From: Digest <deadmail>
To: "OS/2GenAu Digest"<deadmail>
Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 00:01:56 AET-10EDT,10,1,0,7200,4,1,0,7200,3600
Subject: [os2genau_digest] No. 1767
Reply-To: <deadmail>
X-List-Unsubscribe: www.os2site.com/list/

**************************************************
Friday 09 January 2009
 Number  1767
**************************************************

Subjects for today
 
1   Broadband speeds : Dennis Nolan <dennis at jeg-og dot com>
2  Re:  Broadband speeds : Peter Moylan <peter at pmoylan dot org>
3  Re:  Broadband speeds : Ed Durrant <edurrant at durrant dot mine dot nu>
4  Re:  Broadband speeds : Mike O'Connor <mikeoc at internode.on dot net>
5  Re:  Broadband speeds : Peter Moylan <peter at pmoylan dot org>
6  Re:  Broadband speeds : Voytek Eymont" <voytek at sbt dot net dot au>
7   UTF-8 combining characters : Peter Moylan <peter at pmoylan dot org>
8  Re:  Broadband speeds : Peter Moylan <peter at pmoylan dot org>
9  Re:  UTF-8 combining characters : Mike O'Connor <mikeoc at internode.on dot net>
10  Re:  Broadband speeds : Ed Durrant <edurrant at durrant dot mine dot nu>
11  Re:  Broadband speeds : Voytek Eymont" <voytek at sbt dot net dot au>
12  Re:  Broadband speeds : Voytek Eymont" <voytek at sbt dot net dot au>
13  Re:  Broadband speeds : Ed Durrant <edurrant at durrant dot mine dot nu>
14  Re:  Broadband speeds : Ed Durrant <edurrant at durrant dot mine dot nu>
15  Re:  Broadband speeds : Ed Durrant <edurrant at durrant dot mine dot nu>
16  Re:  Broadband speeds : Wayne <smee.wayne at gmail dot com>
17  Re:  Broadband speeds : Peter Moylan <peter at pmoylan dot org>
18  Re:  Broadband speeds : Ken Laurie <ken.laurie at graeleah dot com>

**= Email   1 ==========================**

Date:  Fri, 09 Jan 2009 17:30:13 +1100
From:  Dennis Nolan <dennis at jeg-og dot com>
Subject:   Broadband speeds

Hi everyone

Is the standard ADSL download speed of 1500kbps 1.5mega bytes per second 
or 1.5 mega bits per second.

Thanks in advance

Dennis.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 

**= Email   2 ==========================**

Date:  Fri, 09 Jan 2009 18:06:47 +1100
From:  Peter Moylan <peter at pmoylan dot org>
Subject:  Re:  Broadband speeds

Dennis Nolan wrote:
>
> Is the standard ADSL download speed of 1500kbps 1.5mega bytes per 
> second or 1.5 mega bits per second.
>
Bits.

Rule of thumb: if an application like a web browser is reporting speed, 
then the unit will be (kilo/mega/whatever)BYTES per second. But if 
someone is trying to sell you something, e.g. a new broadband plan, then 
the unit will be whatever-BITS per second, because it sounds better.

Next lesson: what mega- and giga- mean when a hard disk is for sale, 
contrasted with what they mean when you try to put data onto the disk.

-- 
Peter Moylan                          peter at pmoylan dot org
                                      http://www.pmoylan dot org

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 

**= Email   3 ==========================**

Date:  Fri, 09 Jan 2009 18:55:16 +1100
From:  Ed Durrant <edurrant at durrant dot mine dot nu>
Subject:  Re:  Broadband speeds

Peter Moylan wrote:
> Dennis Nolan wrote:
>>
>> Is the standard ADSL download speed of 1500kbps 1.5mega bytes per 
>> second or 1.5 mega bits per second.
>>
> Bits.
>
> Rule of thumb: if an application like a web browser is reporting 
> speed, then the unit will be (kilo/mega/whatever)BYTES per second. But 
> if someone is trying to sell you something, e.g. a new broadband plan, 
> then the unit will be whatever-BITS per second, because it sounds better.
>
> Next lesson: what mega- and giga- mean when a hard disk is for sale, 
> contrasted with what they mean when you try to put data onto the disk.
>
And then there's the difference between MiB and MB and GiB and GB - I 
always thought MiB was an old way of writing MB but its actually a 
different number of Bytes.

