| 7:55 pm on May 9, 2002 (gmt 0)|
>upload to servers on a 56K modem, it wouldn't be cost effective.
Sorry, I run 40+ domains (lost count somewhere around 8,000 pages) and feed a dedicated Sparc Ultra-2 over a dial-up. Works fine.
| 7:58 pm on May 9, 2002 (gmt 0)|
You never get dropped?
I want your phone sevice!
| 8:06 pm on May 9, 2002 (gmt 0)|
|if you travel and jack into your email from hotels, you need a dial-up ISP |
Actually, many hotels are providing high speed service from the rooms now. The better ones don't even charge for it.
The cheaper ones have you pay $10/day.
| 8:06 pm on May 9, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Not really, maybe once a month on my primary account. I have 4 other accounts on 2 other ISPs as a backup.
I make money on the web, good money. I spoil myself regularly and spend more on eating out in a day or two than DSL would cost me for the month... I'm not adverse to the cost, I just don't see the value added. All of the arguments above have basically fallen into "you're gonna love it" or "once you've tried it you can't give it up," but you haven't made a convincing argument as to why I might need broadband.
| 8:09 pm on May 9, 2002 (gmt 0)|
>>BTW, if you travel and jack into your email from hotels, you need a dial-up ISP
Good point. In fact, the ISP side of my company markets that idea... I just referred a friends union local there; five dialup accounts, one for each of their newly-purchased laptops.
>> You never get dropped?
I don't. Like I said, I stay logged on using dialup for several hours at a time. I used to have trouble, but about a year ago I went outside and ripped out the phone line from the phone company's interface all the way inside my house. Good, solid connections ever since.
| 8:12 pm on May 9, 2002 (gmt 0)|
>The cheaper ones have you pay $10/day.
That's pretty pricey when you consider a national ISP like earthlink is around $22/mo. Nor do road warriors want to A) worry about which hotel has what, or B) add other charges to their room bill.
| 8:13 pm on May 9, 2002 (gmt 0)|
how long does it take you to upload a 1mb file?
With our dial up (and yes we do have one for tesing purposes only) it takes 15 minutes. That's 15 minutes in which I could be doing something else.
On cable/dsl 3 minutes tops!
| 8:20 pm on May 9, 2002 (gmt 0)|
>> Actually, many hotels are providing high speed service from the rooms now.
Recently I read -- probably either in InfoWeek or one of the other free magazines that clutter my PO box -- that in the past few months the trend has reversed: some chains are discontinuing broadband availability, and few are planning to add the service. Turns out that people don't really use it, especially at those hotels that do charge for it.
| 8:24 pm on May 9, 2002 (gmt 0)|
JayC could this because of the currnent "wireless" innovations.
I know one of my site owners is looking into a wireless connection so he can dial up his site while he is on the road.
In fact lets explore that avenue along with this cable/dls versus modem.
| 8:35 pm on May 9, 2002 (gmt 0)|
>how long does it take you to upload a 1mb file?
I usually connect somewhere around 28 kbps. I run multiple screens and frequently upload/download in background... there is always something else to do. I handle files around 250-400k fairly regularly, above that size much less frequently. If someone were sending me 4 or 5 .doc attachments daily (and I wasn't in a position to be able to nuke them (or their attachments)), I could see a need for broadband.
But even if I sat and simply watched two 15-minute uploads a month, that's $40/hour at a difference of $20/mo for broadband vs dialup.
...And I'm not your average consumer. How many 1mg files does JohnQ handle a month?
| 8:38 pm on May 9, 2002 (gmt 0)|
depends on what the age of the kids are!
| 11:25 pm on May 9, 2002 (gmt 0)|
BTW, if you travel and jack into your email from hotels, you need a dial-up ISP. Soooo... we're back to square one.
Why not use an internet cafe?
Cheaper for access when traveling. Therefore, no requirement for an ISP. :)
|brotherhood of LAN|
| 11:42 pm on May 9, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Im in Scotland, part of G8, the 8 richest countries in the world. In my area, there is no option, no DSL for me, as far as I am aware of. The technological means to provide it to me just isnt there.
Even when it comes, I wouldnt buy it. My lean mean pages dont take too long too upload and I usually stick to close circles online, and wander v.occassionally.
