Dial-Up Users "Don't Want Broadband" 593
Barence writes "The majority of dial-up Internet users say they don't want to upgrade their connection to broadband, according to a new study in the US. The Pew Internet & American Life research found that 62% of dial-up users had no interest in upgrading to a high-speed connection." (CNN is carrying the AP's story on the study, too.)
Nooo! (Score:5, Funny)
We must convert the dial-up heathens!
Send more broadband missionaries!
Re:Nooo! (Score:5, Funny)
A Happy World! (Score:4, Funny)
Dial-Up Users "Don't Want Broadband"
and vice versa!
A place for everything - everything in its place. Such a happy, tidy universe!
Re:Nooo! (Score:5, Insightful)
i really do not get this whole idea that the US sucks because of lack of broad band adaptation. I mean, I have broadband, and it's nice for what i do. But do my parents need it? no dialup would be fine for them. Do my sisters need it? no. You can certainly browse the web and send/recieve email on dialup, so I really don't get this obsession over it. (by obsession i mean I see these articles frequently on /. for some reason.)
Re:Nooo! (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Nooo! (Score:4, Funny)
How do you keep Windows patched? Oh sorry forgot this was /. how do you download Linux?
Ah, not doing either of those? For God sake, stick with dial-up I can't take the extra spam!!!
Re:Nooo! (Score:4, Informative)
At least one neighborhood in Queens, NY just got broadband within the last year. I don't know where people get the idea that the whole country is wired. Much of the country doesn't even have cable. And most is too rural to get DSL or FIOS.
Re:Nooo! (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Nooo! (Score:4, Interesting)
Many rural areas still lack broadband access. My father lives in such an area where even the dialup is run out of a closet leased from the local funereal home. There is no cable television provider, and he is far outside the allowable distance from the CO for DSL.
Yeah, he's in the middle of nowhere in Utah, but then again a lot of the population lives in rural areas with similar constraints.
Re:Nooo! (Score:5, Interesting)
what makes you think that being out in buttfuck does not equal being in civilization ? Civilization does not equal 'living in a city'.
I've lived in many different places, some rural and some not, the thing I noticed is that it doesn't really matter whether you're in a rural area or not, the big deciding factor for a carrier to install broadband is COMPETITION.
As soon as they start losing their dial up customers to some yokel with a wifi hookup they make sure broadband becomes available pronto.
Re:Nooo! (Score:5, Insightful)
have them visit www.ford.com, or any other automotive retailer's website.
the flash alone will suck down megs of data on something that is barely viewable with broad band is becoming the normal.
a lot of car sites have so much flash you would think the police would catch on and arrest the serial flashers.
Re:Nooo! (Score:5, Insightful)
But why does that bother you? Who cares if someone has a slow connection, or even no connection? The world got along just fine (actually, from evidence, a lot better) without everyone having an instant connection to everyone else.
And get off my lawn!
Brett
Re:Nooo! (Score:5, Funny)
I hope it stays that way. If it wasn't for the people on slow connections I'd never be able to frag anyone online in a FPS.
Re:Nooo! (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Nooo! (Score:5, Insightful)
Fortunately for the spammers, those unpatched systems don't need much bandwidth to send lots of two line text-only spam.
"Are we there yet?" (Score:3, Informative)
those unpatched systems don't need much bandwidth to send lots of two line text-only spam.
Automatic Updates downloads patches in the background.
Automatic Updates downloads service packs in the background
"We'll get there when we get there." The service works just fine whether you have dial-up or broadband.
This is not headline news.
If you have the patience of a ten year old, you can order Windows XP Service Pack 3 [microsoft.com] on C
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
What The Hell Is Microsoft BITS? (Score:4, Informative)
From 2005, "The Reader's Digest" version of how it works:
BITS is a cool new file transfer feature of Windows that asynchronously downloads files from a remote server over HTTP. BITS can manage multiple downloads from multiple users while making use of idle bandwidth exclusively. Although the use of BITS is not limited to auto-updating applications, it is the underlying API used by Windows Update. And since it is available to any application, it can be used to do much of the really tough work involved in creating an auto-updating application.
Here is the basic idea. An application asks BITS to manage the download of a file or set of files. BITS adds the job to its queue and associates the job with the user context under which the application is running. As long as the user is logged on, BITS will drizzle the files across the network using idle bandwidth. In fact, the code-name for the BITS technology is Drizzle, which, it turns out, is quite descriptive of what BITS does.
