Is it OK to use wireless?

[Becky Rose]

No.

[richy]

heheh :thumb:

[aoun]

i use wireless.. whats the problem?

[atledreier]

I'm on wireless as well, and I have no problems. I used a wireless USB thingy before, and that was bad... Real bad. Now I got a proper PCI solution that works almost as good as a wired network. Almost.

[letdown427]

i use wireless.. whats the problem?
:nod:

[Becky Rose]

Humour aside now and being more serious.

I have the option of using wireless or using an ethernet cable. When i'm on wireless I see no difference in my gameplay experience. However for people around me it's a nightmare, hense I use ethernet.

The problem is that wireless doesnt send data at a consistent rate, so players on wireless appear to jitter all over the track. It really is a menace.

If you are on wireless, please check by asking other players if you appear laggy. If so, please try to find a way to go on ethernet.

The plus side is that it should give you a hell of an advantage playing counter strike!

[Rappa Z]

i think there is more laaggg with wireless.

[Vain]

i think there is more laaggg with wireless.
O rly?
Well done, Sherlock!

Vain

[SamH]

I'm wireless here (not much option, short of running wires over 3 floors) but I have a good strong signal, and I've disabled QOS packet scheduling.
I'm not particularly UP on this stuff, but following the advice from others definitely got it sorted for me.

QOS often causes problems apparently, withholding packets. Other than poor connections though, I gather this is the primary problem for wireless connections causing visible lag.

[Becky Rose]

That's interesting SamH and thank you - I shall try to test this tonight if I get the chance.

[keiran]

I run a PCI wireless card and before that a USB stick without any problems that I know of.

Considering the amount of leagues I've done now, if I was lagging I'm sure as hell someone would have told me by now :p

Keiran

[Becky Rose]

I tried with QoS packet scheduler removed (PCI card wireless) and asked if I was lagging and I was given a 4/10 :/.

There may be some good wireless solutions out there which do work with minimal or accepteable lag, perhaps it is equipment related or config related, or maybe it's down to what our walls are made of.

Although i've not knowingly raced a wireless player who wasn't lagged I can say i've knowingly crashed avoiding numerous wireless players, and it's a major menace. I know because I can spot the tell-tale jitter now and when I do I ask, "are you on wireless by chance..."

I respectfully request that anyone who plays LFS on wireless specifically asks if they are lagging and checks that their connection is stable.

Thanks.

[the_angry_angel]

Respectfully, perhaps more practical advice would be to suggest taking it easier around those who race on WiFi, and those who are experiencing high lag. For example, I'd consider the correct overtaking method in these situations to be the same as with those who are slow, and inconsistant backmarkers.

To be honest, most people on WiFi have no choice to change infrastructure, and many of us have managed to pass without issue over the years, not just those with wireless, but those in australia racing in the uk servers, those with extreme packet loss, etc. etc.

If you're passing close enough to get hit by a warp move across. If its on the high speed back straight on BLGP (for example), wait your time until the lower speed corner's where you can overtake safely, where smaller warps occur. Here you are less likely to get knocked off the track, and if you do, you wont be in such a high speed collision.

I don't mean to cause offence, and I've rewritten this about 20 times. If this still sounds harsh, then my original post would've been much worse.

[Vain]

The problem isn't that big in normal street cars. It's more of a problem in the very agile singleseaters, because due to the nature of the cars it is impossible to just align yourself to the flow of the lagging person and wait for a good positio to make the move (that is because small changes in brake-spots make a huge difference in speed in SS).
I don't think anyone wants WiFi-users to begin begging for mercy whenever entering a server. That is not the aim. But I think they should know that they are or might be lagging. They should spend a thought on the topic and perhaps use a different sheduler to get rid of the problem, or upgrade the firmware of the WiFi device.

Problems have to be voiced to get a solution.

Vain

[Becky Rose]

If you're passing close enough to get hit by a warp move across
Taking onboard what Vain has said about the stock cars not being so much of a problem, I race Fox almost exclusively in LFS either on whatever is the next league race track or on SO Classic, and in my opinion both passing a WiFi player and starting next to one on the grid is a matter of pure luck.

