If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Just downloaded a 1.45 GB file in five minutes...
The house gets 117 Mb per second (300+ Mbps is available). My LAN port
is connected to an extender that is connected via Wi-Fi (5 GHz band) to our router. I'm using the extender like a huge USB adapter/antenna. Got the matching router and extender dirt cheap from eBay. I know there is faster, feel free to boast, but this is outrageous in my experience. Downloading a 1.45 GB file in five minutes. I don't get the full 117 Mbps, but it occasionally goes over 70. I use a radar sensitive channel (not sure what that's about, but it's fast) on the 5 GHz band. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Just downloaded a 1.45 GB file in five minutes...
John Doe wrote:
The house gets 117 Mb per second (300+ Mbps is available). My LAN port is connected to an extender that is connected via Wi-Fi (5 GHz band) to our router. I'm using the extender like a huge USB adapter/antenna. Got the matching router and extender dirt cheap from eBay. I know there is faster, feel free to boast, but this is outrageous in my experience. Downloading a 1.45 GB file in five minutes. I don't get the full 117 Mbps, but it occasionally goes over 70. I use a radar sensitive channel (not sure what that's about, but it's fast) on the 5 GHz band. The feature has value. But there are other important aspects. "Cap" My ISP has a definite cap (per month Gigabyte count). But, if you download in the wee hours, it doesn't count towards your cap. One user (in a public forum) admitted to downloading 1TB of material in a month, using that option. (While the cap on the plan isn't nearly that large.) So while our transfer speeds are slower, we have a rather generous "Cap" arrangement. It's "unlimited" in the wee hours. I've never come close to hitting the cap, whether counted or not. As for people with faster rates than yours, any Google Kansas user could give you a run for your money. And as a joke or promotional stunt, an ISP owner in a foreign country, ran a 10GbE link to his moms place. So if the Google Kansas users don't beat you, "mom" would :-) When "mom" needs a cooking recipe, it arrives "fast". You have to wonder though, whether any server on the Internet, could keep up with that kind of node. I know some machines at CERN could, but they're probably not directly connected to the regular Internet. And there are higher rates than that available. Think of the disk drives you'd need to keep up. https://gcn.com/articles/2013/04/26/...rea=TC_BigData Paul |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Just downloaded a 1.45 GB file in five minutes...
On Mon, 23 May 2016 10:07:27 -0000 (UTC), John Doe
wrote: The house gets 117 Mb per second (300+ Mbps is available). My LAN port is connected to an extender that is connected via Wi-Fi (5 GHz band) to our router. I'm using the extender like a huge USB adapter/antenna. Got the matching router and extender dirt cheap from eBay. I know there is faster, feel free to boast, but this is outrageous in my experience. Downloading a 1.45 GB file in five minutes. I don't get the full 117 Mbps, but it occasionally goes over 70. I use a radar sensitive channel (not sure what that's about, but it's fast) on the 5 GHz band. Seems I might get about half that a 750M file in 5min. For $35 monthly on a special one-year promotion, who cares what's better;... if someone's paying $200 monthly ISP and wipes their ass with money instead of Dollar General toilet paper, as I'm inclined, it's no sweat off my back. I may go back to prior speeds at the end of the year promotion, slower by a factor of x10;- I'm not sure yet. #1: Those high speeds don't always apply, even for file transfers, except in idealized data-transfer conditions. #2: Like everything about PCs, it's relative to your perceived efficiency and how contingent is a resultant optimization phase for utilizing efficiency;- IOW, do I need to see 2500Kbs transfers, or, at what lessor point does outrageous become personally relative...ASDL, x10, maybe x20 faster than 56K dial-up? #3: Is there really so much on the Internet -- past the hype of selling a lease to tiered data ranges to US customers -- priced for on-average twice over what a fair cross-section of Europeans nations pay for similar rates -- essential for me to also subscribe to that sense of immediacy? Still some, I suppose, might boast to realize industrial standards for WWW4/HTML5 mandatory advertising, establishing transparency between affiliate partnerships, such as Microsoft and the NSA, vaguely for a sort of transitional period to "easing the quease" in squatting over a nationalized pile of grand surveillance schemes. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Just downloaded a 1.45 GB file in five minutes...
