Slashdot Mirror

“Edge lasts 24% longer than Chrome and a massive 94% longer than Firefox on average”

Assuming this to be true, that would mean that Edge renders pages more efficiently that the others. If so, the most plausible reason for this would be that Edge is using different API calls than the rest. If so that would mean Microsoft is cheating on this test. It wouldn't be the first time softwares premier software innovator has done so. There even was a name for this back in the day, Microsoft Undocumentation.

Resolution is a function of the underlying Operating System. The only way Edge browser would play at full resolution and not the others is if Windows was designed detect the running browser and reduce resolution if not running Edge.

"Microsoft claimed Microsoft Edge was built to take advantage of platform features in Windows 10"

In other words, and yet again Micosoft made sure to undocument certain API calls that makes viewing media on other browsers a "jolting experience". Or as in another example shifting the text 30 pixels to the left on detecting Opera, therefore rendering the text as slightly jagged. Of course the blame is entirely down to Opera for not following Microsoft industry standards.

If he'd tried to do this project in San Francisco, the project would have been tied up for years in red tape and citizen protests.

Not to mention sued into oblivion by AT&T, Verizon and Sprint.

In a larger more populated area this kind of solution just wouldn't work, where a corporation would be doing the bureaucratic legwork and infrastructure maintenance required for a large scale operation.

If he'd tried to do this project in San Francisco, the project would have been tied up for years in red tape and citizen protests.

Until those retards at Apple decided to remove the perfectly good working FTP implementation from the Finder.

Finder? D00d, that's a user-mode NFS server with an FTP client you've got there; the Finder just thinks it's a remote mount. (The UI stuff comes from a combination of the FTPFS plugin for the NetFS framework and NetAuthAgent/NetAuthSysAgent.)

And in what fashion was it "removed"? If I go to ftp://ftp.sonic.net/pub in Safari on Yosemite, it still does the mount.

https://corp.sonic.net/ceo/201...

in 2004, the FCC took steps to limit competition, turning away from key provisions of the 1996 Telecom Act. They set aside unbundling requirements which serve as a key bridge for competitive carriers. By circumventing Congress this way, the Bush-appointed Chairman of the FCC was able to turn back a competitive tide, creating an intentional duopoly on Internet access in the US.

The FCC Chairman was Michael Powell

'For example, “COM supports an undocumented feature called channel hooks. Well, they are semidocumented in the Win32 header files and in Don Box's ActiveX/COM column (MSJ, January 1998). Microsoft does not officially support channel hooks on either Windows NT 4.0 or Windows 2000 If you're still reading, then you've acknowledged that disclaimer and I can get into the details”' ref

Bengie take a look at what they charge for real business lines: http://www.sonic.net/solutions...
They also want to distribute via. colo not at endpoints: http://www.sonic.net/colocatio...

Now for small business at endpoints they offer cheap packages but all the carriers do that. The small business products are mostly offering bandwidth down plus phone (i.e. they look like residential from a network standpoint). Maybe they won't freak about small business servers but they certainly would if the business were doing anything remotely like 1gbs regularly. They charge a lot more for that.

They aren't doing anything different than any other residential carrier. It is not $80 to distribute 1gb/1gb throughout the USA or just about every service in country would be running from their network with rates that cheap.

Bengie take a look at what they charge for real business lines: http://www.sonic.net/solutions...
They also want to distribute via. colo not at endpoints: http://www.sonic.net/colocatio...

Now for small business at endpoints they offer cheap packages but all the carriers do that. The small business products are mostly offering bandwidth down plus phone (i.e. they look like residential from a network standpoint). Maybe they won't freak about small business servers but they certainly would if the business were doing anything remotely like 1gbs regularly. They charge a lot more for that.

They aren't doing anything different than any other residential carrier. It is not $80 to distribute 1gb/1gb throughout the USA or just about every service in country would be running from their network with rates that cheap.

