Comments on: Getting my in-laws online, at last

At 4,000 feet and off the grid, a pair of 60-somethings who haven't participated in the last 30-plus years of media innovations get their first taste of the Internet.

[sci062999]

Use Adblock+ for Firefox. That will help to eliminate unnecessary ads and save on the bandwidth. Remember to switch off the LinkScanner feature in AVG.

i love adblock - but i was wondering does it just eliminate the ads from being displayed on screen or does it prevent the from being downloaded alltogether? if its the second, only then would it conserve any bandwidth.
and i am wondering if its the second case - then how does it know that a pic is an ad until it downloads the ad and then checks it?

[rpokane]

Daniel,
Great read! This is the first article I've read to completion in a while.
Please keep us updated.

[Get_Bent]

Why not go with a more low-power computer since your in-laws have limited power availability? There are plenty of options that would still give them a decent computer without sucking down the watts.

And I suggest that you burn the service packs, updates, utilities, etc. to CD and take it with you on your next visit.

[Daniel Terdiman]

I'll definitely be bringing everything up to them next time on CD. Being a Mac guy myself, it hadn't entirely occurred to me what they would need to get their Windows setup fully secure. But I do now.

Thanks for the tip.

[rapier1]

The thing to keep in mind is that switching a Mac won't alleviate the need to download and install bulky service packs and updates. Its just a fact of modern computing life that you'll need to do it. Also, I've noticed that some people are reluctant to switch operating systems because of UI differences. More than a couple of people have gone to Mac and then switched back because they didn't want to learn a new way of doing things. If your in-laws aren't having any real problems with windows and they know how to do what they need to do I would be hesitant to push a different solution on them even if it might arguably be better.

[thedrexl]

Good article but someone needs to fired for all the horrible grammar problems in this.

[chinapanda]

I agree good content, so I can forgive the grammar. I'd recommend reading tech sites for their content and not their grammar.

[AJ Pants]

Agreed, Could have been really good but simply has not been not written well. Stick with your day job mate.

[stan2w]

Kettle calling the pot black, check your own!
I thought that the article was interesting, one of the first that I have read all the way to the end.

[stan2w]

AJ Pants, Why the double negative?

[natebow]

Also living on a mountaintop (but in north central PA), satellite - and also for me Hughesnet - is the only option. No cable, no DSL, not even EVDO wireless is available here (I have to drive 7 miles to get a reliable signal on my mobile). I would agree that the "Fair Access Policy" Hughesnet uses causes noticeable headaches. I don't know the ins & outs of satellite internet, but I can imagine there are more bandwidth concerns and availability issues than for wireline internet (maybe I'm wrong? I'd love any ammo to take back to Hughesnet). Despite the Hughesnet pamphlets, even modest YouTube viewing can put me over the limit - they make it sound better than it really is, in my experience. I use one of their top tier plans for my home and hit the daily use cap, and NEVER download or stream movies or TV shows.

Rural areas DO need better access to broadband internet, and satellite service, in my experience, does not cut it. Whether a fan of the current federal stimulus or not, I do hope the rural broadband access packages included bring much-needed help to those of us who choose to not live in the urban areas! We're not lesser citizens because we live away from high density populations, though broadband providers, and popular culture, certainly cast us that way. Expense or not - phone lines and electric lines have made it to most every corner of our country - it is time for politicians to stand up against corporate greed (rural service at the expense of corporate profits) and get this done for the greater good of all US citizens. Though there are tradeoffs to living rurally rather than in an urban area, broadband should no longer be one of those.

[Daniel Terdiman]

Yes, this really concerns me. I am worried that if their experience is not satisfactory, they'll abandon the whole project and our hopes for having them be connected will be dashed. I guess we'll have to see how it goes, and if they need to up their threshold, we'll find a way to make it happen.

[rapier1]

The main problem is that you can't really upgrade the bandwidth on a satellite without replacing the satellite. With terrestrial networks its a lot easier and less expensive to upgrade the bandwidth. So I'm sorry to say it but you are right. That being said, wireless may be an option for some people in rural communities. Using directional antennas, outdoor wireless bridges and so forth its possible to extend the range to several miles with line of sight. Probably not a feasible option in the case though.

You mentioned that while at their house you have EVDO access using your Mac. If you're get a Rev. A connection at their house, I'd recommend you sign them up to whatever wireless broadband provider (Sprint or Verizon) you use. If you're not within the Rev. A coverage area and were just connecting on the 1xRTT network, they still might be able to reach the Rev. A coverage area with an out-of-the-box booster antenna (about $25). I used the Verizon-brand booster antenna a couple years ago to get my Rev. A connection 2 miles (as the crow flies) from the edge of without-the-antenna range.

