Apple releases broadband tuner 1.0

Discussion in 'MacBytes.com News Discussion' started by MacBytes, Nov 28, 2005.

  1. MacBytes macrumors bot

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2003
  2. liketom macrumors 601

    liketom

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2004
    Location:
    Lincoln,UK
    #2
    thats cool , but when i downloaded it it went straight into the installer? i thought 10.4 always had that download pop up?

    but cool anyway
     
  3. crazzyeddie macrumors 68030

    crazzyeddie

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2002
    Location:
    Florida, USA
    #3
    Same here. It must be one of those net-enabled DiskImages with some sort of Apple-trusted key.... sounds sorta like M$.
     
  4. GKThursday macrumors regular

    GKThursday

    Joined:
    May 25, 2005
    #4
    Ditto,
    I did get a warning as it started installing, but it's a bit late at that point.
    Yi+
    Thursday
     
  5. thejadedmonkey macrumors 604

    thejadedmonkey

    Joined:
    May 28, 2005
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    #5
    This is where I spaz. Please, never ever ever ever compare Apple to M$ (No matter how similar they are :p )
     
  6. mduser63 macrumors 68040

    mduser63

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2004
    Location:
    Salt Lake City, UT
    #6
    I think this is Tiger only. Tried to install it on my Power Mac (running Panther) and it said that it couldn't be installed.
     
  7. ITASOR macrumors 601

    ITASOR

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2005
    #7
    I'm hesitant to install this because my internet it working surprisingly well lately and I have a feeling this will end my happiness. Besides, how much faster can it make it?
     
  8. mainstreetmark macrumors 68020

    mainstreetmark

    Joined:
    May 7, 2003
    Location:
    Saint Augustine, FL
    #8
    I hate that stupid thing.
     
  9. bluebomberman macrumors 6502a

    bluebomberman

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2005
    Location:
    Queens, NYC
    #9
    Where does it install to exactly? I don't see how you uninstall it...
     
  10. treblah macrumors 65816

    treblah

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2003
    Location:
    29680
    #10
    I'm guessing you have 'Open safe files automatically' checked?
     
  11. samh004 macrumors 68020

    samh004

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2004
    Location:
    Australia
    #11
    It mentions:

    There is an optional uninstaller that can be used to restore the settings that were in effect at the time just before the system parameters were changed.

    So I would assume you just launch it again and select uninstall if need be.
     
  12. bluebomberman macrumors 6502a

    bluebomberman

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2005
    Location:
    Queens, NYC
    #12
    Okay, not entirely intuitive to launch the installer to uninstall it...but your answer sounds plausible enough.

    Internet's working, at least, so I'll stick with it.
     
  13. runninmac macrumors 65816

    runninmac

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2005
    Location:
    Rockford MI
    #13
    So im takin it wont help for standard homenetworks? (if i even understand what it does?)
     
  14. dejo Moderator

    dejo

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2004
    Location:
    The Centennial State
    #14
    Would you prefer malware instead? ;)
     
  15. iGary Guest

    iGary

    Joined:
    May 26, 2004
    Location:
    Randy's House
  16. dejo Moderator

    dejo

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2004
    Location:
    The Centennial State
    #16
    Does anyone know if this will have much effect on the following setup: Mac to Airport Base Station via Airport Extreme, Base Station to cable modem via cat-5, cable modem to... well, you know the rest?
     
  17. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #17

    What he said.
     
  18. DavidLeblond macrumors 68020

    DavidLeblond

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    Location:
    Raleigh, NC
    #18
    Unless you have one bitchin' cable connection, I'm guessing no. I'm not touching this one... says for very fast connections (5Mbps or greater) and thats not me.
     
  19. bentoon macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2003
    Location:
    NYC
  20. xStep macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2003
    Location:
    Less lost in L.A.
    #20
    Will it Help Home Networks

    Here is a short (Linux) tutorial about this very subject...
    http://www.onlamp.com/pub/a/onlamp/2005/11/17/tcp_tuning.html

    How I understood it was; when you have a very high speed network connection and the time for the packets to get from your box to the destination is long, your better off sending bigger chunks of data. It sounded to me part of the issue was that the client was waiting for acknowledgments that the packets were received correctly, before sending more data. If your sending more data per packet, your waiting on fewer receipt notices.

    So, it doesn't sound like this will help your internal network which has high bandwidth and very low latency.

    I wonder what happens when this goes through a router. Does the router have to be tuned too?
     
  21. shamino macrumors 68040

    shamino

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2004
    Location:
    Purcellville, VA
    #21
    According to the Apple page, it is meant for people with high-speed (5M or faster) links with high-latency. In other words, satellite users.

    People using satellite broadband often have problems with internet access, because of the high latency, relative to the bandwidth. You've always been able to hack around this by tweaking some system parameters (increasing the size of the TCP buffers). This application simple performs the tweak for you (increasing the send-buffer to 128K and the receive buffer to 350K) using an Apple-supported installer.

    It doesn't do anything you couldn't do yourself, but the self-contained installer should (hopefully) prevent people from making mistakes that might cripple their networking capabilities.
     
  22. iMeowbot macrumors G3

    iMeowbot

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2003
    #22
    Yep. Nothing wrong with your system, 10.4 is in the system requirements. You can, however, still get the same effect by using the sysctl command from the terminal.
     
  23. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #23
    My connection does seem a little more perky now. Then again It's 6 Mb at least.
     
  24. mkrishnan Moderator emeritus

    mkrishnan

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Location:
    Grand Rapids, MI, USA
    #24
    It's weird for Apple to release a one-off "tuner" instead of making this a configurable option in an upgrade to the networks preference pane.... :(
     
  25. shamino macrumors 68040

    shamino

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2004
    Location:
    Purcellville, VA
    #25
    Unless you've got a seriously crippled ISP, only satellite users will need this.

    All other kinds of high-speed connections (like cable modems and leased lines) usually have very low latency.

    The problem with satellite is that the speed of light can't be increased. A geostationary satellite (which is what you must use if your antenna doesn't have elaborate controls to follow it across the sky) must be at an altitude of about 36,000km. Light moves at about 300,000km/s, so it takes light about 0.12s to get to the satellite. Multiply that by 4 (you to the satellite, satellite to the destination, reply from the destination to the satellite, reply from the satellite to you) and you get about a one-half second (0.48s) round-trip delay.

    So, when TCP sends a packet, it will be at least half a second before the ACK comes back from the computer on the other end. When you've got a high speed link, a LOT of traffic can arrive (or be sent) during that half-second. (at 5Mbps, a half-second is 2.5Mb or 320KB.) This is enough to easily overflow your buffers, causing TCP's congestion control to kick in, drastically slowing down the entire connection.

    The workaround is to increase the buffers enough so that they don't fill up before the ACK packets arrive. This way, everything keeps on streaming nicely, without annoying slowdowns. Apple's choice of 350K for the receive buffer covers the estimated 320K burst, plus a little slack space.
     

Share This Page

71 November 28, 2005