On Thu, Aug 26, 2004 at 09:30:55AM +0100, Mike McKay wrote: > There is definitely some wisdom in that statement. But I have to ask > the question - what do all of you (not just Chris) need that expensive > bandwidth for?
I suppose it depends on your needs. You're right: for single-user asynchronous stuff like POP3 or HTTP, even 128K up/down is fine--if not necessarily speedy. But imagine that you were running 10 24-bit VNC sessions, or pushing 100Kbps per dynamic web site, or had several people in your house downloading from iTunes at the same time...things would CRAWL. > So please justify it to me - why should I shell out way too much money > in order to host my stuff elsewhere (if you say reliability, tell me I can't justify it to you; it's either something you need or it isn't. *I* need it to free up my measly 256K upstream (I couldn't care less about scum^H^H^H^HCharter's downstream) for remote X, VNC, and SSH sessions. YMMV. -- Find my Techno-Geek Journal at http://www.codegnome.org/geeklog/ _______________________________________________ RLUG mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.rlug.org/mailman/listinfo/rlug
