![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 16 Dec 2010 14:45:10 -0800 (PST), Larry L
wrote: My kid is moving back home while he waits to head off to grad school. In the mean time he has three jobs, two of which are as research assistants for professors and apparently require lots of time on the Internet. So, I guess we're in the market for a fast connection. Nothing "wired" is available out here and I'm trying to figure out the differences between "radio" and satellite wireless providers. Currently my little tray icon says 26.4 kbps and I'm also trying to get a feel for how much faster 1.5 megabyte/sec is and how that should be abbreviated ... MB/sec MBps mbps mb/sec etc etc. I thought I knew some of this stuff but it's many many years since I had any real interest in puters and my "knowledge: has evaporated. After thumbing through 3 wireless ISP companies brochures I'm even more confused than my norm. TIA Well, the math is simple enough: if you really can achieve 1.5 Megabytes per second on a wireless WAN connection available in your location, that's nearly 500 times higher throughput than your 26.4 Kilobit dial-up connection provides. From a utility viewpoint, that's a humongous enabler. Indeed, in this era, your dialup connection is not far removed from Marconi's time wrt practicality. Just saying... |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Dec 16, 3:18*pm, personaobscura
wrote: On Thu, 16 Dec 2010 14:45:10 -0800 (PST), Larry L wrote: My kid is moving back home while he waits to head off to grad school. * In the mean time he has three jobs, two of which are as research assistants for professors and apparently require lots of time on the Internet. So, I guess we're in the market for a fast connection. * *Nothing "wired" is available out here and I'm trying to figure out the differences between "radio" and satellite wireless providers. Currently my little tray icon says 26.4 kbps and I'm also trying to get a feel for how much faster 1.5 megabyte/sec is and how that should be abbreviated ... MB/sec *MBps *mbps mb/sec etc etc. * *I thought I knew some of this stuff but it's many many years since I had any real interest in puters and my "knowledge: has evaporated. *After thumbing through 3 wireless ISP companies brochures I'm even more confused than my norm. TIA Well, the math is simple enough: if you really can achieve 1.5 Megabytes per second on a wireless WAN connection available in your location, that's nearly 500 times higher throughput than your 26.4 Kilobit dial-up connection provides. From a utility viewpoint, that's a humongous enabler. Indeed, in this era, your dialup connection is not far removed from Marconi's time wrt practicality. Just saying... I know how bad my current connection is, I've been trying years to get something done about it. I'm the last house on a dead end rural road and the phone lines are so old they actually go through trees in a couple places ( the wood has grown around the wires, over time.) The phone repair guy once told me he had never seen worse or more spliced lines BUT the phone company says they meet the minimum data transfer required by regulations ( enough for a FAX machine, apparently ) and there is no way they are going to replace a mile of line to make me happy. One thing I want to know is there an official difference between mb and MB ... are these a million bits and a million bytes and is byte 8 times the data as bit. The people on the phones seem to use "megabit" and "megabyte" interchangeably but I think that is wrong .... are most advertised speeds in bits or bytes? TIA,again |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 16 Dec 2010 15:42:50 -0800 (PST), Larry L
wrote: On Dec 16, 3:18*pm, personaobscura wrote: On Thu, 16 Dec 2010 14:45:10 -0800 (PST), Larry L wrote: My kid is moving back home while he waits to head off to grad school. * In the mean time he has three jobs, two of which are as research assistants for professors and apparently require lots of time on the Internet. So, I guess we're in the market for a fast connection. * *Nothing "wired" is available out here and I'm trying to figure out the differences between "radio" and satellite wireless providers. Currently my little tray icon says 26.4 kbps and I'm also trying to get a feel for how much faster 1.5 megabyte/sec is and how that should be abbreviated ... MB/sec *MBps *mbps mb/sec etc etc. * *I thought I knew some of this stuff but it's many many years since I had any real interest in puters and my "knowledge: has evaporated. *After thumbing through 3 wireless ISP companies brochures I'm even more confused than my norm. TIA Well, the math is simple enough: if you really can achieve 1.5 Megabytes per second on a wireless WAN connection available in your location, that's nearly 500 times higher throughput than your 26.4 Kilobit dial-up connection provides. From a utility viewpoint, that's a humongous enabler. Indeed, in this era, your dialup connection is not far removed from Marconi's time wrt practicality. Just saying... I know how bad my current connection is, I've been trying years to get something done about it. I'm the last house on a dead end rural road and the phone lines are so old they actually go through trees in a couple places ( the wood has grown around the wires, over time.) The phone repair guy once told me he had never seen worse or more spliced lines BUT the phone company says they meet the minimum data transfer required by regulations ( enough for a FAX machine, apparently ) and there is no way they are going to replace a mile of line to make me happy. One thing I want to know is there an official difference between mb and MB ... are these a million bits and a million bytes and is byte 8 times the data as bit. The people on the phones seem to use "megabit" and "megabyte" interchangeably but I think that is wrong .... are most advertised speeds in bits or bytes? TIA,again I can offer 3- 4 sugggestions 1 Get a cousin, friend,son of a friend grand kid of a friend - a young guy (who uses the web) - to set you up and pay him $10 per hr If you do not have the above Go to Staoles or Office Max and ask a few of the kids that work there to help you on the side - same 10 or so $$$ 3 Geek Squad More money 4 a local computer store Your connection is antiquated - Fred |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 16 Dec 2010 15:42:50 -0800 (PST), Larry L
