I live in Montreal. My ISP is iStop (http://www.istop.com), and I'm subscribed to their 3.5mbit/800kbit residential DSL service for 49.95$ canadian, which is roughly 35$ US (I just did x0.65)
Service of late has been pretty good, and they have the cheapest bandwidth costs that I've ever seen on a residential line -- 2$/GB canadian if you go over your limit, and should you want to raise your monthly cap in advance, 10$/10GB canadian.
They don't have any problems with servers, and while new clients don't get them anymore, I have a free static IP:)
I'm actually considering THT or CUIC, the cost goes up to 70$ CDN, and I'd have to pay extra for the static IP, but neither of them have monthly caps.
I'm not saying 3mbit DSL lines should be used to provide internet service (Though, a 3.5mbit non-pppoe business DSL line is certainly resellable), I'm just trying to illustrate the point that while overselling a T1 is OK, overselling it by 32000% isn't a good idea. Even with slower 1mbit DSL lines, or even crippled 512kbit DSL lines, it wouldn't take very many simultaneous transfers before the network slowed to a crawl. I might not be a network engineer, but I know enough about networking to realize that massively overselling a pipe is a recipe for disaster; I've seen it happen many times.
If you're going to be running Cat 5, why not use IT for the internet connection? It's much faster.
I also seriously doubt that one 1.5mbit T1 will be enough for 160 DSL connections. It's not even fast enough to support one DSL connection where I live; my 3.5mbit DSL connection, which sets me back about 35$ US per month, would be horribly slow if piped through a T1.
Now, I realize that most people don't have 3.5mbit. Everybody in eastern Canada (At least Quebec and Ontario) have access to 1mbit DSL (1.2mbit minus overhead). It'd only take two people to try to download at the same time to saturate your T1. What if 10 people tried to download? How much would YOU pay for a 150kbit internet connection?
Q: When Lindows was first advertised, it was billed as being fully Windows compatible, or close to it. Yet, fast forward to today and we find no more mention of Windows compatibility, nor does Lindows have higher Windows compatibility than Wine. What happened?
I decided to take a look at it, thinking it looked neat, but imagine my surprise when I discovered that it couldn't run faster than about 3FPS on an AthlonXP 1900+.
Seriously, this thing must be pretty badly written to not be able to get any better speed than 3FPS on a modern computer.
Oddly enough, Anandtech's numbers show the complete opposite: The Opteron beat ALL other CPUs at ALL games. Including the P4 3.0C in UT2K3. Take a look:
You're leaving out another part of the painful transition; people who had just bought a 68K Mac suddenly found themselves being unable to run new software on their new Mac. Apple introduced the PowerPC, yet kept right on selling 68K models for the lower end, and every single person who bought one got screwed.
Nobody knew it at the time, but by paying a few hundred (And I really mean a small few) more dollars, you would get a machine that would be much more versatile in the future. But, at the time, the PowerPC machines provided no advantage, and cost more.
With a radius of 50KM, we're talking 24649 square kilometers. At 72mbit, that's a total of 3 kilobits per square kilometer. Such speed! And imagine if you had more than one customer per square kilometer, as one would expect in a metropolitan environment...
I'm not an American. I love it anyway. But having a diabetic in the family has something to do with it, you just get used to diet and find regular too sweet.
That's what Diet is for.
Stories of Aspartame causing cancer are overrated; sure, if you feed a rat a good portion of it's body weight in aspartame, it gets cancer... I'd like to see a human drink enough diet coke to ingest 30 pounds of aspartame.
Oh please. Do you really think if your precious seti@home hadn't come along, nodody else would have tried to create a distributed computing client? Don't fool yourself.
As for your supposed revelation, I'll believe it when I see it. I think it more likely that we'll all be dead before it produces any results.
Ugh! I have 80KB/s upstream, and with BT doing about 40KB/s up last night it was only getting 10-20 down. I'll try again tonight, hopefully you're right and many more people are online.
What exactly does opening port 6881 do? I have it closed and BT has no trouble uploading, though it doesn't seem to want to max out my upstream at ~80KB/s.
And why should I use this client rather than one that doesn't punish people for having low upstream, or a monthly cap? I like KaZaA just fine thank you, with it's 4 million + users at any given time (OpenFT is just sad by comparison)
That most internet connections aren't symetrical? What about people on connections with 4mbit downstream, but only 120kbit upstream? Should they really be limited to downloading at 12KB/s?
Once BitTorrent solves the problem about jacking up my bandwidth bill, and only running at the speed of my upstream, maybe I'll consider it. Until then, it's useless and expensive. Downloading RH9 off BitTorrent will cost me more than subscribing to RHN!!!
Slashdot Mirror
I live in Montreal. My ISP is iStop (http://www.istop.com), and I'm subscribed to their 3.5mbit/800kbit residential DSL service for 49.95$ canadian, which is roughly 35$ US (I just did x0.65)
:)
Service of late has been pretty good, and they have the cheapest bandwidth costs that I've ever seen on a residential line -- 2$/GB canadian if you go over your limit, and should you want to raise your monthly cap in advance, 10$/10GB canadian.
They don't have any problems with servers, and while new clients don't get them anymore, I have a free static IP
I'm actually considering THT or CUIC, the cost goes up to 70$ CDN, and I'd have to pay extra for the static IP, but neither of them have monthly caps.