I think he is on to something but the path lengths are too long. Presuming the market will stand for nothing less than mobility and at least 4G class data rates, physics requires that radio paths be shorter than he conjectures. Here's why: Mobility means the user device must be powered from batteries and fit in your pocket. It must contain its own antenna. Thus there is a maximum local_storage/delivered_bit ratio available. It costs battery power to deliver a bit of information. Non-line-of-sight paths are entirely too wasteful - witness a cellphone "handy-talky" that can communicate 2000 miles in truly free space not making it into a cell site only 2 miles away in real world conditions. Wireless goes as inverse-square so that's a million-to-one loss, 60 dB. Given one has to use truly LOS (as in laser light), the question of radio path length is answered by looking at the aperture of the antenna in the user's device. It can be thought of as a "bucket" that catches whatever falls on it. The size of the bucket is roughly the physical size of the device. While as frequency goes up (shorter wavelength) antenna gain goes up, so does path loss. The device can only catch as much flux as is falling on it. This is like solar panels - sunlight is about 1 kW/m^2 on earth- try as you might you won't get more energy per unit capture area. If one does the link analysis and applies Shannon's equation, the ONLY solution that works requires paths of, perhaps, a few hundred meters. For this reason, the drones need to be quite low and there need to be more of them. It turns out that this is possible if they are tethered and powered from the ground. http://www.sonic.net/~n6gn/SWT... gives an example of a way to do this while also allowing the (heavy) network hardware to stay on the ground. Demo coming soon. n6gn

sonic.net has no datacaps and no "artificial" speed limits. [Note: I'm not affiliated with them--just a very happy customer since I switched in March].

Of course, I'm assuming that when you said "CPUC" that means California PUC. If so, go to http://www.sonic.net/ and enter your AT&T landline number. They will tell you how many feet you are from the sonic CO. Then, go to http://www.dslreports.com/foru... to see what your likely speed with sonic will be.

I'm 5000 feet to the sonic CO, so I got 1.3 megabytes/second [2x AT&T's elite service]. sonic is also cheaper. And, tech support couldn't be more pleasant or helpful.

In fact, when you post a tech question to a sonic tech forum, you might just get a response from Dane [Jasper]--the sonic.net CEO

The expenses are around $20k for a typical customer located between 50 and 100m from the node including all equipment and trenching through the premises.

That price is so outrageous that it has to be trenching to 1 single house that has no others around it and hiring a crew for the 1 time job. That's your first problem, trenching is expensive but hanging wires on existing poles isn't. If your municipality doesn't have poles then they should have underground conduits laid for you to just pull the fiber through. If you have neither poles nor conduits then there are micro-trenchers that can carve out ~1cm of road to lay the fiber in that costs much than digging up standard trenches.

Here is a blog post where Dane Jasper says it costs Sonic $500-2500 per home passed to run fiber but he often says under $500 so the $2500 figure is probably on the extreme side for more remote houses.

https://corp.sonic.net/ceo/201...

Well, lucky you, living in a city blessed by Google Fiber.

In the rest of the country, the Internet is generally slow. It doesn't matter if it's liberal or conservative. The government isn't forcing competition, and the government isn't taking the lead on building infrastructure, so the cable and phone companies invest way less on fast Internet than in almost every other industrial country.

Even in Silicon Valley, with its dense urbanization, left-leaning politics, and large population of knowledge workers, most of Silicon Valley has pathetic options for broadband. It's either AT&T, slow and expensive DSL, or Comcast, fast and very expensive cable.

Though, Kessler has a bit of a point with regulations. As you would expect, some of the knowledge workers in Silicon Valley have been trying to get fast and affordable Internet into the area. My current favorite is Sonic.net, but I'm keeping Monkeybrains in mind in case I move into range. It's been extremely slow going. Even AT&T is having problems, getting the permits necessary for their faster-but-still-slow U-verse upgrades.

Where in the SF Bay area do you live? I ask because I had crappy DSL (and it doesn't matter who your ISP was, speed is the same; I had DSLExtreme for years) cause I lived 10k+ feet from the office and switched to Comcast and I get 50mbit+ now.