Cheers/2

Ed.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 

**= Email   4 ==========================**

Date:  Fri, 09 Jan 2009 18:41:36 +1000
From:  Mike O'Connor <mikeoc at internode.on dot net>
Subject:  Re:  Broadband speeds

Ed Durrant wrote:
> Peter Moylan wrote:
>> Dennis Nolan wrote:
>>> Is the standard ADSL download speed of 1500kbps 1.5mega bytes per 
>>> second or 1.5 mega bits per second.
>>>
>> Bits.
>>
>> Rule of thumb: if an application like a web browser is reporting 
>> speed, then the unit will be (kilo/mega/whatever)BYTES per second. 
>> But if someone is trying to sell you something, e.g. a new broadband 
>> plan, then the unit will be whatever-BITS per second, because it 
>> sounds better.
>>
>> Next lesson: what mega- and giga- mean when a hard disk is for sale, 
>> contrasted with what they mean when you try to put data onto the disk.
>>
> And then there's the difference between MiB and MB and GiB and GB - I 
> always thought MiB was an old way of writing MB but its actually a 
> different number of Bytes.
>
> Cheers/2
>
> Ed.
Hi All,

In the case of e.g. MP3 Devices - an "8GB" from the Manufacturer says 8 
Billion bytes, with Billion defined as 10^9, which is a lot smaller 
(7.45GiB) than 8GiB (8x2^10x2^10x2^10)!
Unlike analogue modem communications, where each 8-bits were accompanied 
by additional start and stop bits (usually these days one of each, but 
may be 1.5 or 2 stop bits on older equipment), one can just divide the  
quoted broadband speed in bits by eight (instead of 10) to get the speed 
in BYTES/sec - standard ADSL is 1536 (down)/256  (up) Kilobits/sec == 
192KBytes/32Kbytes (theoretical). On my upgraded plan with internode I 
notice my 8 megabits/second capacity is divided as 7616 mbps down/ 384 
kbps up, a combined total of 8000 mbps. As my line goes through a 
Telstra RIM, unless and until they upgrade the DSLAMs in it, I'm 
throttled by Telstra to 3 mbps down, but close to the quoted up speed.

Regards,
Mike
Regards,
Mike

-- 
Failed the exam for
--------------------
MCSE - Minesweeper Consultant and Solitaire Expert
--------------------
Personal replies to any of : 
mikeoc (at) internode (dot) on (dot) net
mikeoc (at) austarnet (dot) com (dot) au
majilok (at) gmail (dot) com
[Please ZIP any attachments, other than GIF/JPG or plain-text]
If you are missing a response from me - check Tweed Heads WX status at:
http://www.bom.gov.au/products/IDR663.loop.shtml#skip

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 

**= Email   5 ==========================**

Date:  Fri, 09 Jan 2009 20:58:08 +1100
From:  Peter Moylan <peter at pmoylan dot org>
Subject:  Re:  Broadband speeds

Mike O'Connor wrote:
> On my upgraded plan with internode I notice my 8 megabits/second 
> capacity is divided as 7616 mbps down/ 384 kbps up, a combined total 
> of 8000 mbps. As my line goes through a Telstra RIM, unless and until 
> they upgrade the DSLAMs in it, I'm throttled by Telstra to 3 mbps 
> down, but close to the quoted up speed.
Telstra is driving me crazy. My ISP is Westnet, and I'm on an ADSL2+ 
plan, thanks to the fact that Westnet uses the Optus DSLAMs in my local 
exchange. (There's some speed degradation, but that can be blamed on the 
3 km of copper between me and the exchange.) Now, I'd like to put my 
girlfriend on the same plan, but her exchange has only Telstra DSLAMs, 
which until recently Westnet could not use.

Just the other day a Westnet tech support person said that I could 
upgrade her to ADSL2+, because Westnet now has a deal with Telstra that 
covers her exchange. Aha, but what is the catch? It turns out that 
Westnet offers some (reasonably good) ADSL2 plans for the exchanges that 
have non-Telstra DSLAMs. But for the exchanges that have only Telstra 
DSLAMs the plan cost is $30/month higher than their standard charge. 
Why? Because that's how much more expensive Telstra is. Sorry, love, but 
my girlfriend has to stay on the 512/128 plan.

