chimera Posted October 5, 2005 Report Share Posted October 5, 2005 i ditched telecom Jetstream500 plan about a month ago and went to IHUG's bliink service. Have never had ANY problems with IHUG as an ISP (been with them for about 8 years - back in the dialup days) Even kept my IHUG account when I tried Xtra (which I ditched about 4 months later because of crap service, sure they'd answer my phone calls but did they ever call me back? No!) Definately recommend IHUG. I never needed to contact their helpdesk as most of their services can be done online. Check out http://www.bliink.co.nz/ for pricing - not too bad. Way less than Telecom/Xtra anyways! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brianemone Posted October 5, 2005 Report Share Posted October 5, 2005 dont worry wasp, im hopefully getting a new position here (to help alittle bit with the incompitence of some employee's) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
misnoma Posted October 5, 2005 Report Share Posted October 5, 2005 I am considering moving to Woosh. What's your opinion? (Currently DSL with Orcon) Woosh is only really good if you're on the road and need mobile internet. Latency sucks (200+ms pings), bandwidth isn't that great, and connection reliability isn't 100%. If you need internet from the back of the car or whatever it's fantastic because you can look past that stuff, but otherwise you'll find it irritating. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pies Posted October 5, 2005 Report Share Posted October 5, 2005 Woosh is only really good if you're on the road and need mobile internet. Woosh isn't a mobile technology, its a portable technology. Symantecs for sure, but if you've used Woosh you will understand what the difference means. If you need mobile look at T3G/CDMA or whatever. I have a Woosh connection, G2-G5 modems and the new PCM modem, as well as VoIP phone etc. The latency is high, the network availablilty is random. Its getting better, but my personal opnion (not the stance of my company) is its not worth consideration at this point. IHUGs DSL is debundleed from Telecoms DSL network. Whats that mean? There is additional latency and some 'dodgy' packet shaping going on. Beware, if low latency is important to you debundled DSL is not for you. Pie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
misnoma Posted October 5, 2005 Report Share Posted October 5, 2005 Woosh isn't a mobile technology, its a portable technology. Symantecs for sure, but if you've used Woosh you will understand what the difference means. If you need mobile look at T3G/CDMA or whatever. Pedant Everyone knows "mobile" only means around Auckland.. there isn't anywhere else in NZ anyway is there? 8) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chimera Posted October 5, 2005 Report Share Posted October 5, 2005 There is additional latency and some 'dodgy' packet shaping going on :lol: and you dont think this happens on Telecom's network? Every new customer Telecom adds to the exchange in your area is another virtual circuit on the DSLAM (digital subscriber line access multiplexer) The more clients they have (in your area) the more bandwidth YOU are sharing with others (regardless of the bandwidth they sell you) To support more customers, they have to add more DSLAMs. Other DSL providers rent a portion of this line space off Telecom. In terms of speed, you can only multiplex data traffic as quick as the hardware Telecom provides - this is generally fast no matter whose providing the service. The true bottleneck for latency is generally the size of the circuit that the ISP has with the rest of the world (therefore who THEY rent bandwidth from nationally and/or internationally) - not the DSL provider. So to compare apples with apples, you'd compare say Xtra with IHUG. I find very little (visible) performance difference in the two - except I save a few more bucks with IHUG :lol: Brian Im sure you can elaborate here, even though you work for the thieving b@#$!@#s :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pies Posted October 5, 2005 Report Share Posted October 5, 2005 The debundelled service in latency is about 30ms worse. I'm not endorsing Telecom, just saying, the debundelled service is shite if your worried about latency by comparison. Its the difference between 30-40 and 70-90. Latency is more important to me, than bandwith. There are other ways to get DSL not from Telecom, and not be on the unbundled service. As for bandwith, most people are on 2mb or less, and the DSLAMS provide more than 2mb per PVC when fully subscribed, so its not a problem unless you are one of the rare customers that has more than 2mb DSL in a DSLAM with multiple 2mb+ subscribers all using more than 2mb of traffic at the same time. Go Telecom Pie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
