12kbps - is this a record?

Fogmatic

At least, that's the dialup speed I'm getting most of the time (when it isn't 12, it's 9.6).

I'm not whining, just curious (luckily for me, a local company's wireless BB masts have recently come within sight).
Can anyone better that speed? Who knows, a national competition might just embarrass Eircoma - sorry, Eircom - into wakefulness. Can anyone suggest a prize? (Or maybe the satisfaction would be enough).

cgarvey

Beat my 2k4 (2 years ago remote Clare)! Granted it's usually 12-19K now, but it was a sustainable 2K for a number of years

watty

I used to do my email via 300baud.
But that was 1988 in Co. Clare.

Fogmatic

Wow! Your 2K is impressive, cgarvey. Maybe there should be a contest for each year's speeds (going back a few years). Plus an overall '21st-Century Ireland' award'. (The Golden Snail or something).

The more public & publicised the better for the award ceremony, eg outside the Dail, on the steps of Eircom's headquarters etc.

I've forgotten the details about baud rates, watty - learned a bit about comms in 1980s evening classes, but never put it into practice (well, it was very expensive & very, very fiddly!). Was 300 baud slow for that era?

watty

9600 bps did exist then.
I'd used Prestel 1200/75 (down/up) in 1981 in N.I.
I used 75 baud telex in 1977. But same week saw a Xerox Star Workstation (ethernet, 32bit, Window GUI, bit mapped graphics, mouse).

I had this then 6months before the text only 320k floppy IBM PC arrived in Ireland.
http://www.old-computers.com/museum/computer.asp?c=210

probably 1981? Sound, GBIP, Serial, Parallel, 2x 1.2MByte floppies, 16bit bus. The PC text only, 8bit bus, parallel/Serial optional.

300baud is about 240bps. I was using this for email at 300baud via X.25 dialup PAD in Belfast and BT server in London from Co. Clare. Email gateways to Telex, Fax and Bitnet (Internet precusor)

With CP/M and external Modem able to do 2400baud.

Faster than 1200/1200 was uncommon. DECT (64K data on Wireless) and ISDN (144kbps line) did exist then, though ISDN rare and DECT not in any consumer products, the cordless phones used 1.6MHz/49MHz Analogue Modulation.

Baud is similar idea to symbol rate. If a start and stop bit, then 10 bits needed for each data bit hence effective actual data bps is 8/10ths of baud rate.

Modern higher speed systems can use 2 (QPSK) to 6 (QAM64) bits per symbol, but also tend to have Forward Error correction from 9/10 (approx 1/10th of bit rate not used for actual data) to 1/2 (about 50% data). QPSK with no FEC = 2bits. QPSK with 1/2 FEC = 0.97 bits per symbol (baud).

smellslikeshoes

I enjoyed reading that, thanks for posting Watty.

Fogmatic

Yes watty, I found your posting very interesting too; the history of computing's one of my hobbies (I bookmarked that website; I collect those sites).

I was a comparative latecomer to computers, my first one being a Sinclair QL (in 1986 in London, after the first term of evening classes). Dixons were selling them off cheap, complete with thermal printer (well, they did have 1 virtue - quietness!). I got an ex-display model (the only 1 left), long since parted with its manual, so it was the deep end as per usual. No monitor included - they could plug into any TV. To see my little programs working in full glory, I used to take the computer (like a slightly elongated keyboard) on the train when visiting my stepmother who had a colour TV.
I'd learned some ordinary Basic. and could see what a good, elegant version QL Superbasic was (the user group people prided themselves on avoiding the 'goto' command like the plague). The computer itself was silent, too (apart from a whirr when it was accessing a microdrive). This was because of one of its space-saving features; no fan. They got very hot, and the user group exchanged designs for home-made heat sinks.
I was fond of the QL though, and kept on using it for years after I got an AT, till I finally gave it to one of the enthusiasts. I named our male Siamese cat Mic, short for Microdrive (his growl sounded just like one).
I still have one of the dead QL keyboard membranes and a few other bits & images, intending to make a collage out of them (I'm basically an artist).

Maybe someone should start a Boards.ie thread about old computers (if one doesn't exist). There's a few other websites about them (that I know of). There was a fascinating thread about them at Friends Reunited a few years ago (titled 'Real Computers'!). The site had a time limit for threads but they didn't notice that one - it went on growing for ages. I was glad I printed out the 20 pages or so, shortly before they finally noticed & pulled it.

Apropos of the proposed dialup speed contest; as discussed elsewhere in this forum, following an EU directive Comreg specified 28.8mbps as the minimum dialup speed for delivering 'Functional Internet Access'. It's what they call a 'legally binding target' (which I can't make sense of logically). The prevailing opinion in this forum is that Comreg has no teeth. They just seem to pussyfoot around, like all the other regulators & tribunals in this country. (Please correct me if that's too sweeping - I'm just a British blow-in!)
So the best venue for the award ceremony could be on the steps of Comreg (perhaps it would remind them where they left their teeth?)

Fogmatic

Down to 9.6kbps now (sometimes 7.2).
Might be in with a chance for a runners-up certificate.

