Driver to drive?

On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 18:39:16 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid>
wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 18:34:05 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 18:03:24 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 16:50:34 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

Folks,

An engineer in Southern California and I collaborate a lot using Skype.
Voice and video is fine (usually, considering that it's only $4.95 resp.
free). But ... when I want to show a drawing or schematic he can see it
trying to show but it never succeeds. After a while I get a message that
the Internet connection is not ok. Puzzles me because:

a. Still screens have almost no bandwidth.

b. Video works with very few freeze moments.

c. GoToMeeting always works, even with video plus screen.

It there a trick to make this work with Skype? We can use GoToMeeting,
of course, but one cannot simply initiate a one-button call. It's a
tedious login thing, only good for bigger meetings.

Right now I am on a 1.2Mbit/sec down and 256kbit/sec up link, similar
with the other engineer. Can't do much about it right now and it's
perfectly fine with GoToMeeting, Webex, and so on.
Gack! That's awfully slow. What are you on, DSL?

Yep. AT&T touts the very fast "UVerse" service where you can watch TV
via Internet but every time I ask they say not in our neigborhood yet :-(
The speeds you tout actually sound like dial-up.

Dial-up won't go past 56k.


I'm showing 3.3Mbit/sec Up and 10Mbit/sec Down, and this location
isn't even one that Cox touts as "high speed".

That is probably cable TV Internet.

Yep.


What's the up-time of that over the years? Got a back-up in case it goes
down? Out here they often just slobber the cables across the flower
beds. Occasionally some four-legged folks come and chomp down on that.

How is that any different than DSL? My only reasonable Internet
option is DSL, too. It's expensive ($50/mo) and slow (3Mb). I'd love
to have cable so I could ditch both DSL and satellite TV.

My backup is 4G (but it isn't at all reliable here, either).

 

[Joerg]

krw@attt.bizz wrote:

On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 18:39:16 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 18:34:05 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 18:03:24 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 16:50:34 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

Folks,

An engineer in Southern California and I collaborate a lot using Skype.
Voice and video is fine (usually, considering that it's only $4.95 resp.
free). But ... when I want to show a drawing or schematic he can see it
trying to show but it never succeeds. After a while I get a message that
the Internet connection is not ok. Puzzles me because:

a. Still screens have almost no bandwidth.

b. Video works with very few freeze moments.

c. GoToMeeting always works, even with video plus screen.

It there a trick to make this work with Skype? We can use GoToMeeting,
of course, but one cannot simply initiate a one-button call. It's a
tedious login thing, only good for bigger meetings.

Right now I am on a 1.2Mbit/sec down and 256kbit/sec up link, similar
with the other engineer. Can't do much about it right now and it's
perfectly fine with GoToMeeting, Webex, and so on.
Gack! That's awfully slow. What are you on, DSL?

Yep. AT&T touts the very fast "UVerse" service where you can watch TV
via Internet but every time I ask they say not in our neigborhood yet :-(
The speeds you tout actually sound like dial-up.

Dial-up won't go past 56k.


I'm showing 3.3Mbit/sec Up and 10Mbit/sec Down, and this location
isn't even one that Cox touts as "high speed".

That is probably cable TV Internet.
Yep.

What's the up-time of that over the years? Got a back-up in case it goes
down? Out here they often just slobber the cables across the flower
beds. Occasionally some four-legged folks come and chomp down on that.

How is that any different than DSL? ...

DSL has a much more professional infrastructure.

DSL: 4ft under ground, goes to a very professional looking stainless
steel cabinet which is securely locked, always clean, even has a
maintained defensible space around it so fires won't lick right up to it.

Cable TV: Coaxes slobbering across flower beds and soil, rocks. Boxes
often have their lid off kilter, no locks attached, one got crushed
quite a bit in an accident a few months ago and they left it that way.
Many boxes in tall dry grass and weeds. Cables under road surfaces are
often 2" below surfcae or less. Often exposed in the ditch.

To me this is a day and night difference. A new neighbor learned this as
well. The cable guys couldn't get his Internet going for over a month so
he took the slower DSL.

... My only reasonable Internet
option is DSL, too. It's expensive ($50/mo) and slow (3Mb). I'd love
to have cable so I could ditch both DSL and satellite TV.

$38 here but only 1.2Mbit/sec.

My backup is 4G (but it isn't at all reliable here, either).

I don't have a smart phone yet. Maybe some day.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

 

On Fri, 30 Aug 2013 17:34:19 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid>
wrote:

krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 18:39:16 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 18:34:05 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 18:03:24 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 16:50:34 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

Folks,

An engineer in Southern California and I collaborate a lot using Skype.
Voice and video is fine (usually, considering that it's only $4.95 resp.
free). But ... when I want to show a drawing or schematic he can see it
trying to show but it never succeeds. After a while I get a message that
the Internet connection is not ok. Puzzles me because:

a. Still screens have almost no bandwidth.

b. Video works with very few freeze moments.

c. GoToMeeting always works, even with video plus screen.

It there a trick to make this work with Skype? We can use GoToMeeting,
of course, but one cannot simply initiate a one-button call. It's a
tedious login thing, only good for bigger meetings.

Right now I am on a 1.2Mbit/sec down and 256kbit/sec up link, similar
with the other engineer. Can't do much about it right now and it's
perfectly fine with GoToMeeting, Webex, and so on.
Gack! That's awfully slow. What are you on, DSL?

Yep. AT&T touts the very fast "UVerse" service where you can watch TV
via Internet but every time I ask they say not in our neigborhood yet :-(
The speeds you tout actually sound like dial-up.

Dial-up won't go past 56k.


I'm showing 3.3Mbit/sec Up and 10Mbit/sec Down, and this location
isn't even one that Cox touts as "high speed".

That is probably cable TV Internet.
Yep.

What's the up-time of that over the years? Got a back-up in case it goes
down? Out here they often just slobber the cables across the flower
beds. Occasionally some four-legged folks come and chomp down on that.

How is that any different than DSL? ...


DSL has a much more professional infrastructure.

The oldest profession has a "professional infrastructure", too. Hmm,
there is a similarity.

DSL: 4ft under ground, goes to a very professional looking stainless
steel cabinet which is securely locked, always clean, even has a
maintained defensible space around it so fires won't lick right up to it.

Wrong. Mine was less than 4" underground. My shovel found it while I
was putting in brick edging around the flower bed.

Cable TV: Coaxes slobbering across flower beds and soil, rocks. Boxes
often have their lid off kilter, no locks attached, one got crushed
quite a bit in an accident a few months ago and they left it that way.
Many boxes in tall dry grass and weeds. Cables under road surfaces are
often 2" below surfcae or less. Often exposed in the ditch.

DSL/phone is no different anymore.

To me this is a day and night difference. A new neighbor learned this as
well. The cable guys couldn't get his Internet going for over a month so
he took the slower DSL.

There isn't a difference in residential installation.

... My only reasonable Internet
option is DSL, too. It's expensive ($50/mo) and slow (3Mb). I'd love
to have cable so I could ditch both DSL and satellite TV.


$38 here but only 1.2Mbit/sec.

I only got .7Mb in my other house - $30.