If it was a minor jitter that'd be fine, but WiFi players regularly swipe from barrier to barrier without notice and can appear a second or more up or down the road with little warning.

People with a PC 15 years old can't play LFS, it's a bit foolhardy to say we should be inclusive because some people can't get the right equipment. Not everyone can afford a new PC - but if it can't play LFS then it can't play, as simple as that. It's not a matter of eliteism, if it effects other peoples enjoyment of the game then it's a problem.

The problem with WiFi is that the issue isn't apparent to the player themselves, which is why I made the post in the first place albiet with all the empathy of a falling elephant :).

[SamH]

In fairness, packet loss and lag aren't solely the domain of wifi users. On our Teamspeak server I'm the only one with a) wifi, b) 16ms ping, and c) 0% packetloss. Those on university networks, those in far-away lands, and those who otherwise involuntarily share connections with others are all subject to this problem.

In LFS, even someone with a solid connection can appear jumpy to others if they've damaged their car's suspension/tracking, such is the limitation of four to six packets per second and the nature of predictive positioning. There are many causes for positioning misinformation.. wifi is just one.

[Tweaker]

Humour aside now and being more serious.

I have the option of using wireless or using an ethernet cable. When i'm on wireless I see no difference in my gameplay experience. However for people around me it's a nightmare, hense I use ethernet.

The problem is that wireless doesnt send data at a consistent rate, so players on wireless appear to jitter all over the track. It really is a menace.

If you are on wireless, please check by asking other players if you appear laggy. If so, please try to find a way to go on ethernet.

The plus side is that it should give you a hell of an advantage playing counter strike!
This is all really funny to read, because there really is hardly ANY difference at all when people use wireless or ethernet when playing games over the internet. The largest difference is transfer rates, but wireless is just about the same for me, and transfer rates do not apply to online gaming really (only network transfers, or if you are using your max download rate that is faster than your wireless supports).

It is kind of odd though, I remember last time I saw you online Becky, and you saw someone lagging, and asked if they were using wireless :really:. He said "no" too. Wireless doesn't cause that!!. If the wireless was laggy, it wouldn't even be stable enough to connect to the internet alltogether. There is very minimal ping differences between the two types, and I think this idea that wireless lags is maybe just from your side. Maybe when you've tried wireless, you don't have a good enough signal? (SNR). Or your wireless access point isn't strong enough? Any number of things could cause it on your end. But I've played online through wireless for many years since it came out, and even on the oldest versions of it, it worked fine.

A friend of mine owns a wireless internet company (for people to get service high up in the mountaints), and from miles and miles away, with line of sight, they can get 15ms to his ISP. Playing online, downloading files, it is all pretty much the same. Now this of course is some heavy duty antennas and equipment, but in general, wherever I go to play on wireless (because I am quite mobile a lot with my laptop), it works just fine as long as you are getting a good signal, and don't have any hardware issues with your own wireless car/adapter. Could be even your hardware lags when your wireless is in use.

I suggest you find a wireless control application, where you can read technical data and find out just how stable your wireless actually is. Something like NetStumbler (http://www.netstumbler.com/). But there are better programs out there.

[SamH]

If someone is laggy, perhaps rather than ask them if they're wifi or not, just tell them to kill Limewire, kill eMule, kill Napster, and cancel their torrents. THESE things WILL cause lag.. no doubt about it.

[Tweaker]

If someone is laggy, perhaps rather than ask them if they're wifi or not, just tell them to kill Limewire, kill eMule, kill Napster, and cancel their torrents. THESE things WILL cause lag.. no doubt about it.
Well, quite simply, ask them if they are downloading. :)

Also for a few days my connection had not been stable, and when I tried to go play online, I would appear to be very skippy and dissapear when the connection timed out. This was with ethernet, but even with wireless it would've had the same effect online in LFS. It is just some people don't have the greatest connections at times, and/or they just don't realize that closing their downloads or whatnot will help their online performance (they probably think their connection is capable of so many things at once).

