<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 5:12 PM, John J. Foerch <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jjfoerch@earthlink.net">jjfoerch@earthlink.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="im">On Wed, Sep 02, 2009 at 04:38:06PM -0400, john-thomas richards wrote:<br>
> > > Just keep telling ourselves, "it's coming...it's coming..."<br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> > And send some of that over this way to Lowell Township while you're at it.<br>
> > :)<br>
><br>
</div><div class="im">> I honestly do not know what I would do with more bandwidth. Faster<br>
> upload would be great, but I don't run a server. Backing up to my<br>
> online backup would be more convenient, that's all. I have the basic<br>
> speed (8Mbps?) from Comcast and my wife and I can both watch something<br>
> from <a href="http://hulu.com" target="_blank">hulu.com</a> just fine. I'm not sure what more speed would get me.<br>
> Not that I wouldn't love it, mind you, I just don't know what I'd do<br>
> with it.<br>
<br>
</div>56k dialup is our only reasonably priced option here. It makes me sad.<br>
<br></blockquote><div>Plenty fast for ASCII text messages - the <br>only kind used by this group.....<br><br>Hey, that's a lot faster that the first <br>Cat modem I had many years ago. The kind <br>with the cups for the handset, and a full <br>
300 baud....<br><br>Lessee. At about the same time you could<br>get a 9,600 baud modem for many $thousands,<br>and it was as big as todays PCs. You needed a<br>"conditioned line" to use it, and that would cost<br>
you a little more.<br><br>By contrast, you're really living it up... ;-)<br><br> -- Bob<br><br></div></div>