US-based ISP America On-Line (AOL) will finally turn off its dialup
Internet service at the end of September <https://www.tomshardware.com/service-providers/network-providers/aol-will-end-dial-up-internet-service-in-september-34-years-after-its-debut-aol-shield-browser-and-aol-dialer-software-will-be-shuttered-on-the-same-day>,
ending 34 years of operation.
AOL was the biggest ISP in the US back in dialup days, but somehow
never made a successful transition to broadband service like everyone
else. Another peculiarity was that, unlike ISPs everywhere else in the
world who offered their dialup service via standard protocols like
SLIP (early days) or PPP (the most common later), AOL always stuck to
its own proprietary protocol.
The company was also infamous for loosing vast numbers of its sign-up
CDs on the world via magazines, free mailouts and so on, in an effort
to drum up business. There were endless jokes about what to do with
this deluge of unwanted AOL CDs.
The company was also infamous for loosing vast numbers of its sign-up
CDs on the world via magazines, free mailouts and so on, in an effort
to drum up business. There were endless jokes about what to do with
this deluge of unwanted AOL CDs.
No landline here any more. The provider I used updated their analogue
POTS to VOIP about 18months ago and I dropped their service then.
Just mobiles in the household.
US-based ISP America On-Line (AOL) will finally turn off its dialup
Internet service at the end of September ><https://www.tomshardware.com/service-providers/network-providers/aol-will-end-dial-up-internet-service-in-september-34-years-after-its-debut-aol-shield-browser-and-aol-dialer-software-will-be-shuttered-on-the-same-day>,
ending 34 years of operation.
AOL was the biggest ISP in the US back in dialup days, but somehow
never made a successful transition to broadband service like everyone
else. Another peculiarity was that, unlike ISPs everywhere else in the
world who offered their dialup service via standard protocols like
SLIP (early days) or PPP (the most common later), AOL always stuck to
its own proprietary protocol.
The company was also infamous for loosing vast numbers of its sign-up
CDs on the world via magazines, free mailouts and so on, in an effort
to drum up business. There were endless jokes about what to do with
this deluge of unwanted AOL CDs.
AOL was the biggest ISP in the US back in dialup days, but somehow
never made a successful transition to broadband service like everyone
else. Another peculiarity was that, unlike ISPs everywhere else in the
world who offered their dialup service via standard protocols like
SLIP (early days) or PPP (the most common later), AOL always stuck to
its own proprietary protocol.
The company was also infamous for loosing vast numbers of its sign-up
CDs on the world via magazines, free mailouts and so on, in an effort
to drum up business. There were endless jokes about what to do with
this deluge of unwanted AOL CDs.
AOL CDs, memories! I remember having a contest with some work colleagues
as to who could collect 100 AOL CDs the quickest. I didn't win and then
had well over 70 to recycle.
I mistakenly though AOL were the biggest single user of PDP-10 computers
but that was CompuServe who had about 200 according to Wikipedia.
AOL wasn't really an ISP, they were a proprietary messaging service
which at some point got an Internet gateway.
The vast majority of AOL services were not reachable from the
internet and could not reach the internet.
Further to that, 34 years ago puts their start in 1991, before CD-ROM
drives became popular in PCs. I think they were giving out floppy disks
for those first few years.
Anybody remember seeing an AOL floppy?
In comp.misc, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
Further to that, 34 years ago puts their start in 1991, before CD-ROM
drives became popular in PCs. I think they were giving out floppy disks
for those first few years.
Anybody remember seeing an AOL floppy?
Definitely. Better than CDs because you could just wipe and reuse them.
https://americanhistory.si.edu/collections/object/nmah_1395721
Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> wrote:
In comp.misc, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid>
wrote:
Further to that, 34 years ago puts their start in 1991,
before CD-ROM drives became popular in PCs. I think they
were giving out floppy disks for those first few years.
Anybody remember seeing an AOL floppy?
Definitely. Better than CDs because you could just wipe
and reuse them.
https://americanhistory.si.edu/collections/object/nmah_1395721
Which I did for many an AOL 3.5" floppy. Not for anything
valuable, but for a "copy file X from computer Y to
computer Z" use they worked just fine.
The CDROM's were only useful to either join AOL (which was
never going to happen) or to make garden scarecrows.
AOL wasn't really an ISP, they were a proprietary messaging service which
at some point got an Internet gateway. The vast majority of AOL services were not reachable from the internet and could not reach the internet.
AOL did own for a while an actual ISP, and I can't remember what it was called, but it did offer normal PPP service.
But the normal AOL service was no more the internet than was Compuserve
or Prodigy.
Rich wrote:
Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> wrote:
In comp.misc, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid>
wrote:
Further to that, 34 years ago puts their start in 1991,
before CD-ROM drives became popular in PCs. I think they
were giving out floppy disks for those first few years.
Anybody remember seeing an AOL floppy?
Definitely. Better than CDs because you could just wipe
and reuse them.
https://americanhistory.si.edu/collections/object/nmah_1395721
Which I did for many an AOL 3.5" floppy. Not for anything
valuable, but for a "copy file X from computer Y to
computer Z" use they worked just fine.
The CDROM's were only useful to either join AOL (which was
never going to happen) or to make garden scarecrows.
I made coasters with them.
Nyssa, who believe it or not is still on dialup (not AOL)
and has been for almost 40 years (not the same ISPs)
Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:which
AOL wasn't really an ISP, they were a proprietary messaging service
servicesat some point got an Internet gateway. The vast majority of AOL
waswere not reachable from the internet and could not reach the internet.
AOL did own for a while an actual ISP, and I can't remember what it was
called, but it did offer normal PPP service.
But the normal AOL service was no more the internet than was Compuserve
or Prodigy.
Someone with more US knowledge please correct me, but I think AOL dialup
a service that ran over the top of your phone service, which you got from your local phone company. That meant you could dial in from anywherewith a
phone connection.they
To move into broadband they couldn't have had a national service like
did with dialup, they needed the phone company to install DSL modems orto
fiber in your particular area. That means it was (and remains) a very piecemeal picture based on who offers service in your area. AOL wouldn't
be bringing anything to the table for that beyond a brand name and access
a small amount of non-internet content, and it wasn't worth doing that piecemeal.while.
By contrast, in the UK the incumbent phone company offered national
wholesale access to DSL and AOL did become a DSL ISP using that for a
Theo
Nyssa <Nyssa@logicalinsight.net> wrote in
news:107farq$38alr$1@dont- email.me:
Rich wrote:
Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> wrote:
In comp.misc, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid>
wrote:
Further to that, 34 years ago puts their start in
1991, before CD-ROM drives became popular in PCs. I
think they were giving out floppy disks for those
first few years.
Anybody remember seeing an AOL floppy?
Definitely. Better than CDs because you could just wipe
and reuse them.
https://americanhistory.si.edu/collections/object/nmah_1395721
Which I did for many an AOL 3.5" floppy. Not for
anything valuable, but for a "copy file X from computer
Y to computer Z" use they worked just fine.
