nCity Domains

"Blog" defined: A search of Wikipedia for the word "blog" yielded:

"The term blog is a blend of the terms web and log..." and
"The modern Blog evolved from an online diary..."

No blogging here... we just don't have time to post and maintain a proper blog on this site. (Can ya feel the disappointment?) Instead, think of this page as a kind of 'catchall' for stuff that just doesn't fit anywhere else. Diatribes, mostly.

Opinions and commentary posted here (and elsewhere on this site) are the views and responsibility of nCity alone. Quoted material from outside sources will be duly credited as such, with links to sources provided where possible.

If it works, update it. (Links = Wikipedia.): As it turns out, we all arrived at the 21st Century dragging four major Operating Systems: The ever-popular DOS/Windows on WinTel boxes; UNIX running a majority of the world's servers; Apple's rock-solid MacOS on PowerPC processors; and a variety of Linux distributions gaining popularity as a free, open source alternative to Windows and proprietary (read: expensive) software. There were other Operating Systems to be sure, but these were the four most common of the day. Two of these Operating Systems were derived from UNIX and (more-or-less) open source, but the other two were strictly proprietary. (Not to give Sun and Solaris short shrift, but Solaris was primarily a mainframe/workstation OS.)
: UNIX, granddaddy of all timeshare/server software dating back to the 1960s, UNIX arrived at 2001 as a respected and full-strength OS (if major-league geeky), designed for multiple users and secure network communications. UNIX logged in, unlocked the door to the 21st Century with a password or two, then confirmed its authorization to open that door before entering 2001. It then closed and locked the door behind it, meticulously logging each step along the way.
: MacOS arrived at the 21st Century on the G4 PowerPC RISC processor from Apple, IBM and Motorola. It simply knocked once, walked in and went to work.
: Linux - as usual - tried to get in for free, only to find that somebody had changed the lock. With the help of a few homemade drivers and scattered bits scavenged from various sources, Linux squirmed under the door but had to leave a few offspring behind when it discovered that software developers kinda like to get paid for their work.
: Windows (surprised to have survived so long) arrived at 2001 even more disoriented than usual, what with the Y2K thing and all. Windows staggered in to find the door wide open and unhinged; the place had been ransacked - again. So, it threw the door aside, gave the looters a job, and invited them to bring all their friends, hoping to charge admission.
: This is all hindsight, of course, but while Windows was gagging on Y2K, Apple was busily creating an entirely new OS (after absorbing NeXT and abandoning Rhapsody). The new MacOS X would incorporate UNIX strengths and security with the Mac's famously easy-to-use interface. Being open source, Mac users now have access to the inner workings of their OS for the first time, along with a command-line terminal. Having ported older MacOS versions to run on Intel chips since System 7, Apple's move to Intel processors might have been predictable, but that development came as something of a surprise to most Mac fans - including me.

The new "killer app.": In the early days, the expense of buying a computer could only be justified by most folks if it served some specific, easily understood purpose. Anyone who ever used a typewriter could certainly understand the advantage of typing, editing and making corrections _before_ actually printing a document, so the word processor program became the first "killer application" to make computers attractive to mainstream consumers. Seems silly now, but at the time very few people had any idea what a computer could be used for, and the word "digital" usually referred to one's fingers (now free of typewriters).
: With the advent of the World Wide Web came Netscape, and with Netscape came a new world of possibilities. The internet quickly became the new "killer app," as it remains to this day. Even those who have no intention of using a computer for anything beyond email and internet can easily recognize the importance of network communications, making a computer necessary as a kind of "information appliance." It seems logical, then, that Apple would choose UNIX as the kernel for a new OS since communications and networking have become so fundamental. Which brings us to the surprise processor switch.....

