Re: A Hypothetical Moral Question About Speed
 

Although it is worth noting that there *are* other factors that will affect Wifi performance. These can be other radio/electrical sources, the presence of metal structures (such as electricity pylons), and even the makeup of the building the WiFi is in. If the building has thick walls, or a lot of metal in the construction, it can severely cripple Wifi. For instance, we are rolling WiFi out across the buildings where I work. The buildings are several hundred years old and have walls up to 4 feet thick. Where we get coverage, we get good speed (tested by downloading files). But, the average range of each access point (we have several) is about 10-20 metres.

It's worth noting that at home, I have two wireless networks. One, operating at 2.4GHz for any devices limited to G class, and one operating at 5GHz for any devices capable of N class speed. While I can get 20 megs relatively easily from either my LAN or the Internet, I can only download stuff at the same speed from the router hosted the N network (an Apple Time Capsule) or from the PC hooked up to the Time Capsule via a gig ethernet connection.

The same router will happily send stuff out via the Ethenet connection at speeds a lot higher than it will via wireless, so I know it's not the router CPU slowing the connection.

My point is that whatever protocol is in use, it may not be feasable to expect high speeds from wireless networks. There are too many variables. You want high speed? Go for Ethenet. You want High Speed without the hassle of having to run cables throughout your house, go for powerline Ethernet.

Re: A Hypothetical Moral Question About Speed
 

The service you are paying for is a 50meg internet connection.

The router is a free benefit given as part of that package, that you are not paying for.

Therefore you're getting exactly what you're paying for. QED.

Re: A Hypothetical Moral Question About Speed
 

Hmm, I don't know. I would assume so though. Networks that don't broadcast an SSID still broadcast their presence, just not the SSID. They appear on my phone and my PSP as an available wireless access point, the only difference being I have to enter the SSID manually before I can connect.

Re: A Hypothetical Moral Question About Speed
 

[QUOTE=Stuart C;34897942]
It's worth noting that at home, I have two wireless networks. One, operating at 2.4GHz for any devices limited to G class, and one operating at 5GHz for any devices capable of N class speed. While I can get 20 megs relatively easily from either my LAN or the Internet, I can only download stuff at the same speed from the router hosted the N network (an Apple Time Capsule) or from the PC hooked up to the Time Capsule via a gig ethernet connection.QUOTE]

same network as me stuart only i use the netgear wndr3300 ,i had issues with speed drop from the router but a slight reconfig of the channels used and all is fine .My point is (to the OP)that alot of speed issues will be caused by poor config and not dodgy equipment as the equipment supplied is of a certain standard .The router supplied WILL do what it is required to do or it just wouldn't be on the market .Also it's in nobody's interest to supply equipment that doesn't work ,"Flurgin" or netgear

Re: A Hypothetical Moral Question About Speed
 

You've got a problem somewhere. You should easily be able to max out your 20Mb connection on a wireless G access point. Without fail at any time of the day I get this from either of mine:-

Date of Speed Test: 2009-10-25 22:53:30
Download Speed: 19536 kbps (2442 KB/sec transfer rate)
Upload Speed: 676 kbps (84.5 KB/sec transfer rate)

I take your point about work environments. I was talking about residential environments.

Re: A Hypothetical Moral Question About Speed
 

agreed ,just tested mine out of curiosity and got 20.36megabit
used vm games site and this converter
http://easycalculation.com/bandwidth-calculator.php

maxed out my connection in 30secs

Re: A Hypothetical Moral Question About Speed
 

Well there you go - all of you who criticised my stand on this issue will be delighted to know that Virgin have given me notice that, seemingly they would rather chuck me off the network than recompense me for the last 6 weeks of hell (and it wasn't all about the wifi - I can't emphasise that enough, there were a lot of other faults, documented elsewhere on this forum, completely unconnected with the wifi)....

So there you go.... that's how much Virgin value their 50meg customers. If a problem is too difficult, they get rid of it. I feel like a kitten who was sick on the carpet, and so got chucked in the river.

Whichever way you look at it - either the service isn't ready for the public, or the public isn't ready for the service... this country is not ready for high-speed internet - and I can proudly say, I am an accidental martyr.

I'm not done with this yet. Watch this space.

Re: A Hypothetical Moral Question About Speed
 

You were plain wrong in your assertion in this thread.

We don't know exactly what went on between you and VM and particularly whether they have given you notice under their contract.

But "accidental martyrs" often have more to answer for than gets uncovered here.

Re: A Hypothetical Moral Question About Speed
 

I am sorry to hear about your bad experiences but it's within Virgin's right to give you notice of their intention to end the contract and I'm not sure what recourse you might think you have.

I would consider exploring other options rather than expending time and energy trying to get into some kind of crusade. You aren't the first person released by their ISP and won't be the last.

Re: A Hypothetical Moral Question About Speed
 

There's a suggestion here that this might in some way be my fault.... You can read the whole story unfold here...

http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/12...-readings.html

You will notice that the engineers were replicating the speed drops at the cabinet. Nothing to do with my wifi.

The only thing that I did was insist on a reasonable compensation for the endless tech visits, the waiting around, the aggrevation and cock ups. I asked reasonably, I asked nicely. I got offered 2 months free broadband, which was cancelled out because my direct debit including my install fee was taken out the same day.

As for crusades... my alternative arrangements are already sorted out thank you. I don't want to come across as "bitter ex-customer" which I am sure is probably how I sound, but the way I have been treated and indeed accused is phenomenal for a company that carries Branson's name and reputation. And I don't give a crap if everyone on this forum thinks its the wrong thing to do, but I WON'T let this drop.

Re: A Hypothetical Moral Question About Speed
 

Nah it's your choice, and good luck with your endeavour wherever it takes you :)

Re: A Hypothetical Moral Question About Speed
 

Thank you Broadbandings. I appreciate that. And congratulations on the fine work you do for people on this forum.

Re: A Hypothetical Moral Question About Speed
 

No problem anywhere with speed externally. I am on a Be 24 meg connection that averages around 20 meg (bad phone line, but BT wanted too much money to investigate the problem for a 4 meg improvement to be worth it). I average around 20 meg via wireless and wired.

Actually, my point about work environments was to illustrate that the structure of the building could have an impact..

Re: A Hypothetical Moral Question About Speed
 

It does raise a point on wireless though, Wifi saturation is pretty much inevitable, helped by the lousy channel planning.
Devices have channels 1-11 or 1-13 if they actually bother with the full UK spec.
The actual widt of the signal channel means that there are only a few really good setups with no or minimal overlap:
1, 6, 11
1, 5, 9, 13 (but 9 is centre for microwave oven interference)
1, 4, 7, 11 (4 channel compromise, 3 spacing is not entirely clear of cross channel spread)
1, 4, 7, 10, 13 (maybe the best comprose, a 3 channel spacing with 4 channels possible in 1-11, 5 in 1-13.

The situation of wireless congestion is only going to get worse, and unless there is some regulation or clear recommendation, the 2.4G band is going to end up unusable, the congestion is added to by other 2.4G devices such as video senders and 2.4G cordless devices.