My backup is 4G (but it isn't at all reliable here, either).


I don't have a smart phone yet. Maybe some day.

Now that I have one, I wouldn't be without it. I use it at work all
the time (so I don't use their infrastructure for personal business).
It turns out that it's useful for getting my work done, too, when IT
screws things up (so much for "professional infrastructure").

 

[Joerg]

krw@attt.bizz wrote:

On Fri, 30 Aug 2013 17:34:19 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 18:39:16 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 18:34:05 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 18:03:24 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 16:50:34 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

Folks,

An engineer in Southern California and I collaborate a lot using Skype.
Voice and video is fine (usually, considering that it's only $4.95 resp.
free). But ... when I want to show a drawing or schematic he can see it
trying to show but it never succeeds. After a while I get a message that
the Internet connection is not ok. Puzzles me because:

a. Still screens have almost no bandwidth.

b. Video works with very few freeze moments.

c. GoToMeeting always works, even with video plus screen.

It there a trick to make this work with Skype? We can use GoToMeeting,
of course, but one cannot simply initiate a one-button call. It's a
tedious login thing, only good for bigger meetings.

Right now I am on a 1.2Mbit/sec down and 256kbit/sec up link, similar
with the other engineer. Can't do much about it right now and it's
perfectly fine with GoToMeeting, Webex, and so on.
Gack! That's awfully slow. What are you on, DSL?

Yep. AT&T touts the very fast "UVerse" service where you can watch TV
via Internet but every time I ask they say not in our neigborhood yet :-(
The speeds you tout actually sound like dial-up.

Dial-up won't go past 56k.


I'm showing 3.3Mbit/sec Up and 10Mbit/sec Down, and this location
isn't even one that Cox touts as "high speed".

That is probably cable TV Internet.
Yep.

What's the up-time of that over the years? Got a back-up in case it goes
down? Out here they often just slobber the cables across the flower
beds. Occasionally some four-legged folks come and chomp down on that.
How is that any different than DSL? ...

DSL has a much more professional infrastructure.

The oldest profession has a "professional infrastructure", too. Hmm,
there is a similarity.

DSL: 4ft under ground, goes to a very professional looking stainless
steel cabinet which is securely locked, always clean, even has a
maintained defensible space around it so fires won't lick right up to it.

Wrong. Mine was less than 4" underground. My shovel found it while I
was putting in brick edging around the flower bed.

That's shoddy work. When we called Digalert before building a fence I
was surprised about the depth. IIRC the woman who came out for the phone
company said they are required to maintain 2ft.

Cable TV: Coaxes slobbering across flower beds and soil, rocks. Boxes
often have their lid off kilter, no locks attached, one got crushed
quite a bit in an accident a few months ago and they left it that way.
Many boxes in tall dry grass and weeds. Cables under road surfaces are
often 2" below surfcae or less. Often exposed in the ditch.

DSL/phone is no different anymore.

Out here it is. There's standards for those.

To me this is a day and night difference. A new neighbor learned this as
well. The cable guys couldn't get his Internet going for over a month so
he took the slower DSL.

There isn't a difference in residential installation.

There is here.

... My only reasonable Internet
option is DSL, too. It's expensive ($50/mo) and slow (3Mb). I'd love
to have cable so I could ditch both DSL and satellite TV.

$38 here but only 1.2Mbit/sec.

I only got .7Mb in my other house - $30.

I think DSL has had its day. The price for a given bandwidth just isn't
competitive with cable TV providers anymore. The downside with cable is
that they usually want to sell bundles, Internet/TV/phone. We wouldn't
want that. Plus that jacks up the price to easily $100 or more a month.

My backup is 4G (but it isn't at all reliable here, either).

I don't have a smart phone yet. Maybe some day.

Now that I have one, I wouldn't be without it. I use it at work all
the time (so I don't use their infrastructure for personal business).
It turns out that it's useful for getting my work done, too, when IT
screws things up (so much for "professional infrastructure").

A lot of our friends say the same, that they wouldn't want to miss it.
Other than looking up a road or contact information, right now I
couldn't imagine what I'd use it for. But I guess that comes with ...
using it

Pricing is high though. Most of them out here have family plans and
those are north of $200/mo, and only with contracts.

Virgin has a plan for $35/mo with 300 phone minutes but "unlimited" for
web, except it slows down if you get past 2.5GB/mo. Only one of their
phones has 4G though. My dream phone would be one where I can also run
Windows programs such as LTSpice or Eagle (just for simple stuff).

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

 

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Fri, 30 Aug 2013 10:25:31 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid>
wrote:

The problem persists if the San Diego engineer works from home where he
has a 5M+ Internet link. It's probably my upload speed of 256k that
hampers things.

Ok, now that we've established the blame, we can precede towards a
solution.

>But why are all other services happy with it?

Good questions. It would be interesting to know how much of your
upstream each of the other services are consuming. If Skype consumes
less bandwidth than the others, then Skype is adapting to its limited
bandwidth rather badly, while the others are using all the bandwidth
they can grab.

On the other foot, it might be the same problem, but backwards. If
Skype is grabbing all the outgoing bandwidth, with nothing reserved
for ACK's, any other traffic (i.e. email, web, ftp) is going to appear
constipated because the other end of the link is not getting timely
ACK's. Skype might be failing to reserve some bandwidth (usually
about 10%) for ACK's, while the others are doing it right.

It might also be a matter of QoS. You may have QoS configured in your
router to give SIP packets, or whatever the other programs are using
priority, while Skype has to fight it out with web and email traffic.

Skype adjusts the protocol and server topology depending on connection
speed. To the best of my limited knowledge, Skype is still
transitioning between topologies:
http://arstechnica.com/business/2012/05/skype-replaces-p2p-supernodes-with-linux-boxes-hosted-by-microsoft/

Microsoft installing Linux boxes? Wow! How did that get past Gates and
Ballmer?

Ballmer is retiring not soon enough, and Gates is busy giving away his
money. Today, Linux isn't the enemy. It's VMware.
<http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/07/25/windows_server_2012_cloud_love/>

For your amusement...
<http://www.mslinux.org>

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

 

[Joerg]

Jeff Liebermann wrote:

On Fri, 30 Aug 2013 10:25:31 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

The problem persists if the San Diego engineer works from home where he
has a 5M+ Internet link. It's probably my upload speed of 256k that
hampers things.

Ok, now that we've established the blame, we can precede towards a
solution.

But why are all other services happy with it?

Good questions. It would be interesting to know how much of your
upstream each of the other services are consuming. If Skype consumes
less bandwidth than the others, then Skype is adapting to its limited
bandwidth rather badly, while the others are using all the bandwidth
they can grab.

It must adapt badly because every time after canning the screen-share I
get a notice that the Internet connection between me and the other
engineer in insufficient. The typical dumbed-down message with zero meat
in there.

On the other foot, it might be the same problem, but backwards. If
Skype is grabbing all the outgoing bandwidth, with nothing reserved
for ACK's, any other traffic (i.e. email, web, ftp) is going to appear
constipated because the other end of the link is not getting timely
ACK's. Skype might be failing to reserve some bandwidth (usually
about 10%) for ACK's, while the others are doing it right.