Processor evolution:: Each OS is designed around a specific central processing unit (CPU), or computer "chip." IBM got off to a slow start, selling WinTel boxes like everybody else while its chip division was developing IBM's own processor. By 2000, IBM had dropped the 68K processor, developed a new RISC chip (the PowerPC) with Apple and Motorola; then all three set about working on the next generation G3s, G4s and G5s. Intel, still producing processors for WinTel boxes (weirdly known as "IBM clones") was following along behind IBM and AMD which began gaining ground with 64-bit architecture. Then, quietly, Motorola spun off its chip division (now called Freescale <http://www.freescale.com/>), and IBM suddenly sold-off its entire personal computer unit to the Chinese (Lenovo <http://www.lenovo.com/us/en/>), leaving Intel and AMD as the sole surviving chip makers. (If I'm missing somebody, please let me know).

Change is eternal...: Each of these changes caused a cascading effect, making various System and software rewrites and updates necessary along the way. Apple has done a spectacular job of leading the industry through various changes while keeping nonsense to a minimum and maintaining Apple's reputation for compatibility (including 32/64-bit CPUs and older OS/app support). Sun has followed suit, and even Microsoft tagged along - last, as usual, with a crude imitation of Apple's first OSX from six years ago (sans backward compatibility).
: Being first means a lot of beta testing - and let's face it: Things change so fast these days, "beta tester" and "early adopter" have become synonymous. But, having progressed thru five major MacOS upgrades along with dozens of minor updates, the new MacOS is well established and highly polished. (Microsoft, on the other hand, faces an uphill battle with its minions, many of whom are switching to Macs.) With both Apple and Sun switching to Intel processors, and some PC makers offering Linux as an alternative to Windows, the industry is moving right along, leaving Microsoft to bring up the rear.

Is it all worthwhile? Yes - with reservations.: Then came broadband, a decidedly mixed blessing. Why? Obviously it is _way_ faster than dialup (assuming your provider is keeping up with demand), but the down side (also an up side) is that it's always connected and you're always online. This allows any software you have installed to "phone home" on launch and send back whatever data it was designed to collect - without your knowledge. As it stands now, this function is commonly used to check for available updates, or perhaps to send system configuration info or validate registration, but it isn't too much of a stretch to think it might be used to collect info about user interests and habits for advertising purposes - or worse. I'm not talking about spyware, adware and the like; I'm talking about mainstream applications, Operating Systems, utility programs and even simple widgets. Many of these access web resources (Apple's Help menu, for example) transparently and automatically, _if_ you are connected via broadband. (If you're on dialup, it probably won't bother.)
: Another disappointing trend is the ever-growing fudge factor. Like buying 2x4 studs that aren't really 2 and aren't really 4, it has become common practice to falsely label hard drive storage as larger than actual capacity. This is accomplished by having two numbers: The drive's "size" - printed in big block letters on the box - and the drive's capacity, sometimes completely unavailable until actually formatting the volume. Another fudge factor involves System Requirements: When meeting a program's minimum System Requirements means that the application will barely launch and cannot run with all of its features enabled, then it's time to _SAY SO_ on the box (and in all advertising). Sometimes, the only way to achieve that program's full potential is to buy a whole new computer. That's just plain rude.
: Having said all that, these perpetual upgrades and resulting updates enable much more functionality at greater speeds and (hopefully) greater efficiency than ever before, especially with communications and network activity. While it might be prudent to wait until after the first round of updates and bug fixes before jumping into something new, it is never a good idea to fall too far behind. So far (at least in the Mac world), benefits far outweigh any drawbacks.

Radio shows for PC propeller heads: Listen to what you don't hear.