How does all of this work? The technology is actually fairly sophisticated. First, BITS is implemented as a Windows service that maintains a collection of jobs organized into a set of priority queues: foreground, high, normal, and low. Each job in the same priority level is given bandwidth via time slices of about five minutes, in a round-robin fashion. Once there are no jobs remaining in a queue, the next priority queue is inspected for jobs.
Jobs in the foreground queue use as much network bandwidth as they can, and for this reason the foreground priority should only be used by code that is responding to a user request. The remaining priorities, high, normal, and low, are much more interesting because they are all background priorities, which is to say that they only make use of network bandwidth that's not in use.
To achieve this background feature, BITS monitors network packets and disregards packets that it recognizes as its own. The remaining packets are considered the active load on the machine's bandwidth. BITS uses the active load information along with the connection speed and some other statistics to decide whether it should continue downloading files or back off in order to increase throughput for the active user. Because of this, the user doesn't experience bandwidth problems.
The ability to drop what it is doing at a moment's notice is very important for BITS. In many cases, only part of a file is downloaded before BITS must give up the network or even lose connection altogether. The partially downloaded file is saved, however, and when BITS gets another crack at the network, it picks up where it left off. This ability to recover does have some side effects.
Remember that BITS is used to transfer files from HTTP servers. A server should be HTTP 1.1-compliant or at least support the Range header in the GET method for BITS to work. This is because BITS needs to be able to request a portion of a file. In addition, the content being downloaded must be static content such as a markup file, code file, bitmap, or sound. A GET request including a Range header makes no sense when requesting dynamic content such as that produced by CGI, ISAPI, or ASP.NET.
Currently, there are two versions of BITS: 1.0 and 1.5. BITS 1.0 ships with Windows XP and has the following features: interruptible background downloading of files, download prioritization, optional notification of completed jobs and error situations, and optional progress notifications for use with dialog boxes and other UI elements. BITS 1.5 ships with Windows .NET Server. In addition to the features contained in BITS 1.0, version 1.5 has interruptible background uploading of files and authenticated connections using Basic, Digest, NTLM, Negotiate (Kerberos) or Passport. BITS 1.5 is available as a redistributable that is compatible with Windows 2000 and greater (see Background Intelligent Transfer Ser
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
what makes you think people still stuck in the dialup days run software updates? Most of them probably don't know their computer account's password.
I ran into one of those just yesterday. Has a five year old computer and has never ran updates. Went to do so and he had no idea his account had a password on it. So now we get to fight that later.
Re:Nooo! (Score:5, Funny)
I mean, I have broadband, and it's nice for what i do. But do my parents need it?
My mom's on dialup (80 yrs old), my dad (77 yrs ols) doesn't even have a computer in his house (they got divorced the year I was married).
My friend Ralph (86 yrs old) doesn't have a computer, but he doesn't need one; he has hookers. And blackjack.
But he forgets the blackjack.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
So I guess the only web he's concerned with is fishnet stockings and in that case "high speed" is not a desirable quality. :D
Re:Nooo! (Score:5, Insightful)
Plus they think they will lose their AOL homepage and email...
Re:Nooo! (Score:5, Funny)
Those poor fools... luckily I printed a copy of the AOL homepage, so I don't worry about such things.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually, loss of their email address IS a big factor for people upgrading from dialup. They don't realize what the benefits are, but can very easily recognize the chaos that's going to cause.
What we need is a "universal portability" thing for email like we have for telephone numbers. (but I call it GMail)
Re:Nooo! (Score:5, Informative)
The US doesn't suck because people choose not to get broadband, it sucks because they can't get it even if they want it.
No, you almost certainly don't. Maybe you think you do, because you have cable or DSL, but those are too slow to count as broadband. The only real broadband in the US (not including business leased lines, of course) is Verizon's FIOS, and that's available in so few areas it might as well be mythical.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The FCC currently defines broadband as 768Kbps or faster [engadget.com]. So even if he has a 512K ADSL line, he's still not on broadband. And I'd agree with him that much of the "broadband" in the US really shouldn't be called that, especially compared to the baseline connections in the rest of the developed world.
