Why did dial up exist?

[Maximilian]

Its the same wires that are used by DSL no? So why was dial up so slow and crap and DSL isnt, considering its the same wall connection thats used. How come they didnt just use DSL or somthing faster to begin with?

 

[giantpinkbunnyhead]

I think the technology simply wasn't there at the beginning... as time went on we learned how to make more efficient use of a phone line.

 

[TheGizmo]

Originally posted by: Soviet
Its the same wires that are used by DSL no? So why was dial up so slow and crap and DSL isnt, considering its the same wall connection thats used. How come they didnt just use DSL or somthing faster to begin with?

damn n00bs

 

[AgaBoogaBoo]

Just because the wires are the same doesn't mean everything else is

 

[gamepad]

It's a conspiracy.

 

[GuitarDaddy]

Because for DSL to work you have to be within a mile of a node, which eliminates all rural areas and even some city locations depending on the network

 

[Blazin Trav]

Originally posted by: Soviet
Its the same wires that are used by DSL no? So why was dial up so slow and crap and DSL isnt, considering its the same wall connection thats used. How come they didnt just use DSL or somthing faster to begin with?

Are you being serious right now?

 

[mugs]

DSL wouldn't work without a DSLAM in the CO.

Edit:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DSLAM

Not to mention giving someone that kind of bandwidth in the 1980s and early 90s would have been prohibitively expensive.

 

[Rubycon]

Gee sand has existed forever. Why didn't we have silicon computers thouSANDs of years ago?

 

[BoomerD]

Is the OP having a blonde moment?

Anyone else remember when we were HAPPY to have anything faster than 2400 BAUD?
33.6K dial-up was IMPRESSIVE when it first came out!
56K was AWESOME!

 

[Maximilian]

Originally posted by: GuitarDaddy
Because for DSL to work you have to be within a mile of a node, which eliminates all rural areas and even some city locations depending on the network

So because back in the day these "nodes" werent as widespread, DSL wasent possible and dial-up was the only option? Like mobile phone masts today werent in place 5-10 years ago, giving no signal or a crappy one.

 

[Kirby]

Originally posted by: GuitarDaddy
Because for DSL to work you have to be within a mile of a node, which eliminates all rural areas and even some city locations depending on the network

Damn straight. I hate going home. My internet at home sucks worse than the AT search function.

 

[Maximilian]

Originally posted by: BoomerD
Is the OP having a blonde moment?

No i just didnt get why they couldnt push 1mbit through the wire with dial up.... its the same damn wire used for dial up and DSL.

 

[Evadman]

Originally posted by: BoomerD
Is the OP having a blonde moment?

Anyone else remember when we were HAPPY to have anything faster than 2400 BAUD?
33.6K dial-up was IMPRESSIVE when it first came out!
56K was AWESOME!

My first modem was 300 baud. I had to take the phone off the hook and put it on top of the modem. I still have it in my attic somewhere.

 

[Rubycon]

Originally posted by: Evadman


My first modem was 300 baud. I had to take the phone off the hook and put it on top of the modem. I still have it in my attic somewhere.

That's an acoustic coupler.

Text

 

[IGBT]

..I used dialup for a long time. First 33.6k then 56k. Only in the last couple years was the n.hood upgraded for dsl and cable.

 

[myjaja]

Originally posted by: BoomerD
Is the OP having a blonde moment?

Anyone else remember when we were HAPPY to have anything faster than 2400 BAUD?
33.6K dial-up was IMPRESSIVE when it first came out!
56K was AWESOME!

Yeah, lol. I once remember it took me like a week to download Titanic.

 

[beer]

Once you see the number of instructions you have to process on a DSP to make ADSL work, you'll understand. Convolutions don't just happen you know! DSPs of the power used in ADSL modems didn't exist in affordable quantities until the past decade..

 

[LegendKiller]

Because the tubes just couldn't be used efficiently.

 

[jadinolf]

Originally posted by: TheGizmo

Originally posted by: Soviet
Its the same wires that are used by DSL no? So why was dial up so slow and crap and DSL isnt, considering its the same wall connection thats used. How come they didnt just use DSL or somthing faster to begin with?

damn n00bs

 

[jadinolf]

Originally posted by: MS Dawn
Gee sand has existed forever. Why didn't we have silicon computers thouSANDs of years ago?

Yeah but the crystal grower hadn't been invented yet.

 

[GuitarDaddy]

Originally posted by: Soviet

Originally posted by: GuitarDaddy
Because for DSL to work you have to be within a mile of a node, which eliminates all rural areas and even some city locations depending on the network

So because back in the day these "nodes" werent as widespread, DSL wasent possible and dial-up was the only option? Like mobile phone masts today werent in place 5-10 years ago, giving no signal or a crappy one.

No, I misread the OP. My explanation is why dial-up still exsists today and is the only option for many people.

Back in the day other technologies hadn't been developed. Dial up was as good as it got.
Like someone else posted, I remeber when 1200 baud was the state of the art and the company I was working for paid $400 bucks for the software that allowed me to dial into the company computer. And the internet was still a gleem in Al Gores eye

 

[manly]

Originally posted by: nkgreen
Damn straight. I hate going home. My internet at home sucks worse than the AT search function.

LOL. :beer:

Originally posted by: Pioneer Premier
Yeah, lol. I once remember it took me like a week to download Titanic.

Turn in your man card, now.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: Soviet

Originally posted by: BoomerD
Is the OP having a blonde moment?

No i just didnt get why they couldnt push 1mbit through the wire with dial up.... its the same damn wire used for dial up and DSL.

Because your phone line is limited to the band of 600-3000 hz - fine for voice communications. The bandwidth of that band is 2400 hz. You're limited to 1 baud per hz, so the best you can do with a POTS line is 2400 baud. By combining the phase, amplitude and frequency of the sound wave, you can have many different combinations and thus get more than one bit per baud. That is how they got modems faster than 2400 bps. If someone tells you they had a 9600 baud modem, they're mistaken. They had a 9600 bps modem.

The upper limit of a POTS modem is 56k, because once your phone call gets to the CO it is turned into a 56kbps digital signal (actually 64kbps with one parity bit per byte).

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: Soviet

Originally posted by: GuitarDaddy
Because for DSL to work you have to be within a mile of a node, which eliminates all rural areas and even some city locations depending on the network

So because back in the day these "nodes" werent as widespread, DSL wasent possible and dial-up was the only option? Like mobile phone masts today werent in place 5-10 years ago, giving no signal or a crappy one.

/smacks forehead on desk

The reason they didn't just go straight to DSL is because DSL didn't exist. The technology hadn't been developed yet. As I said above, additional equipment is required in the CO to do DSL. That equipment didn't exist when people were tooling along at 300 bps. Just like analog modem technlogy took a long time to develop, DSL modem technology took time to develop.