On 2016-05-23, Flasherly wrote:
On Mon, 23 May 2016 10:07:27 -0000 (UTC), John Doe wrote: The house gets 117 Mb per second (300+ Mbps is available). My LAN port is connected to an extender that is connected via Wi-Fi (5 GHz band) to our router. I'm using the extender like a huge USB adapter/antenna. Got the matching router and extender dirt cheap from eBay. I know there is faster, feel free to boast, but this is outrageous in my experience. Downloading a 1.45 GB file in five minutes. I don't get the full 117 Mbps, but it occasionally goes over 70. I use a radar sensitive channel (not sure what that's about, but it's fast) on the 5 GHz band. Seems I might get about half that a 750M file in 5min. For $35 monthly on a special one-year promotion, who cares what's better;... if someone's paying $200 monthly ISP and wipes their ass with money instead of Dollar General toilet paper, as I'm inclined, it's no sweat off my back. I may go back to prior speeds at the end of the year promotion, slower by a factor of x10;- I'm not sure yet. #1: Those high speeds don't always apply, even for file transfers, except in idealized data-transfer conditions. #2: Like everything about PCs, it's relative to your perceived efficiency and how contingent is a resultant optimization phase for utilizing efficiency;- IOW, do I need to see 2500Kbs transfers, or, at what lessor point does outrageous become personally relative...ASDL, x10, maybe x20 faster than 56K dial-up? #3: Is there really so much on the Internet -- past the hype of selling a lease to tiered data ranges to US customers -- priced for on-average twice over what a fair cross-section of Europeans nations pay for similar rates -- essential for me to also subscribe to that sense of immediacy? Still some, I suppose, might boast to realize industrial standards for WWW4/HTML5 mandatory advertising, establishing transparency between affiliate partnerships, such as Microsoft and the NSA, vaguely for a sort of transitional period to "easing the quease" in squatting over a nationalized pile of grand surveillance schemes. AND he didn't try to download from a "pay to get hi speed" website. e.g. the download speed is 50 kbps for an unsubscribed user no matter what the file size is. Higher speed is at $20/month for that site & some others.. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Just downloaded a 1.45 GB file in five minutes...
On Mon, 23 May 2016 15:18:35 -0000 (UTC), lew
wrote: AND he didn't try to download from a "pay to get hi speed" website. e.g. the download speed is 50 kbps for an unsubscribed user no matter what the file size is. Higher speed is at $20/month for that site & some others.. Nope, didn't occur to enter my mind some people pay for a subscription to those speeds on specialized sites, as you say, places like Netflix. (Along with the media clashes when they surface between control and dominance for apportioning out higher speeds, in case all else isn't equal to neutral ISP dispensation practices.) |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Just downloaded a 1.45 GB file in five minutes...
On Monday, May 23, 2016 at 1:11:07 PM UTC+3, John Doe wrote:
The house gets 117 Mb per second (300+ Mbps is available). My LAN port In Greece, I used to get 0.33 Mbps, about 1000 times slower, as late as 2008. They did something involving fiber optic (I saw the trench machine) and now I get a "blazing" 2.5 Mbps. In the Philippines I pay for 3 Mbps (foolishly, I should have known) but rarely get better than 1.5 Mbps, plus the entire town's network (it's not Manila, but Manila is not much better) goes offline for a few hours and sometimes one day, once in a while. Enjoy your First World internet. RL |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Just downloaded a 1.45 GB file in five minutes...
