February 28th Is The Big Day

[madamimadam]

Re: that sucks

Originally posted by AlphaTech


That sounds just plain old nasty... to be at the mercy of the feds to allow you to get faster internet... I got spoiled at work with having three T1 lines available (shared with about 250-300 users/systems). That is why I went with DSL as soon as I could. That and I got tired of having to dial in every time.

Now that I have had a chance to relax for a few (bad day at work), it makes some sense to convert the less populated states to fiber optics faster. Eventually everyone in the US will have that in available to them, it's just a matter of time.

It is not so bad in the sense that our "slow" cable is MORE than adequate for my needs but the inability to add a server means the business has to be on ADSL which is MUCH slower than cable and has a traffic limit of 1GB per month before extra charges apply. 1GB might sound like plenty to some but when you have 8 people on it and customers accessing a web page, it goes fast.

 

[AlphaTech]

madamimadamtimallen

That still sounds nasty to me. I guess we are spoiled over here in the US with the freedom to choose our providor as we see fit, and put just about anything we want on those connections.

At work, we have some servers that are located in NJ (we are in MA) that some people access from our location. While we have something around 3Mb between the two sites, it gets eaten up way too fast. Because of necessity, some people have to access files directly from that server, which causes many issues. Typically, we have to crank the memory allocations for the application that the file belongs to (typically excel) just to let them open a file. The files are never larger then between 3MB and 5MB, but we have to crank excel by about 2x to 4x what it is set to initially just to get the file to open and not crash their system.

I couldn't even begin to imagine the horrors of having a server with a max of 1Mb available to it. Even 8 people would be slow (painfully so I am certain).

 

[madamimadam]

Originally posted by AlphaTech
madamimadamtimallen

That still sounds nasty to me. I guess we are spoiled over here in the US with the freedom to choose our providor as we see fit, and put just about anything we want on those connections.

At work, we have some servers that are located in NJ (we are in MA) that some people access from our location. While we have something around 3Mb between the two sites, it gets eaten up way too fast. Because of necessity, some people have to access files directly from that server, which causes many issues. Typically, we have to crank the memory allocations for the application that the file belongs to (typically excel) just to let them open a file. The files are never larger then between 3MB and 5MB, but we have to crank excel by about 2x to 4x what it is set to initially just to get the file to open and not crash their system.

I couldn't even begin to imagine the horrors of having a server with a max of 1Mb available to it. Even 8 people would be slow (painfully so I am certain).

I think I just found the vital difference; you use your connection COMPLETELY different. On connections like this, you would not dream of accessing a file like those used in excel directly via the web. Everything is downloaded to HDD and then used; for anything else, a method of accessing information via HTML has to be set up, esp. if you want the info to be editable.

 

[AlphaTech]

Originally posted by madamimadamtimallen


I think I just found the vital difference; you use your connection COMPLETELY different. On connections like this, you would not dream of accessing a file like those used in excel directly via the web. Everything is downloaded to HDD and then used; for anything else, a method of accessing information via HTML has to be set up, esp. if you want the info to be editable.

The problem is when they don't pull the file down to their hard drive, but use it while it still sits on the server. We tell everyone to pull their files (fonts included) down to their computer before opening it up. But because someone decided that those certain files HAVE to be opened up on the server, it causes problems.

The connection is via a WAN, not the web, but it is still nasty for such things. There is also the problems of the network going down, or the servers getting filled with files and being taken off the network. But that is a story for another day.

 

[madamimadam]

Originally posted by AlphaTech


The problem is when they don't pull the file down to their hard drive, but use it while it still sits on the server. We tell everyone to pull their files (fonts included) down to their computer before opening it up. But because someone decided that those certain files HAVE to be opened up on the server, it causes problems.

The connection is via a WAN, not the web, but it is still nasty for such things. There is also the problems of the network going down, or the servers getting filled with files and being taken off the network. But that is a story for another day.

I have NEVER dealt with a WAN, though I understand the basis of it, but is there no way of stopping people opening the files via the server. The fact will always remain, as you VERY well know, that most people just have NFI when it comes to computers and insist on doing what they are told not to.