|
$130/mo 50/5 business class + 2x $5/mo static IPs (no ports blocked, servers allowed) When I first got it a few years ago it was one of the fastest cable connections in the country, pretty much only beaten by those lucky enough to be in areas where FiOS was considered competition, but now it seems everyone else has caught up and most providers offer similar or better where this is still the fastest I can get. Then again I really can't complain all that much about 50/5. edit: found a historical result from back in '11  That's a pretty big change in how it compares to the rest of the country's average, especially considering how anything above ~15-20mbit/sec tends to be ignored by anyone but geeks and businesses. wolrah fucked around with this message at 19:00 on Oct 31, 2013 |
#
¿
Oct 31, 2013 18:55
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 12:32 |
|
|
KillHour posted:Dat ping. Welcome to the world of satellite communication. Most consumer satellite networks are in geostationary orbit because it allows a stationary dish rather than requiring expensive tracking and positioning equipment to constantly re-point the dish. Geostationary orbit for this planet is 22,236 miles above the equator. If you recall your high school physics class, the speed of light is 186,282 miles per second. 22236 miles / (186282 miles / second) = 0.1194 seconds or 119.4 milliseconds. That's the one-way trip time from the moment the signal is emitted from the ground until it is received at the satellite or vice versa. Also, achieving this time requires being directly underneath the satellite. If you're anywhere else on the planet you're probably further away, adding more time. Now let's think about a ping. For simplicity's sake let's say you're pinging something at the ISP's headend rather than actually going out over the internet, and we'll ignore any latency introduced in the modem, satellite, or headend equipment as it should be relatively minimal. 000 ms: Your computer sends the ping, the modem transmits it to the satellite. 120 ms: The satellite receives the message, forwards it to the headend. 240 ms: The headend receives the message, sends it to the target computer. 240 ms: The target computer receives the ping, replies. 240 ms: The headend transmits the reply up to the satellite. 360 ms: The satellite receives the message, forwards it back down to your modem. 480 ms: Your modem receives the reply and forwards it to your computer. That's almost a half of a second delay, bare minimum, in absolutely ideal conditions. Being further from the equator adds a few milliseconds to each leg, as does being at a different latitiude. For example where I'm at in NE Ohio (41.1N, 81.7W) to the Exede satellite in the 115.1W orbital slot the extra distance would add another 9 milliseconds. It looks like most of their ground stations are in the western US, so picking the closest one to the bird in Tuscon, AZ (32N, 111W) there's 4 milliseconds there as well. That puts us at 506 milliseconds minimum theoretical round-trip time from an average US location without having even reached the internet. This is why no one ever recommends satellite over terrestrial broadband services. It is an option of last resort for those who can't get useful service any other way. Real-time games are made effectively unplayable and any sort of live communication takes on a delay comparable to that of an old-school international telephone call (which of course used geostationary satellites). A satellite service provider can of course operate at a lower altitude to reduce latency, as well as using orbits that cross over the targeted service area, but this introduces a number of problems including how to point the clients at the birds, relaying messages when the bird is in a spot that it can't see a ground station, and additional fuel requirements to maintain the proper orbit with greater drag from the slight bits of atmosphere out there. You also need a lot of equipment up there instead of just one. The Iridium satellite network uses this approach with 66 active satellites and a few spares. Obviously all this costs significantly more to operate than a single big satellite in GEO with a bunch of spot beams.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2014 18:52
|
|
|
Geemer posted:So I'm guessing that that company is just being smart and not spending money on upload capacity they won't use. Most "real bandwidth" connections like those used by ISPs are symmetrical, so they're still paying for it, but if they can sell you an asymmetrical connection then they can also sell their upstream capacity to upstream-heavy users like datacenters. Last-mile type connections like DSL, DOCSIS (Cable), PON, cellular, etc. are actually asymmetrical by design, but pretty much anything involving dedicated lines (T1/3, OCxx, etc.) is physically capable of the same speed in both directions and any asymmetry is being artificially introduced by the provider. Also, I'm happy. My ISP finally processed my upgrade, so I now have the fastest non-fiber home internet in the state of Ohio. 
