[Samgotit]

Quote:

Originally Posted by pne /img/forum/go_quote.gif 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.

If I misinterpreted the tone, I apologize. This thread seemed like a continuation of the whining about the the image size limit in the the PYPH thread.

But by two of the responses so far, it's not a waste of time. Also, the etymology of "56k beware" has widened, meaning "big files in here", which is still a good alert for those at work or even for those with slower highspeed connections.

 

[Kang]

I'm still using dial-up at home. More money for music!

 

[apnk]

I am on dial-up at home. I live in a rural idaho town (500 souls), the only way to get high speed is to get one of those internet Dish or Directv satalites which are to expensive. Wait, nevermind the local gasoline station has free wi-fi (through satalite), but I am not going to spend my evenings there.

 

[Austin 3:16]

Not everyone lives in a city. And just because you do, doesn't mean you should justify acting like you're all high-and-mighty just because you have high speed internet. Grow up.

And satellite internet is VERY expensive and unreliable.

 

[Duggeh]

I simply copied this image from google images search without looking in the least at its context. So if its 5 years out of date its not my fault. Well it is, but i don't care.

 

[colonelkernel8]

How old is that graph?

 

[nibiyabi]

I guarantee that that graph is from the 20th century.

EDIT: Yup. US Broadband Breaks 60% among Active Internet Users, but growth slows - UK Broadband Penetration Nears 75% at Home - September 2005 Bandwidth Report

This link says that US broadband prevalence broke the 60% barrier back in August 2005.

 

[Duggeh]

Kindly read my post.

Also, 2005 is hardly the 20th century.

 

[nibiyabi]

Umm, yeah. In 2005 it was over 60%, and in your graph it was 34%, therefore probably the 20th century. And I had to highlight your post just now to read the words because you made the text white.

 

[Duggeh]

Thus was the content of the post put into its context. Merry Christmas.

 

[troymadison]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duggeh /img/forum/go_quote.gif Thus was the content of the post put into its context. Merry Christmas.

Merry Christmas

 

[Duggeh]

Quote:

Originally Posted by troymadison /img/forum/go_quote.gif Merry Christmas

({)

 

[Austin 3:16]

Quote:

Originally Posted by troymadison /img/forum/go_quote.gif Merry Christmas

That's so last year....

 

[rincewind]

There are INSANELY differing prices for broadband between different countries. I'm in Australia and we pay about 80USD a month for an ADSL2+ connection (which in reality doesn't go anywhere near close to the limits of ADSL - it runs more like ADSL1), and we have a peak (7am-1am) quota of 40Gb and off peak of 110Gb. Whereas ppl I know in Hong Kong get 10x this speed (ie properly functioning ADSL2) for about 1/4 the price, with NO quotas.

I think USA, Japan, EU and some parts of Asia have the best internet infrastructure and pricing. Countries which simply don't have the infrastructure, or countries with stupid pricing like here are far behind. For example, my GF refuses to get broadband because she currently spends $13USD a month for dialup with no 'limits' (dl quota), but the cheapest broadband plans from remotely reputable ISPs are along the lines of 35USD/month for 256kbps/64kbps, with a 1Gb on/1Gb off quotas. LAME. I've seen similar plans for +/-10USD, but this still gives a rough indication of how stupidly it's priced here. From googling, it looks like ~43% of Australians had broadband in 2006-07. We are a very sparsely populated area, with (I believe) the majority of country areas still on dialup. The USA has 31ppl/km^2, whereas Australia has 2.6ppl/km^2. Someone has to cater to that other ~60% and the technology doesn't currently exist to cost effectively provide broadband to such a wide area.

(ps, here's a good diagram outlining population density I reckon population density is a pretty good (rough) indication of broadband access/cost).

 

[nibiyabi]

Merry Christmas.