W
Winfield Hill
Guest
https://tech.slashdot.org/story/19/08/20/1450204/the-truth-about-faster-internet-its-not-worth-it
--
Thanks,
- Win
--
Thanks,
- Win
W
Whoey Louie
Guest
On Tuesday, August 20, 2019 at 1:54:57 PM UTC-4, Winfield Hill wrote:
Depends on what you mean by faster. If you're on some DSL line that;s
only 1.5 MBits and you go to cable at 100, it's very likely going to be
worth it for most people. If you have 50 Mbits with an existing provider
and pay them more to go to 200, then few people will see a benefit that;s
worth it or even a benefit at all. The latter seems to be what the
article is talking about.
Depends on what you mean by faster. If you're on some DSL line that;s
only 1.5 MBits and you go to cable at 100, it's very likely going to be
worth it for most people. If you have 50 Mbits with an existing provider
and pay them more to go to 200, then few people will see a benefit that;s
worth it or even a benefit at all. The latter seems to be what the
article is talking about.
J
John Larkin
Guest
On 20 Aug 2019 10:54:32 -0700, Winfield Hill <winfieldhill@yahoo.com>
wrote:
>https://tech.slashdot.org/story/19/08/20/1450204/the-truth-about-faster-internet-its-not-worth-it
I occasionally do giant Dropbox transfers, so speed is nice. 50M is
good, 400M is a bit better but not really necessary.
I paid for 50M at home, got 130M, and Comcast just replaced our modem
and upgraded up to something astronomical.
Truckee is a problem. On a holiday weekend when all the kids are
inside watching movies (why come to the mountains to do that?) and
playing games, things get annoyingly slow.
wrote:
>https://tech.slashdot.org/story/19/08/20/1450204/the-truth-about-faster-internet-its-not-worth-it
I occasionally do giant Dropbox transfers, so speed is nice. 50M is
good, 400M is a bit better but not really necessary.
I paid for 50M at home, got 130M, and Comcast just replaced our modem
and upgraded up to something astronomical.
Truckee is a problem. On a holiday weekend when all the kids are
inside watching movies (why come to the mountains to do that?) and
playing games, things get annoyingly slow.
Guest
On Tuesday, August 20, 2019 at 1:54:57 PM UTC-4, Winfield Hill wrote:
In the case of Comcast, those speed increments are only $10 apart.
In the case of Comcast, those speed increments are only $10 apart.
J
John Larkin
Guest
On Tue, 20 Aug 2019 18:50:22 GMT, Jan Panteltje
<pNaOnStPeAlMtje@yahoo.com> wrote:
But why do people text, when they could talk?
<pNaOnStPeAlMtje@yahoo.com> wrote:
But why do people text, when they could talk?
J
John Larkin
Guest
On 20 Aug 2019 11:54:31 -0700, Winfield Hill <winfieldhill@yahoo.com>
wrote:
Could be. Or maybe the local cable company - the only option - needs
more infrastructure everywhere.
I do big uploads, which the kids don't do. When the upload speed gets
way below 1M, that slows things down.
At work, we have symmetric 400+400 over our dish on the roof. That's
nice for sending big PDFs and doing giant Dropbox syncs.
I've got to remember to not run LT Spice in a Dropbox folder. It tries
to upload .RAW files.
wrote:
Could be. Or maybe the local cable company - the only option - needs
more infrastructure everywhere.
I do big uploads, which the kids don't do. When the upload speed gets
way below 1M, that slows things down.
At work, we have symmetric 400+400 over our dish on the roof. That's
nice for sending big PDFs and doing giant Dropbox syncs.
I've got to remember to not run LT Spice in a Dropbox folder. It tries
to upload .RAW files.
W
Winfield Hill
Guest
John Larkin wrote...
Network backbone bottleneck?
--
Thanks,
- Win
Network backbone bottleneck?
--
Thanks,
- Win
J
Jan Panteltje
Guest
On a sunny day (20 Aug 2019 10:54:32 -0700) it happened Winfield Hill
<winfieldhill@yahoo.com> wrote in <qjhc4o01dvk@drn.newsguy.com>:
Essentially it is correct, I do not need faster than the 4G I have now either,
However
in the past 3G was also OK, but youtube came, and just trying CNN takes lots of bandwidth
even my online banking seems to take MBs just to log in.
So when 5G comes, advertisers will find stuff to send to you
that takes Giga Bytes, and for you to see anything at all you will need the high speed.
