|
Slooooow!
DSL not working today. sigh On dial up which fortunately I retained for
just such a day. How did I ever stand this before I got DSL? It's incredibly slow - or something is wrong with my connection. Said 45K when I dialed it up though. Praying my DSL comes back soon! -- You know it's time to clean the refrigerator when something closes the door from the inside. |
Slooooow!
On Tuesday, April 5, 2016 at 12:58:16 PM UTC-4, KenK wrote:
DSL not working today. sigh On dial up which fortunately I retained for just such a day. How did I ever stand this before I got DSL? It's incredibly slow - or something is wrong with my connection. Said 45K when I dialed it up though. Praying my DSL comes back soon! I am typing this very slowly so as not to overwhelm your dial-up connection. How fast is your DSL? When I moved from my then-current phone company's DSL to Verizon and their cable-modem connection to the internet I said to myself "How did I ever stand being on DSL?" :-) Man, I can't imagine what dial-up must be like. I wonder if it's worse than using my smartphone as a mobile hot-spot. |
Slooooow!
On 5 Apr 2016 16:58:10 GMT, KenK wrote:
DSL not working today. sigh On dial up which fortunately I retained for just such a day. How did I ever stand this before I got DSL? It's incredibly slow - or something is wrong with my connection. Said 45K when I dialed it up though. Praying my DSL comes back soon! I wanted to keep my dialup, but was in a hurry. Now I figure I'll dig out a modem when the time comes, and hope I haven't forgotten how to do the initializing string. I found dial-up fast enough for email and newsgroups, and audio. Slow for the web and too slow for video. Last night I got my friend's computer working and downloaded 5000 emails, representing 78 days since January 19. It took over an hour, and it seemed very slow. This was DSL but wifi, with a big CRT monitor right between the router and the wifi receiver. Would that make a difference? I know at 80 feet wifi is slower than Cat5, but what about at 18". Is it any faster than, maybe because of fewer lost packets? Anyhow, I did other things during the hour. |
Slooooow!
|
Slooooow!
On 04/05/2016 11:58 AM, KenK wrote:
DSL not working today. sigh On dial up which fortunately I retained for just such a day. How did I ever stand this before I got DSL? It's incredibly slow - or something is wrong with my connection. Said 45K when I dialed it up though. Praying my DSL comes back soon! I had dial-up as a backup for the first few years after getting cable internet. Now, I use a 4G device (https://yourkarma.com/). BTW, we got cable internet in 2003, but DSL won't be available until this summer (IIRC). Maybe that's because the cable has been so good. -- Mark Lloyd http://notstupid.us/ Theology: The study of elaborate verbal disguises for non-ideas. |
Slooooow!
On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 at 1:51:58 PM UTC-4, KenK wrote:
DerbyDad03 wrote in news:99646e10-c546-48a3-8ddd- : How fast is your DSL? I have no idea. It's back, by the way. When I went to DSL I first checked into the local high-speed internet services. All were either tied to also paying for TV (which I never watch) or had terrible service and product reports. DSL maybe slower, but at least I've had very few problems - only out twice, a few hours, in all the years I've used it. Fast enough for pleasant Usenet, email, and Google research. I've not tried Youtube or other video - will some day. Try http://www.speedtest.net/ I'd be curious to see how much DSL has improved since I used to use it. I'm not home right now, but I'll try to remember to run wired and wifi speed tests on my various devices tonight and post the results. |
Slooooow!
|
Slooooow!
On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 at 5:01:49 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Wed, 6 Apr 2016 11:38:55 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03 wrote: On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 at 1:51:58 PM UTC-4, KenK wrote: DerbyDad03 wrote in news:99646e10-c546-48a3-8ddd- : How fast is your DSL? I have no idea. It's back, by the way. When I went to DSL I first checked into the local high-speed internet services. All were either tied to also paying for TV (which I never watch) or had terrible service and product reports. DSL maybe slower, but at least I've had very few problems - only out twice, a few hours, in all the years I've used it. Fast enough for pleasant Usenet, email, and Google research. I've not tried Youtube or other video - will some day. Try http://www.speedtest.net/ I'd be curious to see how much DSL has improved since I used to use it. I'm not home right now, but I'll try to remember to run wired and wifi speed tests on my various devices tonight and post the results. I just tested mine on that site and I am getting 9.96meg down, 720k up It's too bad that the Paintster has me plonked because my numbers might blow his mind. He doesn't think 9.96 down is possible? Wait until he sees my numbers. Wired PC - 61.97 Mb down, 6.22 Mb up iPad - 44. 89 Mb down, 6.52 Mb up Android phone - 60.54 Mb down, 6.2 Mb up Of course, these numbers will vary with each test and will be slightly lower when multiple devices are accessing the network. |
Slooooow!