Resistance is futile.: Like Mac fans everywhere, I've learned to avoid discussing computers around most PC users (see the Mac Myths section). If you use a Mac, you know what I mean. Suffice it to say, it's almost always a waste of time. Listening to computer shows on the radio is about the same, but at least you know what to expect, and why:
: Caller: "I bought a brand-new PC, only had it about three months, and it keeps crashing. I run all the utility programs you recommend, but it keeps collecting viruses and spyware anyway, then it crashes again, and..... should I sell it and get a - [caller is cutoff] - ?"; The next word had to be "Macintosh."
: This radio show - like so many others - is roughly one-half advertising, with another one-third of its air time wasted on the host's self-adulation, self-aggrandizing, and constant references to subjects "coming up in the next hour." The remaining 17% or so of actual content typically deals with Windows malware, Windows security issues and Microsoft bugs, supported by ads for products designed to deal with these same problems - ads that often feature the show's very own host. Is it any wonder that Macs are avoided on this program? No. All these people are out of work if/when PC users switch to the Macintosh platform.
: Caller: "Hi. I'm trying to figure out how I can send an email with a photo or graphic inline, within the email message. I use a Mac, so it should be easy, right?"; The radio show's host just chuckled, got sidetracked into something about email addresses, then cut to a commercial.
: My guess is that the 'Mac reference' got past show's screener. Why would that matter? Because, on a Mac, it _is_ easy: Open an outgoing email window, then drag the photo or graphic into that email window. That's all there is to it. Problem is, a PC user will never receive it that way; on PCs, any attachment - inline or otherwise - is treated as a potential virus, stripped out and quarantined. Email and attachments are opened in different apps, in multiple windows, and must be found in different locations - after scanning both, of course.
: I have to admit, I listen sometimes just to hear about all the abuse I'm missing: The latest virus, and the steps necessary to protect yourself; announcements of five-year-old technology newly arrived in the Windows world; how to reformat your hard drive if Windows was shutdown improperly; how to get rid of unwanted and invisible Word files containing personal information. And, one of my favorites, "plug and play" processes requiring installation of drivers, reboots and system reconfiguration. It's the greatest Mac advertising ever, but PC users don't know that.

Expand your horizons.: There _are_ many other sources of information these days, including web resources, podcasts, and a variety of independent tech shows on AM and FM (but nothing beats hands-on experience). Having been a guest on one such program, it was refreshing to hear their even-handed approach to computer technology and be able to contrast and compare various platforms without the usual PC bent. It's too bad such programs can't seem to gain a wider audience without agenda-driven funding and the resulting bias.
: Sad to hear all the needless nonsense Windows users have to go thru just for simple functions like email and internet; and I'm always amazed at how many people believe all that long-suffering succotash is the norm for all computers - without giving it a second thought.
: I once asked a PC technician to name the worst virus he'd ever encountered.; Without hesitation he replied, "Windows."

Newspaper bias or seven years bad luck? Apple plumbs the depth of bad press.

The 1990s were not kind to "Apple's rabid fans," according to a pair of butthead staff writers at SF's Chronicle (front page, 1/24/96). In fact, local news media pounded Apple on a regular basis for a time. Stories of Apple's imminent demise appeared weekly, if not daily. It was relentless. Rumors were rampant. Every tiny hint of trouble reported in mindless minutia by media "experts" with a certain kind of sky-is-falling flair. Almost gleeful, they were. Even CalPERS (California Public Employees' Retirement System) made headline news when it dumped all of its Apple holdings at almost exactly the same time Apple hit its all-time historic low of $13 per share. (Someday I'll do the math and figure out how much money CalPERS lost.) Buy low, sell high. Duh. Laminated montage of SF Chronicle stories from the late 90s, currently hanging on the MacShack's bathroom door.: Not that Apple's history is lacking drama, no. It's one whale of a tale, told on magazine covers, in strange, sometimes ugly headlines and in more than a few books. There was even a goofy, made-for-TV movie that was almost as stupid as it was disappointing. (Some network apparently thought the story was over.)
: So, why all the bad press? Makes no more sense now than it did then. Today, it seems Apple has to be four times better than everybody else just to get a nybble of attention. And then it's only grudgingly. Thanks to the iPod (and Pixar, to some extent), Apple can no longer be ignored - but that's not to say the news media is capable of getting their facts straight.