The CDROM's were only useful to either join AOL (which
was never going to happen) or to make garden scarecrows.
I made coasters with them.
Nyssa, who believe it or not is still on dialup (not AOL)
and has been for almost 40 years (not the same ISPs)
Hi Nyssa,
Nice to see you are still around!
David
Someone with more US knowledge please correct me, but I think AOL dialup was a service that ran over the top of your phone service, which you got from your local phone company. That meant you could dial in from anywhere with a phone connection.
To move into broadband they couldn't have had a national service like they
By contrast, in the UK the incumbent phone company offered national
wholesale access to DSL and AOL did become a DSL ISP using that for a while.
To move into broadband they couldn't have had a national service like
they did with dialup, they needed the phone company to install DSL
modems or fiber in your particular area.
In comp.misc, Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
Someone with more US knowledge please correct me, but I think AOL dialup was >> a service that ran over the top of your phone service, which you got from
your local phone company. That meant you could dial in from anywhere with a >> phone connection.
Yes, but probably to a local number for price and quality reasons.
To move into broadband they couldn't have had a national service like they
AOL was (not originally but for several years) part of Time Warner which provides networking over cable TV lines in a large part of the country.
By contrast, in the UK the incumbent phone company offered national
wholesale access to DSL and AOL did become a DSL ISP using that for a while.
Interesting. I've never used AOL dial-up, but I did use AOL very briefly (months) for a job. It was a matter of simply logging in over an
existing network connection. Most people who use AOL still probably do
that. Not sure if they have anything more than support for your aol.com
email address left as part of the service.
Elijah
------
then $WORK was interested in AOL keywords
Rich wrote:
Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> wrote:
In comp.misc, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid>
wrote:
Further to that, 34 years ago puts their start in 1991,
before CD-ROM drives became popular in PCs. I think they
were giving out floppy disks for those first few years.
Anybody remember seeing an AOL floppy?
Definitely. Better than CDs because you could just wipe
and reuse them.
https://americanhistory.si.edu/collections/object/nmah_1395721
Which I did for many an AOL 3.5" floppy. Not for anything
valuable, but for a "copy file X from computer Y to
computer Z" use they worked just fine.
The CDROM's were only useful to either join AOL (which was
never going to happen) or to make garden scarecrows.
I made coasters with them.
Nyssa, who believe it or not is still on dialup (not AOL)
and has been for almost 40 years (not the same ISPs)
US-based ISP America On-Line (AOL) will finally turn off its dialup
Internet service at the end of September
On 12/08/2025 13:08, Nyssa wrote:
Rich wrote:
Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> wrote:
In comp.misc, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid>
wrote:
Further to that, 34 years ago puts their start in
1991, before CD-ROM drives became popular in PCs. I
think they were giving out floppy disks for those
first few years.
Anybody remember seeing an AOL floppy?
Definitely. Better than CDs because you could just wipe
and reuse them.
https://americanhistory.si.edu/collections/object/nmah_1395721
Which I did for many an AOL 3.5" floppy. Not for
anything valuable, but for a "copy file X from computer
Y to computer Z" use they worked just fine.
The CDROM's were only useful to either join AOL (which
was never going to happen) or to make garden scarecrows.
I made coasters with them.
Nyssa, who believe it or not is still on dialup (not AOL)
and has been for almost 40 years (not the same ISPs)
given the fastest dial up modems are 56 kilobits, it must
feel really slow viewing websites that rely on broadband
to fling audio or video or Java/SHockwave/Flash at you?
And downloading software must have taken days?
On Sun, 10 Aug 2025 08:11:54 -0000 (UTC)
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
US-based ISP America On-Line (AOL) will finally turn off its dialup
Internet service at the end of September
There are other dial-up providers beside AOL. That kind of connection
is only good for email however and maybe Usenet. Impossible to surf
the modern web. I remember when webpages strove to keep an individual
page size below 30KB. Long ago.
On 12 Aug 2025 13:36:15 +0100 (BST), Theo wrote:
To move into broadband they couldn't have had a national service like
they did with dialup, they needed the phone company to install DSL
modems or fiber in your particular area.
The way it worked here in NZ was, during the last-but-one Labour
Government under Helen Clark, they passed a law forcing Telecom, the-then owner of the copper network, to “unbundle the local loop”. That meant it had to allow third-party equipment into neighbourhood junction boxes on an equal basis to its own Internet service, so they could make use of the existing copper lines into people’s houses to offer whatever services the residents wanted.
That was the “big bang” for broadband in NZ. That has worked well for about the last 20 years, and now we are finally getting rid of all that copper, and moving everyone to fibre. And the governance structure has
been a bit more carefully thought out this time: the owner-operator of the physical fibre network has from the beginning been kept separate from the service providers who actually use it to connect customers. This is to ensure fair competition and avoid conflicts of interest.
Retrograde <fungus@amongus.com.invalid> wrote:<snip>
<snip>There are other dial-up providers beside AOL.
Indeed. Testing "cnn.com" just now<snip>
Browsing that, over 56k dialup, would be a very slow endeavor.
SH wrote:
On 12/08/2025 13:08, Nyssa wrote:
Rich wrote:
Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> wrote:
In comp.misc, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid>
wrote:
Further to that, 34 years ago puts their start in
1991, before CD-ROM drives became popular in PCs. I
think they were giving out floppy disks for those
first few years.
Anybody remember seeing an AOL floppy?
Definitely. Better than CDs because you could just wipe
and reuse them.
https://americanhistory.si.edu/collections/object/nmah_1395721
Which I did for many an AOL 3.5" floppy. Not for
anything valuable, but for a "copy file X from computer
Y to computer Z" use they worked just fine.
The CDROM's were only useful to either join AOL (which
was never going to happen) or to make garden scarecrows.
I made coasters with them.
Nyssa, who believe it or not is still on dialup (not AOL)
and has been for almost 40 years (not the same ISPs)
given the fastest dial up modems are 56 kilobits, it must
feel really slow viewing websites that rely on broadband
to fling audio or video or Java/SHockwave/Flash at you?
And downloading software must have taken days?
Plus my local (rural) phone lines are crap. I get ~43Kbps
on average. It was better when I lived in the Big City.
On 8/14/2025 8:19 AM, Nyssa wrote:
Plus my local (rural) phone lines are crap. I get ~43Kbps
on average. It was better when I lived in the Big City.
If I may ask, which ISP are you using?
I've been doing some testing with several ISPs lately, all of whom
seem to resell GlobalPOPs these days (including AOL it seems). The
top speed I've gotten is 36000 a handful of times, and usually I get
31.2 or 33.6 - very difficult to get a V.90 connection anymore. They
seem to have done some kind of concentration where they've cheaped
out on their phone lines, doesn't seem to be real T1s anymore.
InterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org> wrote:
On 8/14/2025 8:19 AM, Nyssa wrote:
Plus my local (rural) phone lines are crap. I get ~43Kbps
on average. It was better when I lived in the Big City.