On Thursday, April 7, 2016 at 7:00:13 AM UTC-4, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 at 5:01:49 PM UTC-4, wrote: On Wed, 6 Apr 2016 11:38:55 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03 wrote: On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 at 1:51:58 PM UTC-4, KenK wrote: DerbyDad03 wrote in news:99646e10-c546-48a3-8ddd- : How fast is your DSL? I have no idea. It's back, by the way. When I went to DSL I first checked into the local high-speed internet services. All were either tied to also paying for TV (which I never watch) or had terrible service and product reports. DSL maybe slower, but at least I've had very few problems - only out twice, a few hours, in all the years I've used it. Fast enough for pleasant Usenet, email, and Google research. I've not tried Youtube or other video - will some day. Try http://www.speedtest.net/ I'd be curious to see how much DSL has improved since I used to use it. I'm not home right now, but I'll try to remember to run wired and wifi speed tests on my various devices tonight and post the results. I just tested mine on that site and I am getting 9.96meg down, 720k up It's too bad that the Paintster has me plonked because my numbers might blow his mind. He doesn't think 9.96 down is possible? Wait until he sees my numbers. Wired PC - 61.97 Mb down, 6.22 Mb up iPad - 44. 89 Mb down, 6.52 Mb up Android phone - 60.54 Mb down, 6.2 Mb up Of course, these numbers will vary with each test and will be slightly lower when multiple devices are accessing the network. Wired PC 29 Mb down, 5 up Android phone at other end of house from router, 16 down, 5 up That's with cable, lowest/standard speed. Cablevision has two higher levels of service speed available for additional cost. |
Slooooow!
|
Slooooow!
On Thu, 7 Apr 2016 04:50:29 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote: Wired PC 29 Mb down, 5 up Android phone at other end of house from router, 16 down, 5 up That's with cable, lowest/standard speed. Cablevision has two higher levels of service speed available for additional cost. Cable is a lot faster here too but Comcast reliability stinks and their customer service is simply dismal. My cable drop is still swinging in the air, from the hardline as high up as I could reach. I set their modem on the curb and told them to come get it. |
Slooooow!
On Thursday, April 7, 2016 at 11:01:58 AM UTC-4, wrote:
On Thu, 7 Apr 2016 04:50:29 -0700 (PDT), trader_4 wrote: Wired PC 29 Mb down, 5 up Android phone at other end of house from router, 16 down, 5 up That's with cable, lowest/standard speed. Cablevision has two higher levels of service speed available for additional cost. Cable is a lot faster here too but Comcast reliability stinks and their customer service is simply dismal. My cable drop is still swinging in the air, from the hardline as high up as I could reach. I set their modem on the curb and told them to come get it. TWC Customer Service is pretty good and petty consistent. Verizon Wireless, on the other hand, is about as inconsistent as can be. Sometimes you get reps that know what they are doing, other times you can't even get them understand the issue, never mind provide a solution. Their Tech Support is usually pretty good and will stick with you until the issue is resolved. It's their billing and general customer service reps that are really hit or miss. My family has been known to leave the house if they know I am calling Verizon Wireless. ;-) |
Slooooow!
DerbyDad03 wrote in
: On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 at 1:51:58 PM UTC-4, KenK wrote: DerbyDad03 wrote in news:99646e10-c546-48a3-8ddd- : How fast is your DSL? I have no idea. It's back, by the way. When I went to DSL I first checked into the local high-speed internet services. All were either tied to also paying for TV (which I never watch) or had terrible service and product reports. DSL maybe slower, but at least I've had very few problems - only out twice, a few hours, in all the years I've used it. Fast enough for pleasant Usenet, email, and Google research. I've not tried Youtube or other video - will some day. Try http://www.speedtest.net/ I'd be curious to see how much DSL has improved since I used to use it. I'm not home right now, but I'll try to remember to run wired and wifi speed tests on my various devices tonight and post the results. 11.28 DL, 0.85 UL. -- You know it's time to clean the refrigerator when something closes the door from the inside. |
Slooooow!
On Thu, 7 Apr 2016 10:45:05 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
wrote: My family has been known to leave the house if they know I am calling Verizon Wireless. ;-) Chuckle. My bride tells people, trust me you don't want my husband to come down here. |
Slooooow!
