Bandwidth

Archived from groups: alt.games.starsiege.tribes (More info?)

I don't mean to brag, or maybe I do, but I finally got Fios. W00tarz!

So, does anybody know of any places other than Fileplanet where I can
actually download files at 15 Mbps? :)

--
Troy
31 answers Last reply
More about bandwidth
  1. Archived from groups: alt.games.starsiege.tribes (More info?)

    On Sat, 30 Apr 2005 07:57:20 GMT, Troy <gimmespam@yahoo.com> wrote:

    >I don't mean to brag, or maybe I do, but I finally got Fios. W00tarz!
    >
    >So, does anybody know of any places other than Fileplanet where I can
    >actually download files at 15 Mbps? :)

    /me looks at his mere 3 Mbps cable connection and pulls up his
    trousers.

    You win.

    --
    --==< S m e g h e a d >==--
  2. Archived from groups: alt.games.starsiege.tribes (More info?)

    Randy Graham wrote:

    > I was thinking the exact same thing. In fact, I think I suffered some
    > shrinkage, and I really can't afford that.

    :)

    I'm lovin' it so far. 15 down, 2 up, and all for just US$50/month. I
    love fiber.

    What really shocked me was that the FilePlanet private servers were
    actually able to send at 15 Mbps. I would never have thought when I
    first connected to a BBS at 300 BAUD that these speeds would even be
    remotely possible in 2005.

    Since the first month is free, I was tempted to ask for the top package
    for the first month. It's 30/5. It's also $200/month, so I would've had
    to drop down to the 15/2 after the first month. Then, I thought, "Do I
    really want to make 15/2 seem slow?"

    --
    Troy
  3. Archived from groups: alt.games.starsiege.tribes (More info?)

    Troy <gimmespam@yahoo.com> wrote in news:63Oce.5434$xy.2268@trnddc08:

    > I'm lovin' it so far. 15 down, 2 up, and all for just US$50/month. I
    > love fiber.

    Where do you have to live to get that? 2 up is enough to run a medium-sized
    game server.

    Why is it asymmetric? Is that a technical limitation or is it because they
    want to charge people extra to host on their servers?

    Any idea what a business-class account runs?
  4. Archived from groups: alt.games.starsiege.tribes (More info?)

    ScratchMonkey wrote:

    > Where do you have to live to get that? 2 up is enough to run a medium-sized
    > game server.

    I'm in southern California, but there are still only a couple of cities
    who have this so far. Verizon is really starting to push it out, though,
    since they also run the phone through the fiber and are planning on
    offering TV.

    I was thinking of running a server, but I'm not sure if I trust my
    system to stay up 24/7 without blowing up. :)

    > Why is it asymmetric? Is that a technical limitation or is it because they
    > want to charge people extra to host on their servers?

    I'm guessing it's just so they'll have more of the total bandwidth
    available for downstream instead of upstream.

    > Any idea what a business-class account runs?

    Well, at my work, we looked into fiber with Cox. For 2/2 service, it was
    slightly less expensive than a T1.

    --
    Troy
  5. Archived from groups: alt.games.starsiege.tribes (More info?)

    "Troy" <gimmespam@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:XnQce.3472$eC.310@trnddc07...
    > ScratchMonkey wrote:
    >
    >> Where do you have to live to get that? 2 up is enough to run a
    >> medium-sized game server.
    >
    > I'm in southern California, but there are still only a couple of cities
    > who have this so far. Verizon is really starting to push it out, though,
    > since they also run the phone through the fiber and are planning on
    > offering TV.
    >
    > I was thinking of running a server, but I'm not sure if I trust my system
    > to stay up 24/7 without blowing up. :)
    >
    >> Why is it asymmetric? Is that a technical limitation or is it because
    >> they want to charge people extra to host on their servers?
    >
    > I'm guessing it's just so they'll have more of the total bandwidth
    > available for downstream instead of upstream.
    >
    >> Any idea what a business-class account runs?
    >
    > Well, at my work, we looked into fiber with Cox. For 2/2 service, it was
    > slightly less expensive than a T1.
    >

    Yep, Keller, Texas, (a burb in the Dallas/Fort Worth area) is also a test
    bed. I'm in Texas but in a small town and darn lucky to have my 3 Mbps
    cable. I am not going to hold my breath for fiber where I am for quite some
    time....

    Quixote
  6. Archived from groups: alt.games.starsiege.tribes (More info?)

