Results 1 to 6 of 6
  1.    #1  
    That's my benchmark so far at 256 colors. This sounds funny but it seems slow and fast at the same time. Faster than the 270 over Cingular and Kami was right that the numbers seem to climb pretty fast. It was loading about 30K of data when it stopped receiving at about 55 seconds.
  2. #2  
    30kbytes in 55 seconds? 4 kbps? I think you just took last place in the speed tests. I really hope these speeds are going to pick up by a factor of 5-10 when they "throw the switch" tommorrow.

    I guess I could look on the bright side. With speeds this slow, I doubt I'll use up my 2MB/month. In fact, I doubt I'll use much data at all.
  3. #3  
    Originally posted by PCMusician
    That's my benchmark so far at 256 colors. This sounds funny but it seems slow and fast at the same time. Faster than the 270 over Cingular and Kami was right that the numbers seem to climb pretty fast. It was loading about 30K of data when it stopped receiving at about 55 seconds.
    Well that is an improvement over my 6035. At 4 shades of gray it took 100 seconds for 21724 bytes.
    David
  4. #4  
    I was just thinking of the history of modem speeds as they related to the history of networked computer use

    1.2k/2.4k: Email
    9.6k/14.4k: Bulliten Boards/Usenet
    33k/56k: World Wie Web
    Cable/DSL: MP3/Photo downloads

    If the 2G phones are running at 1.2k, thats equivalent to the days of email. If this "3G" (more like 2.5G) vision service is only going to give us 14kbps, we're still a ways from real www use, much less downloading stupid pictures of fish to our phones just for the heck of it.

    I wonder what sprints business model is?
  5. #5  
    Originally posted by work_permit
    30kbytes in 55 seconds? 4 kbps? I think you just took last place in the speed tests. I really hope these speeds are going to pick up by a factor of 5-10 when they "throw the switch" tommorrow.

    I guess I could look on the bright side. With speeds this slow, I doubt I'll use up my 2MB/month. In fact, I doubt I'll use much data at all.
    That is right on par with what I am getting. Loading the main page at www.treocentral.com takes about 1 minute and is about 30-40k as far as I can remember. Definitely not blazing fast for sure. I think my old Wireless web could have done about the same.

    Lame
  6. #6  
    Originally posted by work_permit
    I was just thinking of the history of modem speeds as they related to the history of networked computer use

    1.2k/2.4k: Email
    9.6k/14.4k: Bulliten Boards/Usenet
    33k/56k: World Wie Web
    Cable/DSL: MP3/Photo downloads

    If the 2G phones are running at 1.2k, thats equivalent to the days of email. If this "3G" (more like 2.5G) vision service is only going to give us 14kbps, we're still a ways from real www use, much less downloading stupid pictures of fish to our phones just for the heck of it.

    I wonder what sprints business model is?
    You are correct. Currently if 3g data speeds cannot be improved browsing the web is basically a delusion, or an act to be taken on only be the extremely patient (i.e. not me). I'll be dropping my 3g account down to the cheapest service plan in a couple of days if they don't get this worked out -- or I may drop Sprint altogether and go with someone really cheap like Verizon or Voice Stream -- granted not as good coverage, but why am I paying all this money to Sprint when they can't deliver on their promises?

Posting Permissions