Re: 288 to 336

Bill Mikulic (
Wed, 17 Apr 1996 19:14:30 -0700


I agree with nearly everything.

One point, many ISPs are regional providers. These types are usually on the
edge of profitability, consequently their equipment is sometimes not top
quality to begin. And with AT&T and MCI offering internet access these
regional providers are on the endangered species list; proceed with caution,
if a small provider goes under it will do so w\o warning & may take your
data with them!

The POTS has a theoretical limit of 35kbs.

On the west coast, using CRL (who is on the Internet backbone, using several
T-3 lines) I ALWAYS connect at 28.8, using an AT&T Dataport Express modem;
both cheaper and more reliable than the junk from USR. Of course one could
opt for a Courier at twice the price!

As for responsiveness and data rates, two things have impact. Your baby bell
and the former mentioned ISPs. For instance, Pacific Bell recently installed
an ATM switch that is an order of magnitude faster. Email that once took a
day now many times is delivered in minutes. If an ISP is overloaded, their
servers will be unresponsive. It doesn't matter how fast your connection is.
A responsible ISP should probably use Sun servers, typically one server
dedicated to one task, i.e. mail, news, web...

Beware of ISDN, many of the routers now being used only support 56kbs per
channel, not the full (American standard) 64kbs, consequently you will only
get 112kbs. BYW, it Europe its 144kbs.


At 04:00 PM 4/15/96 +0000, Leslie McCLure wrote:
>> David I. Sommers, Ph.D. wrote:
>> > I upgraded ny Sportster from 288 to 336 and now consistently log-on at
>> > It seems to me that the limiting factor is how the ISP is set up rather
than anyt
>> >
>> > David Sommers
>> Greetings:
>> This is unfortunate as I cannot see how ANY ISP would want to limit the
B/W of
>> their customers?!? Maybe, if you can try out other ISP locations with
28.8 baud
>> support, you will see the difference.
>An ISP pays for T1 connections a a very high rate. You can only get
>so much bandwidth from a T1 which means you can only get so many
>people on at a given time. The more people the more money, a cold
>hard fact of life.
>Also when you are spending $150 to $200 for A single modem it is
>quite easy to afford to be on the highest cutting edge of technology.
>When you spend nearly that much money but are buying 100 to 200 or
>more modems to meet your customers demands, then the cutting edge
>gets dulled by business common sense.
>Also, Ascend, on of the major players in the ISP router game, has
>problems connecting with and sustaining connections to, 28,800 bps
>modems using a Rockwell chip. Most providers that are using this
>have found that they can support connections to these modems at
>26,400 and have adjusted their systems to do so.
>Also, the local telephone system where you are located only has so
>much bandwidth in their local loop. With the growth of Internet
>usage and the number of people that simply use the telephone, the
>telcos have not been able to increase their physical plant rapidly
>enough the handle the volume. And with the new deregulations that
>allow anyone to provide local call service, don't expect a rush to go
>out and do it till the dust settles.
>Within a year to eighteen months you will be connecting to the
>Internet through you present TV cable or a celluar phone type
>connection. When these come about you will be reaching speeds that
>will rival the LAN speed in any office in town. Believe it or not,
>even the vaunted 33,600 modems are outdated and obsolete. Even if
>the technology wasn't changing so fast, ISPs are not going to throw
>serious money into modems when the future is so shakey.
>And no modem connects faster than the modem on the answering end.