My opinion on BTO
David Batt
trouble due to my ABIT KT7A mobo. Had some inital difficulties installing
due to a monitored alarm system, BT Engineer was very friendly (although he
did eat half a packet of cookies & did not demonstrate the system working).
After the engineer left, I attempted to connect, no connection (error 721 in
DUN) great I thought, what a suprise), tested it on a couple of machines got
the same result. Phoned BTO helpdesk, on hold 15 minutes about 14.00 the
line connected, all I can say is wow.
Playing Quake, QuakeII with pings to quake.demon.co.uk at 37 max
Downloading at 85.5 KB/S max
Could not be happier with the service (so far, well a static IP would make
me happier)
Anyone else care to share their opinions (include your exchange for
reference)
P.S. The engineer told me his next appointment was to convert a HH to ADSL,
so it looks like it is possible
David Batt
Burgess Hill
dtb...@btinternet.com
Buffer the FTP Slayer
"David Batt" <david...@ninthwave.co.uk> wrote in message
news:9dqs61$jsud6$1...@ID-53157.news.dfncis.de...
Give it a couple of weeks and wait for BT to "do an upgrade" and that is
where all your woes will begin (I do have personal experience of BTO)
As for your download speeds, (85.5 KB/S) I think your OS is telling you
porkies, quite simply it is not possible to get this kind of download speed
on a 512K downstream line, the maximum which you can hope for is 64 KB/S. I
doubt you will even get this because you will still have to take into
account the TCP/IP overheads.( although it will be pretty close)
Mark
Huw Wyn Jones
80ps during one Napster session.
BTW I'm on Madasafish. Excellent customer service, friendly staff who at
least sound as if they give a damn and a fixed IP. There is a god.
Huw
{[ZenmasteR]}
its a technical limit
you might spike higher which is where the upto 40 x speed comes in
if its 70+kb/s on even large downloads then either Madasafish are giving
600+Kbits connection to you or something else is up
--
___________________________________
"Out here on the perimeter there are no stars
Out here we is stoned - immaculate"
___________________________________
Remove XS to reply
Mark
about 57-58k.
"{[ZenmasteR]}" <zenm...@XS.btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:nK8M6.49970$aE1.3...@nnrp4.clara.net...
Philip Cave
system monitor
Carl
"Philip Cave" <philip...@thequizfactory.com> wrote in message
news:9dr9ss$4o$1...@taliesin.netcom.net.uk...
> Not sure about that - I've monitored downloads and seen peaks of 64k on my
> system monitor
>
>
>
> > Yep, plus the overheads of ADSL take another 11% which trims that down
to
> > about 57-58k.
> >
> > "{[ZenmasteR]}" <zenm...@XS.btinternet.com> wrote in message
> > news:nK8M6.49970$aE1.3...@nnrp4.clara.net...
> > > 64kbps is the limit
> > > its a technical limit
> > > you might spike higher which is where the upto 40 x speed comes in
> > > if its 70+kb/s on even large downloads then either Madasafish are
giving
> > > 600+Kbits connection to you or something else is up
IE's download monitoring is not exactly the best, so I wouldn't take what it
claims as gospel.
Remember also that IE starts downloading files as soon as you click the
download button and the connection is made, but only starts the clock when
you tell it where to put the file, depending on the time in between you
doing this this could increase the data rate artificially quite
considerably, even on a quite large download. On 64Kbps ISDN I have
apparently downloaded a 3.7Mb file at over 7.9k/sec, quite impossible.
Also the USB DSL is NOT 512Kbps. It is (I THINK) 584Kbps, which was done by
BT to give a download bandwidth AFTER DSL overheads of 500Kbps. That's why
it's called IPStream 500. Taking into account the TCP/IP overheads,
downloads of 61 - 62 KB/s are possible, indeed I have seen downloads on a
mate's BTO of that rate.
Carl
Philip Cave
I agree that the information on a download screen can easily be
misinterpreted, but the system monitor is very accurate
Special K
"Carl" <x-fac...@NOSPAM.excite.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3b013b1c$1...@news2.vip.uk.com...
Compression at work?
K
Dark Star
It has been stated that ADSL does not, I think with the ATM, have
compression in the tranceving...
Jason
--
јЄКА`АКЄј,ИИ,јЄКА`АКЄј,ИИ,јЄКА`јЄКА`АКЄј,ИИ,јЄКА`АКЄј,ИИ,јЄКА``АКЄј,И
Come to the Temple of Rat. Soon to be opened upon the
worship of all. Sing in praise of Misty, Patch and the baby
Sniff
Fear not heathens for the blessed will rip apart their cage's, hunt
you down unmercifuly and procede to viceously lick your toes off :)
јЄКА`АКЄј,ИИ,јЄКА`АКЄј,ИИ,јЄКА`јЄКА`АКЄј,ИИ,јЄКА`АКЄј,ИИ,јЄКА``АКЄј,И
PuRaTeCh
<david...@ninthwave.co.uk> wrote:
>Had BTOpenworld installed midday yesterday, I was expecting quite a bit of
>trouble due to my ABIT KT7A mobo. Had some inital difficulties installing
>due to a monitored alarm system, BT Engineer was very friendly (although he
>did eat half a packet of cookies & did not demonstrate the system working).
>
>After the engineer left, I attempted to connect, no connection (error 721 in
>DUN) great I thought, what a suprise), tested it on a couple of machines got
>the same result. Phoned BTO helpdesk, on hold 15 minutes about 14.00 the
>line connected, all I can say is wow.
>
>Playing Quake, QuakeII with pings to quake.demon.co.uk at 37 max
<SNIPPED>
Dare i ask what you get at minimum?
Mine hovers around 50-80ms realistically during online play on various
servers. I was reliably informed that the overhead between the home
users pc and "the internet" was 40ms.
A lot of people keep replying in this group and the Unreal Tournament
group saying they get about 45ms.
David Batt
<SNIPPED>
>
> Dare i ask what you get at minimum?
>
> Mine hovers around 50-80ms realistically during online play on various
> servers. I was reliably informed that the overhead between the home
> users pc and "the internet" was 40ms.
>
> A lot of people keep replying in this group and the Unreal Tournament
> group saying they get about 45ms.
The lowest i've seen on my machine is 28ms.
STE
<PuRaTeCh> wrote in message news:30ACO9ciB++Mh7...@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 15 May 2001 10:18:42 +0100, "David Batt"
> >Playing Quake, QuakeII with pings to quake.demon.co.uk at 37 max
> Dare i ask what you get at minimum?
>
> Mine hovers around 50-80ms realistically during online play on various
> servers. I was reliably informed that the overhead between the home
> users pc and "the internet" was 40ms.
>
> A lot of people keep replying in this group and the Unreal Tournament
> group saying they get about 45ms.
I used to get in the 50-80 range with a Pentium 2.450, 128Mb 100Mhz ram.
When I upgraded my Motherboard, memory to 256MB 133Mhz, & CPU to Athlon
1Ghz.
They dropped to closer 40ms on a decent server.
The point being, it surprised me how much a CPU upgrade reduced my ping
time.
STE ;ｬ!
A User
misreport the download speed in most cases.
Thus if you have a true say 64-70kbps true rate, it may temporarily get
mis-reported as 70-90kbps.
Its simply a measurement/calculation error, not a sudden burst of high
speed. Sorry!
Andy
"{[ZenmasteR]}" <zenm...@XS.btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:nK8M6.49970$aE1.3...@nnrp4.clara.net...