:shrug:

[richy]

its the solar flares they get in the way of it :scratchch

[Sawyer]

solely depends how good the wireless is really. The best thing to do is ping a server over 1000 times and if no big pings raise up you can say its rock solid.
For example a new technology here will come in action in about a month or 2. Its wireless and its rock solid. It uses Docsis system just like cable with pings of 7,8... So thats some kind of super duper wireless connection which is better then standard ADSL2+ with pings of 14ms.
Wired cable is probably still better but it has same pings as the wireless solution but only tests will tell this.

For example I can play any game with my upload fully maxed out with utorrent. If you use Cfosspeed it will hold your ping steady under 40 all the time no matter what.

[MrGrumpy]

And bloody 'auto update' on McAfee! (and probably other software too, but McAfee as far as I know doesn't allow you to specify what times auto-updates are permitted)

You can be happily racing around then all hell kicks loose (my PC stutters like mad as well as causing lag to others), just because an update is being downloaded.

[Zero7]

And bloody 'auto update' on McAfee! (and probably other software too, but McAfee as far as I know doesn't allow you to specify what times auto-updates are permitted)

You can be happily racing around then all hell kicks loose (my PC stutters like mad as well as causing lag to others), just because an update is being downloaded.

Yes, I've had that same problem with AVG Free and just recently I had Spyware Doctor kick in and start a scan of my entire machine. I'd just installed Patch S and suddenly the frame rate went through the floor - I thought hmmm :really: then realised that my anti-spyware was running in the background :schwitz:

You know the solution - easy, do a manual update of AV and turn off AS.

The problem with WiFi is that the issue isn't apparent to the player themselves, which is why I made the post in the first place albiet with all the empathy of a falling elephant :).

As for wireless, I've run LFS on a wireless laptop and never had anyone report that I was lagging, but then again I never asked so can't be sure for certain, but I'm sure if I was lagging and warping all over the place I'd soon know about it from others.

[Becky Rose]

you saw someone lagging, and asked if they were using wireless . He said "no" too. Wireless doesn't cause that!!
One time, just one time, that this happened ! :)

I had a prime replay but it was a patch S one, next time I spot the tell tale jitter i'll post a replay.

All I am asking is that wireless players ask if they are appearing laggy next time they race. I think some WiFi solutions are better than others.

[Tweaker]

But my point is, this whole wireless deal going on here just sounds a bit wild... you just have to realize that someone's wireless internet connection is probably the smallest possible reason why someone is lagging online.

I mean, the first post just goes to show you have something against wireless for online gaming :p.

If anything, the average driver appears to lag online in LFS from these main reasons:

-Unstable internet connection
-Downloading/Uploading while playing
-Downloading skins ingame momentarily
-Using 56k/dialup

[Becky Rose]

But when I see someone lagging badly to the extent they are a menace I ask if they are on wireless, and all but once they where.

Maybe I have something against wireless, but I try it here ( I would preffer not to have an ethernet cable between rooms) and I get the same thing: I dont notice the difference, but others do.

Is it not more likely that some wireless solutions are better than others? I'm not sure what circumstances prevail, but I think everyone realises that downloading stuff in the background messes things up.

The problem is with cars that continually ping pong and they do it in a particular manner that is instantly recogniseable, it's not like low latency or the odd missed packet, it's varied latency with lots of missed packets and the result is a very wild car.

I can post a link to an S patch replay, you'll have to wait for a T patch one.

http://www.bansheestudios.com/ftp/IkhamLag.mpr

The player on wireless here is Ikham, take a look if you can with an S patch install - that's the tell tale WiFi lag, and it's not playable, and it's not just a poor connection.

Maybe some router brands are better than others, maybe it's an 802.11g thing and not other protocols. I dont know, I just know that in the 10 players or so I spotted it on, only 1 said he wasnt on wireless, and when we discussed it afterwards nobody else then turned around and said "i'm on wireless am I lagging too?"

Perhaps it is something that effects single seaters more and so others get on fine with WiFi, but what i'm saying is please check you aren't lagging this badly - because in the case of the driver in that replay (who since went Ethernet, is a nice guy, and who i've had some good races with) I was taken out half a dozen times that night trying to avoid him.

