Internet troubles

[Uncle Shags]

I am moving in a couple weeks and so far it looks like I am screwed. My online gaming may have to come to an end. I'm trying not to freak out.

So here is the deal. I live in a very rural area that doesn't have many options (internet or otherwise...). The only cable company is Time Warner cable which I am using in my current house, but my new road isn't wired for it. A guy checked the address and said the closest cable is 1.25 miles and it would cost me $44,000 to run cable to my house. Apparently there is a process where you can get a bunch of neighbors together to sign a petition and promise to sign up for cable, but I hear that takes a year at least.

My other option is dsl, but there is only one company that does it (Verizon) and they also don't have any houses wired on my road. I haven't been able to talk to anyone about getting it wired, but I am assuming it will be the same story as Time Warner.

So as far as I can tell my only options for internet are dial-up, which is too slow, and mobile broadband which has a download limit which prevents online gaming.

Does anyone have any suggestions?

[Kakarat]

Satellite internet?, not sure how reliable that is. That is another option to check into.

[Vanraw]

DSL uses your phone line. Its a data over voice technology. So they do not have run lines to the house, but they do need to say they support it for your lines and then they can remotely run a test on a existing phone line in the house and tell you if and what level of service can be added.

Most of the large telco's have DSLAMs on most lines. But sometime there is loss or other impairments on the last mile that impact the ability to offer the service.

The thing about DSL is that you will not get cable level speeds, but closer to 1 meg. The technology does go much higher but you need to be pretty close to the CO, But it is much better then dial up.....

I would call them and ask if the address can support it, and then they can test. Might have toi test after you move in though.....

Also since this is Verizon, make sure you ask when FIOS will be there. Even if you know it is not in the area, every time some ask inside a vz foot print the track the request and then it helps them to define next expansion area's.

The other option is using a cell carrier or look around for a wifi offering. The wifi offering is usually small mom and pop shops that will feed a line of site shot into your house. If there is no internet there, its likely that some one is offering a wireless offering.

[Zirak]

I had a friend try satellite for online gaming once and it had huge latency issues so... not a good thing.

[Slamz]

I bet you could still do MMORPGs on dial-up. These games don't tend to be that dependent on latency and just from a perspective of cost to the company it makes sense to keep bandwidth requirements low.

Twitch FPS gaming would suck but maybe you'd still have some options. The TF2 engineer is a very lag friendly class for instance, and to a large extent so is the Heavy (which only "aims" in a rather vague way anyway). Your days as a TF2 sniper or scout are probably coming to an end, though.

RTS games tend to be latency friendly, though some of them can be bandwidth hogs. I bet you'd be fine in Starcraft 2, though.



How's cell phone reception?

I wonder if you can do some sort of unlimited data plan and get your PC to connect to that somehow.

There may be some kind of option for trying to find the nearest person who DOES have broadband and figuring out a way to hook into that. Microwave transmitters and receivers? Wireless with boosters? I can only imagine that there are cheaper ways to get a signal over 1.25 miles than $44,000 would buy.

[Moristans]

I played EQ on dial-up for a couple of months. Honestly, the major issue was hourly cost, not playability.

[Snowreap]

There may be some kind of option for trying to find the nearest person who DOES have broadband and figuring out a way to hook into that. Microwave transmitters and receivers? Wireless with boosters? I can only imagine that there are cheaper ways to get a signal over 1.25 miles than $44,000 would buy.

a quick google search for "wireless point-to-point bridge" generates a lot of useful links.

-ken

[Diggles]

DSL uses your phone line. Its a data over voice technology. So they do not have run lines to the house, but they do need to say they support it for your lines and then they can remotely run a test on a existing phone line in the house and tell you if and what level of service can be added

DSL requires you be within 1 mile of routing center or remote substation, which is highly unlikely for anyone in rural area.

Satellite has horrible latency (good luck with 1000 ping) and insane bandwidth limits. Last client I helped that had it was limited to 300mb/month.


Moral of the story is have fun with dial up, dont choose to live in backwater East Jesus next time.

[Vanraw]

Diggles your not correct. Adsl distance to the DSLAM needs to be around 2 miles or less, but it can work up to 5 miles away depending on allot of things such as guage of wire, quality of the interconnects, grounding etc. Also alot of carriers were deploying DSLAM's into hubs to get around distance limitations to the CO. The other thing to note that most people forget, is that it isnt miles to the CO, but mils of wire (which can typically be longer then what people think.

ADSL Doesn't have massive latency issues over other solutions. Its considerably better then dial up in both bandwidth and latency. Some aspects of ADSL can be better then cable in that the bandwith is not shared at the hub. So if your getting 1 meg downstream, its all yours. But clearly a FIOS or cable is best. But if you dont have those then DSL is a very viable option.

The thing to do is to call Verizon and ask if they offer it. Its much better then dialup, and for the most part much better then a 3g cellar solution as well.