When I went to DSL I first checked into the local high-speed internet services. All were either tied to also paying for TV (which I never watch) or had terrible service and product reports. DSL maybe slower, but at least I've had very few problems - only out twice, a few hours, in all the years I've used it. Fast enough for pleasant Usenet, email, and Google research. I've not tried Youtube or other video - will some day. Try http://www.speedtest.net/ I'd be curious to see how much DSL has improved since I used to use it. I'm not home right now, but I'll try to remember to run wired and wifi speed tests on my various devices tonight and post the results. 11.28 DL, 0.85 UL. Out of interest, do you know the percentage of people in the US who can get fibre (so called Superfast internet) ? Here in the UK it's over 90% rising to 95% by 2017. For the record mine is 50Mbps down 19Mbps up using ethernet (wired). -- Bod |
Slooooow!
On Thursday, April 7, 2016 at 2:03:49 PM UTC-4, Bod wrote:
When I went to DSL I first checked into the local high-speed internet services. All were either tied to also paying for TV (which I never watch) or had terrible service and product reports. DSL maybe slower, but at least I've had very few problems - only out twice, a few hours, in all the years I've used it. Fast enough for pleasant Usenet, email, and Google research. I've not tried Youtube or other video - will some day. Try http://www.speedtest.net/ I'd be curious to see how much DSL has improved since I used to use it. I'm not home right now, but I'll try to remember to run wired and wifi speed tests on my various devices tonight and post the results. 11.28 DL, 0.85 UL. Out of interest, do you know the percentage of people in the US who can get fibre (so called Superfast internet) ? Here in the UK it's over 90% rising to 95% by 2017. For the record mine is 50Mbps down 19Mbps up using ethernet (wired). -- Bod I'm very surprised at the 19Mb up. Any idea if that is typical for your side of the pond? Mid-to-High single digits seems to be the norm for those of us using the higher speed offerings. As I posted earlier, my numbers are as follows: Wired PC - 61.97 Mb down, 6.22 Mb up iPad - 44. 89 Mb down, 6.52 Mb up Android phone - 60.54 Mb down, 6.2 Mb up |
Slooooow!
On 07/04/2016 19:26, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Thursday, April 7, 2016 at 2:03:49 PM UTC-4, Bod wrote: When I went to DSL I first checked into the local high-speed internet services. All were either tied to also paying for TV (which I never watch) or had terrible service and product reports. DSL maybe slower, but at least I've had very few problems - only out twice, a few hours, in all the years I've used it. Fast enough for pleasant Usenet, email, and Google research. I've not tried Youtube or other video - will some day. Try http://www.speedtest.net/ I'd be curious to see how much DSL has improved since I used to use it. I'm not home right now, but I'll try to remember to run wired and wifi speed tests on my various devices tonight and post the results. 11.28 DL, 0.85 UL. Out of interest, do you know the percentage of people in the US who can get fibre (so called Superfast internet) ? Here in the UK it's over 90% rising to 95% by 2017. For the record mine is 50Mbps down 19Mbps up using ethernet (wired). -- Bod I'm very surprised at the 19Mb up. Any idea if that is typical for your side of the pond? Mid-to-High single digits seems to be the norm for those of us using the higher speed offerings. As I posted earlier, my numbers are as follows: Wired PC - 61.97 Mb down, 6.22 Mb up iPad - 44. 89 Mb down, 6.52 Mb up Android phone - 60.54 Mb down, 6.2 Mb up I'll check how common that upload speed is with other ISPs and get back to you. I'm with a company called Talk Talk and 19Mbps upload speed is the faster out of the two fibre packages from them. The other slower package gives you up to 1.9Mbps upload speed. -- Bod |
Slooooow!
On 07/04/2016 19:26, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Thursday, April 7, 2016 at 2:03:49 PM UTC-4, Bod wrote: When I went to DSL I first checked into the local high-speed internet services. All were either tied to also paying for TV (which I never watch) or had terrible service and product reports. DSL maybe slower, but at least I've had very few problems - only out twice, a few hours, in all the years I've used it. Fast enough for pleasant Usenet, email, and Google research. I've not tried Youtube or other video - will some day. Try http://www.speedtest.net/ I'd be curious to see how much DSL has improved since I used to use it. I'm not home right now, but I'll try to remember to run wired and wifi speed tests on my various devices tonight and post the results. 11.28 DL, 0.85 UL. Out of interest, do you know the percentage of people in the US who can get fibre (so called Superfast internet) ? Here in the UK it's over 90% rising to 95% by 2017. For the record mine is 50Mbps down 19Mbps up using ethernet (wired). -- Bod I'm very surprised at the 19Mb up. Any idea if that is typical for your side of the pond? Mid-to-High single digits seems to be the norm for those of us using the higher speed offerings. As I posted earlier, my numbers are as follows: Wired PC - 61.97 Mb down, 6.22 Mb up iPad - 44. 89 Mb down, 6.52 Mb up Android phone - 60.54 Mb down, 6.2 Mb up I did this speedtest just now. The upload is normally nearer 19Mbps, but shows 17 on this test. https://www.dropbox.com/s/hrof4wpeuh...0test.PNG?dl=0 -- Bod |
Slooooow!