Case in point: Intel announces their intention to adopt a dual-processor architecture in 2004, and it's all over the news. No mention of the fact that Apple was using twin processors in 1996 (PPC 9500/180MP). 64-bit? AMD got that announcement, this time only a few years behind the copper-based G5 Macintosh. Intel processors in Macs? Gee, we can run Winduhs on the Mac now, like _that's_ good news - or news at all (see Mac Myths section). Did we poke fun at Intel? Yes, we did. (Composite from 1998 "Toasted Bunny" ad.): Meanwhile, market pariah Microsoft becomes increasingly irrelevant. Now, _there's_ a story: PC sales are down, Apple is posting record profits, Intel has joined the show, iPods and iPhones are everywhere. Microsoft is losing control and could soon be little more than a footnote.
: As an Apple shareholder, it nice to see the Mac gain visibility and the recognition it deserves; after all, Apple is a computer company (as Woz rightly pointed out). If you count yourself among "Apple's rabid fans," you can rest assured that no news regarding Apple only means the company is doing better than expected. Why Apple's progress shouldn't be cause for celebration - especially here in Northern California - remains a mystery to me.

Microsoft weighs in: Lauded as the Great Innovator that it never was.

: Often cited by a variety of self-proclaimed "experts" on TV and radio as the source of all computer technology and innovation, Microsoft's place in history has always been dead last. Last to accommodate a mouse, last to get onboard the World Wide Web, last to provide any sort of "security." These are just a few of the more notorious last-place accomplishments of Microsoft; there are countless others, large and small. Meanwhile, Microsoft struggles to maintain a death grip on its myriad Windows users, doing its best to make sure nothing gets thru to the Windows platform that isn't owned or controlled by Microsoft. (Look no further than Netscape for a prime example. Anybody remember those antitrust hearings?) Vista appears to be more of the same.

Better off without Microsoft.: Truth is, we'd all be _much_ better off today without Microsoft's influence on the computer market and technology. Like a ball-and-chain, the industry as a whole (and Apple in particular) has been dragging Microsoft and its captive audience along, inch by inch. Thanks to Microsoft, we all have to stoop to the lowest common denominator in order to network with its minions. From a Mac perspective, it's like trying to communicate with someone whose only language is ebonics*. (Roger calls it "Microquine," Rod prefers "Microsquib." Randy just winks.)
: Many (most?) PC users have no experience with anything other than Windows/DOS, and many of them apparently assume all computers are alike. What's truly unfortunate is the amount of time and money they have invested in their PCs; the longer they stick with Windows, the deeper their commitment and investment becomes. That can make switching platforms an expensive proposition. While much of the hardware is compatible, and most (if not all) major software programs are cross-platform, there's still a considerable expense in both time and money. (The learning curve is more like an unlearning curve.) On the up side, any expense from switching to a Mac will soon be compensated by increased productivity and reduced down time. Don't take my word for it, do the research yourself. Or, you can keep listening to those PC computer shows.
: *Ebonics: California's Oakland School District attempted to obtain federal funds for bilingual education by classifying unintelligible street slang as a foreign language and calling it ebonics.

Research the Web's structure and organization. Here are a few links to get you started:
Briefly:

Network Solutions (NetSol) was created to oversee the Internet under the U.S. Department of Defense. When the web was "privatized," NetSol was purchased by VeriSign, and then the issue of VeriSign's monopoly was addressed. Since then, a variety of other registrars have been created to handle various top-level domains (TLDs) including newly created TLDs, leaving the two largest TLDs - .net and .com - in the hands of VeriSign.