[Uncle Shags]

I found a wireless company and called them up. I gave them my address and they said the neighbor's got it. Since I am not in LoS of their tower they have to put more expensive equipment on the house, which means a $400 install. The guy on the phone said I could game with 512kb/256kb ($56/mo), but I am pretty sure I would need the 1000kb/512kb, which is $80/mo. Pretty friggin' expensive. I looked today and can see the big honking dish the neighbors have on their roof. I wish I could just get in with them, run a cable to my house and mooch their connection.
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.premierwireless.us/">http://www.premierwireless.us/</a><!-- m -->

Vanraw, I did call Verizon, two times actually because I'm desperate and gave them my address both times. Denied both times. The second time I tried to get the girl to tell me where the next house was that got DSL, to see if I was even close. She was clueless. Are you saying I should ask a different way to get more/better info?

If I went with an unlimited cell plan and used 3G, is that fast enough? Would that be faster than dial-up? Right now I'm only playing Warhammer Online. No FPSs. Do you really think dial-up/3g could handle it?

[Vanraw]

On Verizon, no. If they said no then they dont have the DSLAM's there.

On the 3g, it is faster and better then dial up. But... you need to make sure it has service at your house. Verizon has very good coverage across the US, but there are holes. ATT national coverage for 3g it terrible.

I have a couple of verizon wireless PCMIA cards we use for our employees. In strong area's we can get 3 meg. in weak area's 512. Both better then dial up but spotty.

FYI on the wireless option, if you go with an Andriod you can make it a 802.11 wifi transmitter. With verizon service you have to hack the phone but the information is avaiable on the web.

Note that your cost for the cell plan with unlimited data may be very close to that $80 number.

[Arsilon]

Depending on which Verizon phone you have, you can do it without a hack but it then requires some additional components on your computer. Pdanet worked well enough when I tried it last -- I haven't tried it since the upgrade to Eclair.

I used to play WoW with someone from Alaska who's only option was playing via her cell phone. She would have a bit of lag at times but she was still able to play and raid well enough.

[Riz]

Keep in mind, the Verizon UNLIMITED 3g data plan is in fact limited to 5gig a month. If you break that limit 3 times, they terminate your service (as unacceptable usage). Sprint also has the same limitations. AT&T currently truly is the only actual unlimited (as in, no limits at all), but they are gearing up to change that also (due to high iphone usage). The 3g tethering option does have risk.

[Diggles]

Keep in mind, the Verizon UNLIMITED 3g data plan is in fact limited to 5gig a month. If you break that limit 3 times, they terminate your service (as unacceptable usage). Sprint also has the same limitations. AT&T currently truly is the only actual unlimited (as in, no limits at all), but they are gearing up to change that also (due to high iphone usage). The 3g tethering option does have risk.

Sounds like grounds for a false advertising civil case!

[Slamz]

The guy on the phone said I could game with 512kb/256kb ($56/mo), but I am pretty sure I would need the 1000kb/512kb, which is $80/mo. Pretty friggin' expensive.

I'd go with the 512/256 plan and try that. That's MORE than enough for gaming. You might be squeezed a bit on video streaming, though, which tends to be 450kbps at the low end. You'll also find your patch days to be slower since that's all about download speed.

But for gaming I think you'll find 512kbps is more than you'll ever need and that what matters MOST is latency and packet loss. You probably won't be able to measure that without signing up. (I doubt seriously if anyone on the phone will know much about either of those issues but you can try.)



My bet with Warhammer is you'd be able to handle scenarios and regular PvE but RvR would probably wreck you.

[Uncle Shags]

I have a poorly sketched out plan. I'm going to have to feel out the $400 install with the wife. I know her first thought will be to blame my gaming (she is bitter). If I can't convince her that it's not just for me, I may have to go with dial up initially. She'll find it unbearable, even for her relatively modest internet needs, and agree to pony up the high installation cost for wireless. She likes to stream videos for her work, and is constantly checking her email and doing research online. She'll break down within the first week I bet, and then it'll be clear that wireless would be for her too, not just my gaming. I just thought all this up on the fly while writing this, so the plan may change.

That $400 is a real hard pill to swallow for me too though - we'll probably only be in that house for 2-3 years.

I have until the first before I am out of my old house so I am going to spend this week binging (and I wonder why she's bitter...) while I have a good connection. We moved my desk to the new place this weekend so now I sit on the floor with my keyboard and mouse in my lap...

Edit: That plan isn't going to work. She knows there are other options (satellite and mobile broadband) and I'd have to lie to her to convince her those wouldn't be viable for non-gaming internet. I'll just have to get her to agree to the $400 install or suck it up and not game.

[Snowreap]

dial-up might work fine for most of your gaming. start with that. if she needs more bandwidth, then get something for her but keep the dial-up for yourself. two cheap plans may be better than one expensive one.

if you need to go with a single plan, don't sweat the $400 too much. other options have installation fees too, even if they advertise 'free installation'. that's what the early termination fee on the contract is for, so they can recoup their installation cost without making you pay it up-front.

