Free Equipment Removal and Russian Santa



For my project pages, I do use thumbnails.
In this instance, I did not feel that this story deserved a page of its own, and posted a link to the jpeg.
i
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

What I do in most places, like my project pages, is that I provide thumbnails of decent quality, like 400x400. They link to pictures of very good quality (loosely defined).
My ebay pictures are about 500 kb.

You presented facts that lead an inescapable conclusion, that it is more important to provide details to (most) people, who can afford good connections, rather than accommodate the remaining few who have a slow connection.
Thumbnails, generally, alleviate this dilemma.

This is wrong.
You may not need to see the veins on leaves on the ground, but there may be a model number,m serial number or some such, that you may want to zoom in. How many holes, shape of holes etc, comes up for many pictures and a good picture saves the viewer and publisher a lot of time.

This is nice.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 31 Dec 2015 16:46:37 -0600, Ignoramus24995

In general, that's true. That is, if you're doing business on the Web and not trying to make it easy for everyone to share it.

Yes, a good policy.

No, it's right. If you've experimented with graphic file formats, you realize that most people GROSSLY underuse JPEG compression. Except with files that are originally photos of black-on-white text on sheets of paper, or converted vector files, you can stomp on those files a lot more with JPEG than most people realize.
You don't need to reduce the pixels. You just reduce, initially, the noise.
Here is an example. I copied one of your photos (2.10 MB), and then compressed it by an additional 72%. Take a look at the two. I snipped out pieces that show type in order to make it easier to see the point. If you can tell the difference, you have better eyes than mine. The "compressed" versions were saved at a setting of "7" (medium) in Photoshop:
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/ntxd797hlv4x3ae/AABMoW21l-sVqNRSxrZ-7Qpqa?dl=0
--
Ed Huntress

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 31 Dec 2015 16:46:37 -0600, Ignoramus24995

No, you have not, in most instances I've seen. Some pages have specified a display size but the entire file has to download to display it at that rez. I don't recall ever seeing a fast-loading page from you in the past several years. Cites, please?

That would be a whole lot better. The file in question this time is exactly FIVE MEGABYTES and sized 5312x2988x16M.
http://igor.chudov.com/tmp/Equipment.jpg

Atta Boy, Old Weird Ed! Serve the rich, fuck the poor (and all the people who are not serviced by fast Internet by their providers).

When used, yes they do.
--
Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes.
Art is knowing which ones to keep.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 31 Dec 2015 16:42:52 -0800, Larry Jaques

We don't publish online magazines for the poor, Old Weird Larry. You may be thinking of _Poor Magazine_. We publish for metalworking companies.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Larry Jaques wrote:

There is a local guy that sells EAS broadcast equipment to AM & FM radio stations. He uses huge image files, then thinks that the 'Constrain' command reduces the size before it is downloaded. I tried for over an hour to convince him to scale the images first. The server was so slow that one image took over 10 minutes to download. The size that it was displayed would have downloaded in about 15 seconds. So, the last time I looked, he still hadn't fixed it, and he was paying a higher fee to the hosting company because of his sloppy programming.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

No, it's not. Ookla reports that the average download speed in the US has jumped by 10 Mbps in just the last year. California is at 40.8 Mbps, the fourth-highest in the country:
http://cordcuttersnews.com/average-united-states-download-speed-jumps-10mbps-in-just-one-year-to-33-9mbps/
Keep in mind that these averages are likely to be biased a little bit high, because people with dial-up probably can't wait to do a test with Ookla. <g>
But they agree with our experience. My guarenteed d/l speed is 50 Mbps. Ookla and several other speed tests consistantly report my speed as just over 60 Mbps, which is the same result I hear from my neighbors who are on our local cable system and are using the mid-priced service, as I am.
If you're under 10 Mbps, you're sucking wind in today's Internet world.
--
Ed Huntress

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 01 Jan 2016 13:08:24 -0500
<snip>

Fastest available in my neighborhood is ADSL 1.5Mbps. No cable service available. To the west a couple miles they can't even get that the last I knew. Have to use dial-up, over-the-air service/modem or get something through the cell providers.
I'm not exactly what you would call "out in the boonies" either...
--
Leon Fisk
Grand Rapids MI/Zone 5b
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Leon Fisk wrote:

I live over 10 miles from town , and I have about 6Mb/sec down and 768(IIRC) up . They DO have fiber optic service to town , I think that might help . I believe our location would qualify as "out in the boonies" .
--
Snag



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Is there something wrong with one of these?
http://broadbandnow.com/Michigan/Grand-Rapids
--
Ed Huntress

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Ed Huntress wrote:

I just went there and punched in my zip. They show "providers" who don't even serve the area! They also show speeds that are NOT possible due to the current infrastructure.
The stat of - 74% of New Yorkers "have access to" 100mbps or faster is BS marketing. Having "access to" is MUCH different than actually having that speed. From my place I can go less than a mile and find people who can't get anything over 3mbps and more that are on dial-up. Even the folks right in town and next to the main feed only get about 12mbps. The infrastructure can't support faster than that.
It's people who use the data from sites like that who seem to think "everyone" has high speed.
--
Steve W.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

The population of NY state is 19.75 million. The combined population of NYC, Westchester County, and Long Island is 17.0 million. 101 Mbps service is offered by Optimum all the way out to Montauk Point and residential 150 Mbps (500 Mbps if you want to spring for another $100/mo) all the way up to Peekskill by Verizon FIOS. In NYC, you can get 335 Mbps in residences, or more from some providers.
If you live in Shrub Oak, it's a little more difficult, but you can get it. <g>
You were saying?