Get the free (with the plan) PCMCIA EVDO card, and stick it in a $70 Airlink AR360W3G Router, which they can connect to with the desktop's LAN cable. I use Sprint and get a reliable, consistent 24/7 1.1-1.3 mbps connection, and have never suffered from Sprint throttling due to high usage (although I used to have Verizon's EVDO and they DID throttle after about 15GB in a month), and I download/use about 2.5-3.5 GB a day. The cost is about $60/mo (for both Sprint and Verizon) for unlimited data with a 2-yr commitment. Considering the price of most satellite plans I've looked into (don't know about this HughesNet one you got them on), this would even be cheaper.

This setup also allows them to take their internet connection on the road (with a cigarette-lighter power inverter), which may not be useful to them now, but could be later (after you've convinced them to get some power-sipping netbooks).

Cheers, and good luck whatever your decision!

-Arthur Grumbine

[xtrasico]

Liked it too. Nice reading. Nice ending. Not like a fairy tale but REAL.

[loose_screw]

Once again it just goes to show that, while content is important, bandwidth is crucial to a satisfactory web experience nowadays.

What happened to the promise of WiMax providing fast internet access to rural areas?

[rapier1]

Still hammering it out but the issue is mostly one of funding. If you can't make a profit on it people just aren't going to be interested. Hopefully some aspects of the stimulus plan will help accelerate the current glacial progress.
http://www.wimax.com/commentary/blog/blog-2009/february/Broadband-Stimulus-a-Boon-for-Rural-WiMAX-0223

[chinapanda]

Nice article---I can SOooo identify,,, I don't have any encouraging words for you though as I've continued to have this problem with my parents connection for years. A bad connection is all it takes to eliminate the usefulness of the internet. That's kind of scary since I rely on it so much. Now my parents hardly ever use it after years of my fruitless attempts to show them all the 'cool' stuff that's possible. Somehow though they continue to live fulfilling lives without it. I'd recommend relaxing and taking an internet 'fast' next time you go for a visit.

[jwilson00m1]

I had to get my parents on a satellite connection too. It was awful. Hughesnet was terribly slow, they were always getting "fapped" (exceeding the fair access policy) especially after they got a mac Mini and had to download 300mb of updates. So, after a painful 2 years and a half I switched them over to a Sprint USB card. It has a FAP but it is calculated on a monthly basis and since parents use their connection in large bursts but not continual steady use, it works better for them and they have yet to be "fapped". The satellite dish is now an expensive lawn ornament. Sigh.

[Daniel Terdiman]

I am deeply concerned about this outcome. I just bought my in-laws a new Mac, which I hope will make it easier for them because they won't have to deal with all the configuration nonsense that is necessary with Windows machines. But they bought their satellite dish instead of leasing it so if their connection remains too slow, it will also become an expensive lawn ornament, and that simply won't be acceptable.

My wife and I are heading back to their mountain next week to conduct part 2 of this process, and hopefully, by then, we'll have resolved many of the issues. But if not, Hughes is going to hear about it, have no doubt.

[btbeme]

I'll trade my hectic lifestyle for your parents. I have a 15 meg connection. They can have it.

[Rickhanscom]

Food for thought.

Hughes offers a 30-Day Satisfaction Guarantee. We hope you are happy with your HughesNet high-speed Internet service. If you are not completely satisfied, you may cancel your service and return your HughesNet equipment to receive a refund. The HughesNet satellite modem, power supply and radio must be returned to Hughes, in good condition, within 60 days of cancelling your service in order to receive the equipment refund. Hughes will provide instructions on how to de-install and return your equipment. You are not required to return, and Hughes is not obligated to de-install or pay for the de-installation of the antenna, mount or any cables. Installation charges and other fees are not refundable.

[loose_screw]

I would return the dish, it's clearly not ready for prime time. Unless you're prepared to browse the web with a Lynx browser.

[dravinashmanwatkar]

why don't you use google chrome,it's the fastest and most easy browser i found out till now. since your in laws are new to browsing they do not have to worry about new page with google to open .simply type any thing in adress bar ,it will show results then navigate according to interest with the links shown in results.
my experience is very nice with chrome.

[rapier1]

Switching browsers won't make their network connection any faster. The bottleneck isn't in the application in this case.

[grabacon9]

At least that your in-laws are willing to try. Most people I talk to won't even budge or try to use a computer.

[MagiMamoru]

Well, I now know that Hughes Net is not a solution,as I would use well over 200MBs a day, just streaming from the SciFi Channel.

Thanks

[brentrbrian]

Thanks for the experiences with Hughes Net ... I have friends that have asked, but, I did not know anyone using their service.

I can send a link to this article.

[sundance808]

you mentioned they have mobile access? why not hook them up with a data plan instead a minimum GPRS/CDMA should be able to give them 33.6kbps.

[wkstar]

After reading this, Satellite Internet is a cruel joke. I guess that I will not be moving anywhere that I can not get a real connection.

[ASROSS]

HughsNet is a total sham. It's almost criminal that they are even allowed to sell their service. Their marketing is totally deceptive to what they actually deliver. Thankfully, they will be out of business soon.