Right now I don't have any tools to gauge that, other than the LED on
the modem. It doesn't indicate a much different amount of data per
second between, for example, GoToMeeting and Skype. Yet GoToMeeting
works reliably and Skype doesn't.

It might also be a matter of QoS. You may have QoS configured in your
router to give SIP packets, or whatever the other programs are using
priority, while Skype has to fight it out with web and email traffic.

The router doesn't have any QoS on there.

Skype adjusts the protocol and server topology depending on connection
speed. To the best of my limited knowledge, Skype is still
transitioning between topologies:
http://arstechnica.com/business/2012/05/skype-replaces-p2p-supernodes-with-linux-boxes-hosted-by-microsoft/
Microsoft installing Linux boxes? Wow! How did that get past Gates and
Ballmer?

Ballmer is retiring not soon enough, and Gates is busy giving away his
money. Today, Linux isn't the enemy. It's VMware.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/07/25/windows_server_2012_cloud_love/

For your amusement...
http://www.mslinux.org

Aha, that's where the toilet paper shortage came from

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

 

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Sat, 31 Aug 2013 09:23:26 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid>
wrote:

It must adapt badly because every time after canning the screen-share I
get a notice that the Internet connection between me and the other
engineer in insufficient.

That's REALLY bad. That message is triggered when the network stack
detects too many retransmissions, a symptom of a really constipated
network route. Try:
Start -> run -> cmd <enter.
netstat -S
and look for errors and retransmissions.

Right now I don't have any tools to gauge that, other than the LED on
the modem. It doesn't indicate a much different amount of data per
second between, for example, GoToMeeting and Skype. Yet GoToMeeting
works reliably and Skype doesn't.

Right click on the Windoze "Task Bar" (bottom of screen) and select
"Task Manager". Click on the "Networking" tab. Not the best monitor
but it should give you a clue as to the total network traffic.

For something better, try:
<http://miechu.pl/freemeter/>
<http://download.cnet.com/NET-Traffic-Meter/3000-2651_4-10630187.html>
<http://www.pcwintech.com/simple-internet-meter-lite>
etc... Google for "XP network traffic meter".

>The router doesn't have any QoS on there.

Buy a router with QoS. Enable QoS for Skype and SIP.
<http://stores.ebay.com/Linksys-Official-Store>
I've been buying EA2700 (refurbished) routers with good results, after
downgrading the supplied firmware to remove Cisco cloud services.
<http://www.ebay.com/itm/300875198122> $40.

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

 

[Joerg]

Jeff Liebermann wrote:

On Sat, 31 Aug 2013 09:23:26 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

It must adapt badly because every time after canning the screen-share I
get a notice that the Internet connection between me and the other
engineer in insufficient.

That's REALLY bad. That message is triggered when the network stack
detects too many retransmissions, a symptom of a really constipated
network route. Try:
Start -> run -> cmd <enter.
netstat -S
and look for errors and retransmissions.

Segments Received : 3466547
Segments Sent : 3065758
Segments Retransmitted: 2500

That doesn't look too bad to me.

Right now I don't have any tools to gauge that, other than the LED on
the modem. It doesn't indicate a much different amount of data per
second between, for example, GoToMeeting and Skype. Yet GoToMeeting
works reliably and Skype doesn't.

Right click on the Windoze "Task Bar" (bottom of screen) and select
"Task Manager". Click on the "Networking" tab. Not the best monitor
but it should give you a clue as to the total network traffic.

I've used that sometimes but it doesn't really tell you how close things
are to a limit on the DSL side. It only reads a percentage, whatever
that means.

For something better, try:
http://miechu.pl/freemeter/
http://download.cnet.com/NET-Traffic-Meter/3000-2651_4-10630187.html
http://www.pcwintech.com/simple-internet-meter-lite
etc... Google for "XP network traffic meter".

Hoping they are safe to download

I am always careful when not knowing sites.

The router doesn't have any QoS on there.

Buy a router with QoS. Enable QoS for Skype and SIP.
http://stores.ebay.com/Linksys-Official-Store
I've been buying EA2700 (refurbished) routers with good results, after
downgrading the supplied firmware to remove Cisco cloud services.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/300875198122> $40.

I think I'll first see if there is any way to increase the DSL speed
here. I like my router because it has an LPT port which makes a 2nd
laser printer available on the LAN as backup. Also, QoS probably won't
help much because when I use Skype there is typically nobody else using
the Internet here. So all the available bandwidth is available to Skype.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

 

[Rich Webb]

On Sat, 31 Aug 2013 11:35:00 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid>
wrote:

Jeff Liebermann wrote:

Right click on the Windoze "Task Bar" (bottom of screen) and select
"Task Manager". Click on the "Networking" tab. Not the best monitor
but it should give you a clue as to the total network traffic.


I've used that sometimes but it doesn't really tell you how close things
are to a limit on the DSL side. It only reads a percentage, whatever
that means.


For something better, try:
http://miechu.pl/freemeter/
http://download.cnet.com/NET-Traffic-Meter/3000-2651_4-10630187.html
http://www.pcwintech.com/simple-internet-meter-lite
etc... Google for "XP network traffic meter".


Hoping they are safe to download

I am always careful when not knowing sites.

Take a look at DU Meter http://www.hageltech.com/dumeter/about.
Inexpensive, 30-day free trial period, and they've been around for
years. Many more options than I routinely use.

 

On Sat, 31 Aug 2013 07:39:33 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid>
wrote:

krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Fri, 30 Aug 2013 17:34:19 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 18:39:16 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 18:34:05 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 18:03:24 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 16:50:34 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

Folks,

An engineer in Southern California and I collaborate a lot using Skype.
Voice and video is fine (usually, considering that it's only $4.95 resp.
free). But ... when I want to show a drawing or schematic he can see it
trying to show but it never succeeds. After a while I get a message that
the Internet connection is not ok. Puzzles me because:

a. Still screens have almost no bandwidth.

b. Video works with very few freeze moments.

c. GoToMeeting always works, even with video plus screen.

It there a trick to make this work with Skype? We can use GoToMeeting,
of course, but one cannot simply initiate a one-button call. It's a
tedious login thing, only good for bigger meetings.

Right now I am on a 1.2Mbit/sec down and 256kbit/sec up link, similar
with the other engineer. Can't do much about it right now and it's
perfectly fine with GoToMeeting, Webex, and so on.
Gack! That's awfully slow. What are you on, DSL?

Yep. AT&T touts the very fast "UVerse" service where you can watch TV
via Internet but every time I ask they say not in our neigborhood yet :-(
The speeds you tout actually sound like dial-up.

Dial-up won't go past 56k.


I'm showing 3.3Mbit/sec Up and 10Mbit/sec Down, and this location
isn't even one that Cox touts as "high speed".

That is probably cable TV Internet.
Yep.

What's the up-time of that over the years? Got a back-up in case it goes
down? Out here they often just slobber the cables across the flower
beds. Occasionally some four-legged folks come and chomp down on that.
How is that any different than DSL? ...

DSL has a much more professional infrastructure.

The oldest profession has a "professional infrastructure", too. Hmm,
there is a similarity.