Calling someone a troll when you're so woefully misinformed only makes you look stupid and mean.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Just because you consider 3 inches "long" doesn't make it so. I'm glad you don't listen to the FCC. I'm happy for you, really. But the vast majority of people who use the Internet realize that 512Kbps isn't really broadband. A half megabit, while faster than dialup, and faster than other options you have, is still not "broadband". Broadband shouldn't be defined by the fastest thing available to a person, it should be defined as a baseline that everyone can agree on. The FCC's number is the closest thi
Re:Nooo! (Score:4, Insightful)
People do want health care, they just don't want to pay for it until they get sick at which case they go to the emergency room and we end up paying for them anyway. Saying that there are people who actually prefer not being able to go to a doctor is ridiculous.
Re:Nooo! (Score:5, Insightful)
Interesting fallacy.
I think it's poisoning the well, but I can't be sure.
If I believe we should have nationalized health care like a civilized country, suddenly I am one of 'them' regardless of the merits of the conversation.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You forgot to list people wanting to:
Obligatory (Score:5, Funny)
We must convert the dial-up heathens
Why should I change? My dialup connection works fine so long as noone picks up th# $% @#$#%)G$%$#^NO CARRIER
Pleeeeease keep them on dial up! (Score:5, Insightful)
Dialup just does not support botting, so it is better to leave them on dialup.
Re:Pleeeeease keep them on dial up! (Score:5, Informative)
They don't make very effective bots, but they still get botted.
I was checking my mother-in-law's computer because she said the internet wasn't working. I connected and twiddled around with settings a bit. At some point I opened up the connections status and I had to smile a bit as her uploads were something like 5MB and downloads were a few thousand k.
She never patched her system because it takes to long over dialup :) Even antivirus updates are painful.
The other cool thing is that she kept having to unplug the phone line because the computer would dial in whenever it needed a connection, and the bot apparently always needed a connection.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
This is why it works so well. This is a security model that anyone can understand and implement. Firewalls, NAT and other alphabet soup is just too much for many/most people to handle. And if they do get botted they get annoyed by the thing interfering with the phone so they have to do something about it.... like fix the problem or unplug.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I mean let's face it, once they're made up their minds you can't Torquemada anything.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Odin84gk (Score:5, Insightful)
In other news, 81% of Americans on Dial-up would like to switch to high speed internet if the price was right...
Nothing to see here... Move along...
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
In other news, 81% of Americans on Dial-up would like to switch to high speed internet if the price was right...
Or, you know, if there were actually any high-speed internet services available in the area.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Makes this [blogspot.com] article all the more interesting...
"according to Ofcom, they [anyone who doesn't want to pay for broadband] are excluded from broadband ... we all know the next step: the rest of us will be forced to finance broadband for the digitally excluded."
Re:Odin84gk (Score:5, Insightful)
Summary: "19 percent say nothing would persuade them to upgrade"
In other news, 81% of Americans on Dial-up would like to switch to high speed internet if the price was right...
Nothing to see here... Move along...
Except the US doesn't get "right" prices since the (wide) territory has been split between the providers which have a de facto local monopoly and can set the prices as they see fit.
Broadband provider is X for $Z. If you aren't happy with that, unless you're in a metropolitan area, the alternative is a POTS modem. In Europe/Asia, in most locations you actually have a choice for at least ADSL2+ providers (up to roughly 22Mbps depending on how far you are from the local hub), and nowadays fibre with typically 50Mbps+ *for the same price* (in France you get *at least* 50Mbps with fibre for about 30 € per month, whis is about, what, $50, $55 ?).
There is a category of users that only use the network to send email. You can do that over a 2.4K modem. I've run a 5 person network over a 9.6K modem with a Linux dial on demand box back when...
Actually, I was part of the tech people building one of the first public ISP in Europe over a *64K* line. For about 9000 subscribers who opted to use the Internet facility (we already had Internet -- among others -- mail gateways for ages). And at the time it was plenty. In the early 90s I downloaded my Linux floppy images on that link (several times even, when you wrote 30 floppies, some were bound to be bad).
Anyway, You and I would have trouble with a modem link (my offsite backups would become very complicated for example), but if all you use is email and a few web pages ? Should work like a charm (maybe adblock would be handy nowadays though).
Oh and I used to check my mail with nothing but a VT100 and a modem. Get off my lawn (waves walker and falls over).