It's some consolation, I suppose, that the government has punished 
Telstra for its arrogance over the national broadband plan. Still, 
phrases like "first up against the wall when the revolution comes" 
spring to mind. Not the technical people, mind you, assuming that there 
are any left. (My father and brother were both technicians with previous 
brandings of Telstra.) But the sales and management people.

I guess that most people on this list are aware of the Whirlpool forum. 
For those who aren't, Whirlpool is a web site where people can share 
their experience of Australian phone companies and broadband ISPs. And, 
on Whirlpool, the most common answer to the newbie question "Which ISP 
should I choose?" is "Anyone except Telstra and Optus". I'd modify that 
slightly. Optus is slightly evil. Telstra is the Microsoft of evil.

(In case anyone wonders: I chose Westnet because it was one of only 
three ISPs considered worth considering for anyone running their own 
servers. And I continue to be impressed that Westnet hires tech support 
people who know what they're talking about. I've even had intelligent 
answers to VoIP questions, despite the fact that VoIP is a competitor 
that reduces the company's income.)

-- 
Peter Moylan                          peter at pmoylan dot org
                                      http://www.pmoylan dot org

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 

**= Email   6 ==========================**

Date:  Fri, 9 Jan 2009 21:09:05 +1100 (EST)
From:  "Voytek Eymont" <voytek at sbt dot net dot au>
Subject:  Re:  Broadband speeds


<quote who="Peter Moylan">

> non-Telstra DSLAMs. But for the exchanges that have only Telstra DSLAMs
> the plan cost is $30/month higher than their standard charge. Why? Because
> that's how much more expensive Telstra is. Sorry, love, but my girlfriend
> has to stay on the 512/128 plan.

AAPT advised me few weeks ago their charges are going up, as, their
provider put up their costs....

what used to be a good deal (12GB at 512/128 for $39) is not so good
anymore... I should really go to 2+, anyhow, 128 doesn't cut it for VOIP
too well...


-- 
Voytek

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
**= Email   7 ==========================**

Date:  Fri, 09 Jan 2009 21:18:56 +1100
From:  Peter Moylan <peter at pmoylan dot org>
Subject:   UTF-8 combining characters

This is the wrong forum for this question, I know, but I don't know who 
else to ask. It's about a nonstandard quirk of the OS/2 rendering of the 
UTF-8 character set. Maybe someone will know where I should really send 
this question.

UTF-8 defines a set of "combining characters" that are used to provide 
things like accented characters. For example, to produce the character 
"è" you can produce the character "e", followed by the code for the 
accent. It's essentially the same as having an "overstrike" facility on 
a keyboard. It's clear in the standard that these "combining accent" 
characters are /postfix/ operators. That is, first you have the code for 
the letter, and then you have the code for the accent. I know that 
intuitively obvious "overstrike" logic would make you produce the accent 
first, but that's not how the standard works.

I have an application (displaying a family tree in web pages) that needs 
those accents, mostly (in my case) for French names. I've implemented 
it, and it works perfectly for the case of an OS/2 server and a Windows 
client. Unfortunately, for the case of an OS/2 server and a 
Firefox-on-OS/2 client, the accents end up in the wrong place. See, for 
example, <URL:http://www.pmoylan dot org/cgi-bin/wft.cmd?D=moylan&P=I009>, 
where the accent on my daughter's name "Mélanie" ends up on the "l" 
rather than on the "e" where it belongs. It's pretty obvious that the 
font rendering engine for the OS/2 version of Firefox is interpreting 
the combining characters as /prefix/ codes rather than the /postfix/ 
codes that the UTF-8 specification requires.

Now, since I have complete control over the CGI code that is producing 
these web pages, I have the option of implementing code of the form
     if browser platform = OS/2 then
          generate the accent codes /before/ the affected character;
     else
         generate the standard UTF-8 codes;
     endif;

The catch is this: given that the OS/2 version of Firefox is a port of 
the Windows version, is there any way of detecting that the client is 
using the buggy OS/2 UTF-8 implementation?

-- 
Peter Moylan                          peter at pmoylan dot org
                                      http://www.pmoylan dot org

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 

**= Email   8 ==========================**

Date:  Fri, 09 Jan 2009 21:26:07 +1100
From:  Peter Moylan <peter at pmoylan dot org>
Subject:  Re:  Broadband speeds

Voytek Eymont wrote:

>  I should really go to 2+, anyhow, 128 doesn't cut it for VOIP too
>  well...

