| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 43926 | 2004-04-01 02:22:00 | Can someone please explain!Fast download on dialup. | Neil McC (178) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 226397 | 2004-04-01 02:22:00 | Just downloaded a game ,and my usual speed according to Flashget is around 4 KB's/sec. Well,this download just took off,and got up around 16KB's/sec.Fastest I've ever seen it. Any idea what happened? It would be great if that happened all the time! |
Neil McC (178) | ||
| 226398 | 2004-04-01 02:27:00 | Have you actually installed the game yet? ;-) I have (rarely) had downloads come in like that and they turned out to be fake programs/files, ie utter rubbish. :-( |
Fire-and-Ice (3910) | ||
| 226399 | 2004-04-01 02:28:00 | It will be because the particular file was easily compressible. Bits were transmitted at the rate possible using the international modem standards. The rate achieved for the information content depends on how much the volume can be reduced by compression. There is no free lunch. |
Graham L (2) | ||
| 226400 | 2004-04-01 02:32:00 | does the game actually work? sometimes the file is compressable and you will gain a lot of speed. othertimes the file is corrupt. however now and then i've seen good downloading of compressed files well above the max its should be, no idea why........just put it down to freak net conditions ;-) |
tweak'e (174) | ||
| 226401 | 2004-04-01 04:15:00 | Fast download on dialup is a contradictions in terms. No other explanation required:) | aperahama (1786) | ||
| 226402 | 2004-04-01 10:27:00 | Thanks for your comments.The game does run,another space invader type.But it was exciting watching it come down!! | Neil McC (178) | ||
| 226403 | 2004-04-02 00:09:00 | There is enough evidence now from all the PF1 postings in recent years, that all the doubting Thomas's who say it is theoretically impossible, will have to accept that there are times when freak download speeds do actually occur with dial up, and it cannot be simply ascribed to compression, or rather lack of compression. I am the very last person on this earth to "believe" in anything unless there is physical proof. The big problem is that this phenomenon is not scientifically repeatable. |
Terry Porritt (14) | ||
| 226404 | 2004-04-02 01:32:00 | I have just a dial up connection and downloaded the free AVG at around the 15 -20 kb/sec. It took about 10 sec for I think it was 5-8MB. I tried it 5 times cause I couldn't believe it and all files worked. A few days latter I tried again and it was back to normal at about 5-6kb/sec at best. asdex |
asdex (1488) | ||
| 226405 | 2004-04-02 04:58:00 | > I have just a dial up connection and downloaded the > free AVG at around the 15 -20 kb/sec. It took about > 10 sec for I think it was 5-8MB. 20kb x 10 seconds =200Kilobits or 200 kilobytes depending on which you meant. That is less than a megabyte. I don't think I could download 5-8 MB in 10 seconds on my full speed jetstream. If you think you are somehow getting 10 gallons out of a pint pot, I think you are mistaken. There are technological bottlenecks in your modem that don't let it happen. Download an uncompressed file into a dedicated folder and compare actual file size with download time. That will tell you the truth. Cheers Billy 8-{) :| |
Billy T (70) | ||
| 226406 | 2004-04-02 04:59:00 | Terry. :O "evidence now from all the PF1 postings" are what is called "anecdotal evidence". There are times when people have "seen" spoons bent, without any physical contact by Uri. There are many mechanical watches which have been stopped, but have restarted when they were brought out in response to television programmes. (I don't think many electronic ones have worked after the treatment ). Duke University have a lot of records of psi card readings, produced by careful selection of data and straight-out cheating. :D The "phenomenon is not scientifically repeatable". Quite right. It's very difficult to repeat something which has not happened. Think about the physics of it, Terry. The telephone circuit is good for 2400 bps. 56k is achieved by very clever phase/amplitude modulation. The two ends manage to synchronise because they both adhere rigidly to the standard. It is a standard. That's what standrds are for in telecommunications. They make it possible for communication to occur. The sending end can't just decide to send at 4 times the standard rate. If it did, there is no way the receiving end could get any sensible results. asdex's experience is easily explained. If the browser does preloading, it could easily have fetched the file before it was actually clicked on. So when it was requested, it was already there, as a temporary file. So it is "downloaded" from one place on the disk to another place. The repeats were equally fast. Because the same thing happened. 4-8 Mbps? (That's what asdex is actually saying -- 15-20 kbps is actually possible, but it won't shift a 5MB file in 10 sec). Not through a V90 modem. Think about what happens when a web page is very slow to load. look at it, then fetch a different site. Now use the Back key (or the tab, or the little arrow in the address line) to fectch the slow page again. There like lightning, isn't it? That's because it's already in your computer. Now use the Refresh button. That's the actual rate as it is downloaded through the line. I'm not a believer. ;-) |
Graham L (2) | ||
| 1 2 | |||||