BTW, I'm in CV.

That was when I lived in the Sunset district of SF -- I've moved out of the city since then and now have Sonic.Net Fusion DSL. 15mbit (5500 feet from the CO) plus a free phone line for $39/month (taxes + equipment rental make it closer to $55) -- great deal, great service. I still have a Comcast 50Mbit connection, but will drop that as soon as my 12 month term is up -- when it works, it works well, but once or twice a week, packet loss and latency go through the roof, and the line becomes unusable for 30 - 60 minutes at a time. Calls to support have not been helpful, by the time I go through their standard script (reboot the computer, renew DHCP, power cycle the modem, etc), the problem either resolves itself or not, but even when it doesn't all they say is that they can send a technician to look at my wiring, but if there's no problem, I'll have to pay.

I got the Sonic connection to use as a backup to Comcast, but for the past few months, I've flipped around with Sonic as the primary and Comcast as the backup and the Sonic connection has been great.

Who has that anymore?

People that don't want to give any money to a cable company and want to give as little money as possible to the AT&T monopoly, and would rather have their money go to a friendly CLEC. I gave up my 50mbit Comcast cable internet connection for a 14mbit DSL connection because several times a week, packet loss would go through the roof and throughput would slow to a crawl on the Comcast connection, while the DSL provider has been rock solid.

Yeah, there's no way I'd give any money to the local cable companies in my area. I have 6mbps DSL through a CLEC and it's great. Unlike what I've seen on my friends cable connection, there's no traffic shaping or blocking of common ports. Last time I read the contract it basically said I could do whatever I want with the connection as far as running servers is concerned, this in contrast to the cable company (and also AT'Ts high speed option) that explicitly disallows things such as hosting web or gameservers, and will play whack-a-mole with your ports if they notice.

Who has that anymore?

People that don't want to give any money to a cable company and want to give as little money as possible to the AT&T monopoly, and would rather have their money go to a friendly CLEC. I gave up my 50mbit Comcast cable internet connection for a 14mbit DSL connection because several times a week, packet loss would go through the roof and throughput would slow to a crawl on the Comcast connection, while the DSL provider has been rock solid.

> to plug my favorite ISP -- Sonic.net

They only offer service in a tiny portion of California. Why recommend a little company like that to an international audience?

They cover nearly all of California's 40 million customers. There are probably one or two people in Sonic.net's service area that read Slashdot.

http://www.sonic.net/sales/maps/broadband/dsl-map.gif

The GP mentioned they were in Seattle. When I lived there, the city granted a monopoly to Comcast, but Comcast doesn't offer Internet access to much of the city. I was stuck with 1.5 Mbps DSL from Qwest. Using SSH over Qwest with the 250 ms ping to Level 3 was so annoying that I often went back to dial-up for the lower latency. To be fair, the consistency and reliability with Qwest was amazing. In four years, it only went down once , and I was able to get the full 1.5 Mbps from just about everywhere. I currently have Comcast, and while I love the higher speed, I miss having a reliable connection. I've had to give-up on online gaming because the connection goes down so many times per day.

So complain to your city representatives - tell them that you're tired of them granting a franchise license to a provider that provides substandard service. And tell them to encourage projects like Gigabit Seattle to bring better internet service to the area.

But don't blame Amazon for poor network latency to their datacenters, when it's the fault of the local ISP.

You ought to talk to your ISP about the high latencies

So, firstly you'll be asked to reboot Windows, then your router. Then you'll be directed to the ISP's test website. Once it appears you are connected and get web pages, they'll try to hang up. If you persist past that stage, they'll probably disconnect the call at some point forcing you to restart from scratch.

Sounds like you have the wrong ISP -- this is a good time to plug my favorite ISP -- Sonic.net. When you call tech support, you get to talk to a real support engineer, not a low paid customer service rep that only knows how to follow a script. When you tell him that you've already rebooted your border gateway and still see high latency and packet loss, he knows what you mean and doesn't have to page through his script to find out how to reply to a customer when he says "packet loss" and when you read the IP addresses from a traceroute, he recognizes all of their router IP's. Oh, and they aren't confused or surprised when you say you're running Linux and tell you that they only support Windows.