DSL: 4ft under ground, goes to a very professional looking stainless
steel cabinet which is securely locked, always clean, even has a
maintained defensible space around it so fires won't lick right up to it.

Wrong. Mine was less than 4" underground. My shovel found it while I
was putting in brick edging around the flower bed.


That's shoddy work. When we called Digalert before building a fence I
was surprised about the depth. IIRC the woman who came out for the phone
company said they are required to maintain 2ft.

This ain't your father's phone company. This is now the norm for
residential phone service. Basically, they just "stitch" the wire
into the sod and call it a day.

Cable TV: Coaxes slobbering across flower beds and soil, rocks. Boxes
often have their lid off kilter, no locks attached, one got crushed
quite a bit in an accident a few months ago and they left it that way.
Many boxes in tall dry grass and weeds. Cables under road surfaces are
often 2" below surfcae or less. Often exposed in the ditch.

DSL/phone is no different anymore.


Out here it is. There's standards for those.

Such a quaint concept. I'll bet new subdivisions aren't buried. It's
too expensive.

To me this is a day and night difference. A new neighbor learned this as
well. The cable guys couldn't get his Internet going for over a month so
he took the slower DSL.

There isn't a difference in residential installation.


There is here.

I highly doubt it.

... My only reasonable Internet
option is DSL, too. It's expensive ($50/mo) and slow (3Mb). I'd love
to have cable so I could ditch both DSL and satellite TV.

$38 here but only 1.2Mbit/sec.

I only got .7Mb in my other house - $30.


I think DSL has had its day. The price for a given bandwidth just isn't
competitive with cable TV providers anymore. The downside with cable is
that they usually want to sell bundles, Internet/TV/phone. We wouldn't
want that. Plus that jacks up the price to easily $100 or more a month.

What they want isn't necessarily what they get. Even the phone
company doesn't require phone service, anymore. They still charge
like it, though.

My satellite, alone, is $170/mo. DSL is another $50 (and mobile
another $150 - going to $170, I think).

My backup is 4G (but it isn't at all reliable here, either).

I don't have a smart phone yet. Maybe some day.

Now that I have one, I wouldn't be without it. I use it at work all
the time (so I don't use their infrastructure for personal business).
It turns out that it's useful for getting my work done, too, when IT
screws things up (so much for "professional infrastructure").


A lot of our friends say the same, that they wouldn't want to miss it.
Other than looking up a road or contact information, right now I
couldn't imagine what I'd use it for. But I guess that comes with ...
using it

Exactly. "You gota pass it to find out how bad it really is."

Pricing is high though. Most of them out here have family plans and
those are north of $200/mo, and only with contracts.

It's cheaper without a contract, though you have to purchase the phone
at "full price". Unless you live where there is only one company
covering the area, it's quite a competitive market, now. Even where
there is only one company (in my case, Verizon is the only one with
towers within "sight"), there are many resellers that are
substantially cheaper than the big-guys. I'll be seriously looking
when my contract is up in January. I should be able to drop my bill
to something under $100 (two smart phones).

Virgin has a plan for $35/mo with 300 phone minutes but "unlimited" for
web, except it slows down if you get past 2.5GB/mo. Only one of their
phones has 4G though. My dream phone would be one where I can also run
Windows programs such as LTSpice or Eagle (just for simple stuff).

That's a good deal. I'll have to take a look at it (don't know who
they use as a carrier). 2.5GB is a lot (I have a 6GB plan but never
use more than 1GB), unless you do streaming. A phone is too small for
any of that stuff. A windows tablet, either 4G or WiFi thought the
phone, would be better. Don't forget that computers suck for "real
work" without a keyboard and mouse, though.

 

[Martin Riddle]

On Sat, 31 Aug 2013 15:58:46 -0400, krw@attt.bizz wrote:

On Sat, 31 Aug 2013 07:39:33 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Fri, 30 Aug 2013 17:34:19 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 18:39:16 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 18:34:05 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 18:03:24 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 16:50:34 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

Folks,

An engineer in Southern California and I collaborate a lot using Skype.
Voice and video is fine (usually, considering that it's only $4.95 resp.
free). But ... when I want to show a drawing or schematic he can see it
trying to show but it never succeeds. After a while I get a message that
the Internet connection is not ok. Puzzles me because:

a. Still screens have almost no bandwidth.

b. Video works with very few freeze moments.

c. GoToMeeting always works, even with video plus screen.

It there a trick to make this work with Skype? We can use GoToMeeting,
of course, but one cannot simply initiate a one-button call. It's a
tedious login thing, only good for bigger meetings.

Right now I am on a 1.2Mbit/sec down and 256kbit/sec up link, similar
with the other engineer. Can't do much about it right now and it's
perfectly fine with GoToMeeting, Webex, and so on.
Gack! That's awfully slow. What are you on, DSL?

Yep. AT&T touts the very fast "UVerse" service where you can watch TV
via Internet but every time I ask they say not in our neigborhood yet :-(
The speeds you tout actually sound like dial-up.

Dial-up won't go past 56k.


I'm showing 3.3Mbit/sec Up and 10Mbit/sec Down, and this location
isn't even one that Cox touts as "high speed".

That is probably cable TV Internet.
Yep.

What's the up-time of that over the years? Got a back-up in case it goes
down? Out here they often just slobber the cables across the flower
beds. Occasionally some four-legged folks come and chomp down on that.
How is that any different than DSL? ...

DSL has a much more professional infrastructure.

The oldest profession has a "professional infrastructure", too. Hmm,
there is a similarity.

DSL: 4ft under ground, goes to a very professional looking stainless
steel cabinet which is securely locked, always clean, even has a
maintained defensible space around it so fires won't lick right up to it.

Wrong. Mine was less than 4" underground. My shovel found it while I
was putting in brick edging around the flower bed.


That's shoddy work. When we called Digalert before building a fence I
was surprised about the depth. IIRC the woman who came out for the phone
company said they are required to maintain 2ft.

This ain't your father's phone company. This is now the norm for
residential phone service. Basically, they just "stitch" the wire
into the sod and call it a day.

Cable TV: Coaxes slobbering across flower beds and soil, rocks. Boxes
often have their lid off kilter, no locks attached, one got crushed
quite a bit in an accident a few months ago and they left it that way.
Many boxes in tall dry grass and weeds. Cables under road surfaces are
often 2" below surfcae or less. Often exposed in the ditch.

DSL/phone is no different anymore.


Out here it is. There's standards for those.

Such a quaint concept. I'll bet new subdivisions aren't buried. It's
too expensive.

To me this is a day and night difference. A new neighbor learned this as
well. The cable guys couldn't get his Internet going for over a month so
he took the slower DSL.

There isn't a difference in residential installation.


There is here.

I highly doubt it.

... My only reasonable Internet
option is DSL, too. It's expensive ($50/mo) and slow (3Mb). I'd love
to have cable so I could ditch both DSL and satellite TV.

$38 here but only 1.2Mbit/sec.

I only got .7Mb in my other house - $30.


I think DSL has had its day. The price for a given bandwidth just isn't
competitive with cable TV providers anymore. The downside with cable is
that they usually want to sell bundles, Internet/TV/phone. We wouldn't
want that. Plus that jacks up the price to easily $100 or more a month.