If I may ask, which ISP are you using?
I've been doing some testing with several ISPs lately, all of whom
seem to resell GlobalPOPs these days (including AOL it seems). The
top speed I've gotten is 36000 a handful of times, and usually I get
31.2 or 33.6 - very difficult to get a V.90 connection anymore. They
seem to have done some kind of concentration where they've cheaped
out on their phone lines, doesn't seem to be real T1s anymore.
56k modems running over POTS copper were never "real T1s" -- despite
the fact that the best-case top speed was a fractional T1 speed.
56k POTS copper modems were a bit of a "hack" that just happened to
work due to legacy design decisions made years prior for the phone
network architecture. And even with short, clean, copper one almost
never saw the advertised "best case top speed". Change that copper to "longer" and "a bit on the older side" and topping out around 35k was
quite normal.
And most telco's have put zero dollars into any preventive maintence
for the analog copper lines, so today in 2025, assuming one still has
legacy copper lines [1], they are more dirty and noisy than they were back with 56k modems were the "big new thing".
Now we seem to be heading for the US model, where hundreds of tiny ISPs
are installing fibre in whatever patch of territory they can stake out
before the big guns (BT and others) get around to replacing their copper
with fibre. Some of those ISPs are wholesaling and some are trying to
be vertically integrated, but many are struggling.
There are other dial-up providers beside AOL.
On 8/14/2025 8:19 AM, Nyssa wrote:
SH wrote:
On 12/08/2025 13:08, Nyssa wrote:
Rich wrote:
Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> wrote:
In comp.misc, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid>
wrote:
Further to that, 34 years ago puts their start in
1991, before CD-ROM drives became popular in PCs. I
think they were giving out floppy disks for those
first few years.
Anybody remember seeing an AOL floppy?
Definitely. Better than CDs because you could just
wipe and reuse them.
https://americanhistory.si.edu/collections/object/nmah_1395721
Which I did for many an AOL 3.5" floppy. Not for
anything valuable, but for a "copy file X from
computer Y to computer Z" use they worked just fine.
The CDROM's were only useful to either join AOL (which
was never going to happen) or to make garden
scarecrows.
I made coasters with them.
Nyssa, who believe it or not is still on dialup (not
AOL) and has been for almost 40 years (not the same
ISPs)
given the fastest dial up modems are 56 kilobits, it
must feel really slow viewing websites that rely on
broadband to fling audio or video or
Java/SHockwave/Flash at you?
And downloading software must have taken days?
Plus my local (rural) phone lines are crap. I get ~43Kbps
on average. It was better when I lived in the Big City.
If I may ask, which ISP are you using?
I've been doing some testing with several ISPs lately, all
of whom seem to resell GlobalPOPs these days (including
AOL it seems). The top speed I've gotten is 36000 a
handful of times, and usually I get 31.2 or 33.6 - very
difficult to get a V.90 connection anymore. They seem to
have done some kind of concentration where they've cheaped
out on their phone lines, doesn't seem to be real T1s
anymore.
InterLinked wrote:
On 8/14/2025 8:19 AM, Nyssa wrote:
SH wrote:
On 12/08/2025 13:08, Nyssa wrote:
Rich wrote:
Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> wrote:
In comp.misc, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid>
wrote:
Further to that, 34 years ago puts their start in
1991, before CD-ROM drives became popular in PCs. I
think they were giving out floppy disks for those
first few years.
Anybody remember seeing an AOL floppy?
Definitely. Better than CDs because you could just
wipe and reuse them.
https://americanhistory.si.edu/collections/object/nmah_1395721
Which I did for many an AOL 3.5" floppy. Not for
anything valuable, but for a "copy file X from
computer Y to computer Z" use they worked just fine.
The CDROM's were only useful to either join AOL (which
was never going to happen) or to make garden
scarecrows.
I made coasters with them.
Nyssa, who believe it or not is still on dialup (not
AOL) and has been for almost 40 years (not the same
ISPs)
given the fastest dial up modems are 56 kilobits, it
must feel really slow viewing websites that rely on
broadband to fling audio or video or
Java/SHockwave/Flash at you?
And downloading software must have taken days?
Plus my local (rural) phone lines are crap. I get ~43Kbps
on average. It was better when I lived in the Big City.
If I may ask, which ISP are you using?
I've been doing some testing with several ISPs lately, all
of whom seem to resell GlobalPOPs these days (including
AOL it seems). The top speed I've gotten is 36000 a
handful of times, and usually I get 31.2 or 33.6 - very
difficult to get a V.90 connection anymore. They seem to
have done some kind of concentration where they've cheaped
out on their phone lines, doesn't seem to be real T1s
anymore.
There weren't many to choose from, and probably even fewer
now.
I'm using one called Dialup4Less based somewhere out in
the Pactific Northwest. The price has doubled since I
signed up, but still a MUCH better value for me than
anything else offered around these parts.
Retrograde <fungus@amongus.com.invalid> wrote:
On Sun, 10 Aug 2025 08:11:54 -0000 (UTC)
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
US-based ISP America On-Line (AOL) will finally turn off its dialup
Internet service at the end of September
There are other dial-up providers beside AOL. That kind of connection
is only good for email however and maybe Usenet. Impossible to surf
the modern web. I remember when webpages strove to keep an individual
page size below 30KB. Long ago.
Indeed. Testing "cnn.com" just now, I'm up to 258 requests and 27.95MB
of "compressed" data transferred, and its JavaScript continues to
"ping" the server side for something, adding to the number and amount
of data.
Browsing that, over 56k dialup, would be a very slow endeavor.
Now up to 359 requests and 38.1MB of compressed data, from the JS pings while I typed the above bits.
On Wed, 13 Aug 2025 20:16:32 -0600, Retrograde wrote:
There are other dial-up providers beside AOL.
That would require you to keep a landline, though.
Plus the fact that telco backhauls are increasingly based on VoIP, using
the common Internet infrastructure, the irony of using that high-speed Internet to offer voice service, which is then used to offer low-speed Internet on top of that ... is ever so slightly staggering.
On 8/15/2025 8:54 AM, Nyssa wrote:
InterLinked wrote:
On 8/14/2025 8:19 AM, Nyssa wrote:
SH wrote:
On 12/08/2025 13:08, Nyssa wrote:
Rich wrote:
Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> wrote:
In comp.misc, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid>
wrote:
Further to that, 34 years ago puts their start in
1991, before CD-ROM drives became popular in PCs.
I think they were giving out floppy disks for
those first few years.
Anybody remember seeing an AOL floppy?
Definitely. Better than CDs because you could just
wipe and reuse them.
https://americanhistory.si.edu/collections/object/nmah_1395721
Which I did for many an AOL 3.5" floppy. Not for
anything valuable, but for a "copy file X from
computer Y to computer Z" use they worked just fine.
The CDROM's were only useful to either join AOL
(which was never going to happen) or to make garden
scarecrows.
I made coasters with them.