misnoma Posted October 5, 2005 Report Share Posted October 5, 2005 The debundelled service in latency is about 30ms worse. From a box with 100Mbit, located in Auckland, pinging my home connection: 64 bytes from 203-173-161-189.bliink.ihug.co.nz (203.173.161.189): icmp_seq=1 ttl=59 time=51.4 ms I was on xtra, got the same ping times. Where does the magical 30ms come from? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chimera Posted October 5, 2005 Report Share Posted October 5, 2005 there are so many factors involved there is no set way to know which dsl and internet provider is the better. performance can be effected by the bandwidth of the remote site you are accessing (and again, where its located - national or internationally) it is most definately effected by the distance you are to the local phone exchange (the further away the slower the connection). it can even be effected by the type of dsl router/modem you buy (poorly written firmware on the router for example) in general you need to take into account all these factors to work out a true performance speed and hence why i dislike wireless for Internet - there are just too many more factors that effect performance. Wireless for around the house though, now thats a different kettle of fish (I just had to say fish) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasp Posted October 5, 2005 Report Share Posted October 5, 2005 Ok Thanks guys appreciate you sharing the knowledge / advice. I'll hold back on Woosh, but I do support the concept of what they are doing and will see if things improve for them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chimera Posted October 5, 2005 Report Share Posted October 5, 2005 bollocks, i just read this: If you are using 2.4GHz cordless phones or X-10 (wireless products such as ceiling fans, lights, and home security systems), your wireless connection will degrade dramatically or drop completely I just bought a new uniden WDECT 2.4Ghz cordless phone for home yesterday :lol: I could hear interference on the phone and spent ages trying to work out where it was coming from... I forgot about my WLAN Must test this tonight I was about to install the mother of all house alarms shortly too, comes with wireless smoke detectors - go figure! :evil: did I say I liked wireless? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pies Posted October 5, 2005 Report Share Posted October 5, 2005 Chimera - Thats why I use 802.11a at home. Lots of stuff uses the 2.4, inclduing Microwaves, garage door openers, xbox wireless controllers, DECT phones (often sold with 300m range, so there are a lot of phones about). Piezola. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chimera Posted October 5, 2005 Report Share Posted October 5, 2005 sweet, i'll take a hit in performance and revert back to a or b then. only use notebook for Internet anyways so bottleneck will be DSL cher Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pies Posted October 5, 2005 Report Share Posted October 5, 2005 B & G are the same, most (all?) b devices can be flashed to G. Pie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chimera Posted October 5, 2005 Report Share Posted October 5, 2005 true that, my bad. was only thinking in terms of speed. both b and g use 2.4Ghz frequency huh? a is 5ghz? problem with a is it needs more line of sight than b or g, plus it cant penetrate as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pies Posted October 5, 2005 Report Share Posted October 5, 2005 Yah 5ghz reserved, so you won't have any problems, and its wider so even if there are more devices there are so many more channels its unlikley to ever be an issue during the lifetime of the technology. Piemania Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chimera Posted October 5, 2005 Report Share Posted October 5, 2005 so you won't have any problems except that its more readily absorbed by other things (such as power) being equal will try it tonight, ta. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
misnoma Posted October 5, 2005 Report Share Posted October 5, 2005 We ran 802.11b over about 2km here in central auckland for about 5 months, from one end (pointing at the skytowerish) we picked up 35 other networks and performance was horrible to say the least Changed to 802.11a, can't see anyone else and it's solid as Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brianemone Posted October 6, 2005 Report Share Posted October 6, 2005 good old wireless. chimera, pies will know a heck of a lot more about all the techie stuff than me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lduncan Posted October 6, 2005 Report Share Posted October 6, 2005 It will be interesting to see the real world performance of WiMAX. The multiple access multiplexing, smart antenna arrays, and interesting use of multipath in CBD areas should help eliminate many of the limitations of the a b and g standards. And back on topic, found this mod for phpBB to allow a printable version of threads. http://www.phpbb.com/phpBB/viewtopic.ph ... sc&start=0 I applied it to my forum and seems to be useable. Layton Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aquatopia Posted October 6, 2005 Author Report Share Posted October 6, 2005 "base station" = ap or access point. wireless is cheap nowadays - especially if your notebook has 802.11a/b/g (wireless) built in. you can pickup ap's for around $150 which includes dsl builtin. linksys (subsidiary of cisco) is a good brand that comes to mind. i run a wrt-54g at home, hooked up to my home lan and wireless notebook. its great surfing from the comfort of your couch - except for hot-lap syndrome Didnt realise they were that cheap nowadays - will look into it then. Cheers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chimera Posted October 6, 2005 Report Share Posted October 6, 2005 Here's an example of the linksys wag54g, builtin dsl, wireless, vpn support etc... http://www.pricespy.co.nz/pno_5815.html linksys products... http://www1.linksys.com/international/group.asp?coid=21&grid=33&scid=35 There are cheaper brands around though and depends on whether you want DSL builtin, vpn functionality etc or just a wireless access point. http://www.pricespy.co.nz/pno_2454.html I find the Linksys to be good for the home user or small office though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.