Did GPRS suddenly get good?

I've grown accustomed to several second ping times and lots
of lost packets when using Cingular GPRS. Just now I connected
(in the boonies about 40 miles west of Indianapolis) and
noticed that my sessions are downright perky. I decided to
test.
60 packets transmitted, 59 received, 1% packet loss, time 59008ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 35.536/49.859/74.886/8.962 ms

Wow! 50ms average?! I never expected that out of GPRS
(especially over Bluetooth). Did Cingular change something?

--kyler

---

› See More: Did GPRS suddenly get good?

Kyler Laird wrote:

> I've grown accustomed to several second ping times and lots
> of lost packets when using Cingular GPRS. Just now I connected
> (in the boonies about 40 miles west of Indianapolis) and
> noticed that my sessions are downright perky. I decided to
> test.
> 60 packets transmitted, 59 received, 1% packet loss, time 59008ms
> rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 35.536/49.859/74.886/8.962 ms
>
> Wow! 50ms average?! I never expected that out of GPRS
> (especially over Bluetooth). Did Cingular change something?
>
> --kyler


They'll never admit anything, even if it makes them look good. Just
bless your good fortune and hope they don't unfix it.

--
jer
email reply - I am not a 'ten'

"Jer" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Kyler Laird wrote:
>
>> I've grown accustomed to several second ping times and lots
>> of lost packets when using Cingular GPRS. Just now I connected
>> (in the boonies about 40 miles west of Indianapolis) and
>> noticed that my sessions are downright perky. I decided to
>> test.
>> 60 packets transmitted, 59 received, 1% packet loss, time 59008ms
>> rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 35.536/49.859/74.886/8.962 ms
>>
>> Wow! 50ms average?! I never expected that out of GPRS
>> (especially over Bluetooth). Did Cingular change something?
>>
>> --kyler
>
>
> They'll never admit anything, even if it makes them look good. Just bless
> your good fortune and hope they don't unfix it.
>
> --
> jer
> email reply - I am not a 'ten'

I have to agree that EDGE has gotten way better all of a sudden. I have the
GC82 Sony card and I ran a speed test it was showing 800 down and 120 up. I
thought it was a fluke so I ran the test 2 more times with the same results.
I rand the test at bandwidthtestplace.com and they seem to be pretty
accurate.

Yesterday I naively wrote:
>Wow! 50ms average?! I never expected that out of GPRS
>(especially over Bluetooth). Did Cingular change something?

I was at lunch and mentioned that to a friend. He asked if I
was sure I wasn't using an open 802.11b access point. Doh!

I'm sure that was it. 50ms is far too good to be true for
GPRS. It was a nice dream though.

--kyler

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <7Qr_d.12816$Z07.9773@trnddc02> on Fri, 18 Mar 2005 03:22:43 GMT,
"Wirelessjuan" <[email protected]> wrote:

>I have to agree that EDGE has gotten way better all of a sudden. I have the
>GC82 Sony card and I ran a speed test it was showing 800 down and 120 up. I
>thought it was a fluke so I ran the test 2 more times with the same results.
>I rand the test at bandwidthtestplace.com and they seem to be pretty
>accurate.

That speed is impossible with EDGE. Were you actually on WiFi? If not, the
results may have been due to caching.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>