| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/29/2004 12:10:45 PM · #1 |
Dont know but somebody might find this worth trying. No good to me because I use Broadband.
It claims 5 x faster than your normal dial up, they manage this with software compression. There are costs but its minimal and if it is as good as they claim it would be worth it.
//www.onspeed.com/
Mike
|
|
|
|
02/29/2004 12:43:08 PM · #2 |
|
|
|
02/29/2004 12:59:11 PM · #3 |
Don't know these, but I got an accelerator free from my service provider. I can't get maximum efficiency out of it because that ruins picture quality. Set for maximum picture quality it usually accelerates less than 2x. The major problem is that I have to turn it off when I want to download a big file to dpcprints, otherwise it won't do the download. Perhaps these are better.
|
|
|
|
02/29/2004 06:50:51 PM · #4 |
| I tried one of those "accelerators" called Propel. It was only modestly faster than plain dial-up and seriously degraded JPG's. Can't be used for any photography site. Not worth the cost or bother to me. |
|
|
|
02/29/2004 06:54:00 PM · #5 |
| don't be cheap go hi-speed. |
|
|
|
02/29/2004 07:04:33 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by coolhar:
I tried one of those "accelerators" called Propel. It was only modestly faster than plain dial-up and seriously degraded JPG's. Can't be used for any photography site. Not worth the cost or bother to me. |
That's the one I'm using. It can be used for photography provided you set it right. But it really doesn't give much acceleration and as I said, I can't load big files to dpcprints unless I disable it. For the most part though, I'm using it because it cost me nothing and any acceleration is better than none.
|
|
|
|
02/29/2004 07:09:24 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by notonline:
don't be cheap go hi-speed. |
Don't have to be cheap these days, some high-speed rates are starting to approach dialup.
If somtehing seems to good to be true... it prolly is!
these accelerators can't push more data than the modem can actually transfer, so they have to compress what they do transfer. there are two ways to compress, lossless and lossy (just like it sounds, with lossy you don't get back exactly what you put in). JPEG is already highly compressed, with a lossy algorithm, so if you further compress it, you'll really bugger up the results.
Music files (MP3, WMA), ZIP archives, etc. are also already highly compressed.
The skinny is that the "big stuff" is already compressed, so what's left? Further squeezing JPEGs and compressing text (text actually IS quite compressible with lossless compression). The end result will be a bit underwhelming, and as posted above will play havoc with JPEGs.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/22/2025 12:50:47 PM EDT.