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Offer someone a connection that doesn't tie up their phone line, is always on and is the same speed or faster than their current connection FOR THE SAME PRICE and of course they'll take it. Even those 19%, who probably misunderstood the question.
Re:Odin84gk (Score:4, Interesting)
There are exceptions for even this. My grandmother, before she passed away, was on $20/month dialup. Broadband in the area the last time I visited: $14/month for their cheapest package(512k).
She didn't want to change.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
19% can't get broadband.
35% say the price is too high.
14% say they would not switch, regardless.
If the prices adjusted downwards, that 35% group of price-objectors would vanish, leaving only 33% of the total who still have dial-up only either being stuck with it or being Luddites who refuse to switch over.
Once the 19% of those who can't get broadband CAN get it, how many of them would switch? The assumption is all of them would, because otherwise, they would be in the "would not switch" category.
That leave
$12 a month versus $50 a month (Score:5, Insightful)
These people are probably your mothers and fathers who aren't particularly into computers. If they're just checking e-mail and maybe a little web surfing on a Pentium II with 128MB of memory, it's hard to argue that they should pay $50 a month for broadband.
I hated paying $50 a month for cable internet even though I used the hell out of it. It just doesn't seem like a reasonable price.
Re:$12 a month versus $50 a month (Score:5, Funny)
$50/month?
Sucker! I only pay $49.95.
Re:$12 a month versus $50 a month (Score:4, Insightful)
Yah but if they're like my parents they paid $20 a month for dialup and $20 a month for a second landline. Cellphones have pretty much negated the need for this, but some families may want to keep their landline unlocked, and in that case broadband isn't that much more expensive.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Apparently behavioral modification is only for dogs.
You're just not using the shock collar [amazon.com] correctly. Try bumping it up a setting or three.
I was thinking the same thing (Score:2, Informative)
And it wasn't that long ago that we did everything over dialup. Even expensive things like ISDN were just 2 64k channels. Barely better than dial-up.
And we managed to communicate, download binaries, mp3s, game, pass through uucp and email on uunet and such on pep modems, ISDN, and slower links.
To this day, about the only thing that crushes dialup are DVD downloads, and some dev apps and games that have become as big as DVDs.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
it's hard to argue that they should pay $50 a month for broadband.
Where do you live? Here in Illinois, these users qualify for AT&T's $10 program. [bellsouth.com] I only pay $20 a month for cable internet (bundled with $40 basic cable). Those options are cheaper than some dial-ups.
Frankly, they are smarter than most of us (Score:5, Insightful)
because the high speed net isn't really doing anything for the majority of people except separating them from their money.
Look, my grand parents and my parents to a similar degree are from a more responsible generation. They didn't burden themselves down with so many monthlies that marketing gurus have dreamed up to separate us from our money. I can't count the number of people I know who scrape by but refuse to acknowledge how they drain their income relentlessly through monthlies. Its only $1 dollar a day! Its only 1.49 a day! Its just $100 a month.
Sheesh. These same people wonder why I can drive and own a new car when I want it. They don't understand the magic of being able to buy something I want when I want it for CASH. I don't look at each month as a routine of $30 here, $50 there, and $100 there, and having to do with X minus a whole lot of Ys.
For the most part with current offerings all high speed internet does is satisfy our impatience. There really isn't that much different to the net for many of us that wasn't there a few years ago. A lot people justify it by "well I might want to do X" and such. Words to make a marketer's ears perk and for them salivate over.
Hell if anything this survey tells me there are many Americans with a real life. Call them hicks, backwards trolls, whatever, I know many do just so they can justify their spending money like it comes from trees. It certainly makes it easier to pass these people off as ignorant but at the end of day who is happier?
Grandma Speed (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Grandma Speed (Score:5, Insightful)
Your grandmother is a wise woman who has better things to worry about.
Cheers
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Blowjobs. Beer. Breasts (real ones, mind you, not those digital ones). Really good food. Vacations without the internet. Fast cars. Easy women.
You could actually partake in some of human culture as well.
His grandmother figured it out. :-P
Cheers
Re:Grandma Speed (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
She says that her internet at home is "perfect Grandma speed", and us "young-uns with fresh brains can handle the zip of that fast stuff."
I'll just go and make some preserves and I'll read that Internet thngammajy whan it's done a'loadin.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Reading the subject line just made me think of some elderly old maid rocking way too fast in her Cracker Barrel chair.