    Troy wrote:
    > I don't mean to brag, or maybe I do, but I finally got Fios. W00tarz!
    >
    > So, does anybody know of any places other than Fileplanet where I can
    > actually download files at 15 Mbps? :)

    Dunno. I can't even max my 10Mbps connection except at speed test sites. :(

    I could probably max it to my current newsserver, but it's capped at
    about 250KB/s total.
    --
    Frank
  7. Archived from groups: alt.games.starsiege.tribes (More info?)

    On Sat, 30 Apr 2005 16:02:00 -0500, "Quixote" <quixote@writeme.com>
    wrote:

    >
    >"Troy" <gimmespam@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    >news:XnQce.3472$eC.310@trnddc07...
    >> ScratchMonkey wrote:
    >>
    >>> Where do you have to live to get that? 2 up is enough to run a
    >>> medium-sized game server.
    >>
    >> I'm in southern California, but there are still only a couple of cities
    >> who have this so far. Verizon is really starting to push it out, though,
    >> since they also run the phone through the fiber and are planning on
    >> offering TV.
    >>
    >> I was thinking of running a server, but I'm not sure if I trust my system
    >> to stay up 24/7 without blowing up. :)
    >>
    >>> Why is it asymmetric? Is that a technical limitation or is it because
    >>> they want to charge people extra to host on their servers?
    >>
    >> I'm guessing it's just so they'll have more of the total bandwidth
    >> available for downstream instead of upstream.
    >>
    >>> Any idea what a business-class account runs?
    >>
    >> Well, at my work, we looked into fiber with Cox. For 2/2 service, it was
    >> slightly less expensive than a T1.
    >>
    >
    >Yep, Keller, Texas, (a burb in the Dallas/Fort Worth area) is also a test
    >bed. I'm in Texas but in a small town and darn lucky to have my 3 Mbps
    >cable. I am not going to hold my breath for fiber where I am for quite some
    >time....

    I was trying to figure out how to frame the begging and pleading with
    my wife for optimal effectiveness in reference to moving back to
    Texas. Keller specifically.


    --
    --==< S m e g h e a d >==--
  8. Archived from groups: alt.games.starsiege.tribes (More info?)

    Troy wrote:
    > I don't mean to brag, or maybe I do, but I finally got Fios. W00tarz!
    >
    > So, does anybody know of any places other than Fileplanet where I can
    > actually download files at 15 Mbps? :)


    HUH?!?!? You were just saying that you couldn't get
    a decent speed.................

    <WHOOSH!> Right over my head, I guess...........

    --
    >^,,^< Miracle


    _______________________________________________________________________________
    Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
    <><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>
  9. Archived from groups: alt.games.starsiege.tribes (More info?)

    Quixote wrote:
    > "Troy" <gimmespam@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    > news:XnQce.3472$eC.310@trnddc07...
    >> ScratchMonkey wrote:
    >>
    >>> Where do you have to live to get that? 2 up is enough to run a
    >>> medium-sized game server.
    >>
    >> I'm in southern California, but there are still only a couple of
    >> cities who have this so far. Verizon is really starting to push it
    >> out, though, since they also run the phone through the fiber and are
    >> planning on offering TV.
    >>
    >> I was thinking of running a server, but I'm not sure if I trust my
    >> system to stay up 24/7 without blowing up. :)
    >>
    >>> Why is it asymmetric? Is that a technical limitation or is it
    >>> because they want to charge people extra to host on their servers?
    >>
    >> I'm guessing it's just so they'll have more of the total bandwidth
    >> available for downstream instead of upstream.
    >>
    >>> Any idea what a business-class account runs?
    >>
    >> Well, at my work, we looked into fiber with Cox. For 2/2 service, it
    >> was slightly less expensive than a T1.
    >>
    >
    > Yep, Keller, Texas, (a burb in the Dallas/Fort Worth area) is also a
    > test bed. I'm in Texas but in a small town and darn lucky to have my
    > 3 Mbps cable. I am not going to hold my breath for fiber where I am
    > for quite some time....
    >
    > Quixote


    And I'll be long dead before it gets to my neighborhood.

    We don't even have cable TV up here yet!

    --
    >^,,^< Miracle


    _______________________________________________________________________________
    Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
    <><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>
  10. Archived from groups: alt.games.starsiege.tribes (More info?)