On 04/07/2016 02:26 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
When I went to DSL I first checked into the local high-speed internet services. All were either tied to also paying for TV (which I never watch) or had terrible service and product reports. DSL maybe slower, but at least I've had very few problems - only out twice, a few hours, in all the years I've used it. Fast enough for pleasant Usenet, email, and Google research. I've not tried Youtube or other video - will some day. Try http://www.speedtest.net/ I'd be curious to see how much DSL has improved since I used to use it. I'm not home right now, but I'll try to remember to run wired and wifi speed tests on my various devices tonight and post the results. 11.28 DL, 0.85 UL. Out of interest, do you know the percentage of people in the US who can get fibre (so called Superfast internet) ? Here in the UK it's over 90% rising to 95% by 2017. For the record mine is 50Mbps down 19Mbps up using ethernet (wired). I'm very surprised at the 19Mb up. Any idea if that is typical for your side of the pond? Mid-to-High single digits seems to be the norm for those of us using the higher speed offerings. As I posted earlier, my numbers are as follows: Wired PC - 61.97 Mb down, 6.22 Mb up iPad - 44. 89 Mb down, 6.52 Mb up Android phone - 60.54 Mb down, 6.2 Mb up We have Charter -- a somewhat upscale package: 60mbps down, 4mbps up. There's a 100mbps down package, but still, I think, only 4mbps up. Even the business packages are not symmetrical, as far as I know. Perce |
Slooooow!
On 07/04/2016 19:51, Percival P. Cassidy wrote:
On 04/07/2016 02:26 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote: When I went to DSL I first checked into the local high-speed internet services. All were either tied to also paying for TV (which I never watch) or had terrible service and product reports. DSL maybe slower, but at least I've had very few problems - only out twice, a few hours, in all the years I've used it. Fast enough for pleasant Usenet, email, and Google research. I've not tried Youtube or other video - will some day. Try http://www.speedtest.net/ I'd be curious to see how much DSL has improved since I used to use it. I'm not home right now, but I'll try to remember to run wired and wifi speed tests on my various devices tonight and post the results. 11.28 DL, 0.85 UL. Out of interest, do you know the percentage of people in the US who can get fibre (so called Superfast internet) ? Here in the UK it's over 90% rising to 95% by 2017. For the record mine is 50Mbps down 19Mbps up using ethernet (wired). I'm very surprised at the 19Mb up. Any idea if that is typical for your side of the pond? Mid-to-High single digits seems to be the norm for those of us using the higher speed offerings. As I posted earlier, my numbers are as follows: Wired PC - 61.97 Mb down, 6.22 Mb up iPad - 44. 89 Mb down, 6.52 Mb up Android phone - 60.54 Mb down, 6.2 Mb up We have Charter -- a somewhat upscale package: 60mbps down, 4mbps up. There's a 100mbps down package, but still, I think, only 4mbps up. Even the business packages are not symmetrical, as far as I know. Perce Just did some checking and most ISPs offering fibre have 2 choices over here. They a 40 down 10 up and 80 down 20 up Some, like mine, do a 38 down 1.9 up and 76 down 19 up There are a few that do 50 down 10 up. -- Bod |
Slooooow!
On 07/04/2016 19:58, Bod wrote:
On 07/04/2016 19:51, Percival P. Cassidy wrote: On 04/07/2016 02:26 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote: When I went to DSL I first checked into the local high-speed internet services. All were either tied to also paying for TV (which I never watch) or had terrible service and product reports. DSL maybe slower, but at least I've had very few problems - only out twice, a few hours, in all the years I've used it. Fast enough for pleasant Usenet, email, and Google research. I've not tried Youtube or other video - will some day. Try http://www.speedtest.net/ I'd be curious to see how much DSL has improved since I used to use it. I'm not home right now, but I'll try to remember to run wired and wifi speed tests on my various devices tonight and post the results. 11.28 DL, 0.85 UL. Out of interest, do you know the percentage of people in the US who can get fibre (so called Superfast internet) ? Here in the UK it's over 90% rising to 95% by 2017. For the record mine is 50Mbps down 19Mbps up using ethernet (wired). I'm very surprised at the 19Mb up. Any idea if that is typical for your side of the pond? Mid-to-High single digits seems to be the norm for those of us using the higher speed offerings. As I posted earlier, my numbers are as follows: Wired PC - 61.97 Mb down, 6.22 Mb up iPad - 44. 89 Mb down, 6.52 Mb up Android phone - 60.54 Mb down, 6.2 Mb up We have Charter -- a somewhat upscale package: 60mbps down, 4mbps up. There's a 100mbps down package, but still, I think, only 4mbps up. Even the business packages are not symmetrical, as far as I know. Perce Just did some checking and most ISPs offering fibre have 2 choices over here. They a 40 down 10 up and 80 down 20 up Some, like mine, do a 38 down 1.9 up and 76 down 19 up There are a few that do 50 down 10 up. A few lucky buggers over here can get Hyperoptic @ *1Gb* down AND 1 Gb upload speed. Mindblowing! -- Bod |
Slooooow!