The end is near my ass. I'm in Los Angeles and I still only have one option for broadband access at any reasonable speed -- and it's Time Warner Cable. The end is nowhere near until we somehow break the monopolistic (or duopolistic) stranglehold these bastards enjoy in any given market. Apparently this stranglehold is in large part perpetuated by political deals these ISPs have made with local government (e.g., the City of Los Angeles) wherein the city gets kickbacks from the ISP for rights of way, etc. Because local governments are dependent on these kickbacks to support their budget, there is no competition. It's a form of payola.

If you're in a Sonic.net coverage area, check them out. I'm 6000 feet from the CO, and get 14mbit down, 1.3mbit upstream -- no monthly bandwidth caps, and their pricing includes a real analog phone line (not VoIP) with unlimited long distance. For about double the price, you can get business DSL that bonds 2 lines to give you about double the speed.

I was getting 50mbit/10mbit from Comcast, but dropped them after moving to Sonic because once a week I'd see latency and packet loss so severe that the line was unusable.

As I understand it, that single-line 20 Mb/s is only possible if you live basically right next to the CO or a DSL-enabled remote terminal (RT). By the time you get to my distance, ADSL2+ is only slightly faster than plain jane ADSL, circa 1998.

Well, this blog post by Sonic's CEO says:

We’ve also seen some inquiries about qualification distances for these products. While qualification distance can vary based upon individual conditions, here are the general guidelines. This is subject to change based upon our observations about performance in the field, because we never want to over promise and fail to deliver.

• 3Mbps/2Mbps: 11,100ft (2.1 miles)
• 6Mbps/2Mbps: 9,500ft
• 12Mbps/2Mbps: 8,000ft
• 18Mbps/2Mbps: 6,600ft
• 30Mbps/2Mbps: 5,000ft

for pair-bonded ADSL2+, so divide by 2 to get non-pair-bonded results. That gives 1.5Mbps/1Mbps at 2.1 miles, which is about what I got for download and better than what I got for upload back in the late '90's. How far are you from the CO or RT?

In theory, yes, I could bond two channels together.

Are you talking about two-line Fusion here? I.e., are you talking about trying to get more than the 20Mb/s maximum for single-line Fusion? (I certainly don't remember getting 20Mb/s from my ADSL back in 1998/1999....)

I should be so lucky as to have 2004-era technology. I'm in the heart of the Silicon Valley, and can't get anything faster than basic 1998-era ADSL. If the HOA would let me put up a fifty foot tower, I could probably point a parabolic Wi-Fi antenna towards the Apple or Google campus and get faster service.

Are you in an area where you could get Fusion from Sonic.net?

Sonic.net does not have data transfer caps. You buy a bandwidth range, and you can use it all 24/7 if you want. Here's what Sonic's CEO says: "My opinion is that caps make little technical sense, and I believe that the fundamental reason for capping is to prevent disruption of the television entertainment business model that feeds the TV screens in most households."

Sonic is one of the few remaining independent US ISPs. They have to lease local circuits from AT&T, but they buy their own upstream bandwidth. In a few areas they have their own fiber to the home, and there they offer gigabit connections for $70 a month.

The key is to avoid the big-name assfaces whenever possible; much like the major cell carriers, they don't give a shill if they lose any particular customer, as long as their bottom line isn't affected. Regional places like Sonic.net or DSL Extreme are MUCH better for any geek to go with, for example -- neither uses caps/throttling or minds home servers, and while both block port 25, DSL Extreme's TOS states they will open it if asked.

The thing is, regional ISPs are rarely well known even in their area, so a lot of people have no clue that there's any options beyond the cable/phone companies. Even if you've never heard of any independent ISPs existing in your area, spend some time searching the web for a local one (they can be very hard to find) and ask at BroadbandReports & Craigslist's Forum area before signing up with a national ISP. It takes some extra time, but it's worth it.