    On 1 May 2005 07:31:40 GMT, "Miracle Smith" <miracle@spamcop.net>
    wrote:

    >Troy wrote:
    >> I don't mean to brag, or maybe I do, but I finally got Fios. W00tarz!
    >>
    >> So, does anybody know of any places other than Fileplanet where I can
    >> actually download files at 15 Mbps? :)
    >
    >
    > HUH?!?!? You were just saying that you couldn't get
    >a decent speed.................
    >
    > <WHOOSH!> Right over my head, I guess...........

    He's getting more than decent speeds. He would like to play around and
    pull close to the maximum.

    Not all servers out there are serving at speeds he can pull. So he's
    bottlenecked.

    To not be the slow point on the network... must be a nice "problem" to
    have. :)

    I bet at this point Troy would rather open a vein than go back to
    dialup. Or even paltry T1 / DSL speeds.

    --
    --==< S m e g h e a d >==--
  11. Archived from groups: alt.games.starsiege.tribes (More info?)

    Troy <gimmespam@yahoo.com> wrote in news:XnQce.3472$eC.310@trnddc07:

    > I'm in southern California, but there are still only a couple of
    > cities who have this so far. Verizon is really starting to push it
    > out, though, since they also run the phone through the fiber and are
    > planning on offering TV.

    Damn. I'm in northern California, where we have SBC. OTOH, my office is
    down the street from Pixar's previous location in Point Richmond and there
    should be fiber in the street there, so it shouldn't be hard to run it down
    the street. But I don't think we're a priority for that. I'm hoping for
    fixed wireless, as we have a great hill above us where a tower could be put
    that could reach much of the northern SF Bay Area.

    >> Why is it asymmetric? Is that a technical limitation or is it because
    >> they want to charge people extra to host on their servers?
    > I'm guessing it's just so they'll have more of the total bandwidth
    > available for downstream instead of upstream.

    I don't think that makes sense. The bandwidth in ADSL is asymmetric because
    of electrical emission issues. The signals start interferering with each
    other when you crank up both directions but you can trade one off against
    the other. That wouldn't be the case with a light-based system.

    More likely is that they're cheaping-out on the peering arrangements.
    Serving packets onto someone else's backbone is more expensive than
    accepting them.
  12. Archived from groups: alt.games.starsiege.tribes (More info?)

    "Troy" <gimmespam@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:ATGce.1037$db7.437@trnddc01...
    >I don't mean to brag, or maybe I do, but I finally got Fios. W00tarz!
    >
    > So, does anybody know of any places other than Fileplanet where I can
    > actually download files at 15 Mbps? :)
    >
    > --
    > Troy

    Is that megabits or megabytes?
  13. Archived from groups: alt.games.starsiege.tribes (More info?)

    One day, while skipping through the forest, I heard the voice of "Adrian
    Ng" <spam.ng@btopenworld.com> coming from a tree, and thought, "Man, this is
    f*ed up," but carried on the following conversation anyway:

    >
    > "Troy" <gimmespam@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    > news:ATGce.1037$db7.437@trnddc01...
    >>I don't mean to brag, or maybe I do, but I finally got Fios. W00tarz!
    >>
    >> So, does anybody know of any places other than Fileplanet where I can
    >> actually download files at 15 Mbps? :)
    >>
    >> --
    >> Troy
    >
    > Is that megabits or megabytes?
    >
    >
    >

    for starters.. lowercase b means bits. even completely ignoring that fact
    and relying solely on logic, the answer would still be bits. if he had a
    15MB/s connection, he would need gigabit ethernet just to fully utilize it
    (read: itd be faster than most lans)

    --
    Adept
  14. Archived from groups: alt.games.starsiege.tribes (More info?)

    DEbig3's last words before the Sword of Azrial plunged through his body
    were:
    > One day, while skipping through the forest, I heard the voice of "Adrian
    > Ng" <spam.ng@btopenworld.com> coming from a tree, and thought, "Man, this is
    > f*ed up," but carried on the following conversation anyway:
    >> Is that megabits or megabytes?
    > for starters.. lowercase b means bits. even completely ignoring that fact
    > and relying solely on logic, the answer would still be bits. if he had a
    > 15MB/s connection, he would need gigabit ethernet just to fully utilize it
    > (read: itd be faster than most lans)

    Also, a good rule of thumb, if talking about data speeds (for RAM, network
    connections, etc) its bits, if its data storage, its bytes.

    a 15megabyte connection would be 120megabit, or about, the equivilent of
    being 60 to 100 times faster than the average cable or DSL connection.
    Your average LAN connection maxes out at 100megabit (with few having
    gigabit ethernet cards, or having a network setup to fully utilize them).
  15. Archived from groups: alt.games.starsiege.tribes (More info?)