Nyssa, who believe it or not is still on dialup (not
AOL) and has been for almost 40 years (not the same
ISPs)
given the fastest dial up modems are 56 kilobits, it
must feel really slow viewing websites that rely on
broadband to fling audio or video or
Java/SHockwave/Flash at you?
And downloading software must have taken days?
Plus my local (rural) phone lines are crap. I get
~43Kbps on average. It was better when I lived in the
Big City.
If I may ask, which ISP are you using?
I've been doing some testing with several ISPs lately,
all of whom seem to resell GlobalPOPs these days
(including AOL it seems). The top speed I've gotten is
36000 a handful of times, and usually I get 31.2 or 33.6
- very difficult to get a V.90 connection anymore. They
seem to have done some kind of concentration where
they've cheaped out on their phone lines, doesn't seem
to be real T1s anymore.
There weren't many to choose from, and probably even
fewer now.
I'm using one called Dialup4Less based somewhere out in
the Pactific Northwest. The price has doubled since I
signed up, but still a MUCH better value for me than
anything else offered around these parts.
I tried a local access number in my area, and connected at
31.2. And sure enough, it appears to be resold GlobalPOPs.
It doesn't look like Dialup4Less has their own dial-up
infrastructure.
Do you mind sharing the specific access number you are
using, and what speeds you usually connect at? I wonder
whether all of their access numbers are deficient, or just
some of them.
My speed limitation (I've never gotten anything neart 56k!)
is the crappy local phone lines. They were orginally GTE
lines and now Verizon has them and does zero maintainance
on them. Verizon is trying to steer landline users to
a product they call "AirConnect" which is simply a home-
based cell service. I was offered it just last month and
told 'em no way. :P~~~~ Their cell service out here isn't
all that great even if I didn't need an analog landline
for dialup.
I tried a local access number in my area, and connected at 31.2. And
sure enough, it appears to be resold GlobalPOPs. It doesn't look like Dialup4Less has their own dial-up infrastructure.
Do you mind sharing the specific access number you are using, and what speeds you usually connect at? I wonder whether all of their access
numbers are deficient, or just some of them.
On Thu, 14 Aug 2025 22:42:46 -0000 (UTC)
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Wed, 13 Aug 2025 20:16:32 -0600, Retrograde wrote:
There are other dial-up providers beside AOL.
That would require you to keep a landline, though.
Plus the fact that telco backhauls are increasingly based on VoIP, using
the common Internet infrastructure, the irony of using that high-speed
Internet to offer voice service, which is then used to offer low-speed
Internet on top of that ... is ever so slightly staggering.
You make two very good points. I'm happy to be free of the landline.
I do harbor some nostalgia for the sound of the modem connecting though.
InterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org> wrote:
I tried a local access number in my area, and connected at 31.2. And
sure enough, it appears to be resold GlobalPOPs. It doesn't look like
Dialup4Less has their own dial-up infrastructure.
Do you mind sharing the specific access number you are using, and what
speeds you usually connect at? I wonder whether all of their access
numbers are deficient, or just some of them.
Your connect speeds over POTS copper is going to be mostly always
influenced by the "last mile wiring" (i.e., the copper from your home
to the local exchange building). So any "deficiency" is very likely to
exist somewhere in that last bit of copper rather than in different ISP
POP endpoints.
Once your copper terminates at the exchange, the rest of the phone
network's all digital, so the analog signals on your wires are
digitized at that point anyway.
On Sun, 10 Aug 2025 08:11:54 -0000 (UTC)
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
US-based ISP America On-Line (AOL) will finally turn off its dialup
Internet service at the end of September
There are other dial-up providers beside AOL. That kind of connection
is only good for email however and maybe Usenet. Impossible to surf
the modern web.
I remember when webpages strove to keep an individual page size
below 30KB. Long ago.
Retrograde <fungus@amongus.com.invalid> writes:
On Sun, 10 Aug 2025 08:11:54 -0000 (UTC)
There are other dial-up providers beside AOL. That kind of connection
is only good for email however and maybe Usenet. Impossible to surf
the modern web.
There's a work-around that can help a little for site you visit often, assuming that useful info will render w/o js, assuming you have a
resident web server on localhost and can write some perl code.
Put a link on your home page on localhost to a cgi-bin script. (You
*do* keep a home page on localhost, don't you? ;-) Cause that link to
send the real URL as data.
Create a cgi-bin perl script that reads the request from your bowser,
then uses wget or similar to fetch the target page.
The script reads in whatever is sent into a perl variable, then use
regexps to elide all IMG and SCRIPT tags/blocks, elides STYLE and SVG
blocks, elides and LINK tags the fetch or prefetch other data.
Like most phone people, I don't like fiber, but that's the way it is.
[Aside: The irony with fiber is that Verizon has cannibalized their
chances of me ever ordering their Internet service, since they refuse to provide regulated voice and unregulated Internet on the same ONT.
There's a work-around that can help a little for site you visit often, assuming that useful info will render w/o js, assuming you have a
resident web server on localhost and can write some perl code.
I do harbor some nostalgia for the sound of the modem connecting though.
On 16 Aug 2025 20:13:03 -0300, Mike Spencer wrote:
There's a work-around that can help a little for site you visit often,
assuming that useful info will render w/o js, assuming you have a
resident web server on localhost and can write some perl code.
In other words, create your own web-caching server. There is already existing Free software (e.g. Squid) that does more along those lines than you might be able to think of.
Back in my dialup days, I discovered one day, quite by accident, that my
ISP was proxying my port-80 accesses through its own web cache. I
discovered this when I was working on a client's site, and was baffled to find that my changes were not being picked up on a refresh.
I can't remember what I did for a workaround: it might have been as simple as configuring Apache to listen on an additional nonstandard port, that I used only for testing.--
Remember, this was when people had to pay for TLS/SSL certs, so they were much less common
On 8/16/2025 2:13 PM, Rich wrote:
InterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org> wrote:
I tried a local access number in my area, and connected at 31.2.
And sure enough, it appears to be resold GlobalPOPs. It doesn't
look like Dialup4Less has their own dial-up infrastructure.
Do you mind sharing the specific access number you are using, and
what speeds you usually connect at? I wonder whether all of their
access numbers are deficient, or just some of them.
Your connect speeds over POTS copper is going to be mostly always
influenced by the "last mile wiring" (i.e., the copper from your
home to the local exchange building). So any "deficiency" is very
likely to exist somewhere in that last bit of copper rather than in
different ISP POP endpoints.
Once your copper terminates at the exchange, the rest of the phone
network's all digital, so the analog signals on your wires are
digitized at that point anyway.
As I mentioned before, my phone service is over fiber ("POTS over
fiber", as Verizon calls it), so my copper loop is only a few feet
long. Like most phone people, I don't like fiber, but that's the way
it is.