The good news; getting BB any day now! (from a local mast).

Keeping the dialup as a standby (my phone/dialup bundle will still make sense). So will keep an eye on it.....

Sponge Bob

1. raise formal complaint with eircom , use their online complaint system on eircom.ie .

2. point out that the speeds ( under 28k) ar a breach of the " Universal Service Obligation " becuase you have no "Functional Internet Access" .

Demand repair within 10 days.

3. If not repaired in 10 days then complaint to comreg , info@comreg.ie , chase comreg every day until THEY m thats comreg , give you a ticket number .

DublinWriter

Fogmatic wrote: »

At least, that's the dialup speed I'm getting most of the time (when it isn't 12, it's 9.6).

Sounds like you're on a 'grouped' landline.

cgarvey

Sponge Bob wrote: »

2. point out that the speeds ( under 28k) ar a breach of the " Universal Service Obligation " becuase you have no "Functional Internet Access" .

No, no it's not (unless I'm very badly mistaken). It's a certain % of lines that need FIA, where feasible, if the weather is fine, and the accounts are good, and the network card lasts the week, and oil prices stay high, etc.

I could be mistaken though?

Fogmatic

Not sure what a 'grouped landline' is?
We got the phone line in when we moved here in '92, and saw the new poles approaching along the road from as far as we could see (a km or so); they were probably new further towards the exchange too, given how scattered homes are here.
They put a box on the pole near our house, then a short cable to the house.
Then our neighbour across the road got a phone, cabled ftom the same box, then they put up a few more poles for a new house further on, and quite a lot of new houses back towards the exchange have been connected.
Our phone tends to go dead in rainy weather, the engineers go up our pole and do something at the box (mastic? black stuff?), and then we get our line back. Until the next time.....

lucernarian

I think the best way to deal with this is to follow what Spongebob advised.

It's ridiculous that you've a line which is only sometimes suitable for ordinary fax operation...

Eircom have to do something about your line up to a cost of €7000 to them. Then there's an incremental cost to you for the costs above this.

Fogmatic

Cancel the good news - the BB installer got a signal from the mast, but said it wasn't good enough.
There's another mast going up (in another direction), and he said it should be better from there. They have to negotiate with O2, and it'll take a few months.....

Yes, I've been going to write a complaint to Eircom for months (printed out detailed instructions etc). But got sidetracked by stuff, including trying to get new Vista desktop & laptop connected to the internet again (having once connected briefly). Maybe it's because Vista doesn't have the slower options for modem speed that 98SE does? But it did work once.

Meanwhile, I can't register any software to start using it, and the Windows
updates I haven't had a chance to do will have been piling up...

Anyone know if I could take my computer to a friend with broadband, and use their connection to get substantial downloads done? (or connect at all, the way things are going)? I've tried to search for the question in various forums, but can't find the right keywords.

Sponge Bob

updates will work anywhere with BB , just set the windows update rate to hourly and not daily at 3am and it will chug away ( including restarts) until its done

then again no self respecting virus will work at 12kbps either

Fogmatic

Thanks Sponge Bob.
A computer can go anywhere, hook into into someone else's ISP account & download stuff then (with permission, I mean)? Is it only with broadband?

It had occurred to me that modern malware might not be compatible with 12/9.2/7.6kbps!

I've collected some info about ways of speeding things up a bit, which I'll try out on this 98SE computer until I can get the new ones connected (will probably use a mixture of Firefox tweaks, free download manager etc). The consensus seems to be the slower the connection, the more difference they make. At least I have this 98SE computer to try them with!

I'm also trying to figure out elsewhere (mostly in forums) how to get the new computers connected again.
I rang UTV yesterday (on the faint offchance they could help), but all they could suggest was 'getting someone' to look at the modem and the computers, though I told them they both got connected once (I'm getting off topic! Though if it's the modem speed, this might be the right forum).

Hal1

6kpBs was my connection record on my trusty 56k modem, back in teh day like.

Fogmatic

You're in the running for an award then, Hal1!

Any volunteers to run a competition? I don't have the time on my hands, what with not being young, and wanting to do lots of stuff. At the moment I'm busy with (amongst other things!) net connection problems, somehow setting up the new computers so I can use them, etc etc. And that's before getting on with the work computers help with in the first place.....

Hal1

That was not the throughput, just the speed it connected at. This was pre 2001 when broadband was something that was dreamed of.

Sponge Bob

simply plug the network card in and launch a browser, the hinternet should appear in the browser like,

automatic updates will then work on the timed intervals

Fogmatic

Still dreamed of, Hal1.....

Thanks Sponge Bob.
I'm not quite with you though - what network card?
The new desktop has one inside it, but I haven't networked anything yet; neither has the friend-with-broadband I had in mind.
Perhaps I should have mentioned it's a USB modem I got to connect the new computers to the phone line (as the manufacturers in their wisdom seem to have decided that the old-style phone ports are obsolete).

jimi_t

4.2k/bps was about as fast as it got for me... absolutely crushing; I'm living just off leeson street as well - its the wiring in the old georgian houses apparently...

