From: usenet@phreaknet.org   
      
   On 8/19/2025 8:21 AM, Nyssa wrote:   
   > InterLinked wrote:   
   >   
   >> On 8/16/2025 8:49 AM, Nyssa wrote:   
   >>> InterLinked wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>> On 8/15/2025 8:54 AM, Nyssa wrote:   
   >>>>> InterLinked wrote:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>> On 8/14/2025 8:19 AM, Nyssa wrote:   
   >>>>>>> SH wrote:   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> On 12/08/2025 13:08, Nyssa wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>> Rich wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>> In comp.misc, Lawrence D'Oliveiro   
   >>>>>>>>>>>  wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> Further to that, 34 years ago puts their start   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> in 1991, before CD-ROM drives became popular in   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> PCs. I think they were giving out floppy disks   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> for those first few years.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> Anybody remember seeing an AOL floppy?   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> Definitely. Better than CDs because you could   
   >>>>>>>>>>> just wipe and reuse them.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> https://americanhistory.si.edu/collections/object/nmah_1395721   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> Which I did for many an AOL 3.5" floppy.  Not for   
   >>>>>>>>>> anything valuable, but for a "copy file X from   
   >>>>>>>>>> computer Y to computer Z" use they worked just   
   >>>>>>>>>> fine.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> The CDROM's were only useful to either join AOL   
   >>>>>>>>>> (which was never going to happen) or to make   
   >>>>>>>>>> garden scarecrows.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> I made coasters with them.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> Nyssa, who believe it or not is still on dialup   
   >>>>>>>>> (not AOL) and has been for almost 40 years (not the   
   >>>>>>>>> same ISPs)   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> given the fastest dial up modems are 56 kilobits, it   
   >>>>>>>> must feel really slow viewing websites that rely on   
   >>>>>>>> broadband to fling audio or video or   
   >>>>>>>> Java/SHockwave/Flash at you?   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> And downloading software must have taken days?   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Plus my local (rural) phone lines are crap. I get   
   >>>>>>> ~43Kbps on average. It was better when I lived in the   
   >>>>>>> Big City.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> If I may ask, which ISP are you using?   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> I've been doing some testing with several ISPs lately,   
   >>>>>> all of whom seem to resell GlobalPOPs these days   
   >>>>>> (including AOL it seems). The top speed I've gotten is   
   >>>>>> 36000 a handful of times, and usually I get 31.2 or   
   >>>>>> 33.6 - very difficult to get a V.90 connection   
   >>>>>> anymore. They seem to have done some kind of   
   >>>>>> concentration where they've cheaped out on their phone   
   >>>>>> lines, doesn't seem to be real T1s anymore.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> There weren't many to choose from, and probably even   
   >>>>> fewer now.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> I'm using one called Dialup4Less based somewhere out in   
   >>>>> the Pactific Northwest. The price has doubled since I   
   >>>>> signed up, but still a MUCH better value for me than   
   >>>>> anything else offered around these parts.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> I tried a local access number in my area, and connected   
   >>>> at 31.2. And sure enough, it appears to be resold   
   >>>> GlobalPOPs. It doesn't look like Dialup4Less has their   
   >>>> own dial-up infrastructure.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Do you mind sharing the specific access number you are   
   >>>> using, and what speeds you usually connect at? I wonder   
   >>>> whether all of their access numbers are deficient, or   
   >>>> just some of them.   
   >>>   
   >>> You can find a list of POPs on their website. I'm in the   
   >>> 804 area code, if that helps.   
   >>   
   >> I pulled the list of access numbers from the site and   
   >> pulled out all the ones in the 804 area code. There seem   
   >> to be only five of them, and none of the numbers even   
   >> works anymore (a lot of access number lists seem to   
   >> include a fair number of stale numbers). Could you also   
   >> share the prefix of the working number that you use?   
   >   
   > Here are the exchanges I've got in my dialup list   
   > for kppp:   
   >   
   > 926   
   > 451   
   > 991   
   > 518   
   > 415   
   >   
   > I usually use the 991 ones since those are closest   
   > to me.   
   >   
   > HTH.   
      
   Yes, although not in the way I was expecting... on their website[1],   
   there are no numbers in any of these exchanges listed, with the   
   exception of the last one - two numbers, 415-4055 and 415-4008. I   
   wouldn't be surprised if those weren't the numbers in your list either.   
      
   It seems the access numbers you are using are "delisted" for whatever   
   reason.   
      
   So, hate to be a pest, but could I ask you to share a couple of the   
   *full* access numbers you are using - by private email if you like? I   
   wonder if those are somehow on a different system than the numbers that   
   are still listed.   
      
   [1] https://www.dialup4less.com/locations.html   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)