 2 phone lines that come with ISDN which a lot of buisnesses like.

You can get 1 64K channel, 2 64K channels which is popular in the US, 3 64K channels which is more popular in Europe. Then it cna go all the way up to 23 or so channels which give one a 1.44 mbit T1 like connection. Then you can throw in the BACP protocol (bandwidth Allocation Control Protocol) and pay per line use, and each channel only becomes active when a threshold is reached on a previous channel like 80% utilized. Then you only pay for when you need to use all those lines and not a flat T1 fee that you may never use from 5PM to 8AM.

The cost of ISDN is coming down in the US over the last 4 years. It use to be around 120 dollars a month for 2 line connection plus cost of each call made (nickle) and how long you used it (nickle per minute). That was horrible, now qwest and ameritech and Southernbell (not texas) have a flat 40 to 50 dollar a month fee with unlimited calls and unlimited use.

What is funny is the different packages and being tech support helping customers out. It cost to call but doesn&#39;t cost to use. Set the routers to dial out and never disconnect and to be sure make a script that ran in the background that ping the ISPs DNS server with 0 bytes of data continously. ping 155.122.11.231 - t -l 0.

And now they are releasing a new version of ISDN which they are marketing as ISDN broadband (makes all of us laugh at tech support because ISDN always was broadband but it is marketing what are you going to do) and it will cost less than normal ISDN and be as fast as DSL but it will have the same up and down. So 512/512, which if you know by DSL standards that costs a shitload, I have 786/256 and that is almost 100 a month with 3 IPs. 768/768 would cost me almost 250 dollars a month or so.

...






LIAR&#33;

[commie kg]

I had ISDN for awhile, and I even like the Satellite broadband better. The upload speeds are slow (11 kilobytes p/s) but the download speeds are fast as hell (600+ kilobytes p/s). Now, it does cost &#036;100 a month, but it&#39;s better than dial-up or ISDN in my opinion.