    "Miracle Smith" <miracle@spamcop.net> wrote in message
    news:427486be$1_1@galaxy.uncensored-news.com...
    > Quixote wrote:
    >> "Troy" <gimmespam@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    >> news:XnQce.3472$eC.310@trnddc07...
    >>> ScratchMonkey wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Where do you have to live to get that? 2 up is enough to run a
    >>>> medium-sized game server.
    >>>
    >>> I'm in southern California, but there are still only a couple of
    >>> cities who have this so far. Verizon is really starting to push it
    >>> out, though, since they also run the phone through the fiber and are
    >>> planning on offering TV.
    >>>
    >>> I was thinking of running a server, but I'm not sure if I trust my
    >>> system to stay up 24/7 without blowing up. :)
    >>>
    >>>> Why is it asymmetric? Is that a technical limitation or is it
    >>>> because they want to charge people extra to host on their servers?
    >>>
    >>> I'm guessing it's just so they'll have more of the total bandwidth
    >>> available for downstream instead of upstream.
    >>>
    >>>> Any idea what a business-class account runs?
    >>>
    >>> Well, at my work, we looked into fiber with Cox. For 2/2 service, it
    >>> was slightly less expensive than a T1.
    >>>
    >>
    >> Yep, Keller, Texas, (a burb in the Dallas/Fort Worth area) is also a
    >> test bed. I'm in Texas but in a small town and darn lucky to have my
    >> 3 Mbps cable. I am not going to hold my breath for fiber where I am
    >> for quite some time....
    >>
    >> Quixote
    >
    >
    > And I'll be long dead before it gets to my neighborhood.
    >
    > We don't even have cable TV up here yet!
    >
    > --
    >>^,,^< Miracle
    >

    Same here - my 1Mbs is as fast as the line allows (I've been told) and my
    father in law is too far from the exchange for anything but dial up.

    As we might be moving in next to him, this is not good news...
  16. Archived from groups: alt.games.starsiege.tribes (More info?)

    ScratchMonkey wrote:
    >>>Why is it asymmetric? Is that a technical limitation or is it because
    >>>they want to charge people extra to host on their servers?
    >>
    >>I'm guessing it's just so they'll have more of the total bandwidth
    >>available for downstream instead of upstream.
    >
    > I don't think that makes sense. The bandwidth in ADSL is asymmetric because
    > of electrical emission issues. The signals start interferering with each
    > other when you crank up both directions but you can trade one off against
    > the other. That wouldn't be the case with a light-based system.

    In a cable system, you have a limited number of slots for upstream and
    downstream modules. Add more upstream modules, and you can fit fewer
    downstream modules. Maybe it's something similar here, although I doubt it.

    > More likely is that they're cheaping-out on the peering arrangements.
    > Serving packets onto someone else's backbone is more expensive than
    > accepting them.

    Also possible, of course. But ISPs? Cheaping out? Never!
  17. Archived from groups: alt.games.starsiege.tribes (More info?)

    Miracle Smith wrote:
    > What is that site that will test your speed for you? I don't see


    I REMEMBERED! It's DSL Reports!

    w00tar!!!!

    <Emily Litella>

    Nevermind.

    </Emily Litella>


    _______________________________________________________________________________
    Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
    <><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>
  18. Archived from groups: alt.games.starsiege.tribes (More info?)

    Frank van Schie <frankNOSPAM@email.it> wrote in
    news:0vqdnaPCWKbYruvfRVnysg@casema.nl:

    > In the case of bits/bytes, people like to count in powers of 2. 2^10 is
    > 1024, so people use 1024 bytes to a kilobyte, 1024 kilobytes to a
    > megabyte, 1024 megabytes to a gigabyte, etc.

    And then there's those silly-looking but more technically accurate suffixes
    when you want to distinguish between base-10 and base-2 -based prefixes.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kibibyte
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mebibyte

    (Shouldn't "mebibyte" be a unit of packet loss?)
  19. Archived from groups: alt.games.starsiege.tribes (More info?)

    ScratchMonkey wrote:

    > Damn. I'm in northern California, where we have SBC. OTOH, my office is
    > down the street from Pixar's previous location in Point Richmond and there
    > should be fiber in the street there, so it shouldn't be hard to run it down
    > the street. But I don't think we're a priority for that. I'm hoping for
    > fixed wireless, as we have a great hill above us where a tower could be put
    > that could reach much of the northern SF Bay Area.

