[lug] SUPERIOR ISP

[mikeslugs at attbi.com]

Sounds like there may be some options out there.  The 
funny thing is, my friend could get aye tee tee bee aye 
if his house was just on the other side of the street.  
There is a huge housing development across the street 
that att could not afford to not provide service to.  
But they couldn't stretch a cable to the two houses 
across the street without charging someone a ton of 
fun.  I'm really interested in theese wireless ISP's.  
Looks like there's a lot of potential for mucho market 
share and they seem to offer a good product/value.  Too 
bad my firend doesn't know anyone across the street with 
a little wireless know-how... a little sharing never 
hurt anyone.  Well the only options appear to be mesa 
and whatcha call it.  I guess I'll send a letter to 
theese guys and see what we can do.  Thanks for the 
referrals y'all!

P.S. If my friend can't get wireless, it's still dish... 
multilink won't provide the speed needed for terminal 
services ( the original reason for my friend looking 
into broadband )... I know, windoze terminal services is 
weak compared to the linux counerpart which has been 
around for ages.  It's all his university provides.
> My company is planning on bring high speed internet to Superior in a few months.  
> I will post when we are ready.  It will be very cheap for the install and 
> pending on your needs about 60 per month.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Frank Whiteley [mailto:techzone at greeleynet.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 06, 2002 10:44 PM
> To: lug at lug.boulder.co.us
> Subject: Re: [lug] SUPERIOR ISP
> 
> 
> If all else fails, how about multilink?  What is his current dialup?  If
> 40K+, then adding more lines and modems will just multiply this at
> incremental costs of the lines and access with neglible binding loss.  We
> call it poor man's ISDN.
> 
> I'm currently running one client on 4*ISDN and latency is 23-25ms.  I
> recently installed multilink*2 for a client in Grover (try Mapquest).  She
> gets 46.6-48K per channel and is very happy (pro proprietary software
> developer/support geek).
> 
> Note that 24/7 dedicated connections are more expensive, but it's hard to
> beat for price/performance for dial-up access.
> 
> Frank Whiteley
> Greeley
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jeff Schroeder" <jeff at neobox.net>
> To: <lug at lug.boulder.co.us>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 06, 2002 6:02 PM
> Subject: Re: [lug] SUPERIOR ISP
> 
> 
> > > I have a friend who lives in superior (just outside
> > > Boulder) who is finally tired of his dial-up
> > > connection.  He's looking for a high speed connection
> > > and has only been able to find one option... dish.
> >
> > I lived in Superior for three years (recently moved to Longmont), and I
> > was able to get DSL at 144k and, later, Sprint broadband.  Of course
> > Sprint has oversubscribed the Denver market, so he's out of luck there.
> > But he might check DSL connectivity by looking somewhere like
> > http://www.dslreports.com...
> > _______________________________________________
> > Web Page:  http://lug.boulder.co.us
> > Mailing List: http://lists.lug.boulder.co.us/mailman/listinfo/lug
> > Join us on IRC: lug.boulder.co.us portf67 channel
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Web Page:  http://lug.boulder.co.us
> Mailing List: http://lists.lug.boulder.co.us/mailman/listinfo/lug
> Join us on IRC: lug.boulder.co.us port=6667 channel=#colug
> _______________________________________________
> Web Page:  http://lug.boulder.co.us
> Mailing List: http://lists.lug.boulder.co.us/mailman/listinfo/lug
> Join us on IRC: lug.boulder.co.us portf67 channelolug