Filemaker 7 on a Qwest wireless modem

I'm using a hosted Filemaker 7 database on 4 Macs. I've got 1.5M DSL
coming through a Qwest Actiontec (GT701WG) then into a router. 2 of
the Macs are hardwired and 2 are wireless. Each Mac loses
"Communication with Host" anywhere from 1-6 times a day. I think some
of the crashes are simultaneous, but not all of them. This started
happening when we switched service, but I can't nail it down to the DSL
provider, the ISP, the modem, or the aurora borealis (the router and
the host are the same). Tech support at the provider and ISP have been
of little use.

Has anyone had similar experiences? How much interruption does a
Filemaker db need in order to drop out? How much interrption is
expected from this modem, hardwired or wireless?

Thanks,

G

In article <(E-Mail Removed) .com>, "Grip" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>I'm using a hosted Filemaker 7 database on 4 Macs. I've got 1.5M DSL
>coming through a Qwest Actiontec (GT701WG) then into a router. 2 of
>the Macs are hardwired and 2 are wireless. Each Mac loses
>"Communication with Host" anywhere from 1-6 times a day. I think some
>of the crashes are simultaneous, but not all of them. This started
>happening when we switched service, but I can't nail it down to the DSL
>provider, the ISP, the modem, or the aurora borealis (the router and
>the host are the same). Tech support at the provider and ISP have been
>of little use.
>
>Has anyone had similar experiences? How much interruption does a
>Filemaker db need in order to drop out? How much interrption is
>expected from this modem, hardwired or wireless?
>
>Thanks,
>
>G
>

If all that changed was the ISP then I suspect dropped packets between you
and the ISP. Are you sure this is the only thing to change?

fundamentalism, fundamentally wrong.

We changed three things. We switched to DSL with a big name company
that starts with a Q. We switched our ISP is a small local company.
And we installed a new modem.

G

In article <(E-Mail Removed) .com>, "Grip" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>We changed three things. We switched to DSL with a big name company
>that starts with a Q. We switched our ISP is a small local company.
>And we installed a new modem.
>
>G
>

So you are getting DSL and ISP from different vendors, mistake IMO. Now
each can point the finger at the other when issues like this pop up.

fundamentalism, fundamentally wrong.

In article <q37Hf.2241$(E-Mail Removed)>, rico_001
@hotmail.com says...
> In article <(E-Mail Removed) .com>, "Grip" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >We changed three things. We switched to DSL with a big name company
> >that starts with a Q. We switched our ISP is a small local company.
> >And we installed a new modem.
> >
> >G
> >
>
> So you are getting DSL and ISP from different vendors, mistake IMO.

I disagree. That's like suggesting people should all use MS Access
because it's made by Microsoft, the dominant OS provider. Access is a
terrible database. Filemaker is a great database. Filemaker Inc. doesn't
make an OS though. So by your logic using filemaker would be a mistake.


Granted Filemaker is owned by Apple... but that's beside the point.
Don't let the facts get in the way of a good analagy! Just pretend this
is the 4D group or something. =)

> Now
> each can point the finger at the other when issues like this pop up.

That's true. But if it was just Qwest with no 3rd party then they'd just
point at the customer.

In article <(E-Mail Removed). net>, 42 <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>In article <q37Hf.2241$(E-Mail Removed)>, rico_001
>@hotmail.com says...
>> In article <(E-Mail Removed) .com>, "Grip"
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> >We changed three things. We switched to DSL with a big name company
>> >that starts with a Q. We switched our ISP is a small local company.
>> >And we installed a new modem.
>> >
>> >G
>> >
>>
>> So you are getting DSL and ISP from different vendors, mistake IMO.
>
>I disagree. That's like suggesting people should all use MS Access
>because it's made by Microsoft, the dominant OS provider. Access is a
>terrible database. Filemaker is a great database. Filemaker Inc. doesn't
>make an OS though. So by your logic using filemaker would be a mistake.
>
>
>Granted Filemaker is owned by Apple... but that's beside the point.
>Don't let the facts get in the way of a good analagy! Just pretend this
>is the 4D group or something. =)

So you think selection of application software is the same as selecting a
vendor for basic internet connectivity.

>
>> Now
>> each can point the finger at the other when issues like this pop up.
>
>That's true. But if it was just Qwest with no 3rd party then they'd just
>point at the customer.

