On Wed, 28 Nov 2018 11:57:04 +0000, Martin Brown
wrote:

(Besides, I think even my Android 4.2.2 has "use wi-fi
where available" as an _optional_ setting, i. e. can be turned off.)

The one that is critical is do not allow insane sized operating system
upgrades to download whilst on a paid for by volume of data connection.

Never trust the default settings for this sort of thing. Helping a
granddaughter set up a new installation of Whatsapp on a new Android
phone yesterday, I guided her to the setting for data usage. Under the
heading "When using mobile data" on my own phone I only have
"Documents" selected, but not "Photos", "Audio" or "Video", because
these things can use up a lot of data but it's still useful to be able
to have a text conversation. (If anybody does send pictures they're
not lost but will not be downloaded until the phone is back home or
within reach of a known wi-fi connection).

I was surprised to see that under this heading on the new phone,
"Photos" was the *only* thing selected, so quickly corrected it.

There's a similar setting in the Play Store to ensure that you only
download apps over wi-fi, and another one for updating the system
software itself (which thankfully doesn't happen very often). It's
worth checking all these settings and giving some thought to how you
want your device to use data. Don't assume the defaults will be the
best settings for you.

Rod.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com

On 28/11/2018 17.03, Martin Brown wrote:
On 28/11/2018 13:03, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 28/11/2018 12.57, Martin Brown wrote:

My own 3G connection will run 20Mbps at home whereas my best fixed line
is 5M and for most rural domestic users round here 1-2M is more typical.
So apart from the data charges which sting a little 3G is way faster
(and 4G is a distant pipe dream - most masts here are still EDGE 2.5G).

Well, my WiFi does at most 45 Mbit (with a 600 Mbit land line). So 4G,
with a theoretical speed of 301Mbit, is faster than my WiFi - unless
there are many phones in the area actively using internet, because the
speed is shared.

That seems insanely slow WiFi speed for such a fast landline.

Indeed, but it is what most providers provide.


Many people have such slow WiFi. And even slower if living on a flat
(apartment): 1 MB is typical.

If there are zillions of users all fighting for the same channel 11 as
BT used to by default set them up to do then you can get a huge slowdown
due to collisions. I persuaded my nearest neighbours to use channels so
that people on the same channel are separated as widely as possible.

Oh, at that place there are so many neighbours all using WiFi that all
channels are used by more than one apartment.


Yes, it is possible to purchase access points using 5 Gh and improve
speed.

Most ISP provided modems are capable of 5GHz operation and 802.11n these
days - maybe you should ask your ISP to replace your antidiluvian unit.

Oh, they will. They are replacing them, forcibly, and charging extra,
which I do not want. I do not know if the new model does 5G - I'll
google. [...] Yes, it has 5G. But apparently only for new clients, not
guaranteed they install it if we complain.

https://comunidad.movistar.es/t5/Blog-Movisfera/Telef%C3%B3nica-sustituye-router-ONT-y-videobridge-por-un-nuevo/ba-p/2505790

--
Cheers, Carlos.

On 28/11/2018 18.18, 123456789 wrote:
On 11/28/2018 6:03 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:

my WiFi does at most 45 Mbit (with a 600 Mbit land line). So 4G,
with a theoretical speed of 301Mbit, is faster than my WiFi

How do you test your speed?

When I test my overall speed I often get different answers depending on
the device used, even though I test at the same (seconds apart) time,
same cable connection, same WiFi, and using the same speed test site.
Reported speeds have varied by as much much as 50 Mbps. As a general
rule the cheaper the device I'm using the lower the reported speed. So I
usually just the same device for day to day comparisons.

For testing the Internet connection speed I use my ISP site. Then I
download a DVD and the speed matches.

For testing the WiFi I time downloading a large file internally to my
LAN. Like desktop machine to laptop machine.

Testing with a phone I don't do, but it is slower than my laptop.