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2014 18:13
|
|
|
revmoo posted:What's wrong with DSL? It's the same speed I had with TWC (actually will be quite a bit faster in practice). Ping will almost certainly improve as well. DSL being anywhere close in speed to cable in the US means it's either some of the best DSL out there or the worst cable. In most areas the fastest DSL offered officially matches a low-to-mid tier of cable, but DSL has never once in my experience (around 50 locations across at least a half dozen carriers) provided the rated speed where cable generally does.
|
|
#
¿
May 9, 2014 06:06
|
|
|
Definitely per-location, they won't even offer me a quote on fiber. $3000/mo + $2700 installation with a three year contract for 9mbit/sec service which is probably just six T1s strapped together.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2015 17:37
|
|
|
Der Meister posted:How can these assholes get away with this poo poo? Because the majority of their customers either don't care or have no other choice. You generally don't pick DSL if you care about speed and there are other wired options. They're not violating any laws as long as they continue to use the magic words "up to" in their advertising, since in theory if you had perfect lines and tested at 4 AM on a Sunday you could possibly get the rated speed. wolrah fucked around with this message at 16:14 on Feb 10, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2015 16:12
|
|
|
derp back != edit
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2015 16:14
|
|
|
Panty Saluter posted:Steam is a torrent style download. Most single servers don't ever get close to 50 Mbps to a single remote computer. If you have a traffic monitor, watch it sometime while you're browsing. very few things will brim any decent connection (or even get close). Steam is not torrent-style. It uses plain old HTTP, you can actually cache it really easily.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 10, 2015 23:16
|
|
|
Always nice to start a download and notice it's going 50% faster than usual... I'm officially on a 100/10 plan, but it looks like new tiers are rolling out:  Apparently it's supposed to be 150/15 for now, then 300/30 is coming in a few months. The Arris Password of the Day generators I used to use don't seem to be working anymore so I can't see what my modem's actually configured for. Anyone know anything about that changing recently?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2015 15:26
|
|
|
peak debt posted:Yeah I honestly never thought this day would come but I have no idea what I'd use faster Internet for Same. I'm at 150/15 now after a bump and even when I was at at 100/10 I couldn't say I felt I actually *needed* more. I live with two other people and we could all be watching 4K Netflix, listening to Google Music, playing a game, chatting on Mumble, streaming on Twitch, and using our VoIP phones at the same time with bandwidth to spare. Only bulk transfers like uploads or downloads actually use the capacity, everything streaming combined doesn't even come close. I would like more bandwidth because I'd always like more bandwidth, but I'm not sure I'm interested in paying for more and honestly when my contract is up I think I might downgrade to the tier below (which is now 100/10) to save a few bucks a month. After getting used to most well-hosted content downloading practically instantly I now get irrationally angry when I come across something that's seemingly hosted on a server from the '90s riding on a T1 somewhere in Nowheristan. gently caress you, every random vendor who puts the absolute bare minimum effort in to their driver site.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2015 07:57
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 12:32 |
|
|
Panty Saluter posted:Yeah, I have that moment when I'm getting something at 300 KB/s and it's annoying me, and then I think about life in '99-00 when I would have performed unspeakable sexual acts to get a consistent 5 KB/s I had exactly the same thought when I discovered the speed upgrade the other day. 10 years ago I had dialup on bad lines that gave me 28.8 on a good day. I'd park my truck in a neighborhood near my work so I could leave my laptop under the seat using whatever open WiFi was around to try to knock out my queues in whatever P2P crap I was using at the time. These days my storage drive takes more time to spin up out of sleep than most downloads take to complete. I have over 5000 times the download speed I had back then, over 50,000 times what my first modem delivered (2400 baud in 1992). I should dig out my old 486 and see if I can get it online, do PPP over serial to my server or something, regain some perspective on the old days. wolrah fucked around with this message at 21:22 on Jun 14, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2015 21:18
|
|
