4 ms·
I don't know how it worked but I never saw better than 53/54k with v.90 or v.92. Maybe there was more going on.
by rascul 3y ago
I don't know how it worked but I never saw better than 53/54k with v.90 or v.92. Maybe there was more going on.
- Aloha 3y agoIt really depended a lot of how clean your pair was, and sometimes even what kind of switch you were homed on. Like channel banks prior to the D4 and a 1AESS would very likely have a marked difference to your speeds.
- MBCook 3y agoOnce, for a short while, I was getting around 110kbps reported from my modem (obviously it was doing compression). It couldn’t do it for binary, but it still was noticeable with HTML and email. It didn’t last long. Whatever accidental phone line + ISP magic enabled it was quickly “fixed”.
- rasz 3y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Point-to-Point_Compression https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Point-to-Point_Compr... but PPP compression wouldnt explain modem reporting faster speed. Btw I never saw PPP compression enabled in the wild either.
- MBCook 3y agoI had a nice US Robotics (or probably 3Com by that point) hardware modem, I have always assumed it was a feature in there somewhere. Maybe it was PPP instead. It was the effective link speed, not something measured with a download tool. This would have been ‘97 or so, so my memory is hazy.