Really? I guess my ISP doesn't count as "major"? They may not be the biggest player, but they've not exactly "small" either. Frankly I respect their business decision of going with the "slow and steady"growth rate instead of the "quickly oversubscribe as many people as possible" that most other ISPs seem to be going with. More importantly, they have a specific policy of treating all data equally:

At Sonic.net, we believe that customers buy our service with the understanding that we will simply deliver their traffic without inspection, modification or artificial limitations.

In summary: We don't touch yer bits! (We believe that would be inappropriate.)
Just because you have an anti-competitive and restricting contract with your ISP doesn't mean everybody does.

You should be careful not to project your own bad decisions onto others - some of us do research first, and choose the businesses we want associate with on more than just price.

"We paid for the internet one dialup account at a time."

Not really, though dialup paid for a bit of it. Much of the cash came from the federal government, in the form the grants that made ARPA/DARPA, and later the subsidies to AT&T/etc to build out fiber-optic to the entire country... which we're still waiting for... over a decade later.

Really? I guess my ISP doesn't count as "major"? They may not be the biggest player, but they've not exactly "small" either. Frankly I respect their business decision of going with the "slow and steady"growth rate instead of the "quickly oversubscribe as many people as possible" that most other ISPs seem to be going with. More importantly, they have a specific policy of treating all data equally:

At Sonic.net, we believe that customers buy our service with the understanding that we will simply deliver their traffic without inspection, modification or artificial limitations.

In summary: We don't touch yer bits! (We believe that would be inappropriate.)
Just because you have an anti-competitive and restricting contract with your ISP doesn't mean everybody does.

You should be careful not to project your own bad decisions onto others - some of us do research first, and choose the businesses we want associate with on more than just price.

"We paid for the internet one dialup account at a time."

Not really, though dialup paid for a bit of it. Much of the cash came from the federal government, in the form the grants that made ARPA/DARPA, and later the subsidies to AT&T/etc to build out fiber-optic to the entire country... which we're still waiting for... over a decade later.

At the core of the problem is the poor quality of Internet service. I'm in the heart of the Silicon Valley, and the fastest Internet service available to me is 3Mbps. If I change ISPs and add channel bonding, I can push it up to the high single digits. If I want to watch a Blu-Ray-quality movie, even with the newer codecs, that means I would need to download at least 15 gigabytes of data. That translates to 11.3 hours of saturating the connection just to watch a single movie.

Thankfully, due to the requirement for the phone companies to lease out their lines, there are multiple non-phone-company, non-cable-company ISPs in the Bay Area. Alas none of the municipalities are planning to roll out fiber and lease it to everyone, but you can get better service from the local ISPs. One such is Sonic.net. Also helps to notice where the local central office is and then find a place to live nearby.

Sonic.NET aren't the only ones. Independent local ISPs are very much alive in most major metropolitan areas, but they're hard to locate. Almost seems like the opening line of The A-Team: "If you need an Internet connection - If no telco will help - and if you can find them - maybe you can hire an ISP". Sonic.NET covers most of the SF/Bay Area, EasyStreet is one for the greater Portland (OR) area.

I was curious whether a major regional ISP was taking part in this clusterfuck, and found an interesting interview from August stating that the only ISPs taking part are AT&T, Cablevision, Comcast, Time Warner Cable and Verizon; independent ISPs are not involved and weren't even asked.

Relatedly, I highly recommend that anyone in the service area for Sonic.net (their CEO/founder was the one interviewed) use them as an ISP -- they're the only one I know of that has been persistently doing what we've all been saying we want ISPs to do when it comes to governmental & *AA demands and investing in fiber connections. No better way to show appreciation than voting with our wallets where we can...

If you don't want to wait till summer, there's the Unofficial Mass Effect Epilogue Slides to tide you over.