wrote: On Dec 16, 3:18*pm, personaobscura wrote: On Thu, 16 Dec 2010 14:45:10 -0800 (PST), Larry L wrote: My kid is moving back home while he waits to head off to grad school. * In the mean time he has three jobs, two of which are as research assistants for professors and apparently require lots of time on the Internet. So, I guess we're in the market for a fast connection. * *Nothing "wired" is available out here and I'm trying to figure out the differences between "radio" and satellite wireless providers. Currently my little tray icon says 26.4 kbps and I'm also trying to get a feel for how much faster 1.5 megabyte/sec is and how that should be abbreviated ... MB/sec *MBps *mbps mb/sec etc etc. * *I thought I knew some of this stuff but it's many many years since I had any real interest in puters and my "knowledge: has evaporated. *After thumbing through 3 wireless ISP companies brochures I'm even more confused than my norm. TIA Well, the math is simple enough: if you really can achieve 1.5 Megabytes per second on a wireless WAN connection available in your location, that's nearly 500 times higher throughput than your 26.4 Kilobit dial-up connection provides. From a utility viewpoint, that's a humongous enabler. Indeed, in this era, your dialup connection is not far removed from Marconi's time wrt practicality. Just saying... I know how bad my current connection is, I've been trying years to get something done about it. I'm the last house on a dead end rural road and the phone lines are so old they actually go through trees in a couple places ( the wood has grown around the wires, over time.) The phone repair guy once told me he had never seen worse or more spliced lines BUT the phone company says they meet the minimum data transfer required by regulations ( enough for a FAX machine, apparently ) and there is no way they are going to replace a mile of line to make me happy. One thing I want to know is there an official difference between mb and MB ... are these a million bits and a million bytes and is byte 8 times the data as bit. The people on the phones seem to use "megabit" and "megabyte" interchangeably but I think that is wrong .... are most advertised speeds in bits or bytes? TIA,again A byte is officially 8 bits, Mb is the accepted notation for Megabits, and MB is Megabytes. From a utility viewpoint, throughput is most readily compared in bits per second. I don't know that there actually are any "regulations" on minimum phone line quality - or what entity would enforce them if there were any. Does the FCC give a crap about such matters - when there isn't any sort of competition to regulate in the first place? (can you pick from more than one phone company? I can't). If one wants to play keyboard commando over voice-grade lines (which only need about 2 kilohertz of bandwidth to do their job adequately) one must accept the condition of the playing field. As for "people on the phones", with remarkably few exceptions you can safely count on them all to be script-reading idiots, and no matter how little you think you know about anything, they'll know less... |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Dec 16, 6:42*pm, Larry L wrote:
On Dec 16, 3:18*pm, personaobscura wrote: On Thu, 16 Dec 2010 14:45:10 -0800 (PST), Larry L wrote: My kid is moving back home while he waits to head off to grad school. * In the mean time he has three jobs, two of which are as research assistants for professors and apparently require lots of time on the Internet. So, I guess we're in the market for a fast connection. * *Nothing "wired" is available out here and I'm trying to figure out the differences between "radio" and satellite wireless providers. Currently my little tray icon says 26.4 kbps and I'm also trying to get a feel for how much faster 1.5 megabyte/sec is and how that should be abbreviated ... MB/sec *MBps *mbps mb/sec etc etc. * *I thought I knew some of this stuff but it's many many years since I had any real interest in puters and my "knowledge: has evaporated. *After thumbing through 3 wireless ISP companies brochures I'm even more confused than my norm. TIA Well, the math is simple enough: if you really can achieve 1.5 Megabytes per second on a wireless WAN connection available in your location, that's nearly 500 times higher throughput than your 26.4 Kilobit dial-up connection provides. From a utility viewpoint, that's a humongous enabler. Indeed, in this era, your dialup connection is not far removed from Marconi's time wrt practicality. Just saying... I know how bad my current connection is, I've been trying years to get something done about it. * I'm the last house on a dead end rural road and the phone lines are so old *they actually go through trees in a couple places ( the wood has grown around the wires, over time.) * The phone repair guy once told me he had never seen worse or more spliced lines *BUT the phone company says they meet the minimum data transfer required by regulations ( enough for a FAX machine, apparently ) and there is no way they are going to replace a mile of line to make me happy. One thing I want to know is there an official difference between mb and MB * ... are these a million bits and a million bytes and is byte 8 times the data as bit. * * The people on the phones seem to use "megabit" and "megabyte" interchangeably but I think that is wrong .... are most advertised speeds in bits or bytes? TIA,again Larry, from what I gather from your post, your telephone line is not adequate for a DSL high speed connection, (hell, it sounds like you can't even get full speed out of your dial up connection). Seems to me like you have a couple of choices. First, is there cable TV (Comcast, Charter, etc) available in your area? If so, they could provide you with a high speed internet connection. You wouldn't have to get cable TV, the connection is available separately. Lacking that, it would seem like a satellite connection would be the next,although more expensive, choice. Hughsnet is the best known, but there are others. Don't get hung up on the numbers. If you're far out in the boonies, your choices will be very limited, and any high speed service you get will be hundreds of times faster than your dial up. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Dec 16, 5:42*pm, Larry L wrote:
