If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Router
"Ken Blake" wrote in message news On Mon, 16 Apr 2018 17:48:12 -0700, "David E. Ross" wrote: How long should a router last? Mine is over two years old. Twice today, I had to reboot it in order to access any Web pages. The answer is "it depends." My current router is a Netgear, and it's been working here for 13 years. I purchased an inexpensive Belkin router in 2001. It was defective so I sent it back for replacement. They sent me a refurbished one and I have been using it ever since without a problem. Couldn't be happier. Love refurbished..... Cheers Ted |
Ads |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Router
On Tue, 17 Apr 2018 22:14:46 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
wrote: In message , Ken Blake writes: [] Personally I use separate devices: a router and a modem. Whether router/modem, printer/scanner, or anything else, I always prefer to avoid combination devices, since if one part fails, you need to replace both. On the whole I agree with you, but we accept some combinations these days: video monitors with inbuilt tuner/decoder/audio-amp (we call that a TV set), microwave oven with integrated timer ... in computing, motherboard with IDE/SATA controller, sound, in many cases graphics. The cost saving - not to mention reduction in number of boxes - sometimes outweighs the inconvenience of only part failing. Yes, for example I still remember having a stereo system consisting of two separate power amplifiers, two separate preamplifiers and an FM tuner. But these days, if such separate devices are still available, they are too pricey for me, and almost all of us (including me) have a single device (usually called a receiver), that does all of them. And it's not always only a matter of cost savings or number of boxes. Sometimes the separate devices aren't available Here in UK at least, what most people refer to as a "router" is a combination ADSL MoDem, ethernet hub/switch/router/whatever, and wifi interface (these days the wifi part is tending to be two band). And in the US, there are also many people who do the same thing. One day they may turn out to be right, and only combination devices will be available. But that day hasn't come yet, and as far as I'm concerned, calling such a combination a router is still wrong, and is likely to confuse many people. I keep seeing messages from people who say they are unable to scan an image with their printer and are looking for help. My guess is that they are talking a combination printer/scanner, but I'm never sure. I sometimes think they may be talking about a printer, and don't realize that a scanner isn't part of it. |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Router
s|b wrote:
On Mon, 16 Apr 2018 17:48:12 -0700, David E. Ross wrote: How long should a router last? Mine is over two years old. Twice today, I had to reboot it in order to access any Web pages. It depends. Is your router running Windows 7? And I think the question has been adequately answered. That routers this year, are reliable. They haven't always been, like in the "bad cap" era. Rebooting a router, causes a couple things to happen. Sure, it restarts the router. But it also wipes out the connection information in Windows 7, when DHCP comes back up. A symptom of "my networking came back", might erroneously assume it was the router reboot that fixed it, when in fact it was a Windows 7 issue. I've found when debugging, there's always overlap, and someone has to take the bull by the horns to make progress. If we always shaved every problem down into tiny little silos ("legal-style debugging"), with no integration of results, we wouldn't get anywhere. Our role here, isn't to spread misery thickly with a knife. Toss out an idea, and move on. If you want to see providers of misery, drop over to the HVAC group sometime, and ask a question about your furnace :-) Paul |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Router
In message , Ken Blake
writes: On Tue, 17 Apr 2018 22:14:46 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote: In message , Ken Blake writes: [] Personally I use separate devices: a router and a modem. Whether router/modem, printer/scanner, or anything else, I always prefer to avoid combination devices, since if one part fails, you need to replace both. On the whole I agree with you, but we accept some combinations these days: video monitors with inbuilt tuner/decoder/audio-amp (we call that a TV set), microwave oven with integrated timer ... in computing, motherboard with IDE/SATA controller, sound, in many cases graphics. The cost saving - not to mention reduction in number of boxes - sometimes outweighs the inconvenience of only part failing. [] And it's not always only a matter of cost savings or number of boxes. Sometimes the separate devices aren't available Indeed. Here in UK at least, what most people refer to as a "router" is a combination ADSL MoDem, ethernet hub/switch/router/whatever, and wifi interface (these days the wifi part is tending to be two band). And in the US, there are also many people who do the same thing. One day they may turn out to be right, and only combination devices will Or (and arguably this may already be the case), they may be right because the language has changed. (I hate it, as it usually results in a loss of distinction, but we can't fight language changes. I know; my brother is associate editor on the Dictionary, so we're well familiar with how the language changes.) be available. But that day hasn't come yet, and as far as I'm concerned, calling such a combination a router is still wrong, and is likely to confuse many