What they want isn't necessarily what they get. Even the phone
company doesn't require phone service, anymore. They still charge
like it, though.

My satellite, alone, is $170/mo. DSL is another $50 (and mobile
another $150 - going to $170, I think).

My backup is 4G (but it isn't at all reliable here, either).

I don't have a smart phone yet. Maybe some day.

Now that I have one, I wouldn't be without it. I use it at work all
the time (so I don't use their infrastructure for personal business).
It turns out that it's useful for getting my work done, too, when IT
screws things up (so much for "professional infrastructure").


A lot of our friends say the same, that they wouldn't want to miss it.
Other than looking up a road or contact information, right now I
couldn't imagine what I'd use it for. But I guess that comes with ...
using it

Exactly. "You gota pass it to find out how bad it really is."

Pricing is high though. Most of them out here have family plans and
those are north of $200/mo, and only with contracts.

It's cheaper without a contract, though you have to purchase the phone
at "full price". Unless you live where there is only one company
covering the area, it's quite a competitive market, now. Even where
there is only one company (in my case, Verizon is the only one with
towers within "sight"), there are many resellers that are
substantially cheaper than the big-guys. I'll be seriously looking
when my contract is up in January. I should be able to drop my bill
to something under $100 (two smart phones).

Virgin has a plan for $35/mo with 300 phone minutes but "unlimited" for
web, except it slows down if you get past 2.5GB/mo. Only one of their
phones has 4G though. My dream phone would be one where I can also run
Windows programs such as LTSpice or Eagle (just for simple stuff).

That's a good deal. I'll have to take a look at it (don't know who
they use as a carrier). 2.5GB is a lot (I have a 6GB plan but never
use more than 1GB), unless you do streaming. A phone is too small for
any of that stuff. A windows tablet, either 4G or WiFi thought the
phone, would be better. Don't forget that computers suck for "real
work" without a keyboard and mouse, though.

Virgin piggy back's on the Sprint network.

Cheers

 

On Sat, 31 Aug 2013 17:47:06 -0400, Martin Riddle
<martin_rid@verizon.net> wrote:

On Sat, 31 Aug 2013 15:58:46 -0400, krw@attt.bizz wrote:

On Sat, 31 Aug 2013 07:39:33 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Fri, 30 Aug 2013 17:34:19 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 18:39:16 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 18:34:05 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 18:03:24 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 16:50:34 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

Folks,

An engineer in Southern California and I collaborate a lot using Skype.
Voice and video is fine (usually, considering that it's only $4.95 resp.
free). But ... when I want to show a drawing or schematic he can see it
trying to show but it never succeeds. After a while I get a message that
the Internet connection is not ok. Puzzles me because:

a. Still screens have almost no bandwidth.

b. Video works with very few freeze moments.

c. GoToMeeting always works, even with video plus screen.

It there a trick to make this work with Skype? We can use GoToMeeting,
of course, but one cannot simply initiate a one-button call. It's a
tedious login thing, only good for bigger meetings.

Right now I am on a 1.2Mbit/sec down and 256kbit/sec up link, similar
with the other engineer. Can't do much about it right now and it's
perfectly fine with GoToMeeting, Webex, and so on.
Gack! That's awfully slow. What are you on, DSL?

Yep. AT&T touts the very fast "UVerse" service where you can watch TV
via Internet but every time I ask they say not in our neigborhood yet :-(
The speeds you tout actually sound like dial-up.

Dial-up won't go past 56k.


I'm showing 3.3Mbit/sec Up and 10Mbit/sec Down, and this location
isn't even one that Cox touts as "high speed".

That is probably cable TV Internet.
Yep.

What's the up-time of that over the years? Got a back-up in case it goes
down? Out here they often just slobber the cables across the flower
beds. Occasionally some four-legged folks come and chomp down on that.
How is that any different than DSL? ...

DSL has a much more professional infrastructure.

The oldest profession has a "professional infrastructure", too. Hmm,
there is a similarity.

DSL: 4ft under ground, goes to a very professional looking stainless
steel cabinet which is securely locked, always clean, even has a
maintained defensible space around it so fires won't lick right up to it.

Wrong. Mine was less than 4" underground. My shovel found it while I
was putting in brick edging around the flower bed.


That's shoddy work. When we called Digalert before building a fence I
was surprised about the depth. IIRC the woman who came out for the phone
company said they are required to maintain 2ft.

This ain't your father's phone company. This is now the norm for
residential phone service. Basically, they just "stitch" the wire
into the sod and call it a day.

Cable TV: Coaxes slobbering across flower beds and soil, rocks. Boxes
often have their lid off kilter, no locks attached, one got crushed
quite a bit in an accident a few months ago and they left it that way.
Many boxes in tall dry grass and weeds. Cables under road surfaces are
often 2" below surfcae or less. Often exposed in the ditch.

DSL/phone is no different anymore.


Out here it is. There's standards for those.

Such a quaint concept. I'll bet new subdivisions aren't buried. It's
too expensive.

To me this is a day and night difference. A new neighbor learned this as
well. The cable guys couldn't get his Internet going for over a month so
he took the slower DSL.

There isn't a difference in residential installation.


There is here.

I highly doubt it.

... My only reasonable Internet
option is DSL, too. It's expensive ($50/mo) and slow (3Mb). I'd love
to have cable so I could ditch both DSL and satellite TV.

$38 here but only 1.2Mbit/sec.

I only got .7Mb in my other house - $30.


I think DSL has had its day. The price for a given bandwidth just isn't
competitive with cable TV providers anymore. The downside with cable is
that they usually want to sell bundles, Internet/TV/phone. We wouldn't
want that. Plus that jacks up the price to easily $100 or more a month.

What they want isn't necessarily what they get. Even the phone
company doesn't require phone service, anymore. They still charge
like it, though.

My satellite, alone, is $170/mo. DSL is another $50 (and mobile
another $150 - going to $170, I think).

My backup is 4G (but it isn't at all reliable here, either).

I don't have a smart phone yet. Maybe some day.

Now that I have one, I wouldn't be without it. I use it at work all
the time (so I don't use their infrastructure for personal business).
It turns out that it's useful for getting my work done, too, when IT
screws things up (so much for "professional infrastructure").


A lot of our friends say the same, that they wouldn't want to miss it.
Other than looking up a road or contact information, right now I
couldn't imagine what I'd use it for. But I guess that comes with ...
using it

Exactly. "You gota pass it to find out how bad it really is."

Pricing is high though. Most of them out here have family plans and
those are north of $200/mo, and only with contracts.

It's cheaper without a contract, though you have to purchase the phone
at "full price". Unless you live where there is only one company
covering the area, it's quite a competitive market, now. Even where
there is only one company (in my case, Verizon is the only one with
towers within "sight"), there are many resellers that are
substantially cheaper than the big-guys. I'll be seriously looking
when my contract is up in January. I should be able to drop my bill
to something under $100 (two smart phones).

Virgin has a plan for $35/mo with 300 phone minutes but "unlimited" for
web, except it slows down if you get past 2.5GB/mo. Only one of their
phones has 4G though. My dream phone would be one where I can also run
Windows programs such as LTSpice or Eagle (just for simple stuff).