Typically not, at that point the business has some leverage and a simple
statement, "I'm buying this from you, make it work". Obviousily you have
never dealt with multiple vendors in a situation like this. It is in their
best interest to point the finger at the other vendor (you should have
bought all this from me, sending a guy out to fix issues with 'his' product
costs me money). With a single vendor there is a single point of contact.

fundamentalism, fundamentally wrong.

In article <A%nHf.1141$(E-Mail Removed)>, rico_001
@hotmail.com says...
> In article <(E-Mail Removed). net>, 42 <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >In article <q37Hf.2241$(E-Mail Removed)>, rico_001
> >@hotmail.com says...
> >> In article <(E-Mail Removed) .com>, "Grip"
> > <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >> >We changed three things. We switched to DSL with a big name company
> >> >that starts with a Q. We switched our ISP is a small local company.
> >> >And we installed a new modem.
> >> >
> >> >G
> >> >
> >>
> >> So you are getting DSL and ISP from different vendors, mistake IMO.
> >
> >I disagree. That's like suggesting people should all use MS Access
> >because it's made by Microsoft, the dominant OS provider. Access is a
> >terrible database. Filemaker is a great database. Filemaker Inc. doesn't
> >make an OS though. So by your logic using filemaker would be a mistake.
> >
> >
> >Granted Filemaker is owned by Apple... but that's beside the point.
> >Don't let the facts get in the way of a good analagy! Just pretend this
> >is the 4D group or something. =)
>
> So you think selection of application software is the same as selecting a
> vendor for basic internet connectivity.

Not at all. With basic internet connectivity your options are often
extremely limited. In many areas there is only one DSL provider.

Selecting a services providers (hosting, etc) however, is much more
complex -- there are a lot more options. And the small local companies
often have much better service and competency. You call them and
somebody competetent picks up the phone... meanwhile the major telcos
have outsourced your support calls to India, and that's after you spend
half an hour working through their automated phone system.

Feeling compelled to select your DSL provider for hosting services is
nuts -- the DSL provider around here has no competency with Filemaker at
all; the most they'd do is let me co-locate my own server, and they
charge triple what other anyone else does for that priviledge.


> >
> >> Now
> >> each can point the finger at the other when issues like this pop up.
> >
> >That's true. But if it was just Qwest with no 3rd party then they'd just
> >point at the customer.
>
> Typically not, at that point the business has some leverage and a simple
> statement, "I'm buying this from you, make it work".

Typically a technician comes out verifies the line meets the standards,
claims it does work. And the problem must be you and/or your software.

At that point your leverage becomes: "I'll stop buying from you if it
doesn't work". Big leverage - like a major telco like Qwest is that
concerned about retaining a difficult customer paying $60/mo, and odds
are the front line flunkies to whom you are issuing this threat couldn't
possibly care less.

> Obviousily you have
> never dealt with multiple vendors in a situation like this.

I've been through this exact scenario a number of times. I seriously
wonder if you have.

> It is in their
> best interest to point the finger at the other vendor (you should have
> bought all this from me, sending a guy out to fix issues with 'his' product
> costs me money). With a single vendor there is a single point of contact.

Yes. And with a single basic DSL line on a major carrier like Qwest,
that point of contact isn't terribly interested in you, but it may be a
necessary evil, because you don't have much choice as far as dsl goes.

On the other hand, the best hosting companies, the ones that will bend
over backwards to serve you often aren't in the DSL provider game,
focussing on their core competency - hosting.

I agree with you in principle, but its like buying a Ford truck and
putting a stereo in it. Sure if you stick with a single vender - Ford,
you'll be able to have any and all issues resolved at the ford dealer
without any finger pointing. But lets face it, Ford stereos are pretty
limited. If you want something truly amazing you'll have to ditch the
ford stereo and put something from another vendor in.