I agree with most of what you say. First of all, the whole concept of the ending is terrible, deus-ex machina and all that, blah blah, others have said it better, it's a terrible concept. But even aside from that, it is totally idiotic that they didn't even try to give us some ending slides and voice overs. It's sad that fans can come up with something so much more satisfying than their crappy endings. This site has made me feel a lot better about the endings (but a lot worse about Bioware/EA):

http://shannon.users.sonic.net/masseffect/

Well, some ISPs are. Just depends on how they structure things legally. Should it be easier for ISPs to stand up and refuse to censor and snoop on their customers? IMO, yes. However, AFAIK, AT&T still retains common carrier status despite their well documented spying efforts, so...

So he does not seem to get the full 6 mbps that http://www.sonic.net/ offers on DSL. Must be to far from the CO or RT to get the full speed.

he bases Comcast but they have faster speeds and better upload. But the Sonic.net directv bundle is better for TV.

Back when regulated public utilities couldn't sell content, we didn't have this problem. The remaining independent ISPs still don't.

It's not a technical limitation. Sonic.net, which serves Northern California and the Los Angeles area, continues to offer unlimited data access up to the bandwidth purchased. Their deal is that you buy, say, 3mb/s to 6mb/s, and they guarantee the lower figure. (I get about 4mb/s on that deal.) There are no additional bandwidth charges, and their CEO says they're aren't going to be any. Since AT&T announced caps, he says Sonic has been "overwhelmed with demand".

They buy a local DSL connection from AT&T and backhaul it to their switch in Santa Rosa, CA. Sonic is also putting in fiber to the home in some areas.

Some ISPs fight for our privacy. http://corp.sonic.net/ceo/2011/08/01/help-us-protect-your-privacy-online/

I searched for "LATA", but I don't know how up to date this is:

http://sonic.net/sales/maps/

Yeah, I've always been impressed that their MOTD is on their main page.

(Yow, just noticed that they have a graph showing support call wait times on their contact page. If that doesn't say something about their customer support, I don't know what does.)

Besides advocating a fairly narrow theory on how to live healthily, this lecture by John Mcdougall talks about the questionable (non-positive) benefits of medication for chronic problems. It was an eye-opener for me, as someone who used to blindly follow his doctor's guidance for all health-related issues. https://ssl.sonic.net/mcdsite/free/DLV04-V01.zip Warning: It's about 80 minutes long - so probably better saved for a rainy day.

If you're in Northern California, you have the option of switching to Sonic.net. Sonic is an independent ISP which has grandfathered rights to lease AT&T DSL lines at favorable rates. They back-haul your DSL link to Santa Rosa, CA, and then connect to the Internet via Cable and Wireless.They have no usage cap and no intention of adding one. Sonic has been slightly more expensive than AT&T until recently. But if you're faced with AT&T's bandwidth cap, they can now be cheaper.

Sonic just sells a data pipe. They don't sell any content over their DSL lines, so they have no incentive to force you into some "entertainment package". (They do resell DirectTV, but that's via a satellite dish and is mostly a sideline for their rural customers.

There's no "packet inspection" nonsense with Sonic. No caching. No funny DNS rerouting. No custom browser. They just pipe through the bits you send and receive. You pay for bandwidth (and it's not "up to 6 mbps", it's "3.0mbsp to 6.0 mbps download, 512kbps to 768kbps upload."). My own line at in that tier measures at about 4.1mbps.

They also have 20mbps and 40mbps services, but they're available only in limited areas.

Sonic also has better policies than AT&T. "Sonic.net, Inc. functions as a common carrier and does not censor." They don't require arbitration; you can go to Small Claims Court if you have to.

You have a DSL that is 10Gb? and cable available at 15Gb?

IF you are not in Japan I call raging BS. You cant have home internet that is FASTER than University to university INTERNET II speeds.

Hee hee. If you change the Gs to Ms, here's a California DSL provider that, unlike the telephone companies, has actually been installing current DSL technology:
  http://sonic.net/solutions/home/internet/fusion/

  $39.95 for (up to) 20 Mb/sec DSL2+, month to month, no contract.
  $79.95 for (up to) 40 Mb/sec DSL2+, month to month, no contract.
  Upstream is 1 - 5 Mb/sec.