Amen to that. VoIP is supposed to work in the 512/128 case, but it 
doesn't really. My partner describes it as the "washing machine". ("I've 
got the washing machine. Can you hang up and call me back?" This is a 
code phrase meaning that I can hear her, but she can't hear me; all she 
hears is a cyclic sound that does indeed sound like a washing machine.)

We tolerate it because a VoIP re-dial is still cheaper than a standard 
phone call. (In fact between her and me it's free, because we're with 
the same company.) It's still a nuisance, though. The thing that made 
VoIP work for me was a switch from 512/128 to an ADSL2+ plan.

-- 
Peter Moylan                          peter at pmoylan dot org
                                      http://www.pmoylan dot org

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 

**= Email   9 ==========================**

Date:  Fri, 09 Jan 2009 20:32:33 +1000
From:  Mike O'Connor <mikeoc at internode.on dot net>
Subject:  Re:  UTF-8 combining characters

Peter Moylan wrote:
> This is the wrong forum for this question, I know, but I don't know 
> who else to ask. It's about a nonstandard quirk of the OS/2 rendering 
> of the UTF-8 character set. Maybe someone will know where I should 
> really send this question.
>
> UTF-8 defines a set of "combining characters" that are used to provide 
> things like accented characters. For example, to produce the character 
> "è" you can produce the character "e", followed by the code for the 
> accent. It's essentially the same as having an "overstrike" facility 
> on a keyboard. It's clear in the standard that these "combining 
> accent" characters are /postfix/ operators. That is, first you have 
> the code for the letter, and then you have the code for the accent. I 
> know that intuitively obvious "overstrike" logic would make you 
> produce the accent first, but that's not how the standard works.
>
> I have an application (displaying a family tree in web pages) that 
> needs those accents, mostly (in my case) for French names. I've 
> implemented it, and it works perfectly for the case of an OS/2 server 
> and a Windows client. Unfortunately, for the case of an OS/2 server 
> and a Firefox-on-OS/2 client, the accents end up in the wrong place. 
> See, for example, 
> <URL:http://www.pmoylan dot org/cgi-bin/wft.cmd?D=moylan&P=I009>, where 
> the accent on my daughter's name "Mélanie" ends up on the "l" rather 
> than on the "e" where it belongs. It's pretty obvious that the font 
> rendering engine for the OS/2 version of Firefox is interpreting the 
> combining characters as /prefix/ codes rather than the /postfix/ codes 
> that the UTF-8 specification requires.
>
> Now, since I have complete control over the CGI code that is producing 
> these web pages, I have the option of implementing code of the form
>     if browser platform = OS/2 then
>          generate the accent codes /before/ the affected character;
>     else
>         generate the standard UTF-8 codes;
>     endif;
>
> The catch is this: given that the OS/2 version of Firefox is a port of 
> the Windows version, is there any way of detecting that the client is 
> using the buggy OS/2 UTF-8 implementation?
>
Hi Peter,

Sorry I can't help with the above - but on a semi-related point whilst 
helping an (OS/2) friend in the US attempt to remove a screwed up (very 
CPU-intensive) directory containing accented French characters - I came 
across Alex Taylor's handy Context/2 application on os2site dot com. This is 
a manual codepage/codepage changer e.g. includes [1207] PMUnicode and 
[1208] UTF-8 Unicode, and a whole heap of other codepages. A very useful 
tool!

http://www.os2site dot com/sw/util/international/context_04.zip

Regards,
Mike

-- 
Failed the exam for
--------------------
MCSE - Minesweeper Consultant and Solitaire Expert
--------------------
Personal replies to any of : 
mikeoc (at) internode (dot) on (dot) net
mikeoc (at) austarnet (dot) com (dot) au
majilok (at) gmail (dot) com
[Please ZIP any attachments, other than GIF/JPG or plain-text]
If you are missing a response from me - check Tweed Heads WX status at:
http://www.bom.gov.au/products/IDR663.loop.shtml#skip

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 

**= Email   10 ==========================**

Date:  Fri, 09 Jan 2009 21:48:31 +1100
From:  Ed Durrant <edurrant at durrant dot mine dot nu>
Subject:  Re:  Broadband speeds