people. And help some unscrupulous sellers, who may sell a real router-only to people who think they're getting a MoDem/router, and/or something with wifi in it, but don't know enough to check. I keep seeing messages from people who say they are unable to scan an image with their printer and are looking for help. My guess is that they are talking a combination printer/scanner, but I'm never sure. I sometimes think they may be talking about a printer, and don't realize that a scanner isn't part of it. Indeed. And you also remind me of the time when one or two printer manufacturers sold a head, that could be fitted to their printer instead of the print head, and turned it into a scanner! (I've recently obtained a _mouse_-like device - actually it works as just a mouse without the special software - that can scan; you basically scribble with it on whatever you're trying to scan. LG smart scan. I was expecting the results it produced to be very poor, full of lines and mismatches [I bought it just because of its extreme portability], but I'm actually very impressed with the results.) -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf Who can refute a sneer? - Archdeacon Paley, in his book Moral Philosophy |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Router
On 04/17/2018 06:23 PM, Ken Blake wrote:
[snip] And in the US, there are also many people who do the same thing. One day they may turn out to be right, and only combination devices will be available. But that day hasn't come yet, and as far as I'm concerned, calling such a combination a router is still wrong, and is likely to confuse many people. Even without a modem, a "router" often contains an ethernet switch and a wireless access point. [snip] -- Mark Lloyd http://notstupid.us/ "The initial word does not lie within the province of the theologian, but of the historian and the psychologist. [Hugh J. Schonfield, _The_Passover_Plot_] |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Router
On 04/18/2018 08:44 AM, Wolf K wrote:
[snip] Footnote: A receiver-amplifier that I owned for many years had an input for a TV antenna and an output for the TV. I have no idea what the designers were thinking: better fringe reception, probably. Or better performance than with a signal splitter. Never used it. Best, The FM band is located between TV channels 6 and 7, so the same antenna can be used for FM and VHF-TV. I have seen some old antenna splitters that have outputs for VHF, UHF, and FM (all 300-ohm balanced). However, this is the first time I've heard of a receiver with a splitter built in. BTW, I can remember when my father watched an opera on channel 13 (the PBS station there), and the audio was broadcast on an FM station at the same time. -- Mark Lloyd http://notstupid.us/ "The initial word does not lie within the province of the theologian, but of the historian and the psychologist. [Hugh J. Schonfield, _The_Passover_Plot_] |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Router
On 17/4/2018 8:48 AM, David E. Ross wrote:
How long should a router last? Mine is over two years old. Twice today, I had to reboot it in order to access any Web pages. Definitely depends on your needs! For basic internet use, it could last forever. -- @~@ Remain silent! Drink, Blink, Stretch! Live long and prosper!! / v \ Simplicity is Beauty! /( _ )\ May the Force and farces be with you! ^ ^ (x86_64 Ubuntu 9.10) Linux 2.6.39.3 不借貸! 不詐騙! 不*錢! 不援交! 不打交! 不打劫! 不自殺! 不求神! 請考慮綜援 (CSSA): http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_...sub_addressesa |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Router
On Wed, 18 Apr 2018 10:49:42 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
wrote: In message , Ken Blake writes: On Tue, 17 Apr 2018 22:14:46 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote: In message , Ken Blake writes: [] Personally I use separate devices: a router and a modem. Whether router/modem, printer/scanner, or anything else, I always prefer to avoid combination devices, since if one part fails, you need to replace both. On the whole I agree with you, but we accept some combinations these days: video monitors with inbuilt tuner/decoder/audio-amp (we call that a TV set), microwave oven with integrated timer ... in computing, motherboard with IDE/SATA controller, sound, in many cases graphics. The cost saving - not to mention reduction in number of boxes - sometimes outweighs the inconvenience of only part failing. [] And it's not always only a matter of cost savings or number of boxes. Sometimes the separate devices aren't available Indeed. Here in UK at least, what most people refer to as a "router" is a combination ADSL MoDem, ethernet hub/switch/router/whatever, and wifi interface (these days the wifi part is tending to be two band). And in the US, there are also many people who do the same thing. One day they may turn out to be right, and only combination devices will Or (and arguably this may already be the case), they may be right because the language has changed. (I hate it, as it usually results in a loss of distinction, but we can't fight language changes. I know; my brother is associate editor on the Dictionary, so we're well familiar with how the language changes.) There's no question about language changing. It always has. To take a single example related to the points under discussion, what almost all of us call a modem these days wouldn't have been called a modem just a few years ago. A modem was a device that converted analog signals to digital and vice versa. So a DSL or cable "modem," both of which are all digital, isn't really a modem. For a while, I resisted, and refused to call such things