Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : 3Com Corporation (COMS) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Andreas Samson who wrote (10974)	12/1/1997 8:17:00 AM
From: Aaron M. Hightower	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 45548

>>The bottlenecks seem to be servers, my PC, and the Internet in general. I bet the Internet doesn't run much faster than ISDN speeds<< << I couldn't agree more. In fact, I'd go a step further. I've seen ISDN in action...I was expecting...well, something much quicker than what I observed, which was not a terribly big improvement over 28.8>> I have used BitSurfrPro/ISDN (for 2 years) NetSpeed/ADSL (for 3 months) and PairGain/SDSL (for 1 year) @HOME cable modems (for 2 months and counting). I would have to say that at least currently, you're wrong. You can get mega big-time bandwidth from lots of sites if you're pipe is big enough, and yes my 1.5Mbps cable modem is much much faster than my 128K ISDN connection ever was. I have also used SDSL over a T1 which was a 768 Kbps connection that was pretty good too. In fact, I believe in cable modems enough that I invested in cable modem stocks. I believe that between ADSL, SDSL, ISDN, and Hybrid Fiber/Coax cable, the cable comes out #1 all around. Just one opinion from someone who has tried pretty much all the options for personal internet connections. Also, I get cable modem service for $34.95/mo without needing a cable subscription or an extra phone line, and I get dedicated IP. This is through @HOME in Fremont, CA. When I lived in Dallas, the provider that was giving me the 768 Kbps also was working with Marcus Cable to do the same Hybrid Cable coax, and had told me personally of the viability (when I was at the same doubting phase that you are in about the feasibility of high-speed internet connections [above and beyond ISDN])... You may want to do more research on ATM and fiber. It's amazing how the hardward for ATM does the kind of half packet-switched and half circuit-switched stuff to eliminate the latency normally associated with routing. Long story short: yes SOME servers suck. Big ones don't. The internet in general is fast, not slow. The internet does run much faster than ISDN, AND (most importantly) a statistical sample of 1 is meaningless (IE: "I saw ISDN and it was slow" means nothing.) Check out comp.dcom.modems.cable and see what they have to say. I hope this message is helpful.

To: Andreas Samson who wrote (10974)	12/1/1997 11:38:00 AM
From: Norman Stone	Respond to of 45548

I think the improvement comes in downloading large files, where the packet sizes can be larger, and also when you have multiple browsers working (updating Java applets, etc.). Connect times are largely dependent on network traffic. But if you expect the network to improve, ISDN positions you for those improvements. That said, I'm still putting my money on cable modems. The TV/PC marriage is inevitable, and the political blockades (DVD and IP standards battles, etc.) will be history as soon as somebody starts to grab market share anyway...