External Links:

American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)

IANA country codes

IANA generic domains

ICANN

Internet Assigned Numbers Authority

InterNIC (Accredited Registrar Directory)

Nat'l Telecom and Information Agency

NTIA agreements and amendments

Public Interest Registry (.org)

VeriSign (.com and .net)

Early History:

In its short but tumultuous history (so far), the "web" has morph'd from Dr. Jon Postel's DARPA model under the U.S. Department of Defense - a redundant network of nodes - to a thriving, international/global network of networks. To its credit, the Federal Government has long taken a hands-off approach, avoiding any "internet governance" and only addressing Domain Name Services (DNS) as necessary to facilitate internet operation on a global scale with respect to borders, languages and technology. The model for control of the internet's entire addressing scheme has changed periodically, as agreements between governments and multinational corporations expire and are renegotiated. The potential for abuse is enormous. ( See the Generic Top Level Domain Memorandum of Understanding: <http://www.gtld-mou.org>)

In 1997, the U.S. Department of Commerce under the Clinton administration was directed to privatize DNS, " ...in a manner that increases competition and facilitates international participation in its management." Through a cooperative agreement between the National Science Foundation (NSF) and Network Solutions Incorporated (NSI), a $35-per-year fee structure was established for DNS registration and management via NSI's Network Information Center (aka, the interNIC) which was later purchased by VeriSign.

The Web now fans out from its backbone of DNS name/number servers (most located in the United States) to countless secondary networks and subnets worldwide with assistance from the U.S. Government, whose continued participation in a global internet is (of course) crucial. However, the idea of putting control of DNS in the hands of the private sector may prove to be another matter. The root DNS registry is currently under license from the U.S. Department of Commerce National Telecommunications and Information Administration, the NTIA and the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority, the IANA. The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, ICANN, certifies specific registrars to sell and manage domain names. These registrars are private-sector corporations (including VeriSign and those listed below).

Top Level Domains (TLDs) are split into three categories:

Country Codes (ccTLD). These domains are all two-letter suffixes assigned to about 250 countries world-wide.

Generic Domains (gTLD). The largest of these, by far, is the .com domain owned by VeriSign.

.aero reserved for the air transport industry by SITA

.com/.net/.cc/.tv, all owned by VeriSign (January 2002)

.org owned by Public Interest Registry (January 2003) is no longer noncommercial

.biz owned by NeuLevel Incorporated

.coop for co-ops, sponsored by the National Cooperative Business Association (NCBA)

.info owned by Afilias Limited

.museum, the Museum Domain Management Association

.name reserved for individuals, operated by Global Name Registry

.pro operated by RegistryPro, Ltd.

.gov reserved for the U.S. Government

.edu reserved for educational institutions, operated by Educause

.mil reserved for the U.S. Military, operated by the Department of Defense

.int for organizations established by international treaty, operated by the IANA

(New domains may have been added to the gTLD category.)

Infrastructure Domain .arpa, the Address and Routing Parameter Area, exclusively for internet infrastructure use and operated by IANA.

Current agreements and amendments (most in pdf format) can be found on the NTIA web site: <http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/nsi.htm>

Registration and Registrar information is available from VeriSign or the American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN): <http://www.arin.net/>

NOTE: Alternative networks include: name.space, AlterNIC, eDNS, WWW2, and others.

Current Trends and Transitions:

Having started with bulletin boards (BBS) using terminal programs (Zterm and BBS-supplied apps), internet access is now achieved using a browser like Safari or Firefox with set standards, thru an internet service provider (ISP), over existing infrastructure such as phone and cable lines or satellite dish. (Electric power lines may also be used for internet and communications, although this is still in experimental stages.)

The internet had a "gold rush" of sorts - the notorious "dot-com bubble" - when get-rich-quick schemes of all sorts flooded the new online internet market. Those ideas with merit survived and flourished (eBay, Amazon, search engines Yahoo and Google, to name a few); but the majority of "dot-coms" were so ill-conceived or outright fraudulent that the period became known for spectacular and costly failures.

The 'net has also survived a kind of "wild west" period with little or no official regulation or control, thanks in large part to the U.S. government's hands-off approach to internet regulation. However, there is growing concern over spam and spoofs, pornography, web sites selling illegal goods, so-called "online predators" and other problems currently being addressed at the user level by various filters and parental controls. In addition, America's antiterrorism stance has justified eavesdropping and domestic spying and threatens to become the ultimate excuse for the "Big Brother" of 1984 fame. In the private sector, Google's controversial decision to cooperate with Chinese government restriction of unapproved web sites is an early example of censorship on a corporate level.