[Aside: The irony with fiber is that Verizon has cannibalized their
chances of me ever ordering their Internet service, since they refuse to provide regulated voice and unregulated Internet on the same ONT. Not
that I would be interested in paying for it, but they try to upsell me
on it every time I call in, and two minutes later I have them admitting
that no, I can't order their Internet service without losing my phone service (being converted to Digital Voice, which I have no interest in).]
I don't have an issue connecting to certain V.90 test numbers (not PPP Internet), so I don't think it's a quality issue with my phone service. Therefore, I believe GlobalPOPs is most likely the issue, but I'm trying
to gather more data to prove that, e.g. different access numbers,
different local loop types (fiber, copper, etc.)
InterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org> wrote:
On 8/16/2025 2:13 PM, Rich wrote:
InterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org> wrote:
I tried a local access number in my area, and connected at 31.2.
And sure enough, it appears to be resold GlobalPOPs. It doesn't
look like Dialup4Less has their own dial-up infrastructure.
Do you mind sharing the specific access number you are using, and
what speeds you usually connect at? I wonder whether all of their
access numbers are deficient, or just some of them.
Your connect speeds over POTS copper is going to be mostly always
influenced by the "last mile wiring" (i.e., the copper from your
home to the local exchange building). So any "deficiency" is very
likely to exist somewhere in that last bit of copper rather than in
different ISP POP endpoints.
Once your copper terminates at the exchange, the rest of the phone
network's all digital, so the analog signals on your wires are
digitized at that point anyway.
As I mentioned before, my phone service is over fiber ("POTS over
fiber", as Verizon calls it), so my copper loop is only a few feet
long. Like most phone people, I don't like fiber, but that's the way
it is.
I missed that small tidbit of information. That, then, /may/ indicate
that Verizon's ONT does not provide the 'trick' that allowed 56k
downloads across copper POTS when that copper terminated at the local
phone exchange. The 'trick' was that there was some way to "turn off"
the digital to analog converter at the exchange end so that the digital
data from the phone network could also make its way down the copper
pair. If Verizon has ommitted that "feature" in their ONT's, then
right about 33k is the maximum you'll get going through the digitizers
that convert the POTS analog to/from digital for the rest of the phone network.
And, I can see Verizon very deliberately omitting the "turn off last
mile digital to analog conversion" in their fiber ONT's, for the
explicit purpose of encouraging those still using 'dialup' to move to
FIOS Internet by restricting the top speed that can be achieved.
[Aside: The irony with fiber is that Verizon has cannibalized their
chances of me ever ordering their Internet service, since they refuse to
provide regulated voice and unregulated Internet on the same ONT. Not
that I would be interested in paying for it, but they try to upsell me
on it every time I call in, and two minutes later I have them admitting
that no, I can't order their Internet service without losing my phone
service (being converted to Digital Voice, which I have no interest in).]
Naturally, they would very much prefer to provide the "unregulated"
option, less pesky 'regulations' to have to abide by that way...
Note, not saying this is reasonable, just that it is very much in
their best interest to do so.
I don't have an issue connecting to certain V.90 test numbers (not PPP
Internet), so I don't think it's a quality issue with my phone service.
Therefore, I believe GlobalPOPs is most likely the issue, but I'm trying
to gather more data to prove that, e.g. different access numbers,
different local loop types (fiber, copper, etc.)
Do you get full 56k speed connects from these V.90 test numbers over
your ONT? If you do, then what I wrote above about Verizon omitting
the "V.90" 'trick' in the ONT is not likely the case.
InterLinked wrote:
On 8/15/2025 8:54 AM, Nyssa wrote:
InterLinked wrote:
On 8/14/2025 8:19 AM, Nyssa wrote:
SH wrote:
On 12/08/2025 13:08, Nyssa wrote:
Rich wrote:
Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> wrote:
In comp.misc, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid>Which I did for many an AOL 3.5" floppy. Not for
wrote:
Further to that, 34 years ago puts their start in
1991, before CD-ROM drives became popular in PCs.
I think they were giving out floppy disks for
those first few years.
Anybody remember seeing an AOL floppy?
Definitely. Better than CDs because you could just
wipe and reuse them.
https://americanhistory.si.edu/collections/object/nmah_1395721 >>>>>>>>
anything valuable, but for a "copy file X from
computer Y to computer Z" use they worked just fine.
The CDROM's were only useful to either join AOL
(which was never going to happen) or to make garden
scarecrows.
I made coasters with them.
Nyssa, who believe it or not is still on dialup (not
AOL) and has been for almost 40 years (not the same
ISPs)
given the fastest dial up modems are 56 kilobits, it
must feel really slow viewing websites that rely on
broadband to fling audio or video or
Java/SHockwave/Flash at you?
And downloading software must have taken days?
Plus my local (rural) phone lines are crap. I get
~43Kbps on average. It was better when I lived in the
Big City.
If I may ask, which ISP are you using?
I've been doing some testing with several ISPs lately,
all of whom seem to resell GlobalPOPs these days
(including AOL it seems). The top speed I've gotten is
36000 a handful of times, and usually I get 31.2 or 33.6
- very difficult to get a V.90 connection anymore. They
seem to have done some kind of concentration where
they've cheaped out on their phone lines, doesn't seem
to be real T1s anymore.
There weren't many to choose from, and probably even
fewer now.
I'm using one called Dialup4Less based somewhere out in
the Pactific Northwest. The price has doubled since I
signed up, but still a MUCH better value for me than
anything else offered around these parts.
I tried a local access number in my area, and connected at
31.2. And sure enough, it appears to be resold GlobalPOPs.
It doesn't look like Dialup4Less has their own dial-up
infrastructure.
Do you mind sharing the specific access number you are
using, and what speeds you usually connect at? I wonder
whether all of their access numbers are deficient, or just
some of them.
You can find a list of POPs on their website. I'm in the 804
area code, if that helps.
In comp.misc, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
Further to that, 34 years ago puts their start in 1991, before CD-ROM
drives became popular in PCs. I think they were giving out floppy disks
for those first few years.
Anybody remember seeing an AOL floppy?
Definitely. Better than CDs because you could just wipe and reuse them.
Someone with more US knowledge please correct me, but I think AOL dialup was >a service that ran over the top of your phone service, which you got from >your local phone company. That meant you could dial in from anywhere with a >phone connection.
To move into broadband they couldn't have had a national service like they >did with dialup, they needed the phone company to install DSL modems or
fiber in your particular area. That means it was (and remains) a very >piecemeal picture based on who offers service in your area. AOL wouldn't
be bringing anything to the table for that beyond a brand name and access to >a small amount of non-internet content, and it wasn't worth doing that >piecemeal.
I've gotten is 36000 a handful of times, and usually I get 31.2 or 33.6
- very difficult to get a V.90 connection anymore. They seem to have
done some kind of concentration where they've cheaped out on their phone >lines, doesn't seem to be real T1s anymore.
Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> wrote:
Definitely. Better than CDs because you could just wipe and reuse them.Except that they were the worst quality floppies and they failed after
a while when you did that. I spent some interesting times recovering
data for a project that used them.
InterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org> wrote:
I've gotten is 36000 a handful of times, and usually I get 31.2 or 33.6
- very difficult to get a V.90 connection anymore. They seem to have
done some kind of concentration where they've cheaped out on their phone
lines, doesn't seem to be real T1s anymore.
Try Panix. I think their pop network is all gone at this point but they
have dialup lines in NYC and they keep them maintained.
long distance today there's little need for local POPs.
On 8/18/2025 1:23 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
With the cost of long distance today there's little need for local
POPs.
I pay 5c a minute for long-distance, why would I use long-distance
access numbers to get online?
InterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org> wrote:
On 8/18/2025 1:23 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
With the cost of long distance today there's little need for local
POPs.
I pay 5c a minute for long-distance, why would I use long-distance
access numbers to get online?
Scott's post implies he may have one of the more expensive local plans
that offer's "free long distance" as part of the deal.
Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> wrote:
In comp.misc, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
Anybody remember seeing an AOL floppy?
Definitely. Better than CDs because you could just wipe and reuse them.
Except that they were the worst quality floppies and they failed after a while when you did that. I spent some interesting times recovering data
for a project that used them.
On 8/18/2025 1:23 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
InterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org> wrote:
I've gotten is 36000 a handful of times, and usually I get 31.2 or 33.6
- very difficult to get a V.90 connection anymore. They seem to have
done some kind of concentration where they've cheaped out on their phone >>> lines, doesn't seem to be real T1s anymore.
Try Panix. I think their pop network is all gone at this point but they
have dialup lines in NYC and they keep them maintained.
I've already tested them. Panix just resells GlobalPOPs, plus they're >considerably more expensive than other ISPs.
With the cost of
long distance today there's little need for local POPs.
I pay 5c a minute for long-distance, why would I use long-distance
access numbers to get online?
InterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org> wrote:
On 8/18/2025 1:23 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
InterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org> wrote:
I've gotten is 36000 a handful of times, and usually I get 31.2 or 33.6 >>>> - very difficult to get a V.90 connection anymore. They seem to have
done some kind of concentration where they've cheaped out on their phone >>>> lines, doesn't seem to be real T1s anymore.
Try Panix. I think their pop network is all gone at this point but they >>> have dialup lines in NYC and they keep them maintained.
I've already tested them. Panix just resells GlobalPOPs, plus they're
considerably more expensive than other ISPs.
They have competent support people who are well worth paying $10/month for.
I didn't realize they still resold GlobalPOPs at all; I thought they discontinued that a while ago.
But they have their own incoming dialin
numbers in 212.
With the cost of
long distance today there's little need for local POPs.
I pay 5c a minute for long-distance, why would I use long-distance
access numbers to get online?
That's insane! Why do you pay so much?
But they have their own incoming dialin
numbers in 212.
Interesting, so their NYC numbers aren't supposed to be GlobalPOPs?
I just dialed the 212 number on their website and it connected at 31.2,
and it's GlobalPOPs.
Do you have a *specific* number that *isn't* GlobalPOPs?
That's insane! Why do you pay so much?
Because it's cheaper than upgrading to the unlimited plans. If you
wouldn't pay more than that on the per-minute plan, it works out cheaper.
On 8/16/2025 8:49 AM, Nyssa wrote:
InterLinked wrote:
On 8/15/2025 8:54 AM, Nyssa wrote:
InterLinked wrote:
On 8/14/2025 8:19 AM, Nyssa wrote:
SH wrote:
On 12/08/2025 13:08, Nyssa wrote:
Rich wrote:
Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> wrote:
In comp.misc, Lawrence D'OliveiroWhich I did for many an AOL 3.5" floppy. Not for
<ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
Further to that, 34 years ago puts their start
in 1991, before CD-ROM drives became popular in
PCs. I think they were giving out floppy disks
for those first few years.
Anybody remember seeing an AOL floppy?
Definitely. Better than CDs because you could
just wipe and reuse them.
https://americanhistory.si.edu/collections/object/nmah_1395721 >>>>>>>>>
anything valuable, but for a "copy file X from
computer Y to computer Z" use they worked just
fine.
The CDROM's were only useful to either join AOL
(which was never going to happen) or to make
garden scarecrows.
I made coasters with them.
Nyssa, who believe it or not is still on dialup
(not AOL) and has been for almost 40 years (not the
same ISPs)
given the fastest dial up modems are 56 kilobits, it
must feel really slow viewing websites that rely on
broadband to fling audio or video or
Java/SHockwave/Flash at you?
And downloading software must have taken days?
Plus my local (rural) phone lines are crap. I get
~43Kbps on average. It was better when I lived in the
Big City.
If I may ask, which ISP are you using?
I've been doing some testing with several ISPs lately,
all of whom seem to resell GlobalPOPs these days
(including AOL it seems). The top speed I've gotten is
36000 a handful of times, and usually I get 31.2 or
33.6 - very difficult to get a V.90 connection
anymore. They seem to have done some kind of
concentration where they've cheaped out on their phone
lines, doesn't seem to be real T1s anymore.
There weren't many to choose from, and probably even
fewer now.
I'm using one called Dialup4Less based somewhere out in
the Pactific Northwest. The price has doubled since I
signed up, but still a MUCH better value for me than
anything else offered around these parts.
I tried a local access number in my area, and connected
at 31.2. And sure enough, it appears to be resold
GlobalPOPs. It doesn't look like Dialup4Less has their
own dial-up infrastructure.
Do you mind sharing the specific access number you are
using, and what speeds you usually connect at? I wonder
whether all of their access numbers are deficient, or
just some of them.
You can find a list of POPs on their website. I'm in the
804 area code, if that helps.
I pulled the list of access numbers from the site and
pulled out all the ones in the 804 area code. There seem
to be only five of them, and none of the numbers even
works anymore (a lot of access number lists seem to
include a fair number of stale numbers). Could you also
share the prefix of the working number that you use?
InterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org> wrote:
I've gotten is 36000 a handful of times, and usually I get
31.2 or 33.6 - very difficult to get a V.90 connection
anymore. They seem to have done some kind of concentration
where they've cheaped out on their phone lines, doesn't
seem to be real T1s anymore.
Try Panix. I think their pop network is all gone at this
point but they
have dialup lines in NYC and they keep them maintained.
With the cost of long distance today there's little need
for local POPs. --scott
InterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org> wrote:
But they have their own incoming dialin
numbers in 212.
Interesting, so their NYC numbers aren't supposed to be GlobalPOPs?
I just dialed the 212 number on their website and it connected at 31.2,
and it's GlobalPOPs.
Do you have a *specific* number that *isn't* GlobalPOPs?
I don't know any of the numbers; I haven't used dialup for twenty years.
But call their support line, they will know. The people on their support line actually know about their service.
That's insane! Why do you pay so much?
Because it's cheaper than upgrading to the unlimited plans. If you
wouldn't pay more than that on the per-minute plan, it works out cheaper.