But that figures, were the theoretical speeds.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

On 28/11/2018 17.08, nospam wrote:
In article , Martin Brown
wrote:

Well, my WiFi does at most 45 Mbit (with a 600 Mbit land line). So 4G,
with a theoretical speed of 301Mbit, is faster than my WiFi - unless
there are many phones in the area actively using internet, because the
speed is shared.

That seems insanely slow WiFi speed for such a fast landline.

Many people have such slow WiFi. And even slower if living on a flat
(apartment): 1 MB is typical.

If there are zillions of users all fighting for the same channel 11 as
BT used to by default set them up to do then you can get a huge slowdown
due to collisions. I persuaded my nearest neighbours to use channels so
that people on the same channel are separated as widely as possible.

Yes, it is possible to purchase access points using 5 Gh and improve speed.

Most ISP provided modems are capable of 5GHz operation and 802.11n these
days - maybe you should ask your ISP to replace your antidiluvian unit.

while 5ghz is certainly preferred, 802.11n @ 2.4gz would be faster than
his 45mbit.

Yes, combining channels, which is impolite on neighbours.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

In article , Carlos E.R.
wrote:

Most ISP provided modems are capable of 5GHz operation and 802.11n these
days - maybe you should ask your ISP to replace your antidiluvian unit.

while 5ghz is certainly preferred, 802.11n @ 2.4gz would be faster than
his 45mbit.

Yes, combining channels, which is impolite on neighbours.

no combining needed. n is faster than g. simple as that.

Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 28/11/2018 17.03, Martin Brown wrote:
On 28/11/2018 13:03, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 28/11/2018 12.57, Martin Brown wrote:

My own 3G connection will run 20Mbps at home whereas my best fixed line
is 5M and for most rural domestic users round here 1-2M is more typical.
So apart from the data charges which sting a little 3G is way faster
(and 4G is a distant pipe dream - most masts here are still EDGE 2.5G).

Well, my WiFi does at most 45 Mbit (with a 600 Mbit land line). So 4G,
with a theoretical speed of 301Mbit, is faster than my WiFi - unless
there are many phones in the area actively using internet, because the
speed is shared.

That seems insanely slow WiFi speed for such a fast landline.

Indeed, but it is what most providers provide.

Doesn't your broadband modem/router have a LAN port? If it has, a
300 Mbps Wireless N router would dramatically increase the speed
(assuming your devices have N-capability as well). Prices of such
routers start at some 30 Euro in our country (NL).

Many people have such slow WiFi. And even slower if living on a flat
(apartment): 1 MB is typical.

If there are zillions of users all fighting for the same channel 11 as
BT used to by default set them up to do then you can get a huge slowdown
due to collisions. I persuaded my nearest neighbours to use channels so
that people on the same channel are separated as widely as possible.

Oh, at that place there are so many neighbours all using WiFi that all
channels are used by more than one apartment.

Yes, it is possible to purchase access points using 5 Gh and improve
speed.

Most ISP provided modems are capable of 5GHz operation and 802.11n these
days - maybe you should ask your ISP to replace your antidiluvian unit.

Oh, they will. They are replacing them, forcibly, and charging extra,
which I do not want. I do not know if the new model does 5G - I'll
google. [...] Yes, it has 5G. But apparently only for new clients, not
guaranteed they install it if we complain.

https://comunidad.movistar.es/t5/Blog-Movisfera/Telef%C3%B3nica-sustituye-router-ONT-y-videobridge-por-un-nuevo/ba-p/2505790

"charging extra"!? If you buy the router, then why should your ISP
charge extra?

Anyhow, if you have a "600 Mbit land line", then why does your ISP get
away with providing only a 45 Mbps router? If an ISP in our country
tried that, a few complaints to a consumer organization would make the
ISP get their act together very quickly.

On 29/11/2018 16.30, nospam wrote:
In article , Carlos E.R.
wrote:

Most ISP provided modems are capable of 5GHz operation and 802.11n these
days - maybe you should ask your ISP to replace your antidiluvian unit.

while 5ghz is certainly preferred, 802.11n @ 2.4gz would be faster than
his 45mbit.

Yes, combining channels, which is impolite on neighbours.

no combining needed. n is faster than g. simple as that.