Without knowing where you live, I can't comment. But see my reply to Leon. He's a real outlier, even in his county.

There is very precise data on Internet access if you want to look for it. I was just tossing out a quick response to Leon's address, which he identifies as Grand Rapids. It's not Grand Rapids. He lives in a mostly rural area 12 miles outside of town.
--
Ed Huntress

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Ed Huntress wrote:

13475 is the closest zip. But Verizon isn't in my area. We have Frontier. The fastest the system supports here is 8mbps. Will never get faster without major upgrades, which won't happen.

I'm farther out than that.
--
Steve W.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Looking at the map, offhand, I would expect you'll be waiting a while. <g> >

I see. Well, you have Cuomo's effort to have 100 Mbps throughout New York state in a couple of years. 'Dunno how that's going, although NYC is going gangbusters to have gigabit wifi throughout the five boroughs.
To me, it reminds me of Rural Electrification in the '30s, and rural telephone a bit later. They were federal mandates and the idea was that the whole country benefits by making those services available to everyone.
I doubt if that will happen again. But a few states will do it, and maybe satellite service, like HughesNet, may fill in the gaps.
The gaps would be you and Leon. d8-)
--
Ed Huntress

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Ed Huntress wrote:

Yeah, It's sort of low priority for the companies.

Yeah, I know folks with Hughes, most think it is crap. Being that it's under Echostar like Dish net I can understand that....
--
Steve W.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
We have higher, but the fiber bundle that tunnels under my driveway and has a up/down link between drive ways won't be connecting to our house. That large bundle (big enough for most small towns) is for the school ONLY. And the limited use they use it for. Outrageous waste of bandwidth. We also pay for 6MBPS and get 5.5 at the very best. They bandwidth limit our accounts and use the level we pay at as the clamp high end and the low end at 5.5. They use 10% of my bandwidth to keep me from exceeding the pay level I pay for.
It is about time for class action suits to force them to use their side and give us 6.5 for a while and then 6.0 as we have paid for for years.
Martin
On 1/2/2016 3:02 AM, Steve W. wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 01 Jan 2016 21:13:21 -0500

Read Steve W's reply, much the same thing here.
Cable service doesn't quite make it this far. DSL is limited by what AT&T is offering, which is the ADSL 1.5Mbps. All the DSL providers are basically reselling the AT&T service. If you read the small print you have to have an AT&T phone to qualify for their plans.
The over-the-air stuff (microwave, whatever), last time I checked around a year ago is the same speed and about the same cost as current ADSL. Of course this has its own unique set of problems/headaches too.
Only thing faster would be a cellphone data package which has its own set of headaches and costs associated with such...
--
Leon Fisk
Grand Rapids MI/Zone 5b
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

My cellular Internet service has lower priority than voice calls and slows or halts during commuting hours. At its best it can't quite keep up with YouTube. This hilly area also has issues with cellphone and broadcast TV reception, though not enough to drive me to paying for cable.
-jsw
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 2 Jan 2016 07:47:41 -0500
<snip>

Interesting observation there. I don't know the pitfalls for the different services but being an old electronics tech I know they are there...
When Nextel first came on in my area they could support 6 Push-to-Talk users per RF channel or 3 Phone users. It caused us a lot of headaches. They took over the old Motorola analog trunking system. Some channels were kept as analog for the time being while the remaining were converted to digital. We serviced the analog side. Nextel the digital. The freq scheme was never designed to be digital. A digital signal takes up the full bandwidth all the time. To our ear it sounds like white noise. If a digital channel got turned on next to the analog control channel it would greatly reduce the whole analog system range due to interference from the new digital channel. We took the grief for a once great system not working well anymore. Customers would get frustrated and sign-up for the "new" system because we couldn't make the old system work right anymore. Worked great for you know who :)
The other systems in my area require a unique modem and antenna. So you will have that expense to figure in. Plus the monthly charge is considerably more for roughly the same speed as ADSL. My current modem/router/wifi unit is a discard from a neighbor. I fixed the wall-wart, got it working again :) Can't beat that price. If you watch Craigs List they turn up there for ~$20 pretty regular...
--
Leon Fisk
Grand Rapids MI/Zone 5b
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I may gift my laptop with a cheap used WWAN card that handles the CDMA EVDO protocol and see if I can register it with a free ISP like FreedomPop.
When the telco tech found out that I understood how their system works he removed bridge taps and cut off the line beyond my house. But the copper pair is much too long for DSL.
-jsw
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.