3.5Mbit!? Says a lot about my parents paltry 1Mbit. Perhaps their line was low on sodium.
Although last year when I bought Cyberpunk I found that a bit of curry powder sped up the ~70GB download quite nicely.
121–130 of 157 posts
3.5Mbit!? Says a lot about my parents paltry 1Mbit. Perhaps their line was low on sodium.
Although last year when I bought Cyberpunk I found that a bit of curry powder sped up the ~70GB download quite nicely.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I kid, the issue was solved some time ago - a telecom engineer pinned it down to a soggy junction box.
That’s funny because my SO’s parents have 1.5Mbps DSL by contract. For only $100/mo they can jump up to 12Mbps. USA and 1 hour from me where I have gigabit docsis 3.1. If they had 1Mbps because of a fault that would be more unfortunate than unfair.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In hind sight wouldn’t 5g have been a better investment than fiber to home, I mean companies will have to have 5g to stay competitive in mobile anyway
No, because 5g is a shared medium. It can deliver... 3 gigabit/s? or something like that? Let's say it's 10Gb. That's 10gb shared with everyone in the vicinity, which is not great especially in high density areas like apartment buildings. Furthermore, you still need to run fiber to the actual base stations anyway.
Wet string? OK, fine. But I defy ADSL to work over something really challenging. Like Telstra copper in Australia.
3.5mb down is faster than my mother used to get from her farm north-west of Kempsey NSW. Though to be fair to Telstra she lived about 30km from the nearest town not 2m like the length of wet string.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The more you learn about this ancient cable technology the more absurd it becomes. We shower these fuckers with money but they would rather keep their paper insulated phone lines with permanent compressors and dryer running than braindead simple fiber. No wonder it is permanently broken and they can't keep a single 9 of reliability.
Fiber may be simple, but the way we use it is not. Unlike copper, a GPON fiber install is going to have active electronics and splice trays for every several dozen subscribers. Plenty of opportunities for water ingress to still cause problems.
Wet string? OK, fine. But I defy ADSL to work over something really challenging. Like Telstra copper in Australia.
Came here to make the same joke. Sure it isn't an insightful comment worthy of great praise. But consider my hat tipped to you. 3.5mb down is faster than my mother used to get from her farm north-west of Kempsey NSW. Though to be fair to Telstra she lived about 30km from the nearest town not 2m like the length of wet string.
This was not outer-whoop-whoop either. Metro Perth.
Telstra. Ya gotta love 'em.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Many parts of rural Prince Edward Island (PEI) has DSL running on a phone system that’s probably original from modernization initiatives in the 1960s - 1980s. Party lines were the norm in some areas up west until late-1980s.
Back when a whole family had the same number and you had to ask whoever answered that you want to talk to so and so. Now days everybody has their own number and with caller id you (sometimes) know who is calling. My daughter is gonna grow up not knowing any of the “shared phone line” etiquette because it is largely obsolete.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In hind sight wouldn’t 5g have been a better investment than fiber to home, I mean companies will have to have 5g to stay competitive in mobile anyway
No, because 5g is a shared medium. It can deliver... 3 gigabit/s? or something like that? Let's say it's 10Gb. That's 10gb shared with everyone in the vicinity, which is not great especially in high density areas like apartment buildings. Furthermore, you still need to run fiber to the actual base stations anyway.
Where I am 5g is same price as fixed broadband but faster for my plan.
Are you paying and using 1g/s have no caps ?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The telephone cable coming into the house is 50volts DC is not AC like a powerline. I know radio waves are just that, waves, its how things like noise cancelling headphones work. Different frequency's give you different ranges or distances for 1 watt, which is why you can bounce Long wave around the planet.
I wasnt taught that radio waves were to be considered identical to AC power down a cable but when thinking about it, they probably are identical with waveform properties and the difference being the medium they are travelling through.
It's common parlance to say "DC component" to refer to any offset from zero in the AC waveform. So, for example, a typical analog telephone line when in use could be described as having a DC component of around 5 volts (referred to as the battery voltage for historic reasons), and then an AC component of around a few volts (varying by signal amplitude) is superimposed. Someone else mentioned the case of an AC signal with its center point not at zero actually being a pulsed DC signal... but both are correct in their own ways. An AC signal with a DC component will have its "neutral" voltage wherever the DC component puts it. This isn't usually referred to as pulsed DC because the AC signal usually starts out that way---as AC, and the DC component gets added. To receive the signal, the DC component is essentially removed. A lot of real systems end up this way either intentionally (in the case of phones) or unintentionally. Much of the time people talk about a DC component its in the sense of an undesirable one induced for some reason. Many people who use SDRs are familiar with this as common direct-conversion SDRs virtually always pick up a spurious DC voltage in the down-converter used to bring the selected frequency band into the range of the ADC. This results in the so-called "DC spike" in the middle of the tuned band.
Now, others have said, and elsewhere you have probably read, that telephone battery voltage is 48-ish volts (varies somewhat by central office equipment and line loss, phones are expected to tolerate a wide range). That's true, but when a phone is taken off hook it closes the loop (while presenting some resistance) and the voltage drops much lower. One of the odd things about DSL from a telephony perspective is that, unlike normal telephone applications, it is designed to function whether the phone is on or off hook. As a result, DSL devices do not make assumptions about the battery voltage, which during DSL operation can vary from off-hook of a few volts to ringing of around 100 volts.
Another odd detail of telephone circuits is that typical local loops use two wires, one pair, for audio both directions. The telephone, though, needs an "in" and an "out" to connect to the microphone and speaker. Similarly, the telephone network itself predominantly operates using pairs of two separate signal circuits, one for each direction, as this greatly simplified analog telephone systems and is required for digitization for digital ones. This is achieved by the use of a hybrid on each end of the phone line, which historically was a type of matching transformer that used some clever electrical tricks to provide three taps. One has signals both directions, the other two have one of each signal cancelled out based on matching or mismatching the impedance of the telephone line. It's a bit hard to wrap your head around and rather clever. Unfortunately hybrids, being analog devices, are never perfect and introduce some oddities on the line. DSL devices must use DSP methods to contend with phase shifts and other issues caused by hybrids. Today, it is increasingly common for not just telco equipment but also consumer phones to also use DSP instead of a hybrid to isolate the directions, since the DSP can self-tune to achieve a more perfect result. Amusingly, so-called "sidetone" in telephones (being able to hear yourself in the speaker) is an undesired result of imperfect performance of the hybrid but turns out to be an important comfort to humans, so DSP-based systems usually intentionally mix the outbound audio into the inbound at a low level.
All of this adds up to DSL being surprisingly robust. Unfortunately, there is a downside to the fact that DSL relies on frequencies beyond what telephone circuits were originally designed to convey: line loss of DSL signals is very high, which results in a rather short practical range for DSL, typically only a few miles even with a local loop in good condition. DOCSIS is able to achieve tens of miles, even at the very high speeds it supports, because coaxial cable and the fittings and amplifiers used are designed to carry high frequencies with minimal loss. Even so, the push to greater-than-gigabit speeds has required outside plant upgrades for cable networks, just as the push to expand DSL coverage (and less so, but in some markets, speed) has lead to outside plant improvements to the telephone network, such as heavy use of remote DSLAMs that "convert" most of the subscriber loop to a longer-range medium like fiber.
I remember in the 90s when we were deploying a business campus, we first used ADSL services from the local carrier, but not for long. We discovered we can get "dry lines", basically just rent copper run from site-to-site, nothing on it from local carrier. Slap ADSL modems on each and we got max throughout, at a fraction of the cost. Then we upgraded to SDSL, and that was like hitting the jackpot.