Why is broadband advertised as upto 10x dial up?

"Jacob Rosse" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:c2fc910f483d88ed9edeed7c923753c3@news.1usenet .com...
> Well I get upto about 4k/s on a 56k modem on dialup and upto 64k/s on
> broadband. That's about 15 times the speed which actually fits with my
> download times. This is the first time I have seen advertising claims
sell
> a product short.
>
> Anyway how come a 56k modem never ever reaches anywhere near 7k/s and yet
> broadand often reaches its limit?
>
>

i regularly got 5.5kb/sec on my old phone line.

It depends on the modem and the quality of the phone line. 56kbit/second is
10.28 * faster than the 576kbit that dsl modems on a half meg connection
will connect at.

analogue modems are a very old technology. bear in mind that it's possible
to get way in excess of a half meg connection through your phone line. even
with a relatively crap line, half meg is doable.

Well I get upto about 4k/s on a 56k modem on dialup and upto 64k/s on
broadband. That's about 15 times the speed which actually fits with my
download times. This is the first time I have seen advertising claims sell
a product short.

Anyway how come a 56k modem never ever reaches anywhere near 7k/s and yet
broadand often reaches its limit?

You are unlikely to be getting 64k/s via a 512 ADSL link without using some
form of compression.
Check your true speed via the speed test here :-
http://www.adslguide.org.uk/

--
Paul Woodsford
Remove ****NOSPAMPLEASE**** to Reply
"Jacob Rosse" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:c2fc910f483d88ed9edeed7c923753c3@news.1usenet .com...
> Well I get upto about 4k/s on a 56k modem on dialup and upto 64k/s on
> broadband. That's about 15 times the speed which actually fits with my
> download times. This is the first time I have seen advertising claims
sell
> a product short.
>
> Anyway how come a 56k modem never ever reaches anywhere near 7k/s and yet
> broadand often reaches its limit?
>
>


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.520 / Virus Database: 318 - Release Date: 18/09/2003

> Well I get upto about 4k/s on a 56k modem on dialup and upto 64k/s on
> broadband. That's about 15 times the speed which actually fits with my
> download times. This is the first time I have seen advertising claims
sell
> a product short.

I agree - with my 56k, I used to get about 4k/sec max, but broadband gets a
steady 60 kb/sec. It really is 15 times the speed, not "up to 10 times".

On Sat, 20 Sep 2003 19:07:59 GMT, Jacob Rosse
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> Well I get upto about 4k/s on a 56k modem on dialup and upto 64k/s on
> broadband. That's about 15 times the speed which actually fits with my
> download times. This is the first time I have seen advertising claims sell
> a product short.

Modem connections support compression so I was quite used to getting
downloads of text newsgroups at anywhere between 7 and 9 KB/s on a
dialup. In that context to say ADSL is 10 times faster is not selling
the product short - in fact they should only be saying up to 7 times
faster for downloading text.

> Anyway how come a 56k modem never ever reaches anywhere near 7k/s and yet
> broadand often reaches its limit?

Maybe you had a crap modem - I've regularly max'ed out a 115.2k serial
port with a V.90 modem with compression enabled. In fact with a modem
with a 230.4k serial port I've gone over 170kbps on a V.90 modem - not
often, but with a download that is compressible, it can happen.

"Chris Jones" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:ci3bb.8215$(E-Mail Removed)...
> > Well I get upto about 4k/s on a 56k modem on dialup and upto 64k/s on
> > broadband. That's about 15 times the speed which actually fits with my
> > download times. This is the first time I have seen advertising claims
> sell
> > a product short.
>
> I agree - with my 56k, I used to get about 4k/sec max, but broadband gets a
> steady 60 kb/sec. It really is 15 times the speed, not "up to 10 times".

I agree! Exactly my experiences.

"Jacob Rosse" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:c2fc910f483d88ed9edeed7c923753c3@news.1usenet .com...
> Well I get upto about 4k/s on a 56k modem on dialup and upto 64k/s on
> broadband. That's about 15 times the speed which actually fits with my
> download times. This is the first time I have seen advertising claims
sell
> a product short.
>
> Anyway how come a 56k modem never ever reaches anywhere near 7k/s and yet
> broadand often reaches its limit?

Analogue modems can get that "fast" if you're downloading something easily
compressible, ie text. But most of us all download already compressed files,
zips, jpegs, mp3s, divx video so few of us ever enjoyed the dubious
pleasures of on-the-fly modem compression to it's full extent.

Although they work over the same lines I believe analogue modems have to
operate in a "noisier" medium, there's less signal to noise so error
correction kicks in and that incurs an overhead in your available bandwidth.
That was one of the big selling points of ISDN, it was a pure digital medium
so you got max possible bandwidth.

I'm not sure if xDSL counts as a digital transport though... We do still use
modems on the services so that suggests to me there is still some form of
analogue <> digital conversion going on. If anyone knows I'd be interested
in learning if DSL is "pure" digital.

"Draxen" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

<snip>
> I'm not sure if xDSL counts as a digital transport though... We do still
use
> modems on the services so that suggests to me there is still some form of
> analogue <> digital conversion going on. If anyone knows I'd be interested
> in learning if DSL is "pure" digital.
>

Hi,
I'm no expert on this, but as I uderstand it ADSL is not pure digital.
The DSLAM in the exchange is a special kind of modem, just like your normal
analogue modem. The signal for ADSL is split into a number of channels each
occupying a particular frequency range. The channels occur at frequencies
between about 300 KHz and 2.2 MHz (I'm not sure of the exact figures, but
its about that).

So whereas with a normal modem, you only have a single channel, and it
transfers data sequentially, with ADSL, the multiple channels allow you to
transfer many streams of data in parallel.

However, all of this data is encoded into analogue signals for transmission
accross the phone line using Frequency Modulation. So it's a bit like
connecting 10 standard modems to the phone line, but with each one operating
in its own frequency band, then distributing the data accross the modems.

--

Martin

In article <3f6d8de1$0$11002$(E-Mail Removed)>, Draxen
<(E-Mail Removed)> writes
>
>Although they work over the same lines I believe analogue modems have to
>operate in a "noisier" medium, there's less signal to noise so error
>correction kicks in and that incurs an overhead in your available bandwidth.
>That was one of the big selling points of ISDN, it was a pure digital medium
>so you got max possible bandwidth.
^^^^^^^^^^^^
you mean
Data-rate=Bandwidth*(log2(1+signal-to-noise ratio))??
:-)

--
robert w hall