RayLopez99 wrote:
John Doe wrote: The house gets 117 Mb per second (300+ Mbps is available) [via Time Warner Cable]. In Greece, I used to get 0.33 Mbps, about 1000 times slower, as late as 2008. They did something involving fiber optic (I saw the trench machine) and now I get a "blazing" 2.5 Mbps. Up until a few weeks ago, it was 5 Mbps here with AT&T DSL. AT&T allegedly has 1 Gbps fiber optic in the city but not here. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Just downloaded a 1.45 GB file in five minutes...
On Wed, 25 May 2016 15:46:15 -0700 (PDT), RayLopez99
wrote: (it's not Manila, but Manila is not much better) goes offline for a few hours and sometimes one day, once in a while. Worked w/ someone from São Paulo, highest city supposedly in the world (surely there's got to be higher in Tibet). She told me they did the same thing regularly every day, scheduled turning off the juice;- also recall in Britain television broadcasts that started up for a few hours and only for the evenings;- then, again, I've been the Middle East, where television simply didn't exist. (Personally, I don't care to watch syndicated network programming, either.) |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Just downloaded a 1.45 GB file in five minutes...
John Doe wrote:
RayLopez99 wrote: John Doe wrote: The house gets 117 Mb per second (300+ Mbps is available) [via Time Warner Cable]. In Greece, I used to get 0.33 Mbps, about 1000 times slower, as late as 2008. They did something involving fiber optic (I saw the trench machine) and now I get a "blazing" 2.5 Mbps. Up until a few weeks ago, it was 5 Mbps here with AT&T DSL. AT&T allegedly has 1 Gbps fiber optic in the city but not here. It's hard to support gigabit fiber properly. You want consistent transfer rates, which means using really big routers somewhere in the city to handle it. You just couldn't "wallpaper" an entire major city with it. It's going to be niche installs for a while yet. Take what the Cable Company here did, on their launch. They promised faster than DSL rates. Then, they connected 5000 customers to one piece of networking equipment. At 8PM in the evening, the customers were getting a megabit per second. At the mall, there was a booth promoting the service. And rather than "curious shoppers" standing around it, there were 20 people griping at the customer service rep inside the booth, complaining about the service. The booth had its own "angry mob" surrounding the booth on all sides :-) And those people were only too willing to share their "grief" with passers-by (me) walking next to the booth. At some point, the Cable Company left the booth there, but pulled the Customer Service rep. Then no one could be seen standing around the booth. They eventually fixed it. They got a clue. But it did take years before their network core was properly scaled to even begin to handle the load. And that's not even near GbE speeds. Paul |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Just downloaded a 1.45 GB file in five minutes...
On 23/05/2016 6:07 PM, John Doe wrote:
I know there is faster, feel free to boast, but this is outrageous in my experience. Downloading a 1.45 GB file in five minutes. I don't get the full 117 Mbps, but it occasionally goes over 70. I use a radar sensitive channel (not sure what that's about, but it's fast) on the 5 GHz band. Might get better speed with a wired connection? -- @~@ Remain silent! Drink, Blink, Stretch! Live long and prosper!! / v \ Simplicity is Beauty! /( _ )\ May the Force and farces be with you! ^ ^ (x86_64 Ubuntu 9.10) Linux 2.6.39.3 不借貸! 不詐騙! 不援交! 不打交! 不打劫! 不自殺! 請考慮綜援 (CSSA): http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_...sub_addressesa |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Win 7: clean install with downloaded file? | ToolPackinMama | Homebuilt PC's | 11 | October 23rd 09 09:14 PM |
Anyone know how to hot-wire a 6400R CPU fan for a few minutes while Isnarf a file of it? | Rick F | Compaq Servers | 0 | September 21st 09 06:20 PM |
More Vista Horror from someone who downloaded it and had problems-- no DVD to fix it! | Jay B | Dell Computers | 34 | March 19th 07 02:09 PM |
Downloaded Program File Folder...Question Please | Louie | Dell Computers | 2 | March 9th 05 04:31 PM |
I've downloaded the manual but.... | JBM | Asus Motherboards | 0 | April 1st 04 02:42 AM |