The current battle for control of internet access by telephone and cable service providers - along with tiered broadband access - might prove to be an even bigger problem. If broadband ISPs begin hampering access to competing networks, things could quickly get ugly. And if any broadband provider gains monopoly status, look for already exorbitant prices to soar. One of the most refreshing and powerful aspects of today's internet is its wide-open, unregulated, global access to information of all sorts (at least here in the States), but those days may be numbered as corporations and governments begin to apply control and attempt regulation.

Domain name registration.

VeriSign has done well to stay out of the spotlight as the internet continues to sort itself out. Registration of domain names is strictly controlled in some ways - country codes for example - but wide open in others. Registrars range from giant VeriSign (still in control of .com and .net) to neighborhood ISPs acting as agents. Registration schemes abound. Services offered by site designers, ISPs, and VeriSign itself range from the bottom-line and regulated biannual fee, to substantial (unjustified) monthly rates charged to the unwary. Registration of a domain name expires at two or five year intervals, to the second. If it goes neglected, someone else could own it. Best to use a reliable registrar and web host.

Your relationship with your web host (ISP) is important for a variety of reasons beyond just its charge for hosting; it might best be viewed as a partnership. Be sure to factor-in your site's use of forms, JavaScript, CGIs, storage requirements, and other qualifications when selecting a host. Then review service contracts for potential web hosts, along with host's past history, equipment, and additional services offered before making a long-term commitment. Having a reliable host capable of managing a variety of domain issues can be a big plus.

Hosting your own web site requires a static IP (Internet Protocol) address, high-speed broadband (3Mbps+), and a fast server. All of which is a possibility for those willing to tackle the technicalities. (The big bottleneck is true broadband availability.) Does it make sense to host your own? Probably not, unless you have bigger plans involving T-1 lines and hosting space, or web sales. It takes time, and it's not easy.

Finding a suitable - and available - domain name presents a problem, too, especially with "speculators" hijacking every name they can think of, then offering these for resale at extortion prices. (As I recall, the domain name "bank.com" sold for $3M.) Many ISPs will snag a domain name for you, automatically, the instant it becomes available - for a reasonable fee. Domain names become quite valuable when you consider promotional materials, investment in site resources, email addresses, and advertising. When checking availability of a given domain name, it might be best to look it up thru a secure server rather than openly checking the interNIC.

<http://www.betterwhois.com/index.htm>

Research links for web access and white papers:
Briefly:

Net access over existing infrastructure - digital subscriber lines (DSL) over telephone lines, and broadband cable via coax - is ridiculously overpriced here (CA), with both companies promising performance levels they cannot deliver while charging irrelevant tiered rates. Telephone and cable companies are fighting over control. But..... cable access also travels over phone lines, putting Ma Bell behind the wheel.

External Links:

American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)

ATT Support pages

Comcast Support pages

Verizon Support pages

DirecWay (Now Hughes Network)

FCC consumer info regarding broadband

A quick data transmission primer:

Unlike conventional electronic circuits that supply and switch electrical current (or "juice," as my father liked to call it), data transmission deals with bits in bytes and packets, the challenge being to move as much data over the wire or thru the air as quickly and efficiently as possible. When discussing data transmission, we use terms like "pipeline" and "bus," terms which adequately describe data transmission issues. In fact, next time you see that popular old PC screen saver that builds a colorful 3-D pipeline, think of it as your internet connection.

Wire, of course, still has electrical specs - volts, amps, watts, resistance - with countless junctions, splices, connectors, etcetera, all subject to age, corrosion and distance, all of which affects data transmission speed and reliability. A 40-year-old phone line might only be capable of 28.8Kbps (bits per second) or less, while a second (newer) phone line to the same computer might send/receive at 44-46Kbps using an analog (dialup) modem. Without the need to translate digital-to-analog and back, a broadband connection over the same phone wire can function considerably faster, provided physical distance and other factors are within range. Electrical characteristics of coax wire gives cable broadband a significant speed advantage over copper phone lines - but that doesn't necessarily mean the end user is going to notice any difference. Transmission speed becomes a factor of reliability, load and location, but nowadays other concerns determine real-world bandwidth "speed", concerns that have more to do with profit than performance.