That's a good deal. I'll have to take a look at it (don't know who
they use as a carrier). 2.5GB is a lot (I have a 6GB plan but never
use more than 1GB), unless you do streaming. A phone is too small for
any of that stuff. A windows tablet, either 4G or WiFi thought the
phone, would be better. Don't forget that computers suck for "real
work" without a keyboard and mouse, though.

Virgin piggy back's on the Sprint network.

Thanks. Their coverage map shows me right at the edge of "fair" and
"off-network roaming". My Verizon coverage isn't anything to write
home about but I don't want to be roaming (which is probably Verizon).
Sounds like it's not an option for me.

I was seriously looking into Page Plus Cellular. They have an
unlimited talk/text plan with 2GB data for $55. It's $70 with 5GB.
Page Plus uses the Verizon network. Since Verizon is raising my price
in the middle of the contract, I'll probably switch in January.

 

[Joerg]

Rich Webb wrote:

On Sat, 31 Aug 2013 11:35:00 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

Jeff Liebermann wrote:

Right click on the Windoze "Task Bar" (bottom of screen) and select
"Task Manager". Click on the "Networking" tab. Not the best monitor
but it should give you a clue as to the total network traffic.

I've used that sometimes but it doesn't really tell you how close things
are to a limit on the DSL side. It only reads a percentage, whatever
that means.


For something better, try:
http://miechu.pl/freemeter/
http://download.cnet.com/NET-Traffic-Meter/3000-2651_4-10630187.html
http://www.pcwintech.com/simple-internet-meter-lite
etc... Google for "XP network traffic meter".

Hoping they are safe to download

I am always careful when not knowing sites.

Take a look at DU Meter http://www.hageltech.com/dumeter/about.
Inexpensive, 30-day free trial period, and they've been around for
years. Many more options than I routinely use.

Thanks, Rich. But first I'll try to get more speed. Because even if I
find Skype to have a bug they won't care one bit.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

 

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Sat, 31 Aug 2013 11:35:00 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid>
wrote:

Segments Received : 3466547
Segments Sent : 3065758
Segments Retransmitted: 2500

That doesn't look too bad to me.

0.3% is good enough and better than most for TCP. However, you should
run Skype Echo Test or talk with someone using Skype first, and then
check the UDP, not the TCP statistics. VoIP (and video) are both UDP,
not TCP.

Right click on the Windoze "Task Bar" (bottom of screen) and select
"Task Manager". Click on the "Networking" tab. Not the best monitor
but it should give you a clue as to the total network traffic.

I've used that sometimes but it doesn't really tell you how close things
are to a limit on the DSL side. It only reads a percentage, whatever
that means.

It's the percentage of your ethernet bandwidth. If you have a
100Mbit/sec ethernet connection to your router, and your DSL is
running at 1.5Mbits/sec, you'll see a tiny 1.5% maximum display on the
graph. This piece of brilliant design was brought to you by the
wonderful folks at Microsoft.

For something better, try:
http://miechu.pl/freemeter/
http://download.cnet.com/NET-Traffic-Meter/3000-2651_4-10630187.html
http://www.pcwintech.com/simple-internet-meter-lite
etc... Google for "XP network traffic meter".

Hoping they are safe to download

I downloaded and ran the first and third on the list. I didn't want
to deal with the CNET download manager and didn't try the 2nd one. No
damage or pyrotechnics so far.

>I am always careful when not knowing sites.

I do lots of image backups, so I'm far less careful. However, if I'm
into paranoia, I fire up a Virtual Machine, and run the program in a
sandbox. It works, I install it on the "real" XP partition.

Buy a router with QoS. Enable QoS for Skype and SIP.
http://stores.ebay.com/Linksys-Official-Store
I've been buying EA2700 (refurbished) routers with good results, after
downgrading the supplied firmware to remove Cisco cloud services.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/300875198122> $40.

I think I'll first see if there is any way to increase the DSL speed
here. I like my router because it has an LPT port which makes a 2nd
laser printer available on the LAN as backup.

Parallel ports are so 20th century. Kinda sounds like an old router,
which may be the cause of the slow speeds. I've replaced various
Netgear WGR614 series routers that seemed to slow down after about 5
years in service. No failures, just a slow down. No clue what that
was about, but replacing the router with something more current made a
big difference. You might also look into the benefits of ethernet
connected laser printers. Incidentally, the typical complaint was not
VoIP problems but rather problems streaming YouTube and Netflix
videos.

Also, QoS probably won't
help much because when I use Skype there is typically nobody else using
the Internet here. So all the available bandwidth is available to Skype.

It will help when you're transferring files at the same time that
you're talking on Skype or reading something on the internet at the
same time.


--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

 

[Joerg]

krw@attt.bizz wrote:

On Sat, 31 Aug 2013 17:47:06 -0400, Martin Riddle
martin_rid@verizon.net> wrote:

On Sat, 31 Aug 2013 15:58:46 -0400, krw@attt.bizz wrote:

On Sat, 31 Aug 2013 07:39:33 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Fri, 30 Aug 2013 17:34:19 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

[...]

DSL: 4ft under ground, goes to a very professional looking stainless
steel cabinet which is securely locked, always clean, even has a
maintained defensible space around it so fires won't lick right up to it.
Wrong. Mine was less than 4" underground. My shovel found it while I
was putting in brick edging around the flower bed.

That's shoddy work. When we called Digalert before building a fence I
was surprised about the depth. IIRC the woman who came out for the phone
company said they are required to maintain 2ft.
This ain't your father's phone company. This is now the norm for
residential phone service. Basically, they just "stitch" the wire
into the sod and call it a day.

I walk a lot through the neighborhoods, on account of two Labradors
who'd get cranky otherwise. Then you see a lot of utility work. When the
AT&T guys come they often show up with heavy duty equipment. The cable
guys ... with a glorified circular saw and some sort of caulking gun.

Cable TV: Coaxes slobbering across flower beds and soil, rocks. Boxes
often have their lid off kilter, no locks attached, one got crushed
quite a bit in an accident a few months ago and they left it that way.
Many boxes in tall dry grass and weeds. Cables under road surfaces are
often 2" below surfcae or less. Often exposed in the ditch.
DSL/phone is no different anymore.

Out here it is. There's standards for those.
Such a quaint concept. I'll bet new subdivisions aren't buried. It's
too expensive.
To me this is a day and night difference. A new neighbor learned this as
well. The cable guys couldn't get his Internet going for over a month so
he took the slower DSL.
There isn't a difference in residential installation.

There is here.
I highly doubt it.

There's a house going up across the valley, phone line is in a trench
just like power, water and sewer. Out here they often use the same
trench as the electric utility.

... My only reasonable Internet
option is DSL, too. It's expensive ($50/mo) and slow (3Mb). I'd love
to have cable so I could ditch both DSL and satellite TV.

$38 here but only 1.2Mbit/sec.
I only got .7Mb in my other house - $30.