It has always been that way, this is also the reason TV moved from DVB-S to DVB-S2 and DVB-T to DVB-T2 here
and ever and ever higher resolutions,
while 80% of the people cannot even see the pixels.
It is all about advertising,
This is why Usenet and some text based groups have a much higher information content
than all those blurbs, it is still free of advertising.
I use an ad blocker, and if sites want me to switch it off I just go to an other site,
This reduces bandwidth, usage, I am still below 10 GB a month.
I can see a future where people can no longer read and write but use smartphones
with icons to express there needs and emotions (emotions)...
Hope it does not go so far, but ... It would lose something valuable.
<winfieldhill@yahoo.com> wrote in <qjhc4o01dvk@drn.newsguy.com>:
Essentially it is correct, I do not need faster than the 4G I have now either,
However
in the past 3G was also OK, but youtube came, and just trying CNN takes lots of bandwidth
even my online banking seems to take MBs just to log in.
So when 5G comes, advertisers will find stuff to send to you
that takes Giga Bytes, and for you to see anything at all you will need the high speed.
It has always been that way, this is also the reason TV moved from DVB-S to DVB-S2 and DVB-T to DVB-T2 here
and ever and ever higher resolutions,
while 80% of the people cannot even see the pixels.
It is all about advertising,
This is why Usenet and some text based groups have a much higher information content
than all those blurbs, it is still free of advertising.
I use an ad blocker, and if sites want me to switch it off I just go to an other site,
This reduces bandwidth, usage, I am still below 10 GB a month.
I can see a future where people can no longer read and write but use smartphones
with icons to express there needs and emotions (emotions)...
Hope it does not go so far, but ... It would lose something valuable.
A
amdx
Guest
On 8/20/2019 12:54 PM, Winfield Hill wrote:
(the one that could be replaced sans sales tax) and I have no complaint
even with 60Mbps. I gives me 59 Mbps with VPN on and 63 Mbps off.
30 to 60 was a $5 upgrade, probably not available anymore. I think
it's now 100MBPS or none.
Mikek
I agree, I can stream to 3 TV's, my internet radio and use my computer
(the one that could be replaced sans sales tax) and I have no complaint
even with 60Mbps. I gives me 59 Mbps with VPN on and 63 Mbps off.
30 to 60 was a $5 upgrade, probably not available anymore. I think
it's now 100MBPS or none.
Mikek
T
Tom Gardner
Guest
On 20/08/19 18:54, Winfield Hill wrote:
> https://tech.slashdot.org/story/19/08/20/1450204/the-truth-about-faster-internet-its-not-worth-it
Even if someone could use the extra bandwidth, in many
cases the speed is limited by the /latency/ or by the
server.
That's doubly true when, for example, a web page needs
many independent http transactions for all the trackers
and advertising gunk.
With a slow connection, installing adblock and noscript
can noticeably speed up browsing the web.
> https://tech.slashdot.org/story/19/08/20/1450204/the-truth-about-faster-internet-its-not-worth-it
Even if someone could use the extra bandwidth, in many
cases the speed is limited by the /latency/ or by the
server.
That's doubly true when, for example, a web page needs
many independent http transactions for all the trackers
and advertising gunk.
With a slow connection, installing adblock and noscript
can noticeably speed up browsing the web.
T
Tom Gardner
Guest
On 20/08/19 20:19, John Larkin wrote:
Phones are for /other/ people's convenience; phones calls
interrupt what I am doing.
With SMSs and emails, they write when it is convenient for
them, I read when it is convenient for me.
Phones are for /other/ people's convenience; phones calls
interrupt what I am doing.
With SMSs and emails, they write when it is convenient for
them, I read when it is convenient for me.
J
John Larkin
Guest
On Tue, 20 Aug 2019 13:08:26 -0700 (PDT), Whoey Louie
<trader4@optonline.net> wrote:
I can say that faster than I can type that, especially while riding a
bicycle.
>Why would you want to call, bother someone, just to communicate that?
We should invent a voice operated equivalent to texting. Maybe some
day we'll have the technology.
Texting seems to be a modern narcotic. A lot of people do it
constantly. What do they have to say?
I never text. I left my phone up at the cabin two weeks ago and don't
miss it. Well, the clock and calendar are handy. I've never owned a
wristwatch.
<trader4@optonline.net> wrote:
I can say that faster than I can type that, especially while riding a
bicycle.
>Why would you want to call, bother someone, just to communicate that?
We should invent a voice operated equivalent to texting. Maybe some
day we'll have the technology.
