connection speed
Moderators: Scott McCloud, Moderators
-
- Consistant Poster
- Posts: 161
- Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2003 9:49 am
- Location: Switzerland
connection speed
connected to my latest comments in the 'oh flash' discussion (see other thread, i wonder what connection speed people use to view webcomics. i post this in the MI section, as it is connected to the newest improv published in flash. (for more info see the other threads please.
<IMG SRC="http://www.mihatsch.net/moritz/gesicht.gif">
-
- Understands reinventing
- Posts: 352
- Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2001 7:00 pm
- Location: Brighton, Michigan
- Contact:
Interesting reading re: US connection speeds.
http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/internet/0 ... index.html
Tim
http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/internet/0 ... index.html
Tim
<A Target="new" HREF="http://www.fifthdigit.com/comics"><Img border="0" src="http://www.fifthdigit.com/comics/zwolAvatar.gif"></A>
<A Target="new" HREF="http://www.fifthdigit.com/comics"> Tim Mallos' Comics and Stuff</A>
<A Target="new" HREF="http://www.fifthdigit.com/comics"> Tim Mallos' Comics and Stuff</A>
good/bad modem
What makes a modem speed good or bad? Do they have (non-cable/DSL) modems faster than 56K, and is there anyone who has a connection slower than that?
-BRUCKER
-
- Understands reinventing
- Posts: 352
- Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2001 7:00 pm
- Location: Brighton, Michigan
- Contact:
Good / Bad is subjective, but probably a more informative couple of choices.
Some old modems still in use had a maximum through-put of 14.4Kbps
Then ya have yer 28.8Kbps
And then yer 56Kkbps.
And...I think you can get some weird non-ISDN 2-phone line 128kbps kinda thing.
And probably more...
I'd guess a "good" modem is one that brings you the stuff you want to see at an acceptable, comfortable rate.
A "bad" modem is one that frustrates the heck out of you.
So, the whole modem thing is pretty subjective.
Tim
Some old modems still in use had a maximum through-put of 14.4Kbps
Then ya have yer 28.8Kbps
And then yer 56Kkbps.
And...I think you can get some weird non-ISDN 2-phone line 128kbps kinda thing.
And probably more...
I'd guess a "good" modem is one that brings you the stuff you want to see at an acceptable, comfortable rate.
A "bad" modem is one that frustrates the heck out of you.
So, the whole modem thing is pretty subjective.
Tim
<A Target="new" HREF="http://www.fifthdigit.com/comics"><Img border="0" src="http://www.fifthdigit.com/comics/zwolAvatar.gif"></A>
<A Target="new" HREF="http://www.fifthdigit.com/comics"> Tim Mallos' Comics and Stuff</A>
<A Target="new" HREF="http://www.fifthdigit.com/comics"> Tim Mallos' Comics and Stuff</A>
- Greg Stephens
- Forum Founder
- Posts: 3862
- Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 7:00 pm
- Location: Los Angeles, California, USA
- Contact:
Sometimes it's like in the song- I got my modem working but I can't connect with you.
Good morning! That's a nice tnetennba.
-
- Consistant Poster
- Posts: 161
- Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2003 9:49 am
- Location: Switzerland
ok i do agree with that. but the only way to save bandwidth in a reasonable way and to use an engine like the tarquin is to program a program plugin to read a tsc-ml (tarquin-style-comic-meta language) as a branch of xml.pege wrote:I have an SDSL connection (256 kbps), but I am aware of a lot of people who only have a slow modem connection - especially in developing countries. IMHO it is always a good idea to save bandwidth.
Peter
i might tip on some friends. maybe they are interested to show their skills on a little open source idea...
kaos
<IMG SRC="http://www.mihatsch.net/moritz/gesicht.gif">
-
- The one and only
- Posts: 293
- Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 7:00 pm
- Contact:
> but the only way to save bandwidth in a reasonable way and to use an
> engine like the tarquin is to program a program plugin to read a tsc-ml
> (tarquin-style-comic-meta language) as a branch of xml.
I'm not totally sure I follow the reasoning on this. At the moment Tarquin files are only really as big as the artwork contained inside them (the flash packaging clocks in at a tiny 3k), so I'm not sure how using xml would save on bandwidth (since you'd still have to download the same amount of artwork at the end of the day).
That said, one bandwidth problem with the engine as currently written is, for daily-updating comics like the MI, you do have to download the whole comic each time. Could XML provide a way round this?
I guess it wouldn't be too hard to write in (using ActionScript or XML or whatever) some kind of option to display only recent panels, rather than the whole comic. Something else to think about in the growing list of things for Tarquin 2.0, I guess (which, considering Tarquin 1.0 isn't actually ready yet, is probably a little way off).
> engine like the tarquin is to program a program plugin to read a tsc-ml
> (tarquin-style-comic-meta language) as a branch of xml.
I'm not totally sure I follow the reasoning on this. At the moment Tarquin files are only really as big as the artwork contained inside them (the flash packaging clocks in at a tiny 3k), so I'm not sure how using xml would save on bandwidth (since you'd still have to download the same amount of artwork at the end of the day).
That said, one bandwidth problem with the engine as currently written is, for daily-updating comics like the MI, you do have to download the whole comic each time. Could XML provide a way round this?
I guess it wouldn't be too hard to write in (using ActionScript or XML or whatever) some kind of option to display only recent panels, rather than the whole comic. Something else to think about in the growing list of things for Tarquin 2.0, I guess (which, considering Tarquin 1.0 isn't actually ready yet, is probably a little way off).
-
- Consistant Poster
- Posts: 161
- Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2003 9:49 am
- Location: Switzerland
this depends on your personal cache as it does when you use HTML. the pictures go into the cache and the browser can load them out of the cache again. this is different in flash where the loading of all files is part of the starting routine. i don't think flash tries to access the browsers cache first.Merlin wrote: That said, one bandwidth problem with the engine as currently written is, for daily-updating comics like the MI, you do have to download the whole comic each time. Could XML provide a way round this?
kaos
EDIT: i'm surprised the flash file is so tiny. i only worked with flash in the beginning and then the files were rather large. it seems they worked on that. i expected a specialised xml to be smaller because you could reduce the complexity of the used meta language.
<IMG SRC="http://www.mihatsch.net/moritz/gesicht.gif">
-
- Reinvents understanding
- Posts: 635
- Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2002 4:47 pm
- Location: The Riptania Sky-Palace in da beauuuuuutiful Bronx.
- Contact:
Re: good/bad modem
Just because you have 56K modem doesn't mean you connect at 56K. My dial-up connection usually connects at 50&2/3K; 52K if I'm lucky. I've observed that modem connetion speed depends on two things: location and ISP. People I know who live in the burbs, that have dial-up, usually connect at a much slower speed than I do here in the Bronx. When I first got my PC and got on the net, I was using the free AOL trial, and I never connected any higher than the 40s. One of the many reasons why I abandoned AOHell in a hurry.BBrucker2 wrote:What makes a modem speed good or bad? Do they have (non-cable/DSL) modems faster than 56K, and is there anyone who has a connection slower than that?
"Park the beers, and grab the smiles. It's flight time." - LtCdr. J. Robert "Bobby" Stone, USN (R.I.P.)