Made me think of a little old lady driving a giant cadillac at half the posted speed limit with a tail of 20 cars stuck behind her.
But really, she's just making excuses. What does she do during slow page loads? Take naps?
Re:Grandma Speed (Score:4, Insightful)
Why, old people porn, of course. :-P
But, in all seriousness, start sending them daily links to videos or photo albums of the youngest of grandchildren, and they'll suddenly discover why they might care to have faster speeds.
I will go out on a limb and say that at least some grandparents have switched for broadband for exactly that reason. "Mac: $900. Broadband connection: $50. Video conferencing story time with the grand kids: fucking priceless".
Cheers
FAKE! (Score:2)
Pew Internet & American Life sounds like a fake business. You should only listen to results from the firm of OMGPEWPEWPEW.
Majority (Score:4, Insightful)
Majority my ass, when did 1/5th become a majority.
Quite the misleading headline.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
When asked what it would take to tempt them to switch, 35% said the price of broadband would have to fall, while almost a fifth said that nothing would tempt them to upgrade, suggesting many die-hard dial-up users simply don't see the need for the higher speeds that are available.
So most want faster internet but cannot afford it, while approximately 1/5th do not want faster internet.
Re: (Score:2)
You didn't comprehend properly. :)
Of the people on dialup, the majority of *those* people (62%) don't have any interest. :)
Majority my ass, when did 1/5th become a majority.
Quite the misleading headline.
Dialup is "good enough" if you're not an addict. (Score:4, Interesting)
Dialup was good enough back in the day. Couldn't -- and still can't -- beat $4.95/mo when 90% of all you needed to do is check your email once a day, which pretty much describes the internet habits of my parents. If they needed anything bandwidth intensive, they'd usually just take care of it at work.
I think the only reason my parents switched to broadband was because I would spend hours tying up the phoneline when I was IMing my friends.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Costs not worth it to some people (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Costs not worth it to some people (Score:5, Funny)
My father said the same thing... (Score:5, Insightful)
...until one of his kids started sending videos of his grandchildren to him, along with the high MP pictures. Add in the gallery (Menalto's Gallery) that I run that hosts lots of family pictures. He also likes to view videos from humoron and other sites of that nature, and dialup just wasn't working for him.
I tried to convince him for at least a couple years that he should get cable or DSL, but he refused to because he either didn't want to pay the up-front costs, or he hated the company (or a combination). He finally got a taste of higher-than-dialup speed at a friends house, bit the bullet, and finally signed up for himself.
Many of these people are probably in the same boat. They just simply don't know what they are missing out on, and that's fine. That means they're either out in their community, or watching TV, etc. I just have a feeling that many of these folks would actually put a higher speed connection to use if they were introduced to all the stuff they could be using it for.
I know for a fact that one of the driving features for my father getting his DSL was that he was able to talk to my deployed brother via the internet far more cheaply than phone calls were. I wonder how many of that 62% have deployed children/family members that they'd like to be able to talk to more often?
If they are being sold on speed... (Score:5, Insightful)
... I'm not too surprised.
The most important difference, as far as I'm concerned is not in speed, but in the always-on nature of the connection.
For a long time my (80-something) parents were quite happy with dial-up. And they basically didn't use the Net. To access the Internet they had to run a phone extension lead across the room. They explained they didn't use the Internet much, and I simply said, "and you wouldn't use electricity much if every time you needed to turn on a light you had to go out to the garage, start up a generator and then run a cable in through the window".
In the end they simply decided that they didn't want to be left behind by the times. They got wireless, I set them up with a Mac (yes, I know but the Dock is a great thing it you only ever need 4 applications) and they never looked back. They're Skyping, Googling, the works.
Exactly how you sell the way that the online experience changes when you are always on is slightly problematic, but it's key. People liek my parents really didn't care if the Web page opened twice as fast.
They have never even used high-speed (Score:5, Insightful)
The few dial-up users I knew a few years ago didn't realize how big the difference was. They assumed that if it took 2 minutes to get a page on dial-up, it would be one minute or 30 seconds on high-speed internet. They equated high-speed internet to upgrading a computer. It's prettier and faster, but it is really the same thing. And they were patient.
That changed when they saw my laptop. Sometimes I would click a link and the page would load and they didn't even register that it happened. dial-up -vs- high-speed is like reading a book through a telescope a mile away -vs- reading it up close. And once you go there you can never go back. So I suspect most of those dial-up users who are left just have never seen the alternative.
