Computer Hardware Question about DSL

Bookmark this page:  YahooMyWeb Yahoo!  Google Google  Windows Live Favorites Windows Live  del.icio.us del.icio.us  digg digg  Add to Netscape Netscape
Subject Author Date
Question about DSL geezer 10-29-05
Posted by Bob on November 1, 2005, 12:36 pm
Please log in for more thread options

>>RR in Houston runs diagnostics that go all the way into my modem. They
>>once spotted a suspect connection at the junction box in the yard and
>>dispatched a tech to fix it. Sure enough there was a corroded module
>>in the box. I have never had a local connection problem since and that
>>incident was several years ago.

>Similar problems can happen with DSL as well as cable.
>Particularly in the fall when there is a large drop in temp
>at night, marginal connections may be subject to drop out.
>Nothing lasts forever and they won't go out and find faults
>until a few people complain enough. I recall a conversation
>with one technician where I was informed that a maintenance
>crew would be dispatched much sooner if multiple people
>called in, plus it's often the case that a level 1 tech will
>start out with the presumption that the problem must be on
>the customer's end, their own setup. Having a neighbor with
>a fault too can eliminate this wasted time while they insist
>one needs to reboot their system, power cycle their
>equipment, etc.

Warner Cable is different. If I call and they cannot find anything on
their end they will schedule a visit to my house. If there was a real
fault, then they cancel the visit.

Several years ago when the cable was not quite mature, I would be one
of the first to call. Every time they would get calls after me for the
same problem, so they would cancel the visit to my house. However once
the fault was not widespread so the tech came over and discovered a
corroded connector. He fixed it and I have never had a problem on my
end since.

It is almost impossible to talk them out of scheduling a visit even
though you know it is an area wide fault. They have a rich history of
how to keep the system up and scheduling visits is part of the
regimen.


--

"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable
one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore
all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
-- George Bernard Shaw


Posted by Bob on November 1, 2005, 12:43 pm
Please log in for more thread options

>Similar problems can happen with DSL as well as cable.

I ran a test that CNET offers at

http://reviews.cnet.com/7004-7254_7-0.html?tag=cnetfd.ld

It gave me 2839 kbps (kilobits per second)

This test is necessarily over the Internet - they tell you that you
will connect to one of their servers on the Internet.

By contrast I ran the test at Warner Cable Road Runner. This
connection is between my computer and a internal computer at Warner,
not far from where I live. There is no Internet involved in this test.

http://www.houston.rr.com/SpeedTest/speedTest.html

4678 Kbps (kilobits per second)

As it obvious, there is a substantial difference. The whole point I
have been trying to make is that these speed tests are not meaningful
unless they test the internal speed of the network connection to the
ISP and do not use the Internet in any way.

Using the Internet for a speed test is subject to wide fluctuations
depending on too many unknown variables.


--

"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable
one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore
all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
-- George Bernard Shaw


Posted by Who Dat? on November 2, 2005, 6:43 am
Please log in for more thread options
On Tue, 01 Nov 2005 12:43:34 GMT, spam@uce.gov (Bob) wrote:

>
>>Similar problems can happen with DSL as well as cable.
>
>I ran a test that CNET offers at
>
>http://reviews.cnet.com/7004-7254_7-0.html?tag=cnetfd.ld
>
>It gave me 2839 kbps (kilobits per second)
>
It gave me 3919.3 kbps

>This test is necessarily over the Internet - they tell you that you
>will connect to one of their servers on the Internet.
>
>By contrast I ran the test at Warner Cable Road Runner. This
>connection is between my computer and a internal computer at Warner,
>not far from where I live. There is no Internet involved in this test.
>
>http://www.houston.rr.com/SpeedTest/speedTest.html
>
>4678 Kbps (kilobits per second)

It gave me 2416 kbps

Now using the one that my cablevison provides it gives me 7007 kbps
What does that tell you guys???



Posted by Bob on November 2, 2005, 7:12 am
Please log in for more thread options

>>I ran a test that CNET offers at
>>http://reviews.cnet.com/7004-7254_7-0.html?tag=cnetfd.ld
>>It gave me 2839 kbps (kilobits per second)

>It gave me 3919.3 kbps

You had a better route. I should have included a tracert.

>>This test is necessarily over the Internet - they tell you that you
>>will connect to one of their servers on the Internet.

>>By contrast I ran the test at Warner Cable Road Runner. This
>>connection is between my computer and a internal computer at Warner,
>>not far from where I live. There is no Internet involved in this test.

>>http://www.houston.rr.com/SpeedTest/speedTest.html
>>4678 Kbps (kilobits per second)

>It gave me 2416 kbps

As expected since you are not connected directly to the Houston RR
network as I am.

>Now using the one that my cablevison provides it gives me 7007 kbps
>What does that tell you guys???

You have a very high speed connection - or the test is not valid.

Warner Cable, the connection provider for the RR ISP in Houston, has
different performance connections. I am on one of the intermediate
tiers. There are faster tiers for business subscribers. Perhaps you
are on such a connection.




--

"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable
one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore
all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
-- George Bernard Shaw


Posted by Bob on October 30, 2005, 11:51 am
Please log in for more thread options
On Sat, 29 Oct 2005 23:36:38 -0700, "Kurt"

>I was talking about where I live. I'm sure cable is perfect where you are.
>But I just did a speed test (at y boss's house) and downloaded at 30KB.
>You're entitled to your opinion and to be as rude as you see fit.

Quit top posting - and quit bullshitting people.

There is no way a cable connection is going to test at 30KB/sec. I can
get faster transmission from 2 tins cans and a long string. <g>

The only speed test that is valid is the one that is between your
computer and a network computer at the cable company. If you attempt
to perform a test that traverses the Internet, it is not a valid test
of the speed of the ISP connection.


--

If you build a man a fire and he will be warm for a day. If you
set a man on fire, he will be warm for the rest of his life.


Similar ThreadsPosted
AT/ATX PS question July 10, 2005, 11:49 pm
UPS Question September 29, 2005, 9:55 am
Question about DSL October 29, 2005, 11:29 am
LCD question November 10, 2005, 12:07 pm
PSU question???/ November 26, 2005, 11:30 pm
HDD Question December 21, 2005, 12:00 pm
DVD-RW question January 11, 2006, 9:51 am
Question regarding 32- and 64-bit PCI March 8, 2006, 12:05 am
usb question May 25, 2006, 10:59 pm
Question about PSU August 13, 2006, 8:07 pm
UPS question October 21, 2006, 3:24 pm
fsb question October 29, 2006, 2:43 pm
Ram question... November 6, 2006, 5:35 pm
DR2 question ? November 29, 2006, 7:51 pm
RAN Question January 11, 2007, 1:57 pm