100mb in 30mins off Ripwave ..!

DominoDub

I getting a very good signal off my Ripwave as I am close to a base station.

I can download a 100mb file in 30mins.

What could I get if I upgraded to NTL etc ...

I dont know if the extra bandwidth would make much of a difference when it has to deal with High contention Ratios.

watty

Contention is usually very high on Ripwave.

dathiultaigh

DominoDub wrote:

What could I get if I upgraded to NTL etc ...

to answer your question ... alot higher download speeds - broadband max at 6mb down 512k up and a lower contention ratio - 17:1 compared to 40:1 contention 512 down 128 down for RW.

I could not find any details for contention on NTL's 1 mb package on their site (nothing is stated on contention on their site for any packages) but RW contention is lower compared to say eircoms 1mb starter pack at 48:1.

There is also magnet that do uncontended packages if thats what you really want.

dub45

DominoDub wrote:

I getting a very good signal off my Ripwave as I am close to a base station.

I can download a 100mb file in 30mins.

What could I get if I upgraded to NTL etc ...

I dont know if the extra bandwidth would make much of a difference when it has to deal with High contention Ratios.

Possibly a lot of heartache, frustration, ulcers lousy customer service and the opportunity to listen to a lot of Vivaldi's four seasons? Have you not read the various NTL threads that are running on here?

Best to wait a few months to see if the NTL situation will improve I think.

Liam Byrne

dathiultaigh wrote:

There is also magnet that do uncontended packages if thats what you really want.

Smart do "uncontended" too.

Assuming you meant 100MB (100 MegaBytes), then that's 455kb/sec, just under the 512kb advertised for Ripwave (which, given my past experience with the thing, is pretty darn good - you must be VERY near the mast).

If you were on an uncontended 4mb connection with a phone line that could take the full whack, then you could divide that 30 mins by about 8, giving you 3 - 4 mins to download the file.

My connection maxes out at about 2.7Mb/sec, because of the phone line, and that gives me a 100MB file in 5 - 6 mins.

DominoDub

Thanks Liam for that ..!

One thing about Ripwave is that it does limit the amount I download. My fear is that if I upgrade I will be downloading Too Much ...and may well go over a cap which there is none on IBB Ripwave.

watty

Ripwave doesn't need a cap. It would be difficult to download as much as some people's Cap on higher speed systems, on Ripwave.

Liam Byrne

DominoDub wrote:

Thanks Liam for that ..!

One thing about Ripwave is that it does limit the amount I download. My fear is that if I upgrade I will be downloading Too Much ...and may well go over a cap which there is none on IBB Ripwave.

No caps on Smart, anyway.....subscribers to the others might let you know the story with them.

BoB_BoT

Liam Byrne wrote:

Smart do "uncontended" too.

Assuming you meant 100MB (100 MegaBytes), then that's 455kb/sec, just under the 512kb advertised for Ripwave (which, given my past experience with the thing, is pretty darn good - you must be VERY near the mast).

If you were on an uncontended 4mb connection with a phone line that could take the full whack, then you could divide that 30 mins by about 8, giving you 3 - 4 mins to download the file.

My connection maxes out at about 2.7Mb/sec, because of the phone line, and that gives me a 100MB file in 5 - 6 mins.

Are you sure you calcualted that right?

100MB = 102400kb
102400kb / 30 (mins) = 3413.3kb per min
3413.3kb / 60 (seconds) = 56.88 kbps

unless i've messed that up too :P

Liam Byrne

Sorry, Bob - 100MB is NOT = 102400kb; the conversion ratio from "Bytes" to "bits" (as indicated in the upper vs lowercase "b") is a factor of 8.

So your 56.88 figure (which is kBps) gets multiplied by 8, giving 455.04 kbps, or the rounded 455kbps that I mentioned.

It is a confusing one, since storage is normally listed in bytes while speed is normally measured in bits, and the x8 is regularly overlooked.

P.S. It can get more confusing, since every "byte" has an added control bit/overhead to ensure that it wasn't corrupted, so that x8 doesn't fully reflect what you receive as data.......a bit like weighing your post/snail mail and including the envelopes (a necessary part of getting it but not really relevant once it gets to you), but the above figures at least mean that your measurements aren't completely out by a factor of 8.

watty

Ah.. but line speed in bits is not same as internal I/O in bits. Line TX has an overhead.

If the website is doing on the fly compression and it is stuff that compresses (NOT video/music/JPEG images as these are compressed already!) then you can get higher than the line speed.

On dialup 10bps is approx 1 Bps

On BB it depends, but factor of 10 more realistic than 8.

But for "real" bits inside PC, 8bits = 1byte.

Liam Byrne

That's kinda what I meant with the "that x8 doesn't fully reflect what you receive as data", but didn't want to confuse things, hence the "at least mean that your measurements aren't completely out by a factor of 8".

Wolverine_1999

Man I pity people on such crap connections in Ireland, not that they can do anything about it themselves ...

I recently had a 16000kbit connection in Germany, into an apartment. This worked out at around 1850kbps, i.e, a full cd downloaded in 4 minutes. So, by the time you have 100mb downloaded in 30 mins, I'd have 5.5GB down

But still, how is the situation with IBB at the moment? Have they realised that customers actually want what is in the product description?

p.s when describing speed, why don't ye guys distinguish between kbit and kbyte? saying "i max at 3mb/sec" suggests that you have a 30mbit connection...

Liam Byrne

"i max at 3mb/sec" suggests that you have a 30mbit

No, it states that you have a 3Mbit connection.

The uppercase "B" is the generally-accepted notation for bytes.

BoB_BoT

Ah sorry, messed that up, I thought you were talking in bytes, have to watch out for the lower and upper case b's :P