who is actually using dialup?
Sep 11, 2007 at 3:00 PM Post #18 of 55
I know nobody who still use dialup.
"Everybody" have some kind of ADSL (2+) or fibre channel connection over here..
 
Sep 11, 2007 at 3:32 PM Post #20 of 55
My '70 something' technology fearing 'old world' parents use dial-up. They use the internet like once a month to check e-mail, and call me when their VCR (VHS) is blinking '12:00'! I kid you not.
 
Sep 11, 2007 at 3:33 PM Post #21 of 55
I still use 56K dial up at home, work has high speed if I need it.

I can get both cable and DSL at home but cost is extremely high still at $400-500 year! A fair price would be about $200 year......then I would sign up, I am not going to get robbed by cable/phone for high speed connection.
 
Sep 11, 2007 at 3:52 PM Post #22 of 55
I find it funny that there are such strong opinions on this subject. Dial-up is indeed archaic (been on broadband service for more than a decade now), but not everyone has the option (satellite is not an option for most due to insane costs). Since when is a common courtesy such a hassle to read? Any considerate person will keep an image to a smaller size (usually linked to the full-size) for the window-resize issue mentioned above, which affects any user, plus to help keep the forum running smoother. This effectively means that people are taking issue with the fact that a thread has a 56k warning in the title. It's not like the content itself has been changed...

...Sounds petty to me.
 
Sep 11, 2007 at 4:47 PM Post #23 of 55
Quote:

Originally Posted by pne /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Ok, so we've all seen threads with titles like 56k Warning. Dialup beware. I'm just curious as who actually still uses dialup these days? I switched to highspeed about 7-8 years ago, and I don't know of a single one of my friends who is still using a 56k modem.


So your friends represent an entire international cross section of those who view Head-Fi?

Quote:

If you're still using the old phone line please post a reply in this thread. If it gets no replies then we can all start posting large images without consideration to those supposedly still on dialup.


Thanks to DarkAngel you have your answer and the thread can be abandoned.

As mentioned more than once, it's about having to scroll to see an image.

If you are concerned about why an image should be limited to 800 pixels, your question should have been who is still using 19"-22" monitors. Even on a widescreen 22" a 800 pixel image on the vertical side will just fit inside the viewing area of Firefox and IE (at 1680x1050 on my particular monitor).
 
Sep 11, 2007 at 5:25 PM Post #25 of 55
"Thanks to DarkAngel you have your answer and the thread can be abandoned.

As mentioned more than once, it's about having to scroll to see an image.

If you are concerned about why an image should be limited to 800 pixels, your question should have been who is still using 19"-22" monitors. Even on a widescreen 22" a 800 pixel image on the vertical side will just fit inside the viewing area of Firefox and IE (at 1680x1050 on my particular monitor)."


X2 (above)

I still use dial-up, and refuse to surrender to the elitists and corporate shills who tell me not to.

- augustwest
 
Sep 11, 2007 at 6:05 PM Post #26 of 55
Cable user here, but the other day I was trying to fix a customers computer, they had dial up. I needed to access an online file and got so frustrated waiting for their connection I tethered my laptop to my phone and got it quickly.
 
Sep 11, 2007 at 7:22 PM Post #27 of 55
Does it matter? It's still annoying even on broadband when I have to wait twenty seconds for a thread page full of oversized pics to load, then have to scroll horizontally because they don't fit on my screen. In the future once everyone is on a 10gb/s fiber optic network and most pages take a quarter of a second to load, the long, five second pages will seem like forever. Things need to be kept under control regardless of how fast our internet is.
 
Sep 11, 2007 at 10:16 PM Post #28 of 55
Quote:

Originally Posted by Samgotit /img/forum/go_quote.gif
So your friends represent an entire international cross section of those who view Head-Fi?



Thanks to DarkAngel you have your answer and the thread can be abandoned.

As mentioned more than once, it's about having to scroll to see an image.

If you are concerned about why an image should be limited to 800 pixels, your question should have been who is still using 19"-22" monitors. Even on a widescreen 22" a 800 pixel image on the vertical side will just fit inside the viewing area of Firefox and IE (at 1680x1050 on my particular monitor).


never said my friends represent anything, just drawing on personal experience. The thread is about how many people have dialup, so no my question has not been answered. I agree you should use common sense when posting in picture threads but my point is are our efforts to post warnings really a waste of time? I remember when I had 56k I still clicked on plenty of image threads. It's not like your computer freezes up and explodes, the text still loads and you just have to be patient with the images.

By large images I meant within reason such as an 800pixel image. It's really annoying to have a picture thread in which each picture is thumbnailed. If I want to browse through 100 pictures thats 100 windows I have to open, versus vertical scrolling.
 
Sep 11, 2007 at 10:29 PM Post #29 of 55
I understand that some people don't have access, and that really blows, but I don't understand why people who do have access won't do it. It's $10-$15/month for 56k and you need to pay another $5/month for a separate phone line if you want to be on the phone at the same time, so for some it's $15-$20/month, when you can just pay $15/month for 768k DSL, which is nearly 15 times faster for pretty much the same price. I really don't get it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top