I will definetely be waiting until there is some sort of economy of scale going on...and a better usage of its advantages as highlighted here
| 11:52 pm on May 9, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Most broadband companies (DSL or Cable) now offer limited monthly dialup usage (10 hrs monthly) as a freebie.
That easily serves the need when you are on the road at the hotels.
That argument flew out the window long ago when the broadband companies understood the need for occassional remote service.
| 11:56 pm on May 9, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Since I changed to adsl my monthly phone bills, telephone plus online costs, are less than half as high as before.
The speed is luxurious - nothing I need, but i certainly enjoy it very much.
| 12:06 am on May 10, 2002 (gmt 0)|
With dial-up, I was using two phone lines at home. Switched to ADSL for $45 a month (also includes dial-up as a backup), got rid of a phone line and dropped ISP. Cost per month is a wash and I enjoy the speed. Don't mind tackling the massive downloads now.
| 12:17 am on May 10, 2002 (gmt 0)|
one thing of course is that high speed is not very available internationally. When it is, like in Malaysia, it is quite expensive. I have been using a dial up on a laptop for 10 years, gaily plugging the cord into hotel phone jacks, and upsetting the hotels who cant understand why i want to pay for a local phone cal rate when they are offering high speed at $10 US or MORE a day - the usual rate in high speed enabled hotels in South East Asia.
Laptop mobile usage is still increasing in usage, almost the mainstream way of connecting worldwide, and is a long way back from all the new mobile technologies.
As RC says, keep your material lean and mean if you want the great non-North American unwashed like me to use it!
MS with their bundling of Windows XP where the basic version has all the multi media technology, does suggest that broadband's killer application is video. But do we, and business users, really need it? Not really. We get by famously by yahoo messenger and email for quick meetings and decision making on the run. High speed access is really about entertainment, and depends on people wanting badly to access film trailers and the like. At the moment it seems they dont need it.
Secondly history shows that as disk space, memory and speed capabilities increase, applications and services fill up to use it. I havent seen they actually provide functionality or information any better than 10 years ago. They do look prettier.
Anyone remember like me when Wordperfect came on one seven inch floppy and you use another floppy disk to store the documents for a whole book? That's around half a megabyte.
No way i want to use broadband so webdesigners can just provide more graphics, pretty videos, and other stuff to further separate me from content.
| 12:20 am on May 10, 2002 (gmt 0)|
>>>What it means is you'd better keep your pages lean & mean, you're going to be dealing with 56k for a long time.
No, what it means is we all band together with Flash and Java intesive sites so that people complain about their connection and upgrade. :)
I'm saving lots of money with my broadband connection. For how much I am online, I would have to pay about $600-$900 a month on phone charges.
I imagine you are going to see a surge in broadband users located in developing countries due to the fact that it is much cheaper overall. It has already happened with mobile phones so why not the same with broadband?
| 12:45 am on May 10, 2002 (gmt 0)|
added to my previous post:
I now have high speed internet access 24/7, flatrate, plus a phone line open plus isdn access for a second machine, all at the same time. At half the price as I had for one phone line plus one isdn connection.
| 12:39 pm on May 10, 2002 (gmt 0)|
>>>It has already happened with mobile phones so why not the same with broadband? <<<
Show me a cell phone bill that is less than a land line!
| 9:42 am on May 15, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Here in Australia we've been limited to our national carrier Telstra until recently. I pay $89AUD pm for 512/128, with this i get a 3gig downlaod limit which suits me most months. We are starting to see other providers now selling the same plan with a 10gig cap for $100AUD, not cheap but signs that its going to change.....hopefully
| 9:53 am on May 15, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Nope its not going to happen soon in developing countries. And not even some developed ones like Malaysia.
Investors want broadband as it as there is much more profit potential in that than people plugging into phone lines. Until sites that people really need cave in and start building heavy pages that cant be accessed sensibly by a phone line, broadband wont take off.
Just to underline what i said before, it is more difficult than waiting for "developing" countries to "catch up". Ideally iid like to be able to access my same internet content and services whether it is at a duper duper rate at home or at work in US cities, while im travelling and in hotels in Latin America with only a phone line, or at my remote beach location with only rusty old phpne lines. Maybe even by my mobile device in a couple of years.
