Arrgghhh... its been raining for days and my internet connection gives me lots of headaches.... My speed reads as this from this website...http://www.speedtest.net/
Just curious..how about the other ranchers speed?
Sean Clark ---> I love this place!!!
Me ------> I definitely love this place!!!
I ran it and got ping: 7
33.03 meg down
15 meg up.
I hear that FIOS is not coming to many more places. If its already in your street, you can get it, but Verizon has cut down its investment in pulling new fiber.
Ernest Friedman-Hill
author and iconoclast
Marshal
Pat Farrell wrote:Wow, @Jeanne, I couldn't stand being that slow.
you kids.
Back in my day, we had acoustic coupler modems that ran at 300 baud. I remember being AMAZED the first time we got a connection that could print TEXT faster than I could read it.
Never ascribe to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.
Pat Farrell wrote:Wow, @Jeanne, I couldn't stand being that slow.
you kids.
Back in my day, we had acoustic coupler modems that ran at 300 baud. I remember being AMAZED the first time we got a connection that could print TEXT faster than I could read it.
I think my first modem experience was 900 baud. I was so excited when I upgraded to 14.4!! And then 28.8. And then 33.6! I didn't think it could possibly get any faster.
fred rosenberger wrote:Back in my day, we had acoustic coupler modems that ran at 300 baud. I remember being AMAZED the first time we got a connection that could print TEXT faster than I could read it.
I've been programming since punched cards. My first exposure to a "terminal" was 110 baud on a AT&T Model 33.
I could easily keep up with 2400 baud modem traffic. 9600 was the first that was faster than my eyes.
Mark Reyes wrote:I was wondering if there's a speed faster than this.
There are ISPs that offer 100 Mbit/s connections, or even faster. I guess it does cost the white out of your eyes, though (to literally translate a Danish expression... ).
Jesper de Jong wrote:There are ISPs that offer 100 Mbit/s connections, or even faster. I guess it does cost the white out of your eyes, though (to literally translate a Danish expression... ).
I live in a new house which is connected by optics, and the provider offers 10, 25 and 100 Mbps plans. I could afford the 100 Mbps quite easily, but the truth is I would not utilize it. I haven't hit even the limits of the 10 Mbps plan yet.
I am just shy of 1Mb/s in both down and up at work - though the applet fails to finish the upload part. I am pretty sure I will be faster than that at home.
Tina,
Is that dialup? When you run the internet speed site, it gives you a link to copy paste to share with friends. Then you come back here and choose the "img" button (fifth to right in the row of buttons) and paste that URL.
We ask to credit where the image came from. Didn't do that here since it is obvious. But if you post a pictures of some cute kittens, crediting the source is appreciated.
It's supposed to be "high-speed"...256Kbps down, 128Kbps up. Which seems to be exactly what I'm getting.
Not likely to get any sort of fiber out in rural SK anytime soon - I read on the news this morning they're finally putting it in the two major cities.
Gregg Bolinger wrote:I think my first modem experience was 900 baud. I was so excited when I upgraded to 14.4!! And then 28.8. And then 33.6! I didn't think it could possibly get any faster.
I seem to recall that there was a "proof" that one couldn't do better than 56kbps (or was it 64kbps?). I tried to locate this proof online, but I haven't been able to.
Anand Hariharan wrote:
I seem to recall that there was a "proof" that one couldn't do better than 56kbps (or was it 64kbps?). I tried to locate this proof online, but I haven't been able to.
Maybe it just takes a really long time to download?
BT seem to be doing OK today (for ADSL), here in sunny Wales:
Anand Hariharan wrote:I seem to recall that there was a "proof" that one couldn't do better than 56kbps (or was it 64kbps?). I tried to locate this proof online, but I haven't been able to.
For normal telephone signals, there's a limited bandwidth allocated on the telephone line. Old-fashioned modems work by translating bits into sound, which gets transmitted over the normal telephone channel which you normally use for speech. Because the bandwidth of that channel is limited, there's a theoretical maximum speed, which is probably somewhere around 64 kbps.
Note that this limit isn't because of the copper wires - the wires can easily carry signals of much higher frequencies. For example ADSL works also over the normal telephone wires, but it uses another frequency band than the band that's normally allocated for speech.
Campbell Ritchie
Sheriff
Joined: Oct 13, 2005
Posts: 32604
4
posted
0
It has to do with bandwidth multiplied by signal‑to‑noise ratio.
0
).
