jdMorgan - 12:18 am on Jul 13, 2004 (gmt 0)

My only purpose in posting here was to warn potential users not to expect DSL or cable performance. If your only option is a 26.4kbps modem, then you'll probably be happier with satellite, as long as you *do* download a few big files every day. The response delay of normal page-to-page surfing is still annoying, but if you can "forgive" that by keeping in mind that your big downloads are fast, then you can be happy.

Satellite is certainly better than an unreliable slow phoneline modem, but it is expensive and the people selling it intentionally gloss over the latency problem. Before I went to satellite, I got 26.4kbps on a good day, and 14,400 whenever it rained. Estimated dates for DSL and cable availability in this area were "never" and "fat chance," respectively. But I am looking forward to the fast-improving "wireless ISP" coverage in this area. Moving back to/near the city is not an option, I'd rather chew my own leg off.

Jim