Peter Moylan wrote:
> Voytek Eymont wrote:
>
>>  I should really go to 2+, anyhow, 128 doesn't cut it for VOIP too
>>  well...
>
> Amen to that. VoIP is supposed to work in the 512/128 case, but it 
> doesn't really. My partner describes it as the "washing machine". 
> ("I've got the washing machine. Can you hang up and call me back?" 
> This is a code phrase meaning that I can hear her, but she can't hear 
> me; all she hears is a cyclic sound that does indeed sound like a 
> washing machine.)
>
> We tolerate it because a VoIP re-dial is still cheaper than a standard 
> phone call. (In fact between her and me it's free, because we're with 
> the same company.) It's still a nuisance, though. The thing that made 
> VoIP work for me was a switch from 512/128 to an ADSL2+ plan.
>
I've used VOIP for several years now using different VSPs and I echo the 
fact that in 128K uplink, forget it - this is all that was originally 
offered on Bigpond cable after they cancelled the (I think) 2Mb/s / 
2Mb/s business service that I had paid for and siad they had "upgraded" 
to an 8Mb/s / 128Kb/s service ! Once you get to 256Kb/s uplink you can 
reliably run 2 VOIP calls consistantly, in fact at one point I had 3 
calls going - two from ATAs and one soft client. I presume you both use 
hardware ATAs and normal telephones, VOIP software clients (which there 
aren't any for OS/2) are a real compromise and very rarely work 
reliaibly in my experience.

I'm on ADSL2+ now and have the luxury of 1Mb/s uplink and 20Mb/s down (I 
only live about 500 metres from the exchange).

Cheers/2

Ed.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 

**= Email   11 ==========================**

Date:  Fri, 9 Jan 2009 21:53:10 +1100 (EST)
From:  "Voytek Eymont" <voytek at sbt dot net dot au>
Subject:  Re:  Broadband speeds


<quote who="Peter Moylan">
> Voytek Eymont wrote:
>
>
>> I should really go to 2+, anyhow, 128 doesn't cut it for VOIP too
>> well...
>
> Amen to that. VoIP is supposed to work in the 512/128 case, but it
> doesn't really.

Peter,

well, I think, depending on what codec you're using, it will wants 70k up,
with 128, there is not much left free.......

so, with no PC on the wire, it probably would work quite well...

[mind you, a friend of mine in Sydney is on DIAL UP, yes, modem dial up,
he leaves PC on dial up all day, and, uses Skype-out to make local calls,
he claims it work well,,,?]



-- 
Voytek

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
**= Email   12 ==========================**

Date:  Fri, 9 Jan 2009 22:03:03 +1100 (EST)
From:  "Voytek Eymont" <voytek at sbt dot net dot au>
Subject:  Re:  Broadband speeds


<quote who="Ed Durrant">

> I've used VOIP for several years now using different VSPs and I echo the
> fact that in 128K uplink, forget it - this is all that was originally
> offered on Bigpond cable after they cancelled the (I think) 2Mb/s / 2Mb/s
> business service that I had paid for and siad they had "upgraded" to an
> 8Mb/s / 128Kb/s service !

128 without a PC to clutter the line will do;
I use 128, as long as there is no PC (user or other) WAN activity, it
works remarkable well


 Once you get to 256Kb/s uplink you can
> reliably run 2 VOIP calls consistantly, in fact at one point I had 3 calls
> going - two from ATAs and one soft client. I presume you both use hardware
> ATAs and normal telephones, VOIP software clients (which there


I have two Linksys/Sipura ATAs for total of 3 voice lines, with cordless
phone , and analogue modem/PMfax and cordless phone on 2nd line;

one ATM is locked to VOIP provider (mynetfone), second one is set to dial
local via mynetfone, o/seas via euro provider



-- 
Voytek

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
**= Email   13 ==========================**

Date:  Fri, 09 Jan 2009 22:04:33 +1100
From:  Ed Durrant <edurrant at durrant dot mine dot nu>
Subject:  Re:  Broadband speeds