Re:They have never even used high-speed (Score:5, Funny)
That's silly. Sure, you need to walk a mile to turn the page, but then you're already there and the rest of the experience is the same.
Dial-up -vs- high-speed is like reading a book with only one word printed on each page -vs- reading a porno mag with embedded videos on each page.
No seriously you guys you don't understand. (Score:3, Funny)
The Internet is not something that you just dump something on. It's not a big truck. It's a series of tubes. And if you don't understand, those tubes can be filled and if they are filled, when you put your message in, it gets in line and it's going to be delayed by anyone that puts into that tube enormous amounts of material, enormous amounts of material.
Don't want to, or don't want to pay? (Score:2)
I have never met someone who said I don't want more goodness for the same price. If your local dial-up provider said, hey we will give you broadband speeds for no extra cost tomorrow... I would be willing to bet that most would jump on it!
The only "advantage" that dial-up offers over broadband is the flexability of providers.
The appeal of broadband is not speed. (Score:2)
If the ISPs in the UK had sold broadband as a speed upgrade I'd still be on dial-up too. The fact is lots of internet users don't need to download things quickly. 56k is more than adequate for email, it's practically overkill for SSH and it's bearable for light web surfing. There really isn't any reason to upgrade if that's all you do. Even the "always on" factor is really just a speed advantage.
The reason I bought into broadband was primarily reliability and the fact that it doesn't tie up your phone line
Need (Score:2)
Most people don't need it anyway. And 1/2 that think they do really don't.
If we could dump all the extra garbage on most webpages, we could conserve a lot of bandwidth as it is.
Re:Need (Score:5, Informative)
If we could dump all the extra garbage on most webpages, we could conserve a lot of bandwidth as it is.
Edit -> Preferences -> Content
Untick load images automatically.
Untick enable Javascript.
Untick enable Java.
Edit -> Preferences -> Applications
Remove any you don't like.
HTH
Say! Slashdot's faster! (Score:3, Informative)
I just undid automatic images, JavaScript and java, and Slashdot loads fast. Props for Slashdot webmasters who still make it look good without JavaScript or images.
I'm one of those (Score:5, Interesting)
I've been sticking with dial-up service because high speed Internet's too much money for me. It's an added monthly fee that I just don't need. I can make do with dial-up. Turn off graphics and Flash and most web pages load just fine on a 56K dial-up connection. I just download patches for my Mac while I'm at work. I don't have a cell phone or cable TV either. I think I was just raised frugally.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I think I was just raised frugally.
Wolves are often quite frugal.
Frankly, I'd be OK with a lower speed connection (Score:5, Insightful)
Frankly, I'd be OK with a lower speed connection, for a lower price, too. Say, 768kbps down for $15 a month would work just fine for me at home. Instead I pay $45 a month for 6mbps that I don't really need.
Yeah right (Score:2)
Some people just get set in their ways (Score:5, Interesting)
It's the same phenomenon that leaves me shaking my head every time they interview some laid-off Detroit autoworker who says something like "This is what I've done my whole life. What am I going to do now?" The obvious questions would be "Good Lord man, you didn't see this coming?" and "Why didn't you get some training or find a field with a brighter future in the last few decades?" Sometimes you just get used to doing something one way, and are lethargic about changing.
You CAN teach an old dog new tricks, you just have to kick him in the ass sometimes to get him out of his rut.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I've have a grandmother who would still be using her 1969 Philco black and white TV if it hadn't broken at some point. Some people just get to a point in their life where they get used to doing things the way they've been used to doing them for a long time. And those people resist change with a surprising tenacity.
I think for many people, the benefits simply aren't worth the cost. And that applies both to high speed Internet and people used to things a certain way. Your grandma probably had no problem changing the channels on the B&W, but has some trouble with all the small buttons on the remote or tv control panel of the color tv. It is more difficult to learn new things as you get older. The hassle of learning how to use a new product, and pay for it, isn't worth the upgraded features for everyone.
My 1200bps modem works just fine for me (Score:5, Funny)
BTW, first post!
More Than The Speed (Score:3, Insightful)
Who needs broadband? (Score:3, Funny)
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Duh! (Score:5, Insightful)
Kinda OT: I guess none of them can ever use linux (Score:4, Interesting)
Linux suppot for dialup is next to nil. Yes it's because of those winmodems, but you'd think a couple of the common chipsets would be reverse engineered or something could be done like ndiswrapper.