modems, but I've given up. The change has happened, and almost everyone, including me, now call them modems. I'm perhaps in the minority, but even though I know it's going to happen, I always try to resist language change happening too fast; it results in people getting confused. be available. But that day hasn't come yet, and as far as I'm concerned, calling such a combination a router is still wrong, and is likely to confuse many people. And help some unscrupulous sellers, who may sell a real router-only to people who think they're getting a MoDem/router, and/or something with wifi in it, but don't know enough to check. Yes. I keep seeing messages from people who say they are unable to scan an image with their printer and are looking for help. My guess is that they are talking a combination printer/scanner, but I'm never sure. I sometimes think they may be talking about a printer, and don't realize that a scanner isn't part of it. Indeed. And you also remind me of the time when one or two printer manufacturers sold a head, that could be fitted to their printer instead of the print head, and turned it into a scanner! Interesting. I don't think I have ever seen or heard of such a device. (I've recently obtained a _mouse_-like device - actually it works as just a mouse without the special software - that can scan; you basically scribble with it on whatever you're trying to scan. LG smart scan. I was expecting the results it produced to be very poor, full of lines and mismatches [I bought it just because of its extreme portability], but I'm actually very impressed with the results.) A couple of weeks ago, while I was at his home taking a guitar lesson, my guitar teacher "scanned" a page of music for me--with his smart phone. Actually he took a photo of it, but the result was almost indistinguishable from a scanned page. |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Router
On Wed, 18 Apr 2018 09:44:50 -0400, Wolf K
wrote: I keep seeing messages from people who say they are unable to scan an image with their printer and are looking for help. My guess is that they are talking a combination printer/scanner, but I'm never sure. I sometimes think they may be talking about a printer, and don't realize that a scanner isn't part of it. Combinations usually have the advantage of a single, integrated design, which is often better than separate boxes. I've never seen such an integrated device that I thought was better than separate boxes. In what respect do you find them better? Not to mention space-saving. :-) Yes, and that can be significant to some people. Not to me, though; my desk has enough room for both. |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Router
On Wed, 18 Apr 2018 08:57:11 -0500, Mark Lloyd
wrote: On 04/17/2018 06:23 PM, Ken Blake wrote: [snip] And in the US, there are also many people who do the same thing. One day they may turn out to be right, and only combination devices will be available. But that day hasn't come yet, and as far as I'm concerned, calling such a combination a router is still wrong, and is likely to confuse many people. Even without a modem, a "router" often contains an ethernet switch and a wireless access point. Yes, and of course that make it a combination device. But since almost all routers these days contain both of these, that usage of the word "router" doesn't bother me anywhere near as much as calling a modem/router combination a router. |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
Router
Mark Lloyd wrote:
On 04/18/2018 08:44 AM, Wolf K wrote: The FM band is located between TV channels 6 and 7 Is that still true in the digital era? In the pre-digital era, there were FM radio receivers that would tune right through the TV bands as well as FM broadcast, and be able to get TV channel sound, since the sound was broadcast in FM. That certainly wouldn't work anymore. I was under the impression that the digital TV frequencies were not the same as the analogue ones - bit I'm not at all sure. BTW, I can remember when my father watched an opera on channel 13 (the PBS station there), and the audio was broadcast on an FM station at the same time. Oh absolutely, PBS stations used to simulcast things like that, before TVs got high-quality stereo sound. -- Tim Slattery tim at risingdove dot com |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
Router
On 4/18/2018 6:44 AM, Wolf K wrote:
Combinations usually have the advantage of a single, integrated design, which is often better than separate boxes. Not to mention space-saving. :-) When Southern California Edison had a power failure -- something that seems to happen any time of the year without regard to the weather -- my router died from the power spike; but my modem was unaffected. Both were plugged into the same surge suppressor. I only had to replace the router. Over the years, my routers and modems have never failed at the same time. If the modem fails, I must replace it to have Internet service. If the router fails, however, I can plug my PC (or my wife's, but not both) into the modem to have Internet service before the router is replaced. Likewise, I have replaced my printer without replacing my scanner. I definitely would not use a combination printer-fax since I can fax directly from my PC via a dongle phone modem. Not only do I avoid integrated hardware but also (to a lesser extent) integrated software. Integrated software has been a major path for malware infections, facilitating the propagation from E-mail, through a browser, and into the operating system. While I have Microsoft's Windows 7 and Office, I use a Mozilla-based browser and E-mail application. I use Nirsoft's file-management applications in place of those in Windows and Acronis True Image in place of the Windows backup. I never use the Windows search capability, relying instead on either Agent Ransack or Everything depending of the type of search. I have AVG AntiVirus running the the background, relegating Microsoft's Security Essentials to scanning individual files, which I also scan with AVG and Malwarebytes. Etc, etc. -- David E. Ross http://www.rossde.com/ First you say you do, and then you don't. And then you say you will, but then won't. You're undecided now, so what're you goin' to do? From a 1950s song That should be Donald Trump's theme song. He obviously does not understand "commitment", whether it is about policy or marriage. |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