Perhaps, but if you're using remote dialup, it might pay. Still, if you
are paying more than two cents a minute within the US you mgith consider
a different long distance provider.
Scott Dorsey wrote:
InterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org> wrote:
I've gotten is 36000 a handful of times, and usually I get
31.2 or 33.6 - very difficult to get a V.90 connection
anymore. They seem to have done some kind of concentration
where they've cheaped out on their phone lines, doesn't
seem to be real T1s anymore.
Try Panix. I think their pop network is all gone at this
point but they
have dialup lines in NYC and they keep them maintained.
With the cost of long distance today there's little need
for local POPs. --scott
The best price I can get for long distance service is
2.5 cents/min. using a dial-around service. So, yes,
local POPs are still important unless you only spend
a few minutes online.
On 8/19/2025 8:25 AM, Nyssa wrote:
Scott Dorsey wrote:
InterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org> wrote:
I've gotten is 36000 a handful of times, and usually I
get 31.2 or 33.6 - very difficult to get a V.90
connection anymore. They seem to have done some kind of
concentration where they've cheaped out on their phone
lines, doesn't seem to be real T1s anymore.
Try Panix. I think their pop network is all gone at
this point but they
have dialup lines in NYC and they keep them maintained.
With the cost of long distance today there's little need
for local POPs. --scott
The best price I can get for long distance service is
2.5 cents/min. using a dial-around service. So, yes,
local POPs are still important unless you only spend
a few minutes online.
That's honestly not that bad for a dial-around provider...
usually they charge through the roof these days!
Especially if it's quality. Mind sharing which carrier
that is?
InterLinked wrote:
On 8/16/2025 8:49 AM, Nyssa wrote:
InterLinked wrote:
On 8/15/2025 8:54 AM, Nyssa wrote:
InterLinked wrote:
On 8/14/2025 8:19 AM, Nyssa wrote:
SH wrote:
On 12/08/2025 13:08, Nyssa wrote:
Rich wrote:
Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> wrote:
In comp.misc, Lawrence D'OliveiroWhich I did for many an AOL 3.5" floppy. Not for
<ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
Further to that, 34 years ago puts their start
in 1991, before CD-ROM drives became popular in
PCs. I think they were giving out floppy disks
for those first few years.
Anybody remember seeing an AOL floppy?
Definitely. Better than CDs because you could
just wipe and reuse them.
https://americanhistory.si.edu/collections/object/nmah_1395721 >>>>>>>>>>
anything valuable, but for a "copy file X from
computer Y to computer Z" use they worked just
fine.
The CDROM's were only useful to either join AOL
(which was never going to happen) or to make
garden scarecrows.
I made coasters with them.
Nyssa, who believe it or not is still on dialup
(not AOL) and has been for almost 40 years (not the
same ISPs)
given the fastest dial up modems are 56 kilobits, it
must feel really slow viewing websites that rely on
broadband to fling audio or video or
Java/SHockwave/Flash at you?
And downloading software must have taken days?
Plus my local (rural) phone lines are crap. I get
~43Kbps on average. It was better when I lived in the
Big City.
If I may ask, which ISP are you using?
I've been doing some testing with several ISPs lately,
all of whom seem to resell GlobalPOPs these days
(including AOL it seems). The top speed I've gotten is
36000 a handful of times, and usually I get 31.2 or
33.6 - very difficult to get a V.90 connection
anymore. They seem to have done some kind of
concentration where they've cheaped out on their phone
lines, doesn't seem to be real T1s anymore.
There weren't many to choose from, and probably even
fewer now.
I'm using one called Dialup4Less based somewhere out in
the Pactific Northwest. The price has doubled since I
signed up, but still a MUCH better value for me than
anything else offered around these parts.
I tried a local access number in my area, and connected
at 31.2. And sure enough, it appears to be resold
GlobalPOPs. It doesn't look like Dialup4Less has their
own dial-up infrastructure.
Do you mind sharing the specific access number you are
using, and what speeds you usually connect at? I wonder
whether all of their access numbers are deficient, or
just some of them.
You can find a list of POPs on their website. I'm in the
804 area code, if that helps.
I pulled the list of access numbers from the site and
pulled out all the ones in the 804 area code. There seem
to be only five of them, and none of the numbers even
works anymore (a lot of access number lists seem to
include a fair number of stale numbers). Could you also
share the prefix of the working number that you use?
Here are the exchanges I've got in my dialup list
for kppp:
926
451
991
518
415
I usually use the 991 ones since those are closest
to me.
HTH.
InterLinked wrote:
On 8/19/2025 8:25 AM, Nyssa wrote:
Scott Dorsey wrote:
InterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org> wrote:
I've gotten is 36000 a handful of times, and usually I
get 31.2 or 33.6 - very difficult to get a V.90
connection anymore. They seem to have done some kind of
concentration where they've cheaped out on their phone
lines, doesn't seem to be real T1s anymore.
Try Panix. I think their pop network is all gone at
this point but they
have dialup lines in NYC and they keep them maintained.
With the cost of long distance today there's little need
for local POPs. --scott
The best price I can get for long distance service is
2.5 cents/min. using a dial-around service. So, yes,
local POPs are still important unless you only spend
a few minutes online.
That's honestly not that bad for a dial-around provider...
usually they charge through the roof these days!
Especially if it's quality. Mind sharing which carrier
that is?
OneSuite.com
I've been a customer for over 20 years. Minimum $10
to set up service.
IIRC if you mention my email address (in the headers),
I think I get a bonus $1 in my account, but I've never
tried it and it may no longer be valid, but what the heck.
My only gripe is that you need to make at least one
call every 6 months or they cut you off (and keep the
balance in your account). I begged once to be reinstated,
and they said "one time only!" so now I have to remember
to make at least one call even when I don't really need
too.
On 8/19/2025 8:21 AM, Nyssa wrote:
InterLinked wrote:
On 8/16/2025 8:49 AM, Nyssa wrote:
InterLinked wrote:
On 8/15/2025 8:54 AM, Nyssa wrote:
InterLinked wrote:
On 8/14/2025 8:19 AM, Nyssa wrote:
SH wrote:
On 12/08/2025 13:08, Nyssa wrote:
Rich wrote:
Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> wrote:
In comp.misc, Lawrence D'OliveiroWhich I did for many an AOL 3.5" floppy. Not for
<ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
Further to that, 34 years ago puts their start
in 1991, before CD-ROM drives became popular in
PCs. I think they were giving out floppy disks
for those first few years.
Anybody remember seeing an AOL floppy?
Definitely. Better than CDs because you could
just wipe and reuse them.
https://americanhistory.si.edu/collections/object/nmah_1395721 >>>>>>>>>>>
anything valuable, but for a "copy file X from
computer Y to computer Z" use they worked just
fine.
The CDROM's were only useful to either join AOL
(which was never going to happen) or to make
garden scarecrows.
I made coasters with them.