    Given the choice between DSL and fixed wireless, I'd pick DSL any day. I
    was lucky with my fixed wireless provider, and it was relatively
    reliable. Most days, I'd get 1.5 - 2 megabits/sec. Still, there were
    days I'd get sub-dial-up speed. When I switched to DSL, even though I
    never went above 1.5 megabits/sec, it was very consistent.

    > I don't think that makes sense. The bandwidth in ADSL is asymmetric because
    > of electrical emission issues. The signals start interferering with each
    > other when you crank up both directions but you can trade one off against
    > the other. That wouldn't be the case with a light-based system.
    >
    > More likely is that they're cheaping-out on the peering arrangements.
    > Serving packets onto someone else's backbone is more expensive than
    > accepting them.

    I was just making a wild guess. I figured that some strands of fiber
    would be used for downstream and some for upstream and they just
    allocated more strands for downstream than upstream. I think your
    explanation makes more sense, though.

    --
    Troy
  20. Archived from groups: alt.games.starsiege.tribes (More info?)

    Schrodinger wrote:

    > 1Mb = roughly 100k per second download speed. Your old "33,000bps" equated
    > to roughly 3k per second.

    Wow. My original connection was 300 bps. So, my new connection is over
    52,000 times faster.

    /e shakes his head in disbelief.

    --
    Troy
  21. Archived from groups: alt.games.starsiege.tribes (More info?)

    "Troy" <gimmespam@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:zDDde.8765$nN.8013@trnddc05...
    > Schrodinger wrote:
    >
    >> 1Mb = roughly 100k per second download speed. Your old "33,000bps"
    >> equated to roughly 3k per second.
    >
    > Wow. My original connection was 300 bps. So, my new connection is over
    > 52,000 times faster.
    >
    > /e shakes his head in disbelief.
    >

    What about pings? Are pings noticeably lower? Seems they should be, fast
    as light etc...

    Quixote
  22. Archived from groups: alt.games.starsiege.tribes (More info?)

    Smeghead wrote:

    > He's getting more than decent speeds. He would like to play around and
    > pull close to the maximum.

    The only place, other than speed tests, that I've found is one of the
    FilePlanet subscriber servers. I consistently max out on that server. I
    never thought I'd get nearly 2 Megabytes/sec downloading a file.

    > Not all servers out there are serving at speeds he can pull. So he's
    > bottlenecked.

    When the installer was trying to show off the connection, he went to
    DSLReports. I had recently reinstalled, so I didn't have Java setup. So,
    he went to the Verizon Fios speed test. It showed 7 MB/sec. The second
    installer said, "Oh, don't use that one. It's slow." I told him to go
    ahead and install Java, so he did, and went back to DSLReports, which
    showed a hair under 15mbps on one of the tests.

    > To not be the slow point on the network... must be a nice "problem" to
    > have. :)

    Yeah. It's nice. It's also nice thinking, "Well, better upgrade my
    router to 802.11g, because 802.11b is too slow for my connection." :)

    > I bet at this point Troy would rather open a vein than go back to
    > dialup. Or even paltry T1 / DSL speeds.

    I'd rather not think of that. It's bad enough having to go to work and
    deal with our pathetic T1. <g>

    --
    Troy
  23. Archived from groups: alt.games.starsiege.tribes (More info?)

    ScratchMonkey wrote:
    > Frank van Schie <frankNOSPAM@email.it> wrote in
    > news:0vqdnaPCWKbYruvfRVnysg@casema.nl:
    >
    >> In the case of bits/bytes, people like to count in powers of 2. 2^10
    >> is 1024, so people use 1024 bytes to a kilobyte, 1024 kilobytes to a
    >> megabyte, 1024 megabytes to a gigabyte, etc.
    >
    > And then there's those silly-looking but more technically accurate
    > suffixes when you want to distinguish between base-10 and base-2
    > -based prefixes.
    >
    > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kibibyte
    > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mebibyte
    >
    > (Shouldn't "mebibyte" be a unit of packet loss?)


    I'm sorry, but I can't possibly take a Kibibyte seriously!

    Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha:::::thud!:::::


    _______________________________________________________________________________
    Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
    <><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>
  24. Archived from groups: alt.games.starsiege.tribes (More info?)