:) Same here, I dumped Sympatico for iStop's 3.5mbit line right after the Sympatico caps announcement was made.
I'm not saying 3mbit DSL lines should be used to provide internet service (Though, a 3.5mbit non-pppoe business DSL line is certainly resellable), I'm just trying to illustrate the point that while overselling a T1 is OK, overselling it by 32000% isn't a good idea. Even with slower 1mbit DSL lines, or even crippled 512kbit DSL lines, it wouldn't take very many simultaneous transfers before the network slowed to a crawl. I might not be a network engineer, but I know enough about networking to realize that massively overselling a pipe is a recipe for disaster; I've seen it happen many times.
If you're going to be running Cat 5, why not use IT for the internet connection? It's much faster.
I also seriously doubt that one 1.5mbit T1 will be enough for 160 DSL connections. It's not even fast enough to support one DSL connection where I live; my 3.5mbit DSL connection, which sets me back about 35$ US per month, would be horribly slow if piped through a T1.
Now, I realize that most people don't have 3.5mbit. Everybody in eastern Canada (At least Quebec and Ontario) have access to 1mbit DSL (1.2mbit minus overhead). It'd only take two people to try to download at the same time to saturate your T1. What if 10 people tried to download? How much would YOU pay for a 150kbit internet connection?
Q: When Lindows was first advertised, it was billed as being fully Windows compatible, or close to it. Yet, fast forward to today and we find no more mention of Windows compatibility, nor does Lindows have higher Windows compatibility than Wine. What happened?
I have the latest Detonator drivers (43.45) for my GeForce 3. They most assuredly support DirectX.
Actually, I was trying to run both the included tutorial, and the included Wizards game; both ran at unplayable speeds around 2-3FPS.
WineX is only designed for gaming, not running business applications, browser plugins, etc.
I decided to take a look at it, thinking it looked neat, but imagine my surprise when I discovered that it couldn't run faster than about 3FPS on an AthlonXP 1900+.
Seriously, this thing must be pretty badly written to not be able to get any better speed than 3FPS on a modern computer.
Oddly enough, Anandtech's numbers show the complete opposite: The Opteron beat ALL other CPUs at ALL games. Including the P4 3.0C in UT2K3. Take a look:
http://anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1818&p =6
You're leaving out another part of the painful transition; people who had just bought a 68K Mac suddenly found themselves being unable to run new software on their new Mac. Apple introduced the PowerPC, yet kept right on selling 68K models for the lower end, and every single person who bought one got screwed.
Nobody knew it at the time, but by paying a few hundred (And I really mean a small few) more dollars, you would get a machine that would be much more versatile in the future. But, at the time, the PowerPC machines provided no advantage, and cost more.
Why would you want to dampen the glow?
Anyhow, my mouse, the Logitech MX 700, doesn't have any glowing, the entire thing is solid coloured. I'd assume the MX 500 is the same.
When I saw Old Mac, I was hoping for something to spruce up my Macintosh LC575 (MC68LC040)!
Whoa, who's drinking 2 litres of pop per day?!?! No wonder so many Americans are obese.
I drink, on average, maybe 3-4 diet beverages (355ml cans) per week. That's an average of roughly 180ml per day.
Besides, it's one thing to feed a rat massive amounts of aspartame in one go, a different thing to feed one the same amount over five years.
With a radius of 50KM, we're talking 24649 square kilometers. At 72mbit, that's a total of 3 kilobits per square kilometer. Such speed! And imagine if you had more than one customer per square kilometer, as one would expect in a metropolitan environment...
I'm not an American. I love it anyway. But having a diabetic in the family has something to do with it, you just get used to diet and find regular too sweet.
That's what Diet is for. Stories of Aspartame causing cancer are overrated; sure, if you feed a rat a good portion of it's body weight in aspartame, it gets cancer... I'd like to see a human drink enough diet coke to ingest 30 pounds of aspartame.
Cola is slightly acidic. What can you do?
Oh please. Do you really think if your precious seti@home hadn't come along, nodody else would have tried to create a distributed computing client? Don't fool yourself.
As for your supposed revelation, I'll believe it when I see it. I think it more likely that we'll all be dead before it produces any results.
How about using your cycles on something that isn't a complete waste of time, like folding@home, or some other project?
It actually DOES have a USB interface. Direct to a PC.
Ugh! I have 80KB/s upstream, and with BT doing about 40KB/s up last night it was only getting 10-20 down. I'll try again tonight, hopefully you're right and many more people are online.
What exactly does opening port 6881 do? I have it closed and BT has no trouble uploading, though it doesn't seem to want to max out my upstream at ~80KB/s.
That IS the whole april fools joke. This story has been reposted what, 4-5 times now? In the past few hours?
And why should I use this client rather than one that doesn't punish people for having low upstream, or a monthly cap? I like KaZaA just fine thank you, with it's 4 million + users at any given time (OpenFT is just sad by comparison)
A bunch of cows die and nobody claims responsibility, so it MUST be aliens? Please.
That most internet connections aren't symetrical? What about people on connections with 4mbit downstream, but only 120kbit upstream? Should they really be limited to downloading at 12KB/s?
Once BitTorrent solves the problem about jacking up my bandwidth bill, and only running at the speed of my upstream, maybe I'll consider it. Until then, it's useless and expensive. Downloading RH9 off BitTorrent will cost me more than subscribing to RHN!!!