At the moment i get all i need with dial up, though broadband would be nice. But even then, I probably wont have broadband at home nor on the road. So it still dosent make sense. IId rather have nice text only pages that deliver nicely whatever speed i use. The extent to which people really NEED graphics, and special effects etc, and videos are highly exagerrated to my mind and apply mainly to entertainment uses of the web. And that just isnt happening. When it does happen (eg: downloading spiderman movies or illegal copies of pop tunes via peer to peer), nobody is making any money!
Now people like us that are working on the internet all the time, maybe downloading lots of things at a time and checking email simultaenously, to have broadband is obvious. So im not surprised with the general view here. But the majority of internet users out there are those who connect say 30 mins a day or a couple of days a week. High-usage groups like us are a very small percentage.
..oops.. sorry for the rant.
| 9:54 am on May 15, 2002 (gmt 0)|
We live in a rural area and waited five years for high speed (DSL). Until then, we were lucky to connect at 26-48, and never did see 56.
Several months ago we got DSL and it's like the world went from black and white to color! I can upload and download all day long quick as a bunny rabbit and still surf all those graphic-intense and Flash sites that *I* enjoy.
Lean and mean may make practical sense, but I want some eye candy when it comes to my personal surfing. And eye candy = bandwidth. The fact I can upload and download for biz quickly is just an extra perk that comes with our long-awaited DSL connection.
Go back to slow dialup? Yeah, right!
| 11:54 am on May 15, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Sounds like we have a good deal in UK 28.99UKP / month for 24/7 ADSL (no total download charges - that sounds like a real ripoff in Oz) + 9.99 for Phone line rental.
I do significant amounts of data transfer, and some SE reporting from my connection and would not go back to dialup unless I was being paid to have the modem in the house.
| 1:16 pm on May 15, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Broadband seems to have really taken off here (UK). You can get your hands on a cable connection (128 Down and 512 Up) for a little over 20 quid/mo. Free instalation and modem makes it (and is making it) the clear choice to even the infrequent web surfers over a dial-up connection. The only remaining problem is that it is only available in the larger towns/cities.
Not sure what the service in the US is like but i have been down less than a couple of times in nearly 3 years! Amazing. Dial up seems to fall on it's ar*s everytime i use it. I fear, however, that when the rest of the country eventualy has the option to switch to BB, it will be as slow as a dial-up or worse. The contention is at the moment 50:1 - or 2k/sec. Lets hope not.
| 1:47 pm on May 15, 2002 (gmt 0)|
By the time the contention becomes a problem I would guess that the higher download speeds will have become cheaper. So you just move up to the speed above the average to get the better service.
| 3:38 pm on May 15, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Who has the greates per capita broadband usage anyway? Isn't it Korea?
| 5:22 pm on May 15, 2002 (gmt 0)|
>>>>>What's clearly missing from the broadband equation is, simply, a reason to use it. Many consumers find dial-up perfectly acceptable for E-mail and Web browsing.<<<<<
I'm about ready to pull my hair out at this comment. I want to incorporate Flash on my site like it's nobody's business, pretty it up with more graphics, but I can't because I'll get a big pile of emails in my inbox complaining that the pages load too slow. It has to be one of the most infuriating Catch 22s out there for me right now dealing with my site. :(
| 7:52 pm on May 15, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Ok where did our financier's come up with their finds, when just today AOL annouces reduction in it's exec staff due inpart to "drop off of dial up's" read the article here;
| 8:21 pm on May 15, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I live in Oklahoma City,OK, and just pay $34.95/month for cable modem (Cox). Adding a second phone would be aprox. $20. That only leaves $15 for dial up access to beat cable modem access. To me it's a no brainer. I don't need a cable modem, but it's right at the same or even cheaper than a dial up plus my time online is much more enjoyable.
| 1:21 am on May 16, 2002 (gmt 0)|
With respect to all (including me!) this thread has almost been exclusively about what WE use and why broadband is better for us. There has been little focus on the customer of our sites, and a few suggestions that dialup users are mentally deficient! :)
Im assuming, Kaspian, that your comment..
"...I want to incorporate Flash on my site like it's nobody's business, pretty it up with more graphics, but I can't because I'll get a big pile of emails in my inbox complaining that the pages load too slow..."
is sarcastic? :)
| This 65 message thread spans 3 pages: < < 65 ( 1  3 ) > > |