I think DSL has had its day. The price for a given bandwidth just isn't
competitive with cable TV providers anymore. The downside with cable is
that they usually want to sell bundles, Internet/TV/phone. We wouldn't
want that. Plus that jacks up the price to easily $100 or more a month.
What they want isn't necessarily what they get. Even the phone
company doesn't require phone service, anymore. They still charge
like it, though.

My satellite, alone, is $170/mo. DSL is another $50 (and mobile
another $150 - going to $170, I think).

Yikes!

My backup is 4G (but it isn't at all reliable here, either).
I don't have a smart phone yet. Maybe some day.
Now that I have one, I wouldn't be without it. I use it at work all
the time (so I don't use their infrastructure for personal business).
It turns out that it's useful for getting my work done, too, when IT
screws things up (so much for "professional infrastructure").

A lot of our friends say the same, that they wouldn't want to miss it.
Other than looking up a road or contact information, right now I
couldn't imagine what I'd use it for. But I guess that comes with ...
using it
Exactly. "You gota pass it to find out how bad it really is."

Pricing is high though. Most of them out here have family plans and
those are north of $200/mo, and only with contracts.
It's cheaper without a contract, though you have to purchase the phone
at "full price". Unless you live where there is only one company
covering the area, it's quite a competitive market, now. Even where
there is only one company (in my case, Verizon is the only one with
towers within "sight"), there are many resellers that are
substantially cheaper than the big-guys. I'll be seriously looking
when my contract is up in January. I should be able to drop my bill
to something under $100 (two smart phones).

Virgin has a plan for $35/mo with 300 phone minutes but "unlimited" for
web, except it slows down if you get past 2.5GB/mo. Only one of their
phones has 4G though. My dream phone would be one where I can also run
Windows programs such as LTSpice or Eagle (just for simple stuff).
That's a good deal. I'll have to take a look at it (don't know who
they use as a carrier). 2.5GB is a lot (I have a 6GB plan but never
use more than 1GB), unless you do streaming. A phone is too small for
any of that stuff. A windows tablet, either 4G or WiFi thought the
phone, would be better. Don't forget that computers suck for "real
work" without a keyboard and mouse, though.
Virgin piggy back's on the Sprint network.

Thanks. Their coverage map shows me right at the edge of "fair" and
"off-network roaming". ...

That was the same here when we got the service many years ago. Since
there was (and still is) no contract I just gave it a shot and it worked
anyways. I got 1-2 bars in the house and some dead spots. Now it
improved, they must have placed a new tower. But I have no idea how the
data speeds would be because I only buy basic talk service.

The funny thing is I occasionally had to hand my bone-simple Nokia 2115i
to business folks who could not get a connection with their fancy smart
phones.

... My Verizon coverage isn't anything to write
home about but I don't want to be roaming (which is probably Verizon).
Sounds like it's not an option for me.

This is their plan:

http://www.virginmobileusa.com/cell-phone-plans/beyond-talk-plans/overview/

The nice thing is that there is no contract. Paid per month and that's
it. It says unlimited but in the fine print there is a 2.5GB limit after
which it slows down. Somewhere I have heard that it may not apply to 4G
connections but I am not sure.

I was seriously looking into Page Plus Cellular. They have an
unlimited talk/text plan with 2GB data for $55. It's $70 with 5GB.
Page Plus uses the Verizon network. Since Verizon is raising my price
in the middle of the contract, I'll probably switch in January.

Isn't it illegal for them to raise prices if you've got a contract?

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

 

On Sat, 31 Aug 2013 16:04:58 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid>
wrote:

krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Sat, 31 Aug 2013 17:47:06 -0400, Martin Riddle
martin_rid@verizon.net> wrote:

On Sat, 31 Aug 2013 15:58:46 -0400, krw@attt.bizz wrote:

On Sat, 31 Aug 2013 07:39:33 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Fri, 30 Aug 2013 17:34:19 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:


[...]

DSL: 4ft under ground, goes to a very professional looking stainless
steel cabinet which is securely locked, always clean, even has a
maintained defensible space around it so fires won't lick right up to it.
Wrong. Mine was less than 4" underground. My shovel found it while I
was putting in brick edging around the flower bed.

That's shoddy work. When we called Digalert before building a fence I
was surprised about the depth. IIRC the woman who came out for the phone
company said they are required to maintain 2ft.
This ain't your father's phone company. This is now the norm for
residential phone service. Basically, they just "stitch" the wire
into the sod and call it a day.


I walk a lot through the neighborhoods, on account of two Labradors
who'd get cranky otherwise. Then you see a lot of utility work. When the
AT&T guys come they often show up with heavy duty equipment. The cable
guys ... with a glorified circular saw and some sort of caulking gun.

You live on a rock? They *certainly* don't here. The tool looks more
like a motorized knife on a power washer cart. Slit the turf and pull
the cable. If there is a trench open when they run the cable, they
may drop it in but that's rare.

Cable TV: Coaxes slobbering across flower beds and soil, rocks. Boxes
often have their lid off kilter, no locks attached, one got crushed
quite a bit in an accident a few months ago and they left it that way.
Many boxes in tall dry grass and weeds. Cables under road surfaces are
often 2" below surfcae or less. Often exposed in the ditch.
DSL/phone is no different anymore.

Out here it is. There's standards for those.
Such a quaint concept. I'll bet new subdivisions aren't buried. It's
too expensive.
To me this is a day and night difference. A new neighbor learned this as
well. The cable guys couldn't get his Internet going for over a month so
he took the slower DSL.
There isn't a difference in residential installation.

There is here.
I highly doubt it.


There's a house going up across the valley, phone line is in a trench
just like power, water and sewer. Out here they often use the same
trench as the electric utility.

Sounds dangerous.

... My only reasonable Internet
option is DSL, too. It's expensive ($50/mo) and slow (3Mb). I'd love
to have cable so I could ditch both DSL and satellite TV.

$38 here but only 1.2Mbit/sec.
I only got .7Mb in my other house - $30.

I think DSL has had its day. The price for a given bandwidth just isn't
competitive with cable TV providers anymore. The downside with cable is
that they usually want to sell bundles, Internet/TV/phone. We wouldn't
want that. Plus that jacks up the price to easily $100 or more a month.
What they want isn't necessarily what they get. Even the phone
company doesn't require phone service, anymore. They still charge
like it, though.

My satellite, alone, is $170/mo. DSL is another $50 (and mobile
another $150 - going to $170, I think).


Yikes!

High, but that's what money is for.

My backup is 4G (but it isn't at all reliable here, either).
I don't have a smart phone yet. Maybe some day.
Now that I have one, I wouldn't be without it. I use it at work all
the time (so I don't use their infrastructure for personal business).
It turns out that it's useful for getting my work done, too, when IT
screws things up (so much for "professional infrastructure").

A lot of our friends say the same, that they wouldn't want to miss it.
Other than looking up a road or contact information, right now I
couldn't imagine what I'd use it for. But I guess that comes with ...
using it
Exactly. "You gota pass it to find out how bad it really is."

Pricing is high though. Most of them out here have family plans and
those are north of $200/mo, and only with contracts.
It's cheaper without a contract, though you have to purchase the phone
at "full price". Unless you live where there is only one company
covering the area, it's quite a competitive market, now. Even where
there is only one company (in my case, Verizon is the only one with
towers within "sight"), there are many resellers that are
substantially cheaper than the big-guys. I'll be seriously looking
when my contract is up in January. I should be able to drop my bill
to something under $100 (two smart phones).