"trader_4" wrote in message ... On Thursday, April 7, 2016 at 7:00:13 AM UTC-4, DerbyDad03 wrote: On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 at 5:01:49 PM UTC-4, wrote: On Wed, 6 Apr 2016 11:38:55 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03 wrote: On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 at 1:51:58 PM UTC-4, KenK wrote: DerbyDad03 wrote in news:99646e10-c546-48a3-8ddd- : How fast is your DSL? I have no idea. It's back, by the way. When I went to DSL I first checked into the local high-speed internet services. All were either tied to also paying for TV (which I never watch) or had terrible service and product reports. DSL maybe slower, but at least I've had very few problems - only out twice, a few hours, in all the years I've used it. Fast enough for pleasant Usenet, email, and Google research. I've not tried Youtube or other video - will some day. Try http://www.speedtest.net/ I'd be curious to see how much DSL has improved since I used to use it. I'm not home right now, but I'll try to remember to run wired and wifi speed tests on my various devices tonight and post the results. I just tested mine on that site and I am getting 9.96meg down, 720k up It's too bad that the Paintster has me plonked because my numbers might blow his mind. He doesn't think 9.96 down is possible? Wait until he sees my numbers. Wired PC - 61.97 Mb down, 6.22 Mb up iPad - 44. 89 Mb down, 6.52 Mb up Android phone - 60.54 Mb down, 6.2 Mb up Of course, these numbers will vary with each test and will be slightly lower when multiple devices are accessing the network. Wired PC 29 Mb down, 5 up Android phone at other end of house from router, 16 down, 5 up That's with cable, lowest/standard speed. Cablevision has two higher levels of service speed available for additional cost. I am suspose to get 50 meg on my cable. By the TWC (Time Warner Cable) speed test I seldon see 30 and usualy less down. I do get atleast 5 or slightly over on the up like I am suspose to get. Some of the other test sites will give 35 to 40 down and the same 5 or slightly over up. I have been thinking about getting in touch and finding out why I am not getting over 30 reported by their speed test. I have bought my own modem,but it is the one they recommend on their web site and it should be capable of atleast 100 or more if cable was sending it. |
Slooooow!
In article ,
says... On 04/07/2016 02:26 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote: When I went to DSL I first checked into the local high-speed internet services. All were either tied to also paying for TV (which I never watch) or had terrible service and product reports. DSL maybe slower, but at least I've had very few problems - only out twice, a few hours, in all the years I've used it. Fast enough for pleasant Usenet, email, and Google research. I've not tried Youtube or other video - will some day. Try http://www.speedtest.net/ I'd be curious to see how much DSL has improved since I used to use it. I'm not home right now, but I'll try to remember to run wired and wifi speed tests on my various devices tonight and post the results. 11.28 DL, 0.85 UL. Out of interest, do you know the percentage of people in the US who can get fibre (so called Superfast internet) ? Here in the UK it's over 90% rising to 95% by 2017. For the record mine is 50Mbps down 19Mbps up using ethernet (wired). I'm very surprised at the 19Mb up. Any idea if that is typical for your side of the pond? Mid-to-High single digits seems to be the norm for those of us using the higher speed offerings. As I posted earlier, my numbers are as follows: Wired PC - 61.97 Mb down, 6.22 Mb up iPad - 44. 89 Mb down, 6.52 Mb up Android phone - 60.54 Mb down, 6.2 Mb up We have Charter -- a somewhat upscale package: 60mbps down, 4mbps up. There's a 100mbps down package, but still, I think, only 4mbps up. Even the business packages are not symmetrical, as far as I know. Perce I have Charter too, and did a couple of tests. Got 65.15 down and 4.37 up at best, and 52.49 up and 4.16 down at worst. BTW, I did clear the cache between tests. I don't think I would ever be happy with anything less after using cable. -- RonNNN |
Slooooow!