-ken

[Slamz]

Edit: That plan isn't going to work. She knows there are other options (satellite and mobile broadband) and I'd have to lie to her to convince her those wouldn't be viable for non-gaming internet. I'll just have to get her to agree to the $400 install or suck it up and not game.

Mobile broadband sounds like trouble if she does video streaming for work. You'd have to do the math but I bet 5 gigabytes goes by relatively quick when streaming video.

Dial-up will suck for surfing in general, I'd say, and will make streaming video impossible.

Satellite is your only real competition, which is surely great for work and streaming video but would suck for gaming. But I imagine satellite would have an installation cost as well -- surely they have to give you a dish, in which case you might as well go with your other plan.

[Uncle Shags]

The satellite option I found has daily allowances - 500mb/day is the max, at $99/mo. <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://consumer.hughesnet.com/plans.cfm">http://consumer.hughesnet.com/plans.cfm</a><!-- m -->

One thing I was just thinking is we are going to have to get dish network or direct tv, which is like $30/mo on top of whatever we go with for internet. Does anyone have experience with using the internet for TV watching (Hulu, Sling, Inner-live, etc), and know if the 1000kb/512kb wireless option would be fast enough for that? If internet TV is a viable option we wouldn't have to get satellite TV, which would make the $400 install a little less painful.

[Slamz]

I was going to suggest that, too.

If you don't watch sports then I think it's pretty easy to drop cable TV service. I'm not sure how easy it is to find live sports casts on the web -- if you can do that then there's probably NO reason to keep cable, or at least not one that justifies the cost.

I use Hulu all the time. According to their website, 1000kb/s is plenty -- their low end is 450kb/s. You can also use ABC.COM and so forth for TV shows but I watched "V" entirely on Hulu. Hulu typically airs shows 24 hours after they air on TV.


If you have a spare computer you can hook it up to your TV. You may need some converters, depending on what inputs/outputs you have available.

For example, my new TV has a VGA in and a standard 1/8" stereo jack input for sound, which made it very simple to hook my computer to it and it looks awesome.

My old TV has an S-Video input and my old computer has an S-Video output (the circular one) so that worked out. My Windows desktop looked like ass (probably because it's an old rear projection TV rather than LCD) but is literally indistinguishable from standard definition television when I watch Hulu on it. I didn't have to buy any connectors because somewhere along the lines of buying monitors and video cards and keeping all those weird cables I had all the converters and cables I needed.


The biggest problem is just that TV on the computer requires more effort. If Hulu doesn't have the show you want, you might have to check Netflix or Amazon or the website of the station that airs the show or PirateBay. Odds are you can find whatever you want but it may require more effort than sitting on the couch and flipping channels.

I do recommend Netflix if you're going to try this option, by the way. The standard Netflix DVD rental subscription comes with free streaming of a lot of older and foreign films -- sometimes you can stream new stuff but generally their "tens of thousands" of streaming shows are 10+ years old or foreign. I would think Netflix would be especially good to have in a rural area anyway, though.

And you can check "Amazon Video On Demand", which is basically like Hulu except instead of watching commercials, you're paying to watch.


Netflix will also pipe directly to a console system, too. Not sure if Amazon VOD does that. But if you can hook up a computer to your TV then you can just do it that way.


Personally, I'm still wasting money on my cable TV. It is nice to occasionally sit down and just "see what's on" but I'm really not getting my money's worth. Netflix and Hulu are 95% of my TV.

[Slamz]

Oh, one catch on computers for watching TV...

It seems that due to video compression technology, you probably need a dual core machine to process full screen TV quality video. I tried to hook up a computer that I think was in the 2 GHz range, single core, and Hulu was pegging out the CPU and giving me an unacceptable framerate (noticeably choppy).

I can run it just fine on a dual-core machine I bought...mmm...3 years ago? But the old single core P4 wasn't good enough, which I found surprising.

[Zirak]

Another option for using the internet for watching shows is a web site called playon.tv. Their system works like this: download and install their program on your PC, point your game console to their website, start streaming media content. Their site automatically detects when a console browser is accessing it, your console searches for a PC on your home network running their software and automatically connects to it. I tried it out recently to watch an episode of Chuck that my DVR failed to record for some reason, streaming Hulu from my main PC to my Wii. It worked really well. This obviates the need to find a sufficiently powerful spare computer to hook to your television.

[Kakarat]

I have been using <!-- w --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.veetle.com">www.veetle.com</a><!-- w --> for my tv needs. Only sports
They again have a program to install so it is of course delayed from real time. But that causes no choppy TV like a direct streaming video.

<!-- w --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.atdhe.net">www.atdhe.net</a><!-- w --> is a compilation of different websites streaming video.

Check them all out and see what you like.

[Slamz]

This obviates the need to find a sufficiently powerful spare computer to hook to your television.

Ohhh, I'll have to look into that. Might have to blow the dust off my XBox 360 for this.

[Jakensama]

PS3 media server will stream pretty much any site to the PS3 as well..