Router
On 17/04/2018 17:10, Ken Blake wrote:
snip Thanks for that clarification, which I also didn't know. I've long known that there are three different kinds of devices: switches, hubs, and routers, but if it's ever been clear to me what the differences are, I had forgotten. Here router is a common shorthand for something that, at least if we're talking about the normal IPv4 internet will contain a something to do NAT (network address translation) possibly with extra firewall features, and optionally a switch, one or more Wi-Fi access point(s) and in some cases a modem. A better name for it in my opinion is "gateway" or "residential gateway". The trouble with calling this a router is that "a router" is also the name of the "nodes" that form part of the Internet infrastructure and accept packets and direct them each onward down the correct connection to get the their destinations efficiently. And I don't think I ever knew that a switch was part of a router. If it accepts multiple wired connections on the LAN side there will be a switch (or effectively be) a switch inside it, unless it's really ancient and has a hub instead. Can you point me to a web site that clearly explains the differences between these devices? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_switch https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethernet_hub (hubs are obsolete technology, everyone uses switches now) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Residential_gateway https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Networ...ss_translation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Router_(computing) -- Brian Gregory (in England). |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
Router
In message , Brian
Gregory writes: On 17/04/2018 17:10, Ken Blake wrote: snip Thanks for that clarification, which I also didn't know. I've long known that there are three different kinds of devices: switches, hubs, and routers, but if it's ever been clear to me what the differences are, I had forgotten. Here router is a common shorthand for something that, at least if we're talking about the normal IPv4 internet will contain a something to do NAT (network address translation) possibly with extra firewall features, and optionally a switch, one or more Wi-Fi access point(s) and in some cases a modem. I'd forgotten about the NAT translation and firewall aspects. A better name for it in my opinion is "gateway" or "residential gateway". The trouble with calling this a router is that "a router" is also the name of the "nodes" that form part of the Internet infrastructure and accept packets and direct them each onward down the correct connection to get the their destinations efficiently. I'm with you, but I fear that ship has flown (!): in both UK and US, "router" is now common parlance for "the box I connect to my 'phone line, to which my laptops and smartphones connect wirelessly to get to the internet". Plenty of dinosaur pedants like you and I don't like it, but it's too late. [] -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf Everybody's throwing dinner parties, cooking this, baking that... Food has eaten television here. - Sam Neill (RT 2014/10/11-17) |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
Router
On 17/04/2018 13:11, Art Todesco wrote:
On 4/16/2018 8:48 PM, David E. Ross wrote: How long should a router last?* Mine is over two years old.* Twice today, I had to reboot it in order to access any Web pages. When you say router, do you mean DSL or Cable / router?* My DSL / router had to be rebooted several time yesterday and the day before ... not because of the router itself, but because something upstream went down. If I would have waited, it would have recovered itself, but a reboot gets service back much faster.* Also, and most importantly, my DSL/router will not route when DSL goes down.* So, you can't even get from one computer to another during a DSL hiccup or outage.* What a great design!* And my guess is that others suffer similar problems. A DSL modem that's switched on during daylight hours will often have trouble continuing to work after dark. Switching it off and on will get it going again. Quite why they seem to be unable to make them so that they can tell when the error rates are getting alarmingly high and automatically recover on their own I don't know. But I've never owned one that wasn't quite happy to just sit there for hours reporting that it couldn't decode anything because there was too much line noise for the speed it had initially negotiated when conditions were better. Even once a DSL modem has adjusted to the worst conditions (usually night time) (by being switched off and on late at night) it's likely it'll occasionally need switching off and on again, maybe about once a week. -- Brian Gregory (in England). |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|