Ah. MIMO. I don't have that currently. I did, but the AP was repurposed.

And of course, the portable devices need to support it as well, which I
don't think they do.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

On 29/11/2018 21.46, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 28/11/2018 17.03, Martin Brown wrote:
On 28/11/2018 13:03, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 28/11/2018 12.57, Martin Brown wrote:

My own 3G connection will run 20Mbps at home whereas my best fixed line
is 5M and for most rural domestic users round here 1-2M is more typical.
So apart from the data charges which sting a little 3G is way faster
(and 4G is a distant pipe dream - most masts here are still EDGE 2.5G).

Well, my WiFi does at most 45 Mbit (with a 600 Mbit land line). So 4G,
with a theoretical speed of 301Mbit, is faster than my WiFi - unless
there are many phones in the area actively using internet, because the
speed is shared.

That seems insanely slow WiFi speed for such a fast landline.

Indeed, but it is what most providers provide.

Doesn't your broadband modem/router have a LAN port? If it has, a
300 Mbps Wireless N router would dramatically increase the speed
(assuming your devices have N-capability as well). Prices of such
routers start at some 30 Euro in our country (NL).

MIMO. I don't have it currently. I would need two such, one per house
level. When I had it I did not see my laptop going much faster.

I will have to consider it.


Many people have such slow WiFi. And even slower if living on a flat
(apartment): 1 MB is typical.

If there are zillions of users all fighting for the same channel 11 as
BT used to by default set them up to do then you can get a huge slowdown
due to collisions. I persuaded my nearest neighbours to use channels so
that people on the same channel are separated as widely as possible.

Oh, at that place there are so many neighbours all using WiFi that all
channels are used by more than one apartment.

Yes, it is possible to purchase access points using 5 Gh and improve
speed.

Most ISP provided modems are capable of 5GHz operation and 802.11n these
days - maybe you should ask your ISP to replace your antidiluvian unit.

Oh, they will. They are replacing them, forcibly, and charging extra,
which I do not want. I do not know if the new model does 5G - I'll
google. [...] Yes, it has 5G. But apparently only for new clients, not
guaranteed they install it if we complain.

https://comunidad.movistar.es/t5/Blog-Movisfera/Telef%C3%B3nica-sustituye-router-ONT-y-videobridge-por-un-nuevo/ba-p/2505790

"charging extra"!? If you buy the router, then why should your ISP
charge extra?

Forget about me replacing the ISP provided router, out of the question.

Why? Well, they manage the router remotely, and they do not publish the
various and complex configurations needed for the router to handle the
phone and TV services. And they do change things, that make things stop
working if you use your own hardware.

Yes, I believe some people do it. I don't have time for that. For
fighting the device and them.



Anyhow, if you have a "600 Mbit land line", then why does your ISP get
away with providing only a 45 Mbps router? If an ISP in our country
tried that, a few complaints to a consumer organization would make the
ISP get their act together very quickly.

Interesting question, but all providers do that.

They do the testing on Ethernet, obviously.

With another provider at another place, the apartment has the minimal
Internet available. The ISP wanted to "improve" speed, and I said "no",
because the WiFi is the same. I had a hard time convincing the girl at
the other side that "no, we do not want more internet speed, and yes, I
know what I'm saying, and no, you don't". No, she did not offer to
improve the WiFi.

So I got a rebate for the house instead. 120 or 150 mbits, I think.


--
Cheers, Carlos.

In article , Carlos E.R.
wrote:

Most ISP provided modems are capable of 5GHz operation and 802.11n these
days - maybe you should ask your ISP to replace your antidiluvian unit.

while 5ghz is certainly preferred, 802.11n @ 2.4gz would be faster than
his 45mbit.

Yes, combining channels, which is impolite on neighbours.

no combining needed. n is faster than g. simple as that.

Ah. MIMO. I don't have that currently. I did, but the AP was repurposed.

i didn't mention mimo.

And of course, the portable devices need to support it as well, which I
don't think they do.

they more than likely do, but even if not, there's still a benefit
going with n versus g.