Peter Moylan wrote:
> Mike O'Connor wrote:
>> On my upgraded plan with internode I notice my 8 megabits/second 
>> capacity is divided as 7616 mbps down/ 384 kbps up, a combined total 
>> of 8000 mbps. As my line goes through a Telstra RIM, unless and until 
>> they upgrade the DSLAMs in it, I'm throttled by Telstra to 3 mbps 
>> down, but close to the quoted up speed.
> Telstra is driving me crazy. My ISP is Westnet, and I'm on an ADSL2+ 
> plan, thanks to the fact that Westnet uses the Optus DSLAMs in my 
> local exchange. (There's some speed degradation, but that can be 
> blamed on the 3 km of copper between me and the exchange.) Now, I'd 
> like to put my girlfriend on the same plan, but her exchange has only 
> Telstra DSLAMs, which until recently Westnet could not use.
>
> Just the other day a Westnet tech support person said that I could 
> upgrade her to ADSL2+, because Westnet now has a deal with Telstra 
> that covers her exchange. Aha, but what is the catch? It turns out 
> that Westnet offers some (reasonably good) ADSL2 plans for the 
> exchanges that have non-Telstra DSLAMs. But for the exchanges that 
> have only Telstra DSLAMs the plan cost is $30/month higher than their 
> standard charge. Why? Because that's how much more expensive Telstra 
> is. Sorry, love, but my girlfriend has to stay on the 512/128 plan.
>
> It's some consolation, I suppose, that the government has punished 
> Telstra for its arrogance over the national broadband plan. Still, 
> phrases like "first up against the wall when the revolution comes" 
> spring to mind. Not the technical people, mind you, assuming that 
> there are any left. (My father and brother were both technicians with 
> previous brandings of Telstra.) But the sales and management people.
>
> I guess that most people on this list are aware of the Whirlpool 
> forum. For those who aren't, Whirlpool is a web site where people can 
> share their experience of Australian phone companies and broadband 
> ISPs. And, on Whirlpool, the most common answer to the newbie question 
> "Which ISP should I choose?" is "Anyone except Telstra and Optus". I'd 
> modify that slightly. Optus is slightly evil. Telstra is the Microsoft 
> of evil.
>
> (In case anyone wonders: I chose Westnet because it was one of only 
> three ISPs considered worth considering for anyone running their own 
> servers. And I continue to be impressed that Westnet hires tech 
> support people who know what they're talking about. I've even had 
> intelligent answers to VoIP questions, despite the fact that VoIP is a 
> competitor that reduces the company's income.)
>
To run against the stream of opinion, apart from them switching plans on 
me when I was on cable, I really have not had any particularly bad 
experiences with Telstra - in fact when I moved here to the Central 
Coast, it was a local commercial Wireless company and Optus that let me 
down promising connectivity and then not delivering, leaving me high and 
dry. I had a Telstra ADSL 2+ connection in and operational in under 3 days !

There's no question they are more expensive than they should be but 
looking at the situation from their side, putting in and running all the 
infrastructure and then being forced by law to sell the service out to 
competitors at a lower price than it cost them to put it in and have 
their competitors take business from them,  ain't fair either ! That's 
why they stopped rolling out ADSL 2+ for some time, having been burnt by 
the government on the ADSL infrastructure.

At least Optus used to put in and maintain their TV and data cables from 
their buildings to the customers houses (I don't know if they do any 
more, given that Optus now sell Foxtel !). Many other ISPs  ride on the 
back of either Telstra or Optus infrastructure, Internode being about 
the only one that comes to mind that doesn't use other peoples DSLAMs 
but they still use the Telstra owned copper connections to the customers 
house as do Optus for their ADSL services.

Looking at the price reductions and performance increase of 3G data 
networks I suspect before long this will replace using the telephone 
cables for internet connectivity. it already has in the UK, my sister 
has found it cheaper to go to a 3G plan with Vodafone rather than use 
ADSL1, she gets better performance more downloads and mobility of the 
connection - she simply has a USB dongle and plugs it either into her 
desktop or laptop as needed.