Both include free telephone service (POTS, not VOIP), unlimited long distance, caller ID, voicemail, plus services like VPN termination, IPv6, IMAP, HTTP/FTP space, Usenet, shell, etc.

http://www.sonic.net/~nbs/star-raiders/ -- there's some sort of tribute page about that game.

yeah right.... those at top had lotsa tax cuts and they accelerated offshoring. Meanwhile they want to continue wars in middle east. Hello... guess what funds the military? Taxes! So pay up for what you started.

Yea right. NOT!!! Most libertarians opposed the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq. Libertarians are calling for Afghanistan and Iraqi withdrawals. And to head you off, they are also saying Iran should not be the new Iraq. They also are for reducing the size of the military. At least try to look into things before making accusations.

OK, but they own the police (SEC)

Citation needed.

so what are us commoners gonna do?

People themselves can request states revoke corporate charters among other things.

Falcon

FEMA can, and many parts of it can be (illegally, IMHO) by executive order.

FEMA can, and many parts of it can be (illegally, IMHO) by executive order.

Monopoly's multiple patents were been variously upheld and overturned on the facts of the cases.

Atari settled over a patent for an in-game camera perspective.

Beneficial Innovations received a settlement from Digg Inc., CBS Interactive Inc., and Jabez Networks Inc. over a patent on Internet gaming technology.

Innovention Toys won an injunction against MGA Entertainment, Toy-R-Us, and Wal-Mart for the game Laser Battle infringing on Innovention's game Khet, and was granted summary judgment when MGA and Wal-mart appealed.

So as far as I know, yes.

And now you know... and knowing is half the battle.

Why shareholders aren't punished for the actions of a corporation is completely beyond me.

The problem with that is that you're penalizing all stockholders, even those who try to clean up the corporation. Or are you one of those who believes in guilt by association? One of the most effective ways to change corporations today is via stockholder activism. Sure investors can use socially responsible investing but that's what shareholder activism is. Of course my way, corporate charter revocation also hurts activist investors.

Falcon

http://www.sonic.net/~n6gn/ocar/ocar.html This is essentially what one does with after market cellphone amplifiers, but the link offers more detail of the theory and what it takes to operate them properly. These amplifiers are bi-directional, both uplink and downlink are supported but in opposite directions. Use two isolated antennas and make the one pointed at the cell site (particularly) as directional as possible. I suggest a $50/$75 3' parabolic 'grid' reflector for PCS/850 MHz respectively. The ones offered for WiFi (2.4 GHz) actually work very well on PCS but not at 850 MHz and offer ~24 dBi gain. If you are really cheap, build corner reflectors http://www.sonic.net/~n6gn/corner.pdf.

http://www.sonic.net/~n6gn/ocar/ocar.html This is essentially what one does with after market cellphone amplifiers, but the link offers more detail of the theory and what it takes to operate them properly. These amplifiers are bi-directional, both uplink and downlink are supported but in opposite directions. Use two isolated antennas and make the one pointed at the cell site (particularly) as directional as possible. I suggest a $50/$75 3' parabolic 'grid' reflector for PCS/850 MHz respectively. The ones offered for WiFi (2.4 GHz) actually work very well on PCS but not at 850 MHz and offer ~24 dBi gain. If you are really cheap, build corner reflectors http://www.sonic.net/~n6gn/corner.pdf.

Warm up a cup of coffee in your microwave oven and drink it while you look over these measurements I made at my house: http://www.sonic.net/~n6gn/EVDOforums/radiation.pdf n6gn

Actually, this one doesn't. Of course they require a phone line and cost more ontop of that. Let's just say that while you pay more for the same product as AT&T, you get some fantastic customer service. My only association with sonic.net is that I used to be a subscriber. I switched to [del]Comcast[/del] Xfinity because they're faster, but i miss the customer service. :(