[the_angry_angel]

Perhaps I should've left my original post as it was, and not tweaked it. It went something like this:

Whilst we're on the subject, dial up users tend to warp a lot as well, not to mention those who play on UK servers, and live in the US, or the Asian regions. Perhaps we should get a geo-ip, and a minimum-latency feature in LFS?

Is this going over the top? Obviously, and my point was that in most situations people have no choice to change their infrastructure, and by requesting that they only play offline would make LFS less accessible; which as far as I can see, LFS is not about (see sprint racing, the availability of online servers, etc.).

Going back to the avoiding and warping, I'm afraid I disagree. Granted I don't play much these days, but when I do it tends to be open wheelers, and in the S1 days I almost exclusively played the MRT - all of which did and still do experience big warping issues. Again, you do get knocked off, its part of the online experience, but it is avoidable.

With regards to WiFi being blamed, perhaps we should be blaming those who advise WiFi, in poor situation's. Unfortunately Joe Public doesn't seem to grasp the concept of how it works (several of my customers thought you could get WiFi anywhere in the world, once you plugged up an access point), and its being pushed erroneously in PC World, Curry's, Best Buy, or whatever your local IT shop is. A lot of people are spending £40+ on what they're being told is good equipment, but incorrect for the situation. To these people £40+ is a lot of money, for something they just use to pick up their email and play a few games.

By definition the internet is not stable. Wireless less so, for obvious reasons.

For those who want some practical advice to improving their online experience;

try changing the default "channel",
high levels of encryption take up processor time (both yours and at the access point). This adds latency. You could just use MAC address filtering, and hope no one picks up the packets you're sending. This means no encryption, but if you fail to update the MAC address list with your laptops, then you won't beable to connect at all,
if you're still using encryption, then consider WEP instead of WPA. WPA is stronger, but uses a TKIP (Temporal Key Integrity Protocol) system, which means that every X minutes it needs to create a new temporary key and start again. This causes a small drop in your connection. Again, this decreases performance for gaming,
also consider using directional antenna's, so that they focus the signal in one area, rather than everywhere,
move the access point. It's logical, but amazing how many people don't do this. Where possible avoid putting the WiFi next to "real walls" (i.e. a wall made out of proper brick's),
disable any QoS. On home network's its pointless in most circumstance's

If there are a lot of other wireless connections (7+), then just give up. Theres a theoretical limit of about 10 or so wireless access point signal's in the same 20m^3 location (I've not yet managed to prove this, although I think I've tested it with enough 2.4GHz equipment that my microwave started to segfault ;) (joke shamelessly stolen from bash.org)).

More over, I think this is a chicken and egg situation inherent in the LFS netcode. TCP is too slow for positioning, so UDP is used (with TCP as a failover). Unfortunately UDP is only faster because theres no order checking of packets, and no "guarantee" that the packet has been received by the intended destination, and more importantly when. As a result, using UDP on any line which is unstable, or has some kind of QoS, or is fundamentally unreliable (i.e. WiFi), you will experience issues; there are no 2 ways about it.

I know this sounds like a bit of a rant, and perhaps that what it is. Over and over again I deal with people deploying technologies incorrectly, or in the wrong circumstance's. Unfortunately theres no way around it, and its something we have to learn to live with. The internet was created to share, and connect people.

Additionally Becky, I know that you didn't mean (or at least I hope not) to say that I shouldn't use WiFi because you say so, but I feel that the statement is trying to restricting my Freedom (as in speech), to do what I want. Those who actively chose, with their own mind's, and were technically clued up should be "allowed" to use WiFi; because they are more likely to know what they doing, and how to minimise the effects on other people. Unfortuntely I'm a bit of a Freedom nut, both in terms of software (www.fsf.org), and what I can and cannot do in life, so I'm probably just taking your statement the wrong way... :tilt:

[the_angry_angel]

Phew, thats a bit of a beast....time to actually do some work, I think :D

[96 GTS]

I use a USB wireless adapter, and I do fine. I've only ever been told I was lagging once, and that was because I'd accidentally left Napster downloading in the background. Granted, I race mostly TBO, but I can still race close to other people, and when I save an .SPR, I don't appear to fly everywhere on the track.