Cheers/2

Ed.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 

**= Email   14 ==========================**

Date:  Fri, 09 Jan 2009 22:17:26 +1100
From:  Ed Durrant <edurrant at durrant dot mine dot nu>
Subject:  Re:  Broadband speeds

Voytek Eymont wrote:
> <quote who="Ed Durrant">
>
>   
>> I've used VOIP for several years now using different VSPs and I echo the
>> fact that in 128K uplink, forget it - this is all that was originally
>> offered on Bigpond cable after they cancelled the (I think) 2Mb/s / 2Mb/s
>> business service that I had paid for and siad they had "upgraded" to an
>> 8Mb/s / 128Kb/s service !
>>     
>
> 128 without a PC to clutter the line will do;
> I use 128, as long as there is no PC (user or other) WAN activity, it
> works remarkable well
>
>
>  Once you get to 256Kb/s uplink you can
>   
>> reliably run 2 VOIP calls consistantly, in fact at one point I had 3 calls
>> going - two from ATAs and one soft client. I presume you both use hardware
>> ATAs and normal telephones, VOIP software clients (which there
>>     
>
>
> I have two Linksys/Sipura ATAs for total of 3 voice lines, with cordless
> phone , and analogue modem/PMfax and cordless phone on 2nd line;
>
> one ATM is locked to VOIP provider (mynetfone), second one is set to dial
> local via mynetfone, o/seas via euro provider
>
>
>
>   
Yes also with MNF - by the way, I guess you know about their global 
connect service, where if for any reason you need to call abroad and 
either your voip equipment isn't working or you're away from home, you 
can call into a local number and call through to anywhere at the same 
rates as you do from home as long as you have registered your alternate 
phone (landline or mobile) in your account. It's a very good service for 
no extra charge - if you have a mynetfone account you get the service. 
What is really crazy is my local number to call in, is in the same 
suburb ! I don't know how that happenned, I suspect one of their 
managers must live around here.

Oh, and I'm sure you know, the cheapest way to get a MNF account is if 
you have a Whirlpool web site account.

Cheers/2

Ed.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 

**= Email   15 ==========================**

Date:  Fri, 09 Jan 2009 22:19:08 +1100
From:  Ed Durrant <edurrant at durrant dot mine dot nu>
Subject:  Re:  Broadband speeds

Voytek Eymont wrote:
> <quote who="Ed Durrant">
>
>   
>> I've used VOIP for several years now using different VSPs and I echo the
>> fact that in 128K uplink, forget it - this is all that was originally
>> offered on Bigpond cable after they cancelled the (I think) 2Mb/s / 2Mb/s
>> business service that I had paid for and siad they had "upgraded" to an
>> 8Mb/s / 128Kb/s service !
>>     
>
> 128 without a PC to clutter the line will do;
> I use 128, as long as there is no PC (user or other) WAN activity, it
> works remarkable well
>
>
>  Once you get to 256Kb/s uplink you can
>   
>> reliably run 2 VOIP calls consistantly, in fact at one point I had 3 calls
>> going - two from ATAs and one soft client. I presume you both use hardware
>> ATAs and normal telephones, VOIP software clients (which there
>>     
>
>
> I have two Linksys/Sipura ATAs for total of 3 voice lines, with cordless
> phone , and analogue modem/PMfax and cordless phone on 2nd line;
>
> one ATM is locked to VOIP provider (mynetfone), second one is set to dial
> local via mynetfone, o/seas via euro provider
>
>
>
>   
Yes also with MNF - by the way, I guess you know about their global 
connect service, where if for any reason you need to call abroad and 
either your voip equipment isn't working or you're away from home, you 
can call into a local number and call through to anywhere at the same 
rates as you do from home as long as you have registered your alternate 
phone (landline or mobile) in your account. It's a very good service for 
no extra charge - if you have a mynetfone account you get the service. 
What is really crazy is my local number to call in, is in the same 
suburb ! I don't know how that happenned, I suspect one of their 
managers must live around here.

Oh, and I'm sure you know, the cheapest way to get a MNF account is if 
you have a Whirlpool web site account.

Cheers/2

Ed.

P.S.  It's a shame you cant call from one VOIP provider to another  from 
Australian VSPs as I think you can in the US and Europe - that would 
then soon mean free phone calls to friends, family and businesses 
worldwide.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 

**= Email   16 ==========================**

Date:  Fri, 9 Jan 2009 20:56:16
From:  Wayne <smee.wayne at gmail dot com>
Subject:  Re:  Broadband speeds

** Reply to note from Dennis Nolan <dennis at jeg-og dot com> Fri, 09 Jan 2009 17:30:13 +1100
>   
> Hi everyone
>   
> Is the standard ADSL download speed of 1500kbps 1.5mega bytes per second 
> or 1.5 mega bits per second.
>   
> Thanks in advance
>   
> Dennis.
>   

