@ Net In Norway @

[RostislaV]

1.00 USD United States Dollars

 

=

 

6.22886 NOK Norway Kroner

 

 

oh...

 

I did`n know that Krona became more heavy ... my congratulations ...

[Glenn]

Download: 4000 kbps

Upload: 400 kbps

ISP: Telenor

Price: 419 NOK/month

Connection type: ADSL

Place: Tromsø

[Petaaar]

Download: 20000

Upload: 1000

ISP: ventel bluecom

Price: 499kr our 80buks $

Connection type: adsl2+

Place: Bærum

Endret 7. februar 2007 av Nokia_dell

[MuLtiPoWa]

I actually really don`t know is this field correct for such theme but I`m very interesting in this question!

 

Unfortunately here is no possibility for starting the polls...

 

So please just give me yours answers simply here.

 

I`m interesting of following -

 

1. What type of Internet connections do you use?

 

Cable Modem, Optical LAN, xDSL`s, other.

 

2. What average speed is standard for Norway and HOW it changes in geographical sense?

 

It means - does the same price for users of the same speed and the same type of  connection in Oslo and behind Norh Pole Circle for example.

 

3. How much costs speed in 1 Mbps and 5 Mbps averagely for whole state, for exactly Oslo and is there big difference between different type of connection?

 

4. And how much the providers has the Norway?

 

I have a big list of them and I`m surprised!

So many for so not big country...

 

Will be very grateful for yours answers. 

7876578[/snapback]

 

Where in Norway are you located? If you have the possibility to get the ISP GET/upc, i would. Because GET can be uncapped easy. Right now im sitting on GET extreme @ 0kr(26mbps/3mbps)

[RostislaV]

Download: 4 Mb

 

Price: 419 NOK/month

 

Connection type: aDSL

 

 

Download: 20 Mb

 

Price: 499 NOK/month

 

Connection type: aDSL+

 

ough ...

 

is this fair ?

Endret 7. februar 2007 av RostislaV

[magio]

It depends on the technology and ISP.

 

With NGT you get 6500/750 (ADSL) for 487NOK and 20000/1100 (ADSL2+) for 499NOK

[kyrsjo]

Well that is hard, but i read that 450 mhz doesent warm up the tissue that wery much. We do not know how dangerous electromagnetic waves are yet, i dont think that it is dangerous at all. But people complaines about headace and such things by using their cell pohnes, so we cant be sure how these waves affect us.

7880333[/snapback]

 

Yeah. Except how do you know wether its placebo or not OTOH - the power (P = dW/dt) is way lower than, say midday sun shining on your face

 

Radiation from ICE or a router has much lower levels than a cell phone.

I.E.  Not dangerous at all.

7880346[/snapback]

 

What do you mean with "levels"? ICE is operating in the 450 Mhz band i think, but it probably uses quite much more power, than do WLAN, which operates in the 2.4 or 5 GHz band - which makes the photons much more energetic, and thus closer to ionizing. OTOH it is still *way* below the ionizing level, which starts at about visible light, depending on what is to be ionized.

 

So - high power => more heat, but decays at about 1/r^2, high frequency => more energetic photons (but for radiocom, it is not enough to matter anyway) - and high energy photons are needed to kick the electrons away from atoms/molecules ("ionization"). Numbers of photons pr. sqare meter of a globular surface centered at the antenna still obeys the 1/r² rule.

 

Ionization is the only way we know EM-radiation can cause cancer etc. The deep warming effects *migth* have some effect, but its still just heat, and the bloodstream removes that exess heat quicly, just as it does when you are exercising - only place it cant cool rapidly is the lense part of the eyes - which is the probable cause for some telecom repair engineers getting "stær" etc.

 

But low-energy photons *could* raise electrons energy-levels somewhat, just not enough to cause ionization. I do not know if this could cause chemical differences, perhaps lowering activation energy for some reactions etc. ?

 

So the bottom line today is "we don't know exactly, but its probably quite safe".

 

But, carry on. I'm just too interested in this stuff There should probably be a thread in the science&technology forum...

 

Cable connection does only have one line to transfer data. That means you can not upload and download at the same time, and get full speed both ways.

E.x. If you have 2mbit down, and 512kbit up. You can only download at 1.5mbit, if you upload at 512kbit.

7880708[/snapback]

 

This is just plain wrong in so many ways, I even don't know where to begin...

7880997[/snapback]

 

Strange - you have half-duplex, which is understandable - but the router/modem doesn't compensate for this by transmitting "above the allowed rate" when heavily taxed on up- and downlink at once, thus emulating full duplex? It would still hurt ping somewhat (tough you could probably "slice" it thin enough to not matter, altough this *could* hurt transmission speed somewhat if the slices are thin and the cables are long, due to latency... Electrical signals in cables don't travel at c.)

 

How about optical lines - are they also half-duplex? Or do they use two cables? Or are there some way to both send and recive a signal, using the same cable, at once (some kind of splitter, maybe on the modem board?)?