> because it was just too slow
The WAN to LAN throughput on a wrt54g is only like 34mbits/s. It’s just too slow to handle a fast internet connection. I guess the fact that so many are still being used shows how ISP connection speeds have stagnated.
The WAN to LAN throughput on a wrt54g is only like 34mbits/s. It’s just too slow to handle a fast internet connection. I guess the fact that so many are still being used shows how ISP connection speeds have stagnated.
I so wished, I could get here a 6mbps connection for half the price of my current 65mps line.
I'm happy with my 1gbps connection where I can download a 50GB game in less than 10 minutes.
Your use case reminds me of the (mystical?) fellow who allegedly complained that his new graphics card didn't allow him to play his favorite 3D FPS game and watch a movie simultaneously.
I've got two monitors.
I've played an MMORPG before where I have a YouTube video playing on the other monitor.
This has been possible for probably 10 years.
Also yes. People live in homes with other people either as a family or house/flat sharing.
Who all use the internet at the same time.
What if they all want to watch 4k video in their room? Whilst their consoles (Nintendo Switch, PS5 or Xbox Series X) are downloading games/updates.
If they want to maintain 4k streaming, they're going to need a fast download speed.
Google Stadia, Amazon Luna, Nvidia GeforceNow are game streaming applications, they require good throughput in addition to low latency.
Low latency requires an uncongested connection.
What if they work on photos and videos in the cloud? They can load them up faster to work on. Rather than requiring a signifant local storage.
Especially if they have symmetric upload speeds.
100Mbps+ is clearly beneficial.
You're conflating your lack of need for fast internet with everyone else not needing it.