The FCC defines broadband as data transmission exceeding 200Kbps in at least one direction, meaning your download direction. Upload capacity is generally unimportant to most consumers (since they seldom have need to send large files), but is critical to servers. Specific web sites that are slow to load or stall are either overwhelmed with traffic, have a programming "bug," or they might have limited capability, but a perceived delay on a regular basis most likely has more to do with your broadband service than a given web site's server.

Broadband technologies and types:

DSL, digital subscriber line, is broadband over phone lines. In this area, it usually means copper wire, but areas served by fiber optic transmission lines have the best of all possible options.

Cable, typically 75� coax here in the foothills, has one major potential flaw; data transmission rates slow down as number of nodes (users) increase. Again, use of fiber optic lines could eliminate this drawback - but there's no sign of fiber happening here in Nor Cal.

Wireless (WiFi), using radio waves and standard protocols (802.11b, 802.11g, 802.11n), wireless protocols provide limited range local area networking (roughly 50 yards indoors to 150 yards outdoors). Some cities have installed free wireless networks with various degrees of success.

Satellite, the most expensive option in terms of monthly rates and equipment, is subject to weather conditions that can affect dish antennas and a certain amount of latency. Speeds vary from a low near dialup to a high in broadband range (as defined by the FCC).

BPL, broadband over powerline, might someday be a serious contender, but not today and not here. It's major advantage is a ready-built infrastructure going virtually everywhere, with speed capability equal to or better than cable or DSL.

Bottom line: $50-$60 per month does not buy full speed.

Once you get past introductory prices and promotions from broadband providers - with lots of fine print, annual contracts, additional service requirements, rebates and other schemes - broadband breaks down into tiered rates that run up to $50-$60 or more per month. Advertised speed comparisons to dialup (at 28.8Kbps) promise data rates you'll never see, and undefined terms like "true high-speed internet" are meaningless. Broadband ISPs cannot guarantee any level of performance; in fact, neither cable or DSL can deliver advertised "speeds." Remember, the FCC's definition of broadband starts at 200Kbps, extremely low; only about four times the speed of dialup (54Kbps), and about 1/6th of where real-world broadband starts (1.5Mbps).

DSL: Here at the shop, we had DSL from 2002 until 2006. At first, data rates were positively snappy at a true 1.5Mbps, the shop's maximum phone line data rate according to extensive (Sunshine) testing. Broadband, whether DSL or cable, has never been that fast since. DSL has steadily declined from its top speed in 2002 to about half the phone line's capability, in the 700Kbps range. It's been as low as 56K at times. In addition, web pages load with a considerable "stall" lasting far too long. No matter..... offers from ATT promise "up to 3Mbps" despite their inability to deliver half that data rate.

Cable: While Comcast claims data rates of 6Mbps and more, their tiered payment structure promises 3Mbps (broadband alone) and 6Mbps (with purchase of additional services). Test results here at the shop briefly showed 3Mbps before dropping to 1.5Mbps on average, then to 1Mbps typical range. An "upgrade" to 6Mbps brought test results back to 1.5Mbps.

NOTE: Unlike ATT, Comcast has no official online speed test; test results are obtained from independent sources and utilities built into the Mac Operating System. It should also be noted that cable data also travels over ATT networks in the normal course of events.

In some areas (east coast), cable broadband was so popular that servers soon bogged down and subscribers flocked to DSL (with distributed access rather than shared access). Here in Nevada County, cable broadband is the new kid on the block and can offer better real-world data rates than DSL seems capable of providing - for now.

nCity Home..........Solutions...........Support..........Technical..........Services..........Courses..........Links