Texting seems to be a modern narcotic. A lot of people do it
constantly. What do they have to say?
I never text. I left my phone up at the cabin two weeks ago and don't
miss it. Well, the clock and calendar are handy. I've never owned a
wristwatch.
W
Whoey Louie
Guest
On Tuesday, August 20, 2019 at 3:19:19 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
Because it's an easier, better way to communicate short messages?
"Running late, be there at 6?"
Why would you want to call, bother someone, just to communicate that?
Or you can text, "The $4K price for the car is OK".
No confusion, you have proof of what you said.
Because it's an easier, better way to communicate short messages?
"Running late, be there at 6?"
Why would you want to call, bother someone, just to communicate that?
Or you can text, "The $4K price for the car is OK".
No confusion, you have proof of what you said.
L
Lasse Langwadt Christense
Guest
tirsdag den 20. august 2019 kl. 22.30.36 UTC+2 skrev Tom Gardner:
and if it has any addresses, dates, times, names etc. you have for it
later
and if it has any addresses, dates, times, names etc. you have for it
later
M
Martin Brown
Guest
On 20/08/2019 20:19, John Larkin wrote:
Think of it as an asynchronous form of email where the recipient doesn't
have to drop everything to respond but gets a ping. It is really good
for short non-urgent messages like "get some milk on your way home".
What was the electricity/gas meter reading today?
No need for pad and pen if the number is there in your txt timeline.
--
Regards,
Martin Brown
Think of it as an asynchronous form of email where the recipient doesn't
have to drop everything to respond but gets a ping. It is really good
for short non-urgent messages like "get some milk on your way home".
What was the electricity/gas meter reading today?
No need for pad and pen if the number is there in your txt timeline.
--
Regards,
Martin Brown
J
John Larkin
Guest
On Tue, 20 Aug 2019 22:44:04 +0100, Martin Brown
<'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote:
But why type that and walk into a light pole? Don't we have
voice-to-text technology? Send a text, but speak it!
<'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote:
But why type that and walk into a light pole? Don't we have
voice-to-text technology? Send a text, but speak it!
D
Dimiter_Popoff
Guest
On 8/20/2019 23:30, Tom Gardner wrote:
This is exactly my attitude as well.
This is exactly my attitude as well.
R
Rick C
Guest
On Tuesday, August 20, 2019 at 4:15:40 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
Wow! You *are* out of the loop. You don't have to type it. Just say it to the phone and it will send the text. I do that in the car all the time. In MD you aren't allowed to hold your phone at all. So everything has to be hands free.
OMG! We do, it's called texting. I guess you are just being silly.
It's actually a bit absurd to think talking is better than texting. The level of slight isolation in texting provides a nice buffer for the simple things that don't actually require initiating a conversation. Forget the hello, goodbye, what did you say?
Less of a narcotic than talking. Many people do that solely because they like the sound of their own voice.
Yeah, I can see that in you. Not willing to actually try new things so much unless they fall well within your comfort zone.
--
Rick C.
- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
Wow! You *are* out of the loop. You don't have to type it. Just say it to the phone and it will send the text. I do that in the car all the time. In MD you aren't allowed to hold your phone at all. So everything has to be hands free.
OMG! We do, it's called texting. I guess you are just being silly.
It's actually a bit absurd to think talking is better than texting. The level of slight isolation in texting provides a nice buffer for the simple things that don't actually require initiating a conversation. Forget the hello, goodbye, what did you say?
Less of a narcotic than talking. Many people do that solely because they like the sound of their own voice.
Yeah, I can see that in you. Not willing to actually try new things so much unless they fall well within your comfort zone.
--
Rick C.
- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
B
Bill Sloman
Guest
On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 5:19:19 AM UTC+10, John Larkin wrote:
<snip>
> But why do people text, when they could talk?
Talking takes longer, and the person you want to talk to has to answer their phone.
If you don't need an instant response, a text is usually fine, and you don't have to put in the socially lubricating exchanges that stretch telephone conversations.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
<snip>
> But why do people text, when they could talk?
Talking takes longer, and the person you want to talk to has to answer their phone.
If you don't need an instant response, a text is usually fine, and you don't have to put in the socially lubricating exchanges that stretch telephone conversations.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
R
Rick C
Guest
On Tuesday, August 20, 2019 at 4:35:08 PM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:
I use an adblock on one of my browsers and some sites won't let me browse.
--
Rick C.
+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
I use an adblock on one of my browsers and some sites won't let me browse.
--
Rick C.
+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209