I know (well, think) that faster broadband speeds, e.g., >300 Mbps are desirable for downloading movies and great amounts of data, and have concluded, that for day to day surfing, there is little value for the cost of the benefit.

But before reaching conclusions without knowing whereof I speak (not exactly an unfamiliar condition), for practical purposes, at what speeds does routine surfing max out?

I don't know exactly what "at what speeds does routine surfing max out" translates to, Harv, but my DSL service (Verizon) gives me an actual c. 6.5Mbps d/l speed, and I find that more that adequate for my needs, which do not included downloading movies, pictures, or large amounts of data.

The biggest d/l's I've ever had to deal with have been OS X Combos, which take a bit longer than I'd prefer (20-25 minutes), but they're nowhere near frequent or long enough to even get me thinking about cable. (Even an Internet Restore, should I ever have to deal with one, would take little more than an hour.)

Artie,

I was mainly thinking about how fast pages/sheets load, e.g., my perceived speed is more a function of the host's server rather than my ISP/broadband DL speed. If that is correct, what is the nominal-optimal broadband speed?

Your d/l speed is a function of both the host's server's d/l speed and your own broadband speed. (And as for page loading time, I think that's a function of the above, plus your Mac's capabilities, browser version included.)

By way of example, my max d/l speed is 785Kbps, and I get all of it on an Apple d/l, but I occasionally get as little as 40Kbps from others, my 785 notwithstanding.

I think the answer to your question may be that "optimal" is whatever speed/cost ratio makes you happy.

Sorry I can't be more helpful, Harv.

My son is a teleraiologist supporting two major Chicago hospitals from his home in Fort Worth. he is constantly downloading huge radiology images every few minutes all night long. His optimal internet speed is somewhere between 60 and 100 Mega bits per second. Much slower than that places patient's lives at risk.

He's reading life-critical images in "real time", so to speak, so I'd imagine that, as opposed to me and Harv, his speed/cost ratio is "Whatever the speed costs, I'll pay!" (Sounds like a huge pressure/responsibility position.)

?

This issue first surfaced when my internet carrier (SuddenLink) raised my download speed from 15 to 30 Mbps and I notice almost no difference in daily surfing. Ergo, I wonder at what speed I would notice a difference.

FWIW: My first modem was a 300 baud dial up...

At work (my employer is a networking company) my laptop speed to the internet is limited only by the wire speed of the ethernet cable, that is about 800Mbs as tested. Frankly, I cannot tell the difference between that and our 20Mbs DSL at home most of the time. I certainly do not perceive much of a difference and have never pined for faster surfing speeds at home, even give the daily contrast between the two.

As noted on the radiology example, the big difference is with large downloads, especially noticeable for OS X updates and other really large files. In those cases the difference is dramatic, but frankly they are few and far between and I am cheap.

For web surfing, where one page may have twenty or more connections required to fully load (often considerably more) latency makes the big difference in perception. Something like OpenDNS will impact the feel as well. Oh, and I do use OpenDNS at home for several years now.

Typo; thanks.

785Kbps s/b 785KBps...6.3Mbps.

That's much as I understand/perceive things.

And to all, thanks for your thoughts.

Tell me about it! AT&T could not get anywhere close to his speed requirements but Charter Cable could for only a $12,500 cable installation charge plus several hundred dollars monthly service fee. That monthly fee also includes a fixed IP address, equally fast upload speeds, and 24x7 immediate repair response.

OFF TOPIC: The medical systems my son is required to work with are all PC based and a couple of weeks ago the entire Chicago end of the system became infected with a virus of undetermined origin. For two or three days he had the only working computer in the network. Once the server in Chicago was restored, he ended up working thirty six straight hours carrying the load of several other radiologists. Suffice it to say only the most life threatening studies could be read until the Chicago work stations could be scrubbed and all the multitudinous interconnecting applications installed from scratch on each workstation. Apparently there was reason to believe the backups were infected as well. Aren't you glad you have a Mac?

Wow! When I was able to go from 1.5 Mbps to 3 Mbps I was in heaven. There is definitely a perceptible difference to me in that jump. But I'm drooling at you folks who have double-digit Mbps speeds. AT&T tells me in the "near future" (measured in months), I should be able to pay for 6 Mbps or more.

Ahh…

Gads, what a HIPAA mess that must have ensued.

Usually no more trouble than the hospital's next shift staff would have. The patient signs HIPA privacy permissions to the hospital and thereby to all the hospital staff including contracting medical practices and their staff.

I take it then the "Chicago Virus" did not compromise patient data (as I had presumed)?

Apparently the virus primarily effected only the access and display systems.

Pendragon,

You report that your first modem was a 300 baud dial up . . .

What are the specifications and the age of the modem you are currently using?

I have found that this can make a difference in a user's experience.

dianne

My computer is a 27" Mid 2010 iMac, 2.93 GHz Intel Core i7 (12GB RAM). I don't know the specs of the modem chipset, if that is indeed what's installed.

And if nostalgia counts... In early 1969, in Italy, I was involved with supporting a worldwide test of something called ARPANET. I rightly knew (of course) nothing would ever come from it...

Does your iMac actually have a modem? (Has it got a phone jack?) I thought Apple eliminated them ages ago.

I imagine that what you've got is either a DSL or cable modem.

You're right. I do not have a modem per-se. Though I do suspect I have a chip or such that serves a modem-like function.

I know that Snowy supports modems with scripts at /Library/Modem Scripts, but my impression is that no sort of hardware is built in to my deuced Mac(hina)...that the scripts pertain to USB modems.

Artie,

Maybe this will help... The ISP [Suddenlink] signal is first routed through an Arris TM822 modem (at least that's what I call it) and from there to my Airport and iMac.

That's your external cable modem, Harv; your iMac hasn't got an internal modem. (The scripts have nothing to do with that modem.)

Right. Gottit. Thanks.

For Web browsing, past a certain point increases in download speed don't make even the tiniest difference. The limiting factors become the speed of the Web server serving the site, the bandwidth of that server, and the speed with which your computer can render HTML/CSS.

Where high speeds really matter is when you're doing large streaming downloads (for example, movies) or when you have multiple tasks all using Internet bandwidth at the same time (multiple computers, perhaps, or maybe one computer doing a download, browsing the Web, fetching email, doing an upload, and playing a game at the same time).

I have the fastest tier of residential broadband available, because I have several computers using this connection (including a server) at once and because I often do very large uploads. For most people's use, the broadband I have would be overkill.