Goto page Previous 1, 2
atec77
Guest
Tue Aug 31, 2010 9:56 am
On 31/08/2010 11:00 AM, keithr wrote:
YHawn
atec77
Guest
Tue Aug 31, 2010 10:00 am
On 31/08/2010 4:05 PM, Mr.T wrote:
Quote:
"atec77"<atec77_at_hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:i5gd8o$mpm$2_at_news.eternal-september.org...
On 30/08/2010 9:18 PM, son of a bitch wrote:
atec77 wrote:
On 30/08/2010 5:39 PM, son of a bitch wrote:
Big Whoop
I get a Maximum of 20 meg on my Land Line, but how many actually get
any
where near 20 Meg?
I can Guarantee the Average Speed of the Wireless will also not be
anything like 20 meg. I reckon you'd be pushing to do 10 Meg.
Do you have a basis for that claim apart from imaginative guesses ?
cite :?
Sure,
1. All Telco's Lie
2. Have tried existing 3G , 7.2 Nets from Unwired, PigBond, Three,
Virgin, Optus. All of these do not live up to THEIR claims, not mine.
Their just Crap.
3. All Telco's Lie, Pigbond have even Lost Lawsuits regarding their
3G and 7.2 claims. And ACCC has even stuck it to PigBond for misleading
claims.
very subject and as you often do a display of nfi
thanks for playing
So just to be clear, are you claiming users WILL get *average* speeds close
to 20MbS? Or that users of the current 7.2 systems ever get close to those
speeds? I certainly have never heard of anyone who does, even for local
downloads. And the speed is usually moot for anywhere else.
MrT.
The whole idea of the "speed is silly
I use a relatively slow link but the down load limit is large , whats
the point of arguing the theory when many have only a small 20 or 30 gig
download hence a small link will suffice
If the methodology in downloads and the connection is flawed in the
specific case mentioned no one has more than vague anecdotal evidence
and a lot of theory in this thread
as to claims
no I don't make specific claims atm
--
X-No-Archive: Yes
keithr
Guest
Tue Aug 31, 2010 10:20 am
atec77 wrote:
Quote:
On 31/08/2010 11:00 AM, keithr wrote:
YHawn
Whats the matter son, don't like answers that contradict your views?
Grant
Guest
Tue Aug 31, 2010 8:30 pm
On Tue, 31 Aug 2010 19:20:00 +1000, keithr <keith_at_nowhere.com.au> wrote:
Quote:
atec77 wrote:
On 31/08/2010 11:00 AM, keithr wrote:
YHawn
Whats the matter son, don't like answers that contradict your views?
Of course they don't. No logic. Shared spectrum and all that. Besides,
peak rates, unlimited rates, people start using it and all of a sudden
there's usage restrictions or "fair use" provisions and the available
bandwidth is used up.
I got unlimited ADSL account, the limit became 60GB "fair use", but the
ISP turfed out the larger users before that, simply refused their business.
An ISP is allowed to do that.
My peak usage was 40GB/Month, is usually half that, ISP and myself mostly
happy for over six years now.
So I think Telstra can say what they like until the new spectrum is full,
then turf the customers that spoil the illusion for others. Wireless is
good is the bush, not so good for dense urban. If it was so good, we'd
all give up the copper / optical network and use wireless. No?
Grant.
Goto page Previous 1, 2
