[CLUE-Tech] Ricochet is in Denver

[Frank Whiteley]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeremiah Stanley" <lists at miah.org>
To: <clue-tech at clue.denver.co.us>
Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2002 11:04 AM
Subject: Re: [CLUE-Tech] Ricochet is in Denver


> > OK, so how does this compare to my AT&T Broadband connection?  (with
> > which, by the way, I've been pretty happy)
> >
> > I stopped paying attention to what AT&T claims is the maximum download
> > speed.  Has anyone here with a cable modem actually painstakingly
> > measured what kind of performance they're getting?
>
> One thing to keep in mind is that there is a difference between Kbps and
> Kb. This is a marketing discrimination that distorts what they are
> advertising. A Kb is a 1024 bits per second, while a Kpbs is one eigth
> that size or 0.125 Kb. This explains why modems are 56k but pull about
> 6-7k/sec.
>
> /* this was how it was explained to me. Post if you have a better
> explanation for how modems work for different services. */
>
> The numbers that Ricochet are advertising would be just faster than a
> 144k DSL line. My 256k DSL I had would pull about 40k/s max at any time
> of day so I'd say that a 176k Ricochet service would so somewhere to the
> tune of 25-30k/sec. At another place in Arvada my cable modem pulled
> about 300k/sec (YMMV dep on area). So, cable is by far the "faster"
> service (not counting ping times, etc.). I'll see if I can dig out my
> MRTG records from about a year ago and post them.
>
> The thing that makes Ricochet cool is that it will be a fantastic last
> mile provider as they don't lay any cables. From where I live now I can
> see peoples houses that can get DSL and digital cable service but my
> property is unavailable for those services. I'm yearning for Ricochet to
> get to my area (according to their website, were covered but not turned
> on yet on the network). At my old apartment the Ricochet box nearest
> that location was mounted about fifteen feet outside my window. Too bad
> I moved!
>
> JStanley
>
I think the bigger issue is whether the service is half or full duplex.
This will have the greater impact on throughput.  256K wireless at
half-duplex is a lot like ISDN speeds.  The 400kbps burst claim sounds like
compression, which is fine for flat ASCII files but doesn't do a lot for
compressed web formats like jpgs and gifs.  Is it truly burstable to
400kbps?

I couldn't find anything on their page to indicate that either full or half
duplex is employed, so I'm curious about what's not being said until the
tech and system information.  Anyone know for sure?

Frank Whiteley
Greeley