I mention this cause I have a friend who got a machine with vista and it runs fairly slow, I was going to set him up with linux, but realized he uses a winmodem for dialup. So that blew that idea.
Some tech only becomes compelling after use (Score:3, Interesting)
There are certain technologies that just aren't compelling until you've actually experienced them, and had a chance to explore the possibilities they give you.
DVRs would be a prime example. Nobody realizes what a difference timeshifting with a season pass makes, until they use one. It converted me from a non-watcher to a fairly avid TV fan, since my primary block was scheduling.
Broadband is another. My parents didn't understand why it was compelling either, until I finally more or less browbeat them into getting a connection. -Now- they get it, and wouldn't go back to dialup for the world.
Once you have it, the value proposition becomes pretty obvious: always on, internet being easily available to all computers in the house, a -lot- faster, more types of websites available, being able to effectively use web-apps, not having to worry about missing emergency calls from relatives (no matter how you configure the modem, sometimes the call-waiting beep doesn't disconnect it) and so on.
I'm not saying these techs are right for everyone. I am saying that in many ways, they're transcendent, and you can't make a good judgment about them until you've actually experienced them.
Simply a case of being content (Score:3, Insightful)
My uncle fell into this category. For years he would happily log into his ISP, check his stocks, read emails, the usual operations. Time after time, I explained that for just about the same price he could have a MUCH faster Internet. He would constantly reply with "it's ok, I'm patient and this works." Usually, I would retort this by saying that his patients was admirable and a good thing, but simply not necessary.
Until one day he moved to a new community which had all the houses pre-setup with cable modems.
In fact, at the new community, broadband was cheaper since it was just "part of the deal."
Since then, I haven't heard the end of "how much faster his computer is now." He absolutely loves it and says he will never go back to dial-up.
Realistically, I think most broadband holdouts fit into this description. Hesitant to change, content and generally patient with the shortcoming they have. But if they had the opportunity to try broadband for an extended period of time, I think most reasonable people would agree it's just better.
Come on some DSL plans are reasonable (Score:3, Interesting)
Basic AT&T DSL is $19.99/month not that much more that dial-up. Other DSL providers have a basic DSL setup that is 384KBPS or 512KBPS which is way more than the old dial-up users need but cost less than that $22 AOL dial-up account that most of them have. In fact AOL will work with the DSL company to offer AOL access and software through the DSL and keep their email and web sites.
It is when you need the 1.5MBPS or higher speeds that you pay a higher price for.
I should note that a lot of dial-up customers still use Windows 95/98/ME systems and some form of WINMODEM and lack the basic Ethernet card needed for most broadband connections. A lot of broadband services no longer give that free Ethernet NIC, but people can buy them for $35 or under and install them themselves if they knew how. Just that the average person doesn't know how to open up their computer and stick in a card to upgrade it even if their lives depended on it.
Also Cable and Satellite companies offer broadband as part of a package deal to make things more affordable and so do local phone companies as well. So we can rule out that it isn't affordable, because it is affordable.
Most POTS systems only get like 33KBPS even if they support 56KBPS protocols due to line noise, as they are forced to connect at lower speeds.
Re: (Score:2)
You mean the little round thing with the red light and cord isn't for talking into?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
You mean the little round thing with the red light and cord isn't for talking into?
If they have dialup their mice have balls.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
My mice are female you insensitive clod!
Re: (Score:2)
My grandmother still fights me when I suggest that she get DSL. It's available to her for $15, but she prefers to pay $12 for the less-expensive dial-up connection -- and another $23 for the phone line on which she uses it.
Re: (Score:2)
Not everyone downloads gigabytes of porn all day.
People that just read their mail and dink around on a webpage or tow don't need broadband.
Re:Some people don't have a choice (Score:5, Funny)
I live in a rural aria
I'm guessing you're an Opera user.
Re:Nostalgia (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I used to be able to tell the connection speed from the squawk during the handshake - way too much time doing tech support.
You're not the only one to have that ability. I used to actually sing along with it.
*Bong! Dee-doo deeeee-dooooo*
It really flustered me when it didn't connect at 56k, not because it was slower, but because we couldn't harmonize.
God, I'm such a loser.