Virgin has a plan for $35/mo with 300 phone minutes but "unlimited" for
web, except it slows down if you get past 2.5GB/mo. Only one of their
phones has 4G though. My dream phone would be one where I can also run
Windows programs such as LTSpice or Eagle (just for simple stuff).
That's a good deal. I'll have to take a look at it (don't know who
they use as a carrier). 2.5GB is a lot (I have a 6GB plan but never
use more than 1GB), unless you do streaming. A phone is too small for
any of that stuff. A windows tablet, either 4G or WiFi thought the
phone, would be better. Don't forget that computers suck for "real
work" without a keyboard and mouse, though.
Virgin piggy back's on the Sprint network.

Thanks. Their coverage map shows me right at the edge of "fair" and
"off-network roaming". ...


That was the same here when we got the service many years ago. Since
there was (and still is) no contract I just gave it a shot and it worked
anyways. I got 1-2 bars in the house and some dead spots. Now it
improved, they must have placed a new tower. But I have no idea how the
data speeds would be because I only buy basic talk service.

The tower locations are shown in maps at fcc.gov. I don't have the
links right now.

The funny thing is I occasionally had to hand my bone-simple Nokia 2115i
to business folks who could not get a connection with their fancy smart
phones.

Probably a deprecated band.

... My Verizon coverage isn't anything to write
home about but I don't want to be roaming (which is probably Verizon).
Sounds like it's not an option for me.


This is their plan:

http://www.virginmobileusa.com/cell-phone-plans/beyond-talk-plans/overview/

The nice thing is that there is no contract. Paid per month and that's
it. It says unlimited but in the fine print there is a 2.5GB limit after
which it slows down. Somewhere I have heard that it may not apply to 4G
connections but I am not sure.

I was seriously looking into Page Plus Cellular. They have an
unlimited talk/text plan with 2GB data for $55. It's $70 with 5GB.
Page Plus uses the Verizon network. Since Verizon is raising my price
in the middle of the contract, I'll probably switch in January.


Isn't it illegal for them to raise prices if you've got a contract?

Apparently IBM no longer has a special deal with them (only T-Mobile).
I think they just figured it out. I have to check to see if my CPOE
has a deal, Oh well, they'll lose a customer in six months (I've been
with them since '00). I was thinking about going with a
pay-as-you-go Verizon plan but not if they're going to raise my rate.

 

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Sat, 31 Aug 2013 20:00:48 -0400, krw@attt.bizz wrote:

That was the same here when we got the service many years ago. Since
there was (and still is) no contract I just gave it a shot and it worked
anyways. I got 1-2 bars in the house and some dead spots. Now it
improved, they must have placed a new tower. But I have no idea how the
data speeds would be because I only buy basic talk service.

The tower locations are shown in maps at fcc.gov. I don't have the
links right now.

I think you mean the FCC ASR (Antenna Structure Registration).
<http://wireless.fcc.gov/geographic/index.htm?job=licensing_database_extracts>
Only towers that are over 200ft or are near an airport need to be
registered:
<http://www.fcc.gov/help/antenna-structure-registration-asr-help>
Few cell towers are over 200ft.

More:
<http://www.towermaps.com/fcc.htm>
Note that most cell sites are NOT registered with the FCC. If you
believe the CTIA, there are 300,000 cell sites in the USA:
<http://www.ctia.org/advocacy/research/index.cfm/aid/10323>
However, that doesn't include repeaters, microcellular, DAS
(distributed antenna systems), Small Cells, leaky coax in tunnels,
water towers, church steeples, and many building mounted sites that do
not involve a tower.

There are various groups that plot cell tower locations and post them
to the internet. I did that 15 years ago for the Santa Cruz CA area:
<http://802.11junk.com/cellular/index.html>
Data is from 2003 and has NOT been updated.

This should be more useful:
<http://www.antennasearch.com>
520,000 towers and 1.6 million "antennas".

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

 

[Brendon]

On 29/08/2013 6:44 AM, Syd Rumpo wrote:

On 28/08/2013 23:31, meow2222@care2.com wrote:
On Friday, August 23, 2013 8:08:09 AM UTC+1, Brendon wrote:

I'm thinking of getting a small solder pot for the occasional short
production run job. Tinning of small hookup wire will be its main use.

5) In practice is it quicker than tinning with an iron & flux cored
solder? Runs would be 200+ wire end to be tinned per session.
Thanks!

Its much quicker. Just dip them in for a mo and they're done. And of
course you can dip in 2 or more at a time


NT

Much quicker, but dab them in flux first.

Cheers

Thanks guys - the folk in China have put one in the post for me.

 

[Fred Abse]

On Fri, 30 Aug 2013 17:34:19 -0700, Joerg wrote:

Cable TV: Coaxes slobbering across flower beds and soil, rocks. Boxes
often have their lid off kilter, no locks attached, one got crushed quite
a bit in an accident a few months ago and they left it that way. Many
boxes in tall dry grass and weeds. Cables under road surfaces are often 2"
below surfcae or less. Often exposed in the ditch.

To me this is a day and night difference. A new neighbor learned this as
well. The cable guys couldn't get his Internet going for over a month so
he took the slower DSL.

Git 'r done!

--
"Design is the reverse of analysis"
(R.D. Middlebrook)

 

On Sat, 31 Aug 2013 21:31:29 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
wrote:

On Sat, 31 Aug 2013 20:00:48 -0400, krw@attt.bizz wrote:

That was the same here when we got the service many years ago. Since
there was (and still is) no contract I just gave it a shot and it worked
anyways. I got 1-2 bars in the house and some dead spots. Now it
improved, they must have placed a new tower. But I have no idea how the
data speeds would be because I only buy basic talk service.

The tower locations are shown in maps at fcc.gov. I don't have the
links right now.

I think you mean the FCC ASR (Antenna Structure Registration).
http://wireless.fcc.gov/geographic/index.htm?job=licensing_database_extracts
Only towers that are over 200ft or are near an airport need to be
registered:
http://www.fcc.gov/help/antenna-structure-registration-asr-help
Few cell towers are over 200ft.

More:
http://www.towermaps.com/fcc.htm
Note that most cell sites are NOT registered with the FCC. If you
believe the CTIA, there are 300,000 cell sites in the USA:
http://www.ctia.org/advocacy/research/index.cfm/aid/10323
However, that doesn't include repeaters, microcellular, DAS
(distributed antenna systems), Small Cells, leaky coax in tunnels,
water towers, church steeples, and many building mounted sites that do
not involve a tower.

No, that's not it. This site had all cell towers listed, including
church steeples. ;-) The information included latitude longitude,
owner, network, and a bunch of other stuff.

There are various groups that plot cell tower locations and post them
to the internet. I did that 15 years ago for the Santa Cruz CA area:
http://802.11junk.com/cellular/index.html
Data is from 2003 and has NOT been updated.

This should be more useful:
http://www.antennasearch.com
520,000 towers and 1.6 million "antennas".