Hal1

jimi_t wrote: »

4.2k/bps was about as fast as it got for me... absolutely crushing; I'm living just off leeson street as well - its the wiring in the old georgian houses apparently...

But that was...you got BB now though right

Fogmatic

Well, mine was down to 4.8kbps yesterday, jimi! (back to 7.2 as I write).

I've been looking into the modem & modem port speed settings drop-down lists in Windows (thanks to most web articles about tweaking dialup connections being oldish and dialup-friendly!). I didn't have much idea about those settings, so have printed out some info. It seems setting the speeds lower, for instance, can actually improve connection speeds, by removing bottlenecks and consequent dropped connections etc.

I'll try some of that stuff tomorrow (and report back, in case of interest to other sufferers).

One forum posting from North America was about a connection slowing down in summer.
(Don't tell Eircom, or they'll blame global warming).

lucernarian

Any further word on this line problem?? Have you spoken to Comreg about it?

Fogmatic

No, I haven't contacted Comreg yet - the first stop's Eircom (and giving them 10 days to respond). Am writing to Eircom any day now; just been too busy, plus it occurred to me that enclosing some modem log printouts might help a bit. I'm trying to collect some suitably appalling ones (it's a blistering 12mbps now, but I shouldn't have to wait too long!)
I've had a run of logging faults with them lately (it's that weather again, when the line's often audibly interrupted, cutting out voice calls too).

Sponge Bob

Have you complained to eircom through their online complainst process ??

Comreg will do nothing for 10 days after you formally complain , then they will probably do nothing anyway the useless ***** .

smallBiscuit

Fogmatic, hope I'm not bursting your bubble, but ...... if that company who are putting up mast's have a name which is similar to 'cold water comms'', forget it.
I'm on a 2mb wireless connection which has been known to reach the blistering speeds of 56kb (on a good day).
They severely oversold their product it is craaaaap.

I want upc (NTL), a 10 or 20mb connection, I could only dream so high! But I can't, no cable to my house. 200ft away, but not to mine

watty

The Chilly Named Company you allude to is Wireless. I thought Fogmatic was on landline dialup (using cattle fencer wire by sound of it).

Fogmatic

I haven't done the cpmplaint to Eircom yet, Sponge Bob - hope to get a chance tomorrow. I've had everything upside-down this year, fitting in new machines etc (between connection troubleshooting etc!), and this is the first evening I've been able to see the desk (and it's 3m long!)
Thanks for reminding me it can be done online.

The wireless broadband scheme I'm hoping to join doesn't sound like yours, smallBiscuit; it's Fastcom. The latest from them is that they're hanging on to the cheques from us disappointed ones (unless we want them back), to be ready when the new mast goes up. So they seem to think there's a possiblility of getting connected while our cheques are still valid.

Cattle fence wire is about it. An Eircom engineer who rang today (in response to the latest of a spate of fault-reporting) said he knew the line was very bad all along our branch from the exchange (he'd tried to connect to the internet through it from his laptop).
I was always going to encourage my nearest neighbours to complain to Eircom too, but maybe it's expanded into a leafleting job!

Fogmatic

Re complaining to Eircom;

I've been collecting printouts of selections from the modem log, to have up my sleeve. 'Selections' is the operative word; with all the connection attempts, connections dropped because of 'no carrier', timeouts etc, there's about an A4 page of log per minute. Between internet sessions, I print out the more outstanding (ie worst) bits, & delete the rest to clear the log and reduce the reading.
To make this easier, when online I check the connection speed frequently, by hovering the mouse over the dialup connection icon (the 2 computers).
Does anyone know if it's possible to make the popup speed info stay popped up, so I can see it all the time? That way, I'd probably notice when it drops below 12kbps (which triggers a worthwhile bit of modem log to print). Or does some other setting/little download exist for seeing the connection speed all the time, without taking up too much screen?
I've asked in the PC Advisor forum (a good one), but no useful answers yet (mostly links to online speed tests - most of them probably have broadband).

Another thing is that I bought a new desktop and laptop 9 months ago, and by the time I had the cash they were all preinstalled with Vista. I was busy, and it took until June to get the new machines to detect the modem (an external USB one I had to get because of lack of phone port). Eventually, during yet another modem install in the new desktop, I went off to put the kettle on etc, and when I got back it had dawned on Vista that there was something there (I'm used to 98SE!). It then connected to the internet first time, at 16kbps, and so did the laptop with the same procedure.

I haven't been able to connect either new computer since, and also haven't achieved a 16kbps connection since. I'm wondering if there's a minimum connection speed that Vista can cope with? Maybe it's somehow related to Vista's slowness, as in detecting the modem (I have printed out stuff about understanding modem logs, but haven't had a chance to learn yet).
I've asked in a Microsoft user forum, but no answer yet (I can't ask Microsoft anything directly, as my Vista is preinstalled).
If it did turn out that Vista won't connect below 16kbps, it would be good ammunition with the complaint to Eircom (never mind 'functional internet access' - it would be 'New computer? No internet access'!)