On Thu, 7 Apr 2016 19:03:44 +0100, Bod wrote:
When I went to DSL I first checked into the local high-speed internet services. All were either tied to also paying for TV (which I never watch) or had terrible service and product reports. DSL maybe slower, but at least I've had very few problems - only out twice, a few hours, in all the years I've used it. Fast enough for pleasant Usenet, email, and Google research. I've not tried Youtube or other video - will some day. Try http://www.speedtest.net/ I'd be curious to see how much DSL has improved since I used to use it. I'm not home right now, but I'll try to remember to run wired and wifi speed tests on my various devices tonight and post the results. 11.28 DL, 0.85 UL. Out of interest, do you know the percentage of people in the US who can get fibre (so called Superfast internet) ? Here in the UK it's over 90% rising to 95% by 2017. For the record mine is 50Mbps down 19Mbps up using ethernet (wired). You have almost 260 people per square KM in UK so one fiber will serve a bunch of people. We are a tad more spread out here. We have 30 per sq/km overall and some states are more like 2-5 people per sq/km in some western states. They are not stringing 20 miles of fiber to serve 30 or 40 households. |
Slooooow!
On Thursday, April 7, 2016 at 3:18:01 PM UTC-4, Ralph Mowery wrote:
"trader_4" wrote in message ... On Thursday, April 7, 2016 at 7:00:13 AM UTC-4, DerbyDad03 wrote: On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 at 5:01:49 PM UTC-4, wrote: On Wed, 6 Apr 2016 11:38:55 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03 wrote: On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 at 1:51:58 PM UTC-4, KenK wrote: DerbyDad03 wrote in news:99646e10-c546-48a3-8ddd- : How fast is your DSL? I have no idea. It's back, by the way. When I went to DSL I first checked into the local high-speed internet services. All were either tied to also paying for TV (which I never watch) or had terrible service and product reports. DSL maybe slower, but at least I've had very few problems - only out twice, a few hours, in all the years I've used it. Fast enough for pleasant Usenet, email, and Google research. I've not tried Youtube or other video - will some day. Try http://www.speedtest.net/ I'd be curious to see how much DSL has improved since I used to use it. I'm not home right now, but I'll try to remember to run wired and wifi speed tests on my various devices tonight and post the results. I just tested mine on that site and I am getting 9.96meg down, 720k up It's too bad that the Paintster has me plonked because my numbers might blow his mind. He doesn't think 9.96 down is possible? Wait until he sees my numbers. Wired PC - 61.97 Mb down, 6.22 Mb up iPad - 44. 89 Mb down, 6.52 Mb up Android phone - 60.54 Mb down, 6.2 Mb up Of course, these numbers will vary with each test and will be slightly lower when multiple devices are accessing the network. Wired PC 29 Mb down, 5 up Android phone at other end of house from router, 16 down, 5 up That's with cable, lowest/standard speed. Cablevision has two higher levels of service speed available for additional cost. I am suspose to get 50 meg on my cable. By the TWC (Time Warner Cable) speed test I seldon see 30 and usualy less down. I do get atleast 5 or slightly over on the up like I am suspose to get. Wired or wireless can make a difference, as can the device. As I noted, the speed on my iPad is 10Mb slower than my Android phone or wired PC. Actually, that just made me chuckle. The 10 Mb that I *lose* on my iPad is faster than some others get in the first place and 20 times *faster* than PaintMan can get at the library. Man, that must s-u-c-k! Some of the other test sites will give 35 to 40 down and the same 5 or slightly over up. I have been thinking about getting in touch and finding out why I am not getting over 30 reported by their speed test. I have bought my own modem,but it is the one they recommend on their web site and it should be capable of atleast 100 or more if cable was sending it. |
Slooooow!
On Thu, 7 Apr 2016 20:12:27 +0100, Bod wrote:
A few lucky buggers over here can get Hyperoptic @ *1Gb* down AND 1 Gb upload speed. Mindblowing! At a certain point you are only going as fast as the site you are downloading from and the slowest link in that path. Speeds like that might be appropriate for a business with lots of users but for your casual homeowner it is just bragging rights. |
Slooooow!
|
Slooooow!
On Thu, 7 Apr 2016 15:20:48 -0400, "Ralph Mowery"
wrote: I am suspose to get 50 meg on my cable. By the TWC (Time Warner Cable) speed test I seldon see 30 and usualy less down. I do get atleast 5 or slightly over on the up like I am suspose to get. Some of the other test sites will give 35 to 40 down and the same 5 or slightly over up. I have been thinking about getting in touch and finding out why I am not getting over 30 reported by their speed test. I have bought my own modem,but it is the one they recommend on their web site and it should be capable of atleast 100 or more if cable was sending it. Ask them to "provision" routers, etc. Some may be related to older hardware that hasn't kept up with advances the service providers after they update hardware. |
Slooooow!