As a general rule, b = bits & B = bytes.  A real rule is M = mega but m =
milli ie. divide by 1000

Cheers
Wayne 


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 

**= Email   17 ==========================**

Date:  Fri, 09 Jan 2009 22:37:51 +1100
From:  Peter Moylan <peter at pmoylan dot org>
Subject:  Re:  Broadband speeds

Ed Durrant wrote:
>
> There's no question they [Telstra] are more expensive than they should 
> be but looking at the situation from their side, putting in and 
> running all the infrastructure and then being forced by law to sell 
> the service out to competitors at a lower price than it cost them to 
> put it in and have their competitors take business from them,  ain't 
> fair either ! That's why they stopped rolling out ADSL 2+ for some 
> time, having been burnt by the government on the ADSL infrastructure.
Yes, I agree to that. The whole issue of privatisation of public 
services has been screwed up by the bureaucrats who seem to assume that 
the engineering cost of doing something is zero, and that everything can 
be worked out in terms of social cost. The truth is that the telephone 
wossnames, or perhaps it was the hair stylists, really should have been 
the first ones up against the wall.

-- 
Peter Moylan                          peter at pmoylan dot org
                                      http://www.pmoylan dot org

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 

**= Email   18 ==========================**

Date:  Fri, 09 Jan 2009 23:15:24 +1100
From:  Ken Laurie <ken.laurie at graeleah dot com>
Subject:  Re:  Broadband speeds

Ed Durrant wrote:
> Voytek Eymont wrote:
>> <quote who="Ed Durrant">
>>
>>  
>>> I've used VOIP for several years now using different VSPs and I echo 
>>> the
>>> fact that in 128K uplink, forget it - this is all that was originally
>>> offered on Bigpond cable after they cancelled the (I think) 2Mb/s / 
>>> 2Mb/s
>>> business service that I had paid for and siad they had "upgraded" to an
>>> 8Mb/s / 128Kb/s service !
>>>     
>>
>> 128 without a PC to clutter the line will do;
>> I use 128, as long as there is no PC (user or other) WAN activity, it
>> works remarkable well
>>
>>
>>  Once you get to 256Kb/s uplink you can
>>  
>>> reliably run 2 VOIP calls consistantly, in fact at one point I had 3 
>>> calls
>>> going - two from ATAs and one soft client. I presume you both use 
>>> hardware
>>> ATAs and normal telephones, VOIP software clients (which there
>>>     
>>
>>
>> I have two Linksys/Sipura ATAs for total of 3 voice lines, with cordless
>> phone , and analogue modem/PMfax and cordless phone on 2nd line;
>>
>> one ATM is locked to VOIP provider (mynetfone), second one is set to 
>> dial
>> local via mynetfone, o/seas via euro provider
>>
>>
>>
>>   
> Yes also with MNF - by the way, I guess you know about their global 
> connect service, where if for any reason you need to call abroad and 
> either your voip equipment isn't working or you're away from home, you 
> can call into a local number and call through to anywhere at the same 
> rates as you do from home as long as you have registered your 
> alternate phone (landline or mobile) in your account. It's a very good 
> service for no extra charge - if you have a mynetfone account you get 
> the service. What is really crazy is my local number to call in, is in 
> the same suburb ! I don't know how that happenned, I suspect one of 
> their managers must live around here.
>
> Oh, and I'm sure you know, the cheapest way to get a MNF account is if 
> you have a Whirlpool web site account.
>
> Cheers/2
>
> Ed.
>
Just to add my two cents worth on voip. I use Pennytel and get local and 
overseas (UK, USA/Canada, China and Singapore) calls for 8 cents 
untimed. Pennytel also have a 1800 number that I provide to the 
relatives so that they can call us from interstate or overseas for the 
cost of a local call. They also have a number that you ring when access 
to the internet is not possible, that allows you to make a phone call at 
the same call rate. I took up their offer of an ATA for $68.88 that came 
with a $50.00 call credit. The ATA is locked to their network for 6 months.

As I now use Linux for my proxy (needed to learn a bit more about it) I 
found that by providing voip with guaranteed bandwidth I can be flat out 
downloading on my Transact (Velocity) 8mb cable connection without 
disturbing my voip phone calls.

regards
Ken
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 