Nyssa, who believe it or not is still on dialup
(not AOL) and has been for almost 40 years (not the
same ISPs)
given the fastest dial up modems are 56 kilobits, it
must feel really slow viewing websites that rely on
broadband to fling audio or video or
Java/SHockwave/Flash at you?
And downloading software must have taken days?
Plus my local (rural) phone lines are crap. I get
~43Kbps on average. It was better when I lived in the
Big City.
If I may ask, which ISP are you using?
I've been doing some testing with several ISPs lately,
all of whom seem to resell GlobalPOPs these days
(including AOL it seems). The top speed I've gotten is
36000 a handful of times, and usually I get 31.2 or
33.6 - very difficult to get a V.90 connection
anymore. They seem to have done some kind of
concentration where they've cheaped out on their phone
lines, doesn't seem to be real T1s anymore.
There weren't many to choose from, and probably even
fewer now.
I'm using one called Dialup4Less based somewhere out in
the Pactific Northwest. The price has doubled since I
signed up, but still a MUCH better value for me than
anything else offered around these parts.
I tried a local access number in my area, and connected
at 31.2. And sure enough, it appears to be resold
GlobalPOPs. It doesn't look like Dialup4Less has their
own dial-up infrastructure.
Do you mind sharing the specific access number you are
using, and what speeds you usually connect at? I wonder
whether all of their access numbers are deficient, or
just some of them.
You can find a list of POPs on their website. I'm in the
804 area code, if that helps.
I pulled the list of access numbers from the site and
pulled out all the ones in the 804 area code. There seem
to be only five of them, and none of the numbers even
works anymore (a lot of access number lists seem to
include a fair number of stale numbers). Could you also
share the prefix of the working number that you use?
Here are the exchanges I've got in my dialup list
for kppp:
926
451
991
518
415
I usually use the 991 ones since those are closest
to me.
HTH.
Yes, although not in the way I was expecting... on their website[1],
there are no numbers in any of these exchanges listed, with the
exception of the last one - two numbers, 415-4055 and 415-4008. I
wouldn't be surprised if those weren't the numbers in your list either.
It seems the access numbers you are using are "delisted" for whatever reason.
I want quality long-distance service, not some cheap service that sounds
like VoIP.
On Tue, 19 Aug 2025 08:55:42 -0400, InterLinked wrote:
I want quality long-distance service, not some cheap service that sounds
like VoIP.
Surely it “sounds like VoIP” precisely because everybody’s backhaul trunks
are over VoIP now. Who is going to pay extra to have dedicated longhaul cables or microwave links that are only used for voice calls and nothing else? Nobody has the amount of voice traffic to justify that.
I've tested some cheap long-distance services that are cheap precisely because they're garbage quality (e.g. Excel, 5102), and can't even hold
a 300 baud modem connection without corruption.
On Tue, 19 Aug 2025 20:56:09 -0400, InterLinked wrote:
I've tested some cheap long-distance services that are cheap precisely
because they're garbage quality (e.g. Excel, 5102), and can't even hold
a 300 baud modem connection without corruption.
The irony of carrying voice service over broadband IP-based backhaul, and then trying to implement a low-bandwidth IP service on top of that ...
only in the USA??
On 8/19/2025 11:17 PM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Tue, 19 Aug 2025 20:56:09 -0400, InterLinked wrote:
I've tested some cheap long-distance services that are cheap
precisely because they're garbage quality (e.g. Excel, 5102), and
can't even hold a 300 baud modem connection without corruption.
The irony of carrying voice service over broadband IP-based
backhaul, and then trying to implement a low-bandwidth IP service
on top of that ... only in the USA??
There is a lot of stuff in the field that uses 300 baud modems for
telemetry.
Low-speed modem protocols without error correction also tend to be a
decent quality test for voice connections.
On Wed, 20 Aug 2025 09:37:24 -0400, InterLinked wrote:
On 8/19/2025 11:17 PM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Tue, 19 Aug 2025 20:56:09 -0400, InterLinked wrote:
I've tested some cheap long-distance services that are cheap
precisely because they're garbage quality (e.g. Excel, 5102), and
can't even hold a 300 baud modem connection without corruption.
The irony of carrying voice service over broadband IP-based
backhaul, and then trying to implement a low-bandwidth IP service
on top of that ... only in the USA??
There is a lot of stuff in the field that uses 300 baud modems for
telemetry.
I have a customer who does a lot of that, up and down the country.
They use wireless connections (formerly 3G, now 4G) for that.
Low-speed modem protocols without error correction also tend to be a
decent quality test for voice connections.
A more accurate test would surely involve actual voices.
On 8/20/2025 6:08 PM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Wed, 20 Aug 2025 09:37:24 -0400, InterLinked wrote:
There is a lot of stuff in the field that uses 300 baud modems for
telemetry.
I have a customer who does a lot of that, up and down the country.
They use wireless connections (formerly 3G, now 4G) for that.
Everything I deal with is on POTS lines.
Low-speed modem protocols without error correction also tend to be
a decent quality test for voice connections.
A more accurate test would surely involve actual voices.
It can be hard to test things like latency and compression purely
from just voice.
Bad or just-okay connections tend to be forgiving for voice but less
so for data.
On Wed, 20 Aug 2025 18:44:40 -0400, InterLinked wrote:
On 8/20/2025 6:08 PM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Wed, 20 Aug 2025 09:37:24 -0400, InterLinked wrote:
There is a lot of stuff in the field that uses 300 baud modems for
telemetry.
I have a customer who does a lot of that, up and down the country.
They use wireless connections (formerly 3G, now 4G) for that.
Everything I deal with is on POTS lines.
Seems like an expensive and unwieldy way to do it. The remote sensors
might need to go months between inspections. They need to, not only
withstand the elements, but have an adequate power supply. A wireless
data connection means they can make a connection, exchange data, and disconnect again, all within a fraction of the time (and power
consumption) it takes to do a modem handshake.
Low-speed modem protocols without error correction also tend to be
a decent quality test for voice connections.
A more accurate test would surely involve actual voices.
It can be hard to test things like latency and compression purely
from just voice.
Sure it is. All you need is the right instrumentation and testing
standards to measure that voice. You *do* have standards, don’t you?
Bad or just-okay connections tend to be forgiving for voice but less
so for data.
Another reason not to use them.
Here <https://www.sierrawireless.com/> is the sort of comms modules
that customer is using.
I was referring to different tests that could be done to evaluate the suitability of a long-distance provider for voice usage.
On Thu, 21 Aug 2025 18:34:28 -0400, InterLinked wrote:
I was referring to different tests that could be done to evaluate the
suitability of a long-distance provider for voice usage.
I thought you were talking about data usage, not voice usage, which you
said tended to be more “forgiving”.
| Sysop: | DaiTengu |
|---|---|
| Location: | Appleton, WI |
| Users: | 1,064 |
| Nodes: | 10 (0 / 10) |
| Uptime: | 148:01:51 |
| Calls: | 13,691 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 186,936 |
| D/L today: |
33 files (6,120K bytes) |
| Messages: | 2,410,931 |