On Thu, 7 Apr 2016 15:20:48 -0400, "Ralph Mowery"
wrote: I am suspose to get 50 meg on my cable. By the TWC (Time Warner Cable) speed test I seldon see 30 and usualy less down. I do get atleast 5 or slightly over on the up like I am suspose to get. Some of the other test sites will give 35 to 40 down and the same 5 or slightly over up. I have been thinking about getting in touch and finding out why I am not getting over 30 reported by their speed test. I have bought my own modem,but it is the one they recommend on their web site and it should be capable of atleast 100 or more if cable was sending it. With cable internet, you are sharing a node with a bunch of your neighbors. Your speed will vary based on what they are doing. |
Slooooow!
On 07/04/2016 20:54, wrote:
On Thu, 7 Apr 2016 19:03:44 +0100, Bod wrote: When I went to DSL I first checked into the local high-speed internet services. All were either tied to also paying for TV (which I never watch) or had terrible service and product reports. DSL maybe slower, but at least I've had very few problems - only out twice, a few hours, in all the years I've used it. Fast enough for pleasant Usenet, email, and Google research. I've not tried Youtube or other video - will some day. Try http://www.speedtest.net/ I'd be curious to see how much DSL has improved since I used to use it. I'm not home right now, but I'll try to remember to run wired and wifi speed tests on my various devices tonight and post the results. 11.28 DL, 0.85 UL. Out of interest, do you know the percentage of people in the US who can get fibre (so called Superfast internet) ? Here in the UK it's over 90% rising to 95% by 2017. For the record mine is 50Mbps down 19Mbps up using ethernet (wired). You have almost 260 people per square KM in UK so one fiber will serve a bunch of people. We are a tad more spread out here. We have 30 per sq/km overall and some states are more like 2-5 people per sq/km in some western states. They are not stringing 20 miles of fiber to serve 30 or 40 households. I understand, but having said that we have a lot of little villages with only a handful of houses plus many farms out in the sticks. Scotland and Wales have mountainous terrain. -- Bod |
Slooooow!
|
Slooooow!
On 07/04/2016 21:00, RonNNN wrote:
In article , says... I have Charter too, and did a couple of tests. Got 65.15 down and 4.37 up at best, and 52.49 up and 4.16 down at worst. BTW, I did clear the cache between tests. I don't think I would ever be happy with anything less after using cable. Swap those 'up/down's' around on the second set of numbers. {sigh, another brain fart!} Lol. -- Bod |
Slooooow!
On Thu, 7 Apr 2016 21:09:43 +0100, Bod wrote:
On 07/04/2016 20:54, wrote: For the record mine is 50Mbps down 19Mbps up using ethernet (wired). You have almost 260 people per square KM in UK so one fiber will serve a bunch of people. We are a tad more spread out here. We have 30 per sq/km overall and some states are more like 2-5 people per sq/km in some western states. They are not stringing 20 miles of fiber to serve 30 or 40 households. I understand, but having said that we have a lot of little villages with only a handful of houses plus many farms out in the sticks. Scotland and Wales have mountainous terrain. Those are the 5% I imagine. The US has not really put that much emphasis on getting fiber to the home. The cable companies have no real incentive since coax meets the needs of their primary business, TV and the telephone companies are slow to expand "last mile" infrastructure when everyone is going wireless. I think the biggest thing we could do to unleash this business would be to unbundle content from data and create competition in the data business. It probably would result in data being metered by the gigabyte but I don't see a huge problem with that. If they are selling data, they will be trying to get you to use more so faster would be better for them. Competition would control prices. Right now, virtually all "cable" operates as a monopoly. |
Slooooow!
wrote in message ... On Thu, 7 Apr 2016 15:20:48 -0400, "Ralph Mowery" wrote: I am suspose to get 50 meg on my cable. By the TWC (Time Warner Cable) speed test I seldon see 30 and usualy less down. I do get atleast 5 or slightly over on the up like I am suspose to get. Some of the other test sites will give 35 to 40 down and the same 5 or slightly over up. I have been thinking about getting in touch and finding out why I am not getting over 30 reported by their speed test. I have bought my own modem,but it is the one they recommend on their web site and it should be capable of atleast 100 or more if cable was sending it. With cable internet, you are sharing a node with a bunch of your neighbors. Your speed will vary based on what they are doing. I live out of town and have no idea how many might be connected to the same node. Being retired I am able to get on at all kinds of hours of the day and night. It seems that it does not make any difference what time of the night or day I check the speed there is not much difference in the reported speeds. Only about half of what they advertise. |
Slooooow!