On 29/11/2018 22:06, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 29/11/2018 21.46, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 28/11/2018 17.03, Martin Brown wrote:
On 28/11/2018 13:03, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 28/11/2018 12.57, Martin Brown wrote:

My own 3G connection will run 20Mbps at home whereas my best fixed line
is 5M and for most rural domestic users round here 1-2M is more typical.
So apart from the data charges which sting a little 3G is way faster
(and 4G is a distant pipe dream - most masts here are still EDGE 2.5G).

Well, my WiFi does at most 45 Mbit (with a 600 Mbit land line). So 4G,
with a theoretical speed of 301Mbit, is faster than my WiFi - unless
there are many phones in the area actively using internet, because the
speed is shared.

That seems insanely slow WiFi speed for such a fast landline.

Indeed, but it is what most providers provide.

Doesn't your broadband modem/router have a LAN port? If it has, a
300 Mbps Wireless N router would dramatically increase the speed
(assuming your devices have N-capability as well). Prices of such
routers start at some 30 Euro in our country (NL).

MIMO. I don't have it currently. I would need two such, one per house
level. When I had it I did not see my laptop going much faster.

I will have to consider it.


Many people have such slow WiFi. And even slower if living on a flat
(apartment): 1 MB is typical.

If there are zillions of users all fighting for the same channel 11 as
BT used to by default set them up to do then you can get a huge slowdown
due to collisions. I persuaded my nearest neighbours to use channels so
that people on the same channel are separated as widely as possible.

Oh, at that place there are so many neighbours all using WiFi that all
channels are used by more than one apartment.

Yes, it is possible to purchase access points using 5 Gh and improve
speed.

Most ISP provided modems are capable of 5GHz operation and 802.11n these
days - maybe you should ask your ISP to replace your antidiluvian unit.

Oh, they will. They are replacing them, forcibly, and charging extra,
which I do not want. I do not know if the new model does 5G - I'll
google. [...] Yes, it has 5G. But apparently only for new clients, not
guaranteed they install it if we complain.

https://comunidad.movistar.es/t5/Blog-Movisfera/Telef%C3%B3nica-sustituye-router-ONT-y-videobridge-por-un-nuevo/ba-p/2505790

"charging extra"!? If you buy the router, then why should your ISP
charge extra?

Forget about me replacing the ISP provided router, out of the question.

Why? Well, they manage the router remotely, and they do not publish the
various and complex configurations needed for the router to handle the
phone and TV services. And they do change things, that make things stop
working if you use your own hardware.

OK so they manage their router remotely - but surely it has a decently
fast fixed wire 10/100/1000 hard wired ethernet socket so you could buy
a modern post-diluvian router to use in addition.

Yes, I believe some people do it. I don't have time for that. For
fighting the device and them.

It should be just a case of disabling the inbuilt Wifi and substituting
your own as a pass through device.

Anyhow, if you have a "600 Mbit land line", then why does your ISP get
away with providing only a 45 Mbps router? If an ISP in our country
tried that, a few complaints to a consumer organization would make the
ISP get their act together very quickly.

Interesting question, but all providers do that.

How do they get away with it? My landline speed is a pathetic 5Mbps (the
average local speed round here is typically 1-2Mbps) but the ISP
supplied router is easily capable of 300M on its Wifi - and the chipset
is nothing special it is the default ISP modem.

They do the testing on Ethernet, obviously.

With another provider at another place, the apartment has the minimal
Internet available. The ISP wanted to "improve" speed, and I said "no",
because the WiFi is the same. I had a hard time convincing the girl at
the other side that "no, we do not want more internet speed, and yes, I
know what I'm saying, and no, you don't". No, she did not offer to
improve the WiFi.

So I got a rebate for the house instead. 120 or 150 mbits, I think.

It is odd that they sell such a fast WAN connection with such a
dreadfully slow Wifi capability. Are you sure that the things Wifi
cannot be re-configured to work as if it was made in the 21st century?

--
Regards,
Martin Brown