Any faster?

[Some102]

So basically, after being stuck with dial up for an inordinately long amount of time, I've finally found out we're able to get satellite internet. I have heard that, (because of the time it takes to get to the satellite and back or something) there might be some slight lag problems with online gaming. But, it would (512 kbps) still be faster for online gaming than a 28kbps dialup, correct?

Thanks for your time,
Some102

 

[Asus]

It is a faster speed (downloads) but higher latency. Perhaps a wash with online gaming. Price very high? That's usually where the real disadvantage is.

 

[Beerdude26]

For Counter-Strike and the like, a 28Kbit connection will suffice if you set your rates, cl_updatrate, cmdrate and the like correct. I know, it's old, but for limited connection speeds, they really make a difference. For bigger games, like Age Of Empires 3 or an MMORPG, you'll need much more speed.

 

[Anthraxxx]

where do you live that you can't get a DSL connection nowadays?

 

[Some102]

...the middle of a 10 acre field surrounded by trees on one side and hills on the other.

:dozey:

I checked with our town for DSL cable, they said they didn't have it for a while because we're too spread out (rural) but we might be getting it in a couple of months.

So what you're all saying is that there would be more lag with satellite?

 

[hungryduck]

I'd try and hold out for DSL or Cable....its only a matter of time until it comes round

 

[Lucid]

Ew, Satellite.

Good for TV, bad for internet.

 

[DEATHMASTER]

Ew, Satellite.

Good for TV, bad for internet.

qft.
Keep the dail up (that just sounds wrong ;()
and wait for the better stuff to come up.

 

[Dog--]

...the middle of a 10 acre field surrounded by trees on one side and hills on the other.

I got the same dealio, out in the country I can only get dial-up, Satellite for $500, then $60 a month, or fiber optics for $30 per foot (to tap the closest line it's about 2 football fields away), and $50 per month.. I'm fvcked where I live..

 

[DEATH eVADER]

...the middle of a 10 acre field surrounded by trees on one side and hills on the other.

:dozey:

I checked with our town for DSL cable, they said they didn't have it for a while because we're too spread out (rural) but we might be getting it in a couple of months.

So what you're all saying is that there would be more lag with satellite?

Where do you live (town, country)?

 

[Sulkdodds]

It's so fast I cry "wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!" every time I open a web page.

 

[tehsolace]

From PERSONAL EXPERIENCE I can tell you do NOT get satellite.

Reasons:
1) Most likely you will have to pay for the dish, which can run into the hundreds (ours cost us $500). THEN you will have to pay for a mandatory installation fee (since you certainly can't install the dish yourself) which ain't cheap either.

2) The lag is unbearable. I mean, considering the data is traveling like 20,000m or something, it should be obvious. You can expect at least a 2 second delay on ANY link you click before it finally starts loading the link.

3) The download speeds generally run pretty respectably, but the upload is total shit.

What really kills the performance is the lag time between communications. It uploads the request for data, you wait seconds before you hear a response, and then you get the data via download.

 

[cheddarrr]

i think with satelite you cant transfer and recieve at the same time..

but im prolly totally wrong