"Bod" wrote in message ... On 07/04/2016 21:00, wrote: On Thu, 7 Apr 2016 20:12:27 +0100, Bod wrote: A few lucky buggers over here can get Hyperoptic @ *1Gb* down AND 1 Gb upload speed. Mindblowing! At a certain point you are only going as fast as the site you are downloading from and the slowest link in that path. Speeds like that might be appropriate for a business with lots of users but for your casual homeowner it is just bragging rights. I agree. I wish that I lived in town for the internet. They have the fiber and forgot the speed,but did get a tour with a group through their equipment room. They have the fastest speed in the state. Somehow got in before there was some kind of speed ruleing on how fast they could run. I think it is either a gigabit or terabit. This is for a county of probably less than 50,000 people. For the home user, I think there are lots of sites that have a hard time sending back even the 20 meg or so that many are rated for on the downlink. |
Slooooow!
|
Slooooow!
wrote in message ... You have almost 260 people per square KM in UK so one fiber will serve a bunch of people. We are a tad more spread out here. We have 30 per sq/km overall and some states are more like 2-5 people per sq/km in some western states. They are not stringing 20 miles of fiber to serve 30 or 40 households. I understand, but having said that we have a lot of little villages with only a handful of houses plus many farms out in the sticks. Scotland and Wales have mountainous terrain. Those are the 5% I imagine. The US has not really put that much emphasis on getting fiber to the home. The cable companies have no real incentive since coax meets the needs of their primary business, TV and the telephone companies are slow to expand "last mile" infrastructure when everyone is going wireless. I think the biggest thing we could do to unleash this business would be to unbundle content from data and create competition in the data business. It probably would result in data being metered by the gigabyte but I don't see a huge problem with that. If they are selling data, they will be trying to get you to use more so faster would be better for them. Competition would control prices. Right now, virtually all "cable" operates as a monopoly. They did install lots of fiber for our town that services only about 30,000 people or less. It was not done by the cabe company,but a fiber optics company. Seems there are lots of unused fiber cables all over the US that was installed,but not used. The fiber companies are jumping on those lines for internet and TV. |
Slooooow!
On Thu, 7 Apr 2016 15:51:01 -0500, "Joe (not really)"
wrote: On 04/07/2016 03:01 PM, wrote: On Thu, 7 Apr 2016 15:20:48 -0400, "Ralph Mowery" wrote: I am suspose to get 50 meg on my cable. By the TWC (Time Warner Cable) speed test I seldon see 30 and usualy less down. I do get atleast 5 or slightly over on the up like I am suspose to get. Some of the other test sites will give 35 to 40 down and the same 5 or slightly over up. I have been thinking about getting in touch and finding out why I am not getting over 30 reported by their speed test. I have bought my own modem,but it is the one they recommend on their web site and it should be capable of atleast 100 or more if cable was sending it. With cable internet, you are sharing a node with a bunch of your neighbors. Your speed will vary based on what they are doing. It really doesn't have to be that way. I have Comcast's 100/20 package. It *always* tests and performs 120Mb/24Mb. I have Comcast 75mb service. This morning it was 90/12 on Speedtest.net On xfinity.speedtest.com it was 20/12 Just checked ten minutes ago and it was 33/12 on Speedtest.net. And about 2 minutes ago it was 90/12 again. On xfinity.speedtest.net it stayed at 20/12. Anyway, it's fast enough for me. |
Slooooow!
On Thu, 7 Apr 2016 16:52:03 -0400, "Ralph Mowery"
wrote: wrote in message .. . You have almost 260 people per square KM in UK so one fiber will serve a bunch of people. We are a tad more spread out here. We have 30 per sq/km overall and some states are more like 2-5 people per sq/km in some western states. They are not stringing 20 miles of fiber to serve 30 or 40 households. I understand, but having said that we have a lot of little villages with only a handful of houses plus many farms out in the sticks. Scotland and Wales have mountainous terrain. Those are the 5% I imagine. The US has not really put that much emphasis on getting fiber to the home. The cable companies have no real incentive since coax meets the needs of their primary business, TV and the telephone companies are slow to expand "last mile" infrastructure when everyone is going wireless. I think the biggest thing we could do to unleash this business would be to unbundle content from data and create competition in the data business. It probably would result in data being metered by the gigabyte but I don't see a huge problem with that. If they are selling data, they will be trying to get you to use more so faster would be better for them. Competition would control prices. Right now, virtually all "cable" operates as a monopoly. They did install lots of fiber for our town that services only about 30,000 people or less. It was not done by the cabe company,but a fiber optics company. Seems there are lots of unused fiber cables all over the US that was installed,but not used. The fiber companies are jumping on those lines for internet and TV. There is a rumor that they put fiber in front of my house 30 years ago in the Sprint build out. but the new phone company says no. I think it may have been destroyed or they just do not now it is there. Fifteen years ago when I got a "locate" they flagged 3 telco cables and the last time it was only 2. They obviously lost one and it may have been the fiber. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:16 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 DIYbanter