Yamyam Posted September 21, 2002 Posted September 21, 2002 ADSL is useless. A good company will build a fiber broadband network with multiple hub sites, more nodes than than they need, and run it all on cable. ADSL is pointless here in the UK, because our national telco (notional telco) won't do it. I live in the middle of the West Midlands conurbation, on a 500-home housing estate (at least) between three large towns, and I can see the BT cable box out of my kitchen window. But I can't have ADSL, because my area's too small. But I can go for TeleWest cable modem arrangements, and I might just do that. I already use them for dialup and cable TV... Then I might try some Laurie-esqe power posting Obsessed is such a strong word. I prefer to think of myself as "differently enthusiastic"
Arctic Posted September 22, 2002 Posted September 22, 2002 ADSL is useless. A good company will build a fiber broadband network with multiple hub sites, more nodes than than they need, and run it all on cable. Nobody prevents you from starting a company based on that business model and get filthy rich. Personally, I do have some doubts about its profitability, though. I have both ADSL and cable here at home. Although they are not equal, they defenitely are competing technologies. I have had ADSL for over two years, without a glitch (not counting a few hours of forecasted downtime), and 99.9%+ uptime is quite good for consumer technology I'd say. The cable modem has been here for two months or so, and I have nothing but praise for it. Not a second of downtime yet, but two months is quite short of course. The ADSL is 1 MBit/s down and 768 kbit/s upstream and the cable gives 525 down and 200 kbit/s up. The cable costs 54 EUR/month including modem and the ADSL won't be that much more (my employer pays the latter so I don't know the exact figure). If I'd have to choose between both if the price would be equal, I'd probably take the ADSL, but only because the rated speed is double, something which you only really notice if you down or upload >100MB files. In terms of user experience, I'd say both are equally good. So I wonder how you came up with the statement that ADSL is useless... t:Bert What's all the fuss about?
Arctic Posted September 22, 2002 Posted September 22, 2002 ADSL is pointless here in the UK, because our national telco (notional telco) won't do it. I guess that means that BT is useless, not the technology What's all the fuss about?
Yamyam Posted September 22, 2002 Posted September 22, 2002 I guess that means that BT is useless, not the technology I'm sure most of the UK will sing along with: "You don't know the half of it, mate!" Obsessed is such a strong word. I prefer to think of myself as "differently enthusiastic"
Laurieheels Posted September 22, 2002 Posted September 22, 2002 Well, Bert, this is how I came up with the statement that ADSL is useless. I work for the company that provides the cable internet. ADSL here maximum down is rated at 2.5 million bits, and cable is ten million bits. When I can download megabytes in a minute or two, I have to wonder that my company has done something right. As well, in the competing area here in Western Canada, there are maybe 100,000 ADSL users, and well over 700,000 cable internet users. That report is a bit old. And independant reporting companies always list us as much higher on the north american listings than any of our competition. So I will correct my statement, and say, that where I live, ADSL is almost useless. You know I am biased, right?
Firefox Posted September 22, 2002 Posted September 22, 2002 BT is useless I agree with that. I don't think ADSL is the future either. Any more comments on the Randi video though. I was trying to work out what she said at the end. It sounded like "That's disgusting". I wonder if one of the camera crew had made a rude face or something?
Laurieheels Posted September 23, 2002 Posted September 23, 2002 I thought she said "I'm not as good as Laurie" Okay, it's obviously not that. Just a touch of ego there... but it should have been what she said. I may learn to play basketball just to see how it goes.
Laurieheels Posted September 23, 2002 Posted September 23, 2002 Yes I am sure that you do. And will he film me as well? Gee, it will give all new meaning to court shoes...
Firefox Posted September 23, 2002 Posted September 23, 2002 I can't believe they let her use that wooden sports hall floor in those shoes. Jumping around and all. Those floors cost 10's 000's £ to install.
Bubba136 Posted September 24, 2002 Posted September 24, 2002 "They" probably didn't know she was going to play in high heels. Being mentally comfortable in your own mind is the key to wearing heels in public.
Firefox Posted September 25, 2002 Posted September 25, 2002 But "they" are anyone associated with making the vid. Do it outside on Tarmac for the same effect. To me it is like burning the Mona Lisa canvas on a cold day for the sake of 5 minutes of hand warming pleasure. In spite of my love seeing nice shoes, maybe I'm alone in that viewpoint.
Laurieheels Posted September 25, 2002 Posted September 25, 2002 I think it would be better if shot on a sunny day on an outdoor court, something asphault, for better litting and more difficult terrain. A broken down playground would showcase my abilities that much more. Why not push it to the limit? And it would preserve the flooring in the gymnasium. I won't say anything else, I do not wish to be held to anything. Chris, I think we need a camera...
BadWriter Posted October 15, 2002 Posted October 15, 2002 Well, I'm a little late to notice this thread but thought I would reply anyway. Apparently several here have more of the background on this video than I do. Overall, I enjoyed it. I don't think Randi did anything that was above and beyond what others on this board could also do, but I do think she deserves credit for having done it. I think she deserves credit for just choosing to wear the shoes in the first place. Im not inclined at this point to criticize her. After watching it I wonder just what her involvement was in the video. It certainly wasn't the quality required if it is for advertising purposes. I'm not sure she even knew how it would ultimately be used. I don't know that she is even aware that others are trying to reach her by e-mail. As another mentioned, at the end she says "oooo, That's disgusting." and walks off the court. As she is walking down the dark hall it seems clear to me that she is unhappy about something that just happened and does not seem to want anything more to do with the photographer. Can anyone supply more details on the background of this video? Charles
Recommended Posts