On Sunday 17 April 2005 08:15 pm, Tom wrote:
M.Schild wrote:
However for downloading large files it was miles faster as once you get started the latency beomes irrelevant.
That is really what interests me. I havenŽt been able to upgrade my Mdk 10 because my present connection is so unreliable. It disconnects all the time....and my phone line drowns when it rains. wouldnŽt do in Scotland :-) Fortunately, it doesnŽt rain often here Maryse
Mary, before this thread gets too far gone .... I researched gettin a satellite connection several years ago. I also had a friend at the time (Carolinas, USA) that got one. His involved about $700 worth of equipment, and a separate dial up(land line) connection for the uplink. It was also very fee expensive.
I can't believe a jurisdiction/gov'mt that provides free service would require such an expenditure. I really think Google or contacting your local provider would get you better info than you're gettin here.
As to rain, yes, satellite will be subject to interruption as t-storms pass over obscuring the path to the satellite. Are you sure they're not planning wifi service? Seems that would make more sense.
The 30 cm oblong dish sounds like what my neighbor has Sprint used to offer this wireless he still has it It's about as fast as the average DSL line
First of all I'll apologize if I inordinately offended Maryse by contraction the name. It wasn't intentional, usually I address people with the exact name they use to post. Mea Culpa.
Second, I'm disappointed that this thread went off on a tangent. The question Maryse asked was very good. IE, how viable is satellite net ? I'm curious as all get out.
An no Aron, satellite is no comparison to DSL, an there is no such thing as "average" DSL unless you succumb to B$ cable advertisements on TV. Cable is fast, but variable bandwidth rates. You are on a 'party line'. More online, the slower you go. DSL is steady (a private line), but you pay more for faster bandwidth rates. (256k to 8Mb). High end 'residential' service is mostly 1.5Mb aDSL which on average is faster than cable. 2Mb service an above requires dedicated lines an is mostly reserved for businesses. An it's true DSL, not asynchronous DSL. A business with 6Mb DSL gets that bandwidth, up an down
It would seem to me, an I've wondered as much for some time, that satellite would be the best way to expand service to the most people. Specially in rural areas or mobile, on the move. While my brushes with it made it seem expensive, I can hardly understand why it would be so. Sat. TV isn't, heck they give the equipment away for free.
BTW, Corpus Christi has wifi (not to be confused with satellite, no 'dish' needed), an from what I can tell, the bandwidth is hardly better than dialup. Just a few days ago I asked a neighbor to go to dslreports.com/stest an he got 10KB/s. That's only a little better than twice dialup speed. An we're only 100 yds or less from the node (antenna).
Anyhow, I hope Maryse reports back, or others with actual experience about satellite Net. An if it's two way, or just a down link requiring a separate uplink
--
Tom Brinkman Corpus Christi, Texas
____________________________________________________ Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com Join the Club : http://www.mandrakeclub.com ____________________________________________________