Most people aren't in the same situation as you, Becky, where they have a choice between wired and wireless, and I don't see the need to restrict people's use of LFS because of that.

P.S. I'm directly above my access point, and I get 90-100% signal strength all the time, but I need a 60 foot ethernet cable to get to my router, because it needs to go down the stairs, so it's doable but very inconvenient.

P.P.S. A slow computer causes more lag than a wireless internet connection.

[NotAnIllusion]

when I save an .SPR, I don't appear to fly everywhere on the track
You wouldn't, SPRs are a completely different thing to MPRs. SPRs I believe are recorded by controller input on your own PC which is why you never see the jerkyness of the car's wheel in replays whereas MPRs use interpolation (http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=X&start=10&oi=define&q=http://amsglossary.allenpress.com/glossary/browse%3Fs%3Di%26p%3D33) with data received from other players. Packets via the server (the PPS value) are sent at a maximum rate of 6 per second. When you think about it quite a lot can happen in between the packets when you're moving at 100mph for example. Any sort of an overhead such as error detection and correction (TCP, not UDP though) or encryption that are typical on a wireless connection slow down the process of delivering the content to LFS.

I think the reason why even in MPRs if you are the one lagging, you see everyone else lagging instead yourself bouncing around is that there isn't the same sort of latency when dealing with your own packets, which can be captured even before sending them to the ether, but you're not receiving other players' packets, hence they are the ones that appear to lag.

What I'm trying to say is that if you lag online, your MPR will show everyone else lagging, not you; the other players' MPRs will show you lagging but not themselves.

[/speculation]

[96 GTS]

Sorry, I meant to say .mpr, but it wsa 4:30 AM LOL.

I always thought .mpr's were stored server side, so when you view them, you see what the server sees. I'm pretty sure of this, because the MP Stash space is on the server, not your computer.

[Becky Rose]

but I feel that the statement is trying to restricting my Freedom (as in speech),
ROFL, **** off ! I don't mean to be stepping on the toes of America, but seeing as I appear to have done so, I hope it hurt proper and it certainly does appears to have let out a cry! What a shame I wasn't wearing a pair of Doc Martin's...

Seriously, suggesting that WiFi users check if they have lag issues and to find an alternative solution if they do is not infringing your civil liberties or rights.

BTW: There's other solutions than ethernet, one very cost effective solution is those ethernet powerblocks that use the buildings power supply as a network hub, they cost about £11 a block, so £22 to take you to your router which is half the price of wireless.

Not using WiFi when it isn't up to the task is hardly saying you cannot play LFS online. It just means dont do it with WiFi if your WiFi setup doesnt work and causes grief for other players.

If a player intentionally crashes other players they are called a wrecker. If a player causes just as much carnage because of continual major lag spikes they are either ignorant of the problem (which I hoped this post would address - but it became a pro-America civil liberty thread instead) or ambivillent and dont give a hoot about other players.

WiFi is not the only solution to go between flaws, if the floors are on the same power phase you could have a much cheaper solution. If they aren't then there are other methods but sadly they do cost more money than WiFi - but if you want to race the Fox and have good close racing rather than playing LFS and believing that most people have trouble controlling their car because "you put so much pressure on them and they spin whenever your near" then it's an option to do something like fibre, or god forbid, put some trunking in or thread a cable into the walls.

With regards the free software foundation i'm not a member. I have release more games, utilities and demos than I could possibly count (probably over 100) in the last 25 years but I hardly see how that's a bartering chip for free speach ! lol.

Scawen charges for his game, is he a communist?

*blink*

[SamH]

All would be fine, but unless I'm grossly mistaken, we've already very clearly established in this thread that WiFi is just about the least likely cause of the effect that you're determined to blame on it.

Sorry.. it just doesn't stick, no matter how hard you throw it.