On Dec 16, 3:18*pm, personaobscura wrote: On Thu, 16 Dec 2010 14:45:10 -0800 (PST), Larry L wrote: My kid is moving back home while he waits to head off to grad school. * In the mean time he has three jobs, two of which are as research assistants for professors and apparently require lots of time on the Internet. So, I guess we're in the market for a fast connection. * *Nothing "wired" is available out here and I'm trying to figure out the differences between "radio" and satellite wireless providers. Currently my little tray icon says 26.4 kbps and I'm also trying to get a feel for how much faster 1.5 megabyte/sec is and how that should be abbreviated ... MB/sec *MBps *mbps mb/sec etc etc. * *I thought I knew some of this stuff but it's many many years since I had any real interest in puters and my "knowledge: has evaporated. *After thumbing through 3 wireless ISP companies brochures I'm even more confused than my norm. TIA Well, the math is simple enough: if you really can achieve 1.5 Megabytes per second on a wireless WAN connection available in your location, that's nearly 500 times higher throughput than your 26.4 Kilobit dial-up connection provides. From a utility viewpoint, that's a humongous enabler. Indeed, in this era, your dialup connection is not far removed from Marconi's time wrt practicality. Just saying... I know how bad my current connection is, I've been trying years to get something done about it. * I'm the last house on a dead end rural road and the phone lines are so old *they actually go through trees in a couple places ( the wood has grown around the wires, over time.) * The phone repair guy once told me he had never seen worse or more spliced lines *BUT the phone company says they meet the minimum data transfer required by regulations ( enough for a FAX machine, apparently ) and there is no way they are going to replace a mile of line to make me happy. One thing I want to know is there an official difference between mb and MB * ... are these a million bits and a million bytes and is byte 8 times the data as bit. * * The people on the phones seem to use "megabit" and "megabyte" interchangeably but I think that is wrong .... are most advertised speeds in bits or bytes? TIA,again "Advertised" speeds are pretty much NOT what you will get.....mostly.....depending. And yes, the difference between MB and mb is exactly as you understand it. And no, the providers are not very good about making the distinction clear. And no, it is not at all likely that you are going to get the former rather than the latter.....especially through phone lines.....at the end of a long dead end rural road. If you really need (or want) high speed internet, move to San Francisco or Minneapolis, and get cable.....or an employer with a REALLY fast connection. giles from somewhere in the land of frozen internet pipes. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 16 Dec 2010 19:55:49 -0800 (PST), george9219
wrote: If you're far out in the boonies, your choices will be very limited, and any high speed service you get will be hundreds of times faster than your dial up. That, my good man, is true! Fred |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Larry, from what I gather from your post, your telephone line is not adequate for a DSL high speed connection, (hell, it sounds like you can't even get full speed out of your dial up connection). I have to get wireless and there seem to be two types available .... satellite and "radio" Both setups require a fairly hefty setup cost for antennas and such and contracts, of course, so I want to make sure I have a decent idea what to expect for the $$$ |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
..
giles from somewhere in the land of frozen internet pipes. don't the bits move faster when near absolute zero .... like in your backyard ....brrr |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 16 Dec 2010 20:58:25 -0800 (PST), Larry L
wrote: Larry, from what I gather from your post, your telephone line is not adequate for a DSL high speed connection, (hell, it sounds like you can't even get full speed out of your dial up connection). I have to get wireless and there seem to be two types available .... satellite and "radio" Both setups require a fairly hefty setup cost for antennas and such and contracts, of course, so I want to make sure I have a decent idea what to expect for the $$$ I'd avoid satellite if possible, especially systems using geosynchronous birds, as the round trip transport latency alone is nearly a full second, and that can be surprisingly aggravating to both applications (eg: Skype) and users. And while systems based on low earth orbit birds have 1/100th the latency, they suffer from pathetic throughput (well under 100 Kbits/sec) and can have coverage issues (mountains). If radio frequency two-way service is available with download throughput in the 12 Mbit/sec range you cited earlier, that'll likely be the best bang for the buck. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
geek question | Larry L | Fly Fishing | 5 | January 12th, 2009 07:20 PM |
OT geek stuff | Larry L | Fly Fishing | 25 | March 18th, 2008 11:16 PM |
OT Need computer geek | Larry and a Cat named Dub | Fly Fishing | 3 | March 2nd, 2007 03:34 PM |
Geek Question | riverman | Fly Fishing | 6 | February 25th, 2007 01:54 PM |
GEEK TR :-D | riverman | Fly Fishing | 5 | July 15th, 2004 05:23 PM |