    I was looking at their T's and C's and it said that no server,
    commercial or private may be run by the end user. :(

    I'd be sorely tempted to anyway, lemme tell ya.
  25. Archived from groups: alt.games.starsiege.tribes (More info?)

    "Miracle Smith" <miracle@spamcop.net> wrote in news:4277264c$1_6
    @galaxy.uncensored-news.com:

    > I'm sorry, but I can't possibly take a Kibibyte seriously!
    >
    > Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha:::::thud!:::::

    Yeah, that sounds like what the dog does to the stuff in his bowl!
  26. Archived from groups: alt.games.starsiege.tribes (More info?)

    Troy <gimmespam@yahoo.com> wrote in news:kCDde.8764$nN.1046@trnddc05:

    > Given the choice between DSL and fixed wireless, I'd pick DSL any day. I
    > was lucky with my fixed wireless provider, and it was relatively
    > reliable. Most days, I'd get 1.5 - 2 megabits/sec. Still, there were
    > days I'd get sub-dial-up speed. When I switched to DSL, even though I
    > never went above 1.5 megabits/sec, it was very consistent.

    I mention it because when shopping for broadband for the new office last
    year, I heard about a guy in the San Jose area that was providing fixed
    wireless to some unwired valley. They were getting something like 8 Mbps
    symmetric, which is to die for. The guy got enough subscribers to "pledge"
    and then he put up the tower above the valley. He had an offer to do the
    same for other areas with enough pledges from that area to make it
    worthwhile. I think it was around 200 houses. There's a perfect ridge
    behind my office to put the tower.

    On a related note, there was a story on Slashdot Sunday about people
    blocking the erection of cellphone towers:

    http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/05/02/0128248

    The NIMBY and BANANA principles rule.
  27. Archived from groups: alt.games.starsiege.tribes (More info?)

    "Quixote" <quixote@writeme.com> wrote in
    news:117e96pakn7kib3@corp.supernews.com:

    > What about pings? Are pings noticeably lower? Seems they should be,
    > fast as light etc...

    Probably only marginally so. Recall that ping would be total travel time,
    and you're just speeding up "the last mile". OTOH, you're latency would be
    better, as would your immunity from packet loss when the local network got
    busy.
  28. Archived from groups: alt.games.starsiege.tribes (More info?)

    "Troy" <gimmespam@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:ATGce.1037$db7.437@trnddc01...
    > I don't mean to brag, or maybe I do, but I finally got Fios. W00tarz!
    >
    > So, does anybody know of any places other than Fileplanet where I can
    > actually download files at 15 Mbps? :)
    >
    > --
    > Troy

    *drools*

    I've got 6/1 or something like that...

    damn you...


    but my 6/6 at work (and i'm a network admin) is REALLY nice :)
  29. Archived from groups: alt.games.starsiege.tribes (More info?)

    Quixote wrote:

    > What about pings? Are pings noticeably lower? Seems they should be, fast
    > as light etc...

    Good question. I haven't really checked that yet.

    --
    Troy
  30. Archived from groups: alt.games.starsiege.tribes (More info?)

    ScratchMonkey wrote:

    > I mention it because when shopping for broadband for the new office last
    > year, I heard about a guy in the San Jose area that was providing fixed
    > wireless to some unwired valley. They were getting something like 8 Mbps
    > symmetric, which is to die for. The guy got enough subscribers to "pledge"
    > and then he put up the tower above the valley. He had an offer to do the
    > same for other areas with enough pledges from that area to make it
    > worthwhile. I think it was around 200 houses. There's a perfect ridge
    > behind my office to put the tower.

    Keep in mind that fixed wireless is usually just overpowered 802.11b.
    While you may be able to get 8 Mbps symmetric, you're also sharing an 11
    Mbps connection with everybody else, which means you may not always see
    that 8 Mbps. Even if it's 802.11g-based, 10 people using it at once
    would drop your speed. Still, if nothing else is available, if you have
    a decent provider who uses decent equipment, it's many times better than
    dial-up or even satellite.

    --
    Troy
  31. Archived from groups: alt.games.starsiege.tribes (More info?)

    Troy <gimmespam@yahoo.com> wrote in news:u3Zde.1934$Ri.1169@trnddc08:

    > Keep in mind that fixed wireless is usually just overpowered 802.11b.

    I think these are the guys I'm thinking of:

    http://www.etheric.net/

    They claim up to 144 Mbps.
Ask a new question

Read More

Download Bandwidth Games Video Games