In article <(E-Mail Removed). net>, 42 <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>In article <A%nHf.1141$(E-Mail Removed)>, rico_001
>@hotmail.com says...
>> In article <(E-Mail Removed). net>, 42
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> >In article <q37Hf.2241$(E-Mail Removed)>, rico_001
>> >@hotmail.com says...
>> >> In article <(E-Mail Removed) .com>, "Grip"
>> > <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> >> >We changed three things. We switched to DSL with a big name company
>> >> >that starts with a Q. We switched our ISP is a small local company.
>> >> >And we installed a new modem.
>> >> >
>> >> >G
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> So you are getting DSL and ISP from different vendors, mistake IMO.
>> >
>> >I disagree. That's like suggesting people should all use MS Access
>> >because it's made by Microsoft, the dominant OS provider. Access is a
>> >terrible database. Filemaker is a great database. Filemaker Inc. doesn't
>> >make an OS though. So by your logic using filemaker would be a mistake.
>> >
>> >
>> >Granted Filemaker is owned by Apple... but that's beside the point.
>> >Don't let the facts get in the way of a good analagy! Just pretend this
>> >is the 4D group or something. =)
>>
>> So you think selection of application software is the same as selecting a
>> vendor for basic internet connectivity.
>
>Not at all. With basic internet connectivity your options are often
>extremely limited. In many areas there is only one DSL provider.
>
>Selecting a services providers (hosting, etc) however, is much more
>complex -- there are a lot more options. And the small local companies
>often have much better service and competency. You call them and
>somebody competetent picks up the phone... meanwhile the major telcos
>have outsourced your support calls to India, and that's after you spend
>half an hour working through their automated phone system.
>
>Feeling compelled to select your DSL provider for hosting services is
>nuts -- the DSL provider around here has no competency with Filemaker at
>all; the most they'd do is let me co-locate my own server, and they
>charge triple what other anyone else does for that priviledge.
>
>
>> >
>> >> Now
>> >> each can point the finger at the other when issues like this pop up.
>> >
>> >That's true. But if it was just Qwest with no 3rd party then they'd just
>> >point at the customer.
>>
>> Typically not, at that point the business has some leverage and a simple
>> statement, "I'm buying this from you, make it work".
>
>Typically a technician comes out verifies the line meets the standards,
>claims it does work. And the problem must be you and/or your software.
>
>At that point your leverage becomes: "I'll stop buying from you if it
>doesn't work". Big leverage - like a major telco like Qwest is that
>concerned about retaining a difficult customer paying $60/mo, and odds
>are the front line flunkies to whom you are issuing this threat couldn't
>possibly care less.
>
>> Obviousily you have
>> never dealt with multiple vendors in a situation like this.
>
>I've been through this exact scenario a number of times. I seriously
>wonder if you have.
>
>> It is in their
>> best interest to point the finger at the other vendor (you should have
>> bought all this from me, sending a guy out to fix issues with 'his' product
>> costs me money). With a single vendor there is a single point of contact.
>
>Yes. And with a single basic DSL line on a major carrier like Qwest,
>that point of contact isn't terribly interested in you, but it may be a
>necessary evil, because you don't have much choice as far as dsl goes.
>
>On the other hand, the best hosting companies, the ones that will bend
>over backwards to serve you often aren't in the DSL provider game,
>focussing on their core competency - hosting.
>
>I agree with you in principle, but its like buying a Ford truck and
>putting a stereo in it. Sure if you stick with a single vender - Ford,
>you'll be able to have any and all issues resolved at the ford dealer
>without any finger pointing. But lets face it, Ford stereos are pretty
>limited. If you want something truly amazing you'll have to ditch the
>ford stereo and put something from another vendor in.


We must be talking different things here, what do you call and ISP? That
is what do the letters I S P stand for in this discussion in your opinion.
Let me say I don't think of ISP and Host as being the same thing.

fundamentalism, fundamentally wrong.

In article <bosHf.26797$(E-Mail Removed)>, rico_001
@hotmail.com says...

> We must be talking different things here, what do you call and ISP? That
> is what do the letters I S P stand for in this discussion in your opinion.
> Let me say I don't think of ISP and Host as being the same thing.

Me either normally.

First, I'm sure we both agree that ISP stands for "internet services
provider".

But I agree there does seem to be a disconnect. I -usually- consider the
ISP to be the company providing the actual internet access to my
premesis. So, my DSL provider would normally be who i consider to be my
ISP.

However, in this case, because the OP differentiated between his DSL
provider and his ISP. I presumed (perhaps mistakenly) that what he was
talking about w/r/t "ISP" is what I'd normally call a host provider.
(which is reasonable, hosting is an internet service, and thus its
reasonable to call someone that hosts an internet services provider
(ISP).

That said, I have dealt with situations where "one's ISP" is merely
reselling DSL from a major telco. But that doesn't seem to apply either,
as I only have one point of contact, "my ISP". The fact that Telco-X
actually owns the wire is irrelevant to me the customer; I don't have an
account with Telco-X, and their support team won't talk to me anyway.

Just as when you buy a Dell or an Apple, and a problem crops up and it
turns out its the hard drive which happens to be a Maxtor - I don't care
what the actual hard drive is; I deal with Dell or Apple - one point of
contact.