Watchdog Clueless Broadband Segment

[Sasahara]

Currently the "Expert" presenter is teaching the stupid how to setup a wireless network.

But the main feature is people not getting the top speed.
Do these dim wit experts still not understand basic ADSL tech, so the "up to speed" is perfectly valid? :/

Anyone can check before they order what bandwidth/speed they are likely to receive and that is normally accurate unless they is a major problem with their phone line.

NB: I dislike the use of speed, as (I assume most people here know) the bits of information are arriving at the same speed, it's just the quantity that's lower. But trying to explaining this to the average Joe is hard when we have TV program and the providers calling it speed is hard.

 

[ultralaser]

NB: I dislike the use of speed, as (I assume most people here know) the bits of information are arriving at the same speed, it's just the quantity that's lower. But trying to explaining this to the average Joe is hard when we have TV program and the providers calling it speed is hard.

So someone using satellite broadband has "bits of information" arriving at the same speed as someone using a fibre connection. Interesting........

 

[( |-| |2 ][ $]

Completely agree with you on the first point. The current system is fine and correct.

Regarding your second point about disliking the use of speed. You can dislike it if you want but it doesn't mean that speed is the wrong word to describe Mbps.

 

[Hilly]

there needs to be a percentage of the speed you can get; for example I have a 160mb line and during the evenings due to over subscription I usually get about 20mb; which is pitiful. Under current rules I have no place for argument, as it's "up too" which is too vague for it to be a useful guideline.

 

[adolf hamster]

In terms of speed being a rate of things happening then its accurate, i get what you mean though that the rate of continuous download and ping are seperate things

 

[Sasahara]

So someone using satellite broadband has "bits of information" arriving at the same speed as someone using a fibre connection. Interesting........

Thanks for your amazing knowledge on satellite data connections. Tell me what that has to do with ADSL? Are you one of watchdogs "experts", that would explain things.

 

[Ste59w]

the bits of information are arriving at the same speed, it's just the quantity that's lower.

lol what?

 

[Pawnless Endgame]

In b4 Rory Cellan-Jones

 

[Django x2]

lol what?

Don't you know? A car travelling from A to B at 160mph will get to B at the same time as two cars travelling at 200mph

 

[Ste59w]

Don't you know? A car travelling from A to B at 160mph will get to B at the same time as two cars travelling at 200mph

Only if the two cars have to pass through the Van Allen radiation belt though.....don't you know the formula bro

 

[ultralaser]

So someone using satellite broadband has "bits of information" arriving at the same speed as someone using a fibre connection. Interesting........

But you said "Currently the "Expert" presenter is teaching the stupid how to setup a wireless network."

A wireless network could have all sorts of gateways, ADSL, Satellite, 3g/4g, dialup etc.... Even if your talking what we know as ADSL connections, we don't all receive packets at the same speed, different physical layers can generate very different latency, you'll see that will latency differences between ADSL2 and fibre to the home. The fundamental idea that if your using ADSL then you all have identical latency seems very odd to me

 

[Ste59w]

Just to put this to rest.

You will receive bits at the same speed. The speed of light of course.

They will arrive at a different time however depending on the factors you mentioned

 

[Nanoman]

If you move your bits faster, will it come at the same speed?

 

[Ste59w]

If you jiggle your bits in front of the router it has been known

 

[dowie]

Regarding your second point about disliking the use of speed. You can dislike it if you want but it doesn't mean that speed is the wrong word to describe Mbps.

that is true that him disliking the use of the word doesn't mean it is the wrong word

however it is still essentially the wrong word regardless of his liking/disliking of it

 

[Malevolence]

Ah, but what if you bend the cable. The bits then have further to travel.

 

[Ste59w]

that is true that him disliking the use of the word doesn't mean it is the wrong word

however it is still essentially the wrong word regardless of his liking/disliking of it

Speed is not the wrong word to describe Mbps.

Mbps is the same thing as miles per hour (MPH). Both are measurements of speed.

 

[Kenai]

Speed is not the wrong word to describe Mbps.

Mbps is the same thing as miles per hour (MPH). Both are measurements of speed.

If you want to be picky, one is speed, one is a data rate more akin to flow volumes than speed or velocity.

Generally speed would be defined as time related to distance, megabits aren't units of distance, so can't really constitute a speed.

 

[Ste59w]

There's no need to be picky, mbps is a measurement of speed full stop.

The distance you think is missing isn't, it's the distance between source and destination, with mbps measuring how many bits can get from point A to B in a certain amount of time.

 

[Kenai]

There's no need to be picky, mbps is a measurement of speed full stop.

The distance you think is missing isn't, it's the distance between source and destination, with mbps measuring how many bits can get from point A to B in a certain amount of time.

That's an incredibly odd way to look at it. Data rate isn't speed. You even say it yourself Mbps is a measure of how many bits can travel, not how fast they are travelling.

You can't (generally) have a measurement of speed without distance in the units. A megabit isn't a distance