[the_angry_angel]

ROFL, **** off ! I don't mean to be stepping on the toes of AmericaWrong country. I'm not American, and I certainly don't subscribe to certain views that they are stereotyped to hold. As an aside, perhaps the apache foundation would've been a better example to give. They're certainly less "pro-American", and make more of a point regarding freedom, etc, and why it exists, and why it should continue to exist for certain technologies. To make myself clear, I believe these to be critical systems for businesses and life (credit transactions, web serving, etc.) - which games do not, and will never comprise of. The FSF do tend to be up themselves a lot. Apologies for my mistake in communication (its so easy to do via text, and the lack of facial expressions) :)

BTW: There's other solutions than ethernet, one very cost effective solution is those ethernet powerblocks that use the buildings power supply as a network hub, they cost about £11 a block, so £22 to take you to your router which is half the price of wireless.With similar speed's to WiFi generally. Granted its more "reliable", but certainly uncommon, difficult to get information on, and can require a higher level of knowledge, regarding the whole IP infrastructure / stack. As far as I am aware you cant just goto PC World, Curries, Best Buy, Tandy, whoever, to pick one of these units up. As such, most consumers will never see this technology.

Not using WiFi when it isn't up to the task is hardly saying you cannot play LFS online. It just means dont do it with WiFi if your WiFi setup doesnt work and causes grief for other players.Theres a massive grey area between those two points in my opinion, and thats whats caused my issue.

but it became a pro-America civil liberty thread insteadAgain, no. I was merely pointing out that the original comment came across incorrectly (at least in my head).

With regards the free software foundation i'm not a member. I have release more games, utilities and demos than I could possibly count (probably over 100) in the last 25 years but I hardly see how that's a bartering chip for free speach ! lol.

Scawen charges for his game, is he a communist?

*blink*I've lost you on this point totally. Sorry, its probably because I'm knackered. I'm sure theres some sarcasm in your comment's regarding charging and communism (i.e. its totally backwards), but I'm afraid its lost on me. I guess 3 hours sleep does that to you.

My whole point that made me mention the FSF was that making a statement like "dont use wifi" wont be received well (and I tried to explain why it came across like this to me). I certainly didnt mean to turn this politicial in any way, shape or form. I was merely trying to justify my argument. I have no gripe with you Becky, whatsoever; so let me say again, I'm all for giving advice (see my last post), and I'm all for comments, but starting a thread in the manner you did just annoyed me a little. It kind of struck me to be similar to the whole "BLUE FLAG!!!" syndrome.

I'm sure you posted in frustration, which I'm certainly no stranger to; feel free to search my history on both LFS and RSC, so I know how you feel. I'll even admit that I probably posted my previous, and this comment with a certain amount of haste.

If you wish to continue this discussion, feel free to pm me or whatever, and I'll probably end up grovelling and hopefully explaining myself :)

[the_angry_angel]

Sorry.. it just doesn't stick, no matter how hard you throw it.Becky's argument does hold a certain amount of water, tbh. It's certainly not the core cause, and setup of your infrastructure will affect it (see my previous to-last-post (argh, I'm starting to get garbled, confusing and quite frankly duller than an inflight magazine produced by Air Belgium (no offence to Belgian's))).

[The Very End]

Been reading some in this thread, and had to bump it big time. Now we don't want that American discussion all over again, but the wireless vs ethernet.

You can say much, and blame other scources, but wireless DOES make problems for online play. I know I canot say anything to back up my statement, but over the years I have been working for various ISP's, and I have had my share of strange conversations with people.

The biggest thing that goes again at this area is lag when playing online. Often their download speed is almost the same as with ethernet, and it seems perfectly normal, but the latency / respond time goes usually up to heavens with using wireless. Problem is that when checking in games or other utilities, it will not be accurate to show the drop-spots. It means that most of the time it's just fine, but every now and then (in real time that means often) a packet is either lost, slowed down or stuff like that, and it will cause a nightmare for the others on the server.

I am sorry to sound like a party pooper, but saying you canot use anything other than wireless due to the house is kind of an argument that canot be used. With today's technology you can run your net / ethernet thorugh the powerlines in the house itself. And personally, a 50 meter long eternet cable beats wireless by far in my eyes.

Sure, there are some, and by some that are of course many, that has wireless networks that works just fine. But the mayority of people that uses wireless are a darn botter when playing online. I yet have to meet a lagger that was not on wireless. Again, if you downloading or uploading anything you deserves a bullet to you head and using statements like "but I am limiting the speed of download/upload, so I shouldn't lag" is not valid either. The packets with information gets slowed down / lagged / canceled every now and then due to the reason that most of the information is used to give and recive information on the things you are downloading or uploading.

So, to sum this all up, sure - you can manage to get a wireless connection that works out, but the mayority of people that uses wireless will be a absolute nightmare for other online players. You should either try using a long ethernet cable or using ethernet thorught the powerlines within the house. Using a statement that the signal is strong is not correct either, because it's nothing to do with the strenght of the signal, it's the fact that wireless has so high chances to get interference, and to the fact that it will ALLWAYS give higher latency than wired connection. Information in the air is generally slower than information sent thorugh cables.

So for peace and love and happy fellow online players, use cables. Even if your connection has a strong signal that doesn't mean you won't lag. If you downloading or uploading while playing, well, let's just say you stop that before you make a fool of yourselfe.

:)

[robubba]

The Very End, a big +1, but you missed one huge point in your statement. Over here in the U.S.A we tend to have some people who are either lazy or dishonest. Wireless signal theft is a huge problem over here. You're right, if a person has a wireless connection in the house it's very easy to run a cable to a pc used for LFS and other online activities. But if you're stealing wireless from your neighbor, well, it's either laggy wireless or nothing at all.

I've seen it many times over here. I caught my neighbor using my wireless and he makes more $ than I do, he owns his own company!!! I asked him why he was using my signal, his response, "I didn't see anything wrong with using it", and "why pay for something I only use occasionally". Needless to say, the police almost had to be called because I was ready to dismantle this arrogant prick. My red-faced, near heart attack rant must of scared him because his house is now for sale.

Pisses me off because shit like this just adds to the image of us americans as wanting everything for nothing. Some of us work for what we have.

Forgive this rant by an old, cranky, LFSer:shrug:

[The Very End]

Hehe, well but me too I would be pretty much pissed off if someone stole something from me (internet speed and usage) and then not saying sorry. If that arrogant person just had said sorry it would be no problem I guess, but beeing as arrogant as that makes the blood boil in the veins.

I agree on your statement, that there probally are a lot of people not aware that there are people using their net, and therfor will most likely lag (if the other person does things involving download / upload and such) .

Best thing is, if you refuses to go over to wired connection - make sure to have a custom cinfigurated password for using the network. Some sites on the internet can actually tell you what password routers have as standards aswell as ways how to crack the password for the wireless signal.

So, change it every now and then.

But please, try as far as it is reasonable to use wired connection when playing online.

[ferrarifan777]

The Very End, a big +1, but you missed one huge point in your statement. Over here in the U.S.A we tend to have some people who are either lazy or dishonest. Wireless signal theft is a huge problem over here. You're right, if a person has a wireless connection in the house it's very easy to run a cable to a pc used for LFS and other online activities. But if you're stealing wireless from your neighbor, well, it's either laggy wireless or nothing at all.

I've seen it many times over here. I caught my neighbor using my wireless and he makes more $ than I do, he owns his own company!!! I asked him why he was using my signal, his response, "I didn't see anything wrong with using it", and "why pay for something I only use occasionally". Needless to say, the police almost had to be called because I was ready to dismantle this arrogant prick. My red-faced, near heart attack rant must of scared him because his house is now for sale.

Pisses me off because shit like this just adds to the image of us americans as wanting everything for nothing. Some of us work for what we have.

Forgive this rant by an old, cranky, LFSer:shrug:
but if you have the wifi password protected not just open then it shouldn't be a problem unless your neighbor is a HAxOr hel probably be too lazy
i live in the us and nobody steals my wireless

[robubba]

I always use cable connection for my pc. Wifi is just for my wife's laptop.

Yes, I had the wireless protected by a password, but this jerk was hacking the password somehow.

[Keling]

OK if the line is 8M and your wireless is 50M+ ( and signal being good ).

But we really have to be careful. You don't know you're lagging unless told.

I've been told to be lagging for 2 or 3 times, but each time everyone else is still smooth on my end. Don't know why ~　:(

[bully2100]

the_angry_angel is spot on ...............its not only the advice which joe public is given but also on what joe public believes. alot of my customers think that once they have a wireless router at home, they can surf the internet "where ever" they are :-).. also pc world will sell you a wifi dongle even if your desktop pc is a foot away from the master socket. "wireless" was /and too some extent still is a "braggin right" imo


i tho stand in the same corner as becky, i think wireless has its place,(mums laptop!!, email, internet) but relying on it for gaming is not the best option, it may be the cheapest option, and the tidest option if stapling some cable along a wall is not for you. Ethernet over power ive found to be better than wireless (tho not cheap).:thumb:


Keling... same goes for lagging in a fps, a player with 200ping will appear like he is teleporting to most with under 50ping, but the player with 200ping will not see everyone else lagging, its may jump now and again...this gives the lagger a big advantage in fps, when he shoots at you, you are exactly where he is shooting, but when u shoot at him, he was there , maybe a second before, but not now!, has alot to do with netcode of course, and some games compensate for it with dodgy hitboxes, well thats the excuse!
:-)

[bbman]

Air has never been good in transporting data and never will be, but like for so many other things marketing went into overdrive and lazy bastards people generally are chose comfort over quality... :shrug:

[the_angry_angel]

Air has never been good in transporting dataThings like RONJA's help out over non-domestic distance, and it's not unknown for a number of ISPs to resort to free space optics over a good old fashioned cable sometimes, just because of the terrain. They're something we're considering at the moment for a company distributed between 3 offices, by 1/2 a mile or so just because leased lines are riduculously expensive in their area.

However I fear that I've become rather off-topic again :(

At the end of the day, best tool for the job. And sometimes that tool just happens to be a hammer if you're a server admin and you need to get rid of laggers.

2 years ago I advocated users doing what they want, and I'll stand by that. Equally tho, if you're lagging like crazy on a server I run, the odds are you won't last long. Freedoms work in both ways ;)

[danthebangerboy]

I know its not exactly the same, as it is 3g internet, but it is wireless so kind of related to this...

What really pisses me off is the fact that all the documentation that came with my huawei e156g dongle says that it can run at 3.6mbps on the fastest (3g) network, which quite frankly total bollocks to be fair, as i can always pick up a 3g signal, usually between 2 and 5 bars, with 5 being full signal, and i have never had the upload speed go any faster than about 600kbps and download of about 5kbps regardless of weather i have full signal or only 2 bars.

So why is the so called available speed allowed to be, well, seemingly made up by the ISP, as i know of a few other people on other forums who have the same dongle as me and the best speed any of them have seen via a speed test is about 790kbps and 6kbps respectively, and he lives in central london on the top floor of a tower block with flat out full 3g signal all the time, which is still nowhere even remotely close to the 3.6meg quoted speed.

[BenjiMC]

i have used wireless for ages now and the only time i have lost connection has been when my PC has crashed. I can't ever recall someone saying that i was lagging or anything like that either. I think as long as you have a good wireless router and dongle you should be fine.

[The Very End]

It doesn't need to completeley disconnect to lag, small lags won't shut down the connection itself :)

But by all means, some wireless connections can work as charm, but they will allways be slower than wired ones, and have a higher chance of interference by other devices.

[BenjiMC]

well ye i suppose interference is one thing. I dont get it on my internet but if i have the TV on while using the internet i get interference on the TV

[boothy]

You know what's funny, with this new laptop I decided to try out using wireless again - I had problems with using it on my old computer upstairs so had been using a very long bit of cat5! - and it hasnt dropped connection once, in comparison to disconnecting itself a few times over a day, going slow, or going so slow it was quicker to disconnect and reconnect.

*touch wood*

Suppose it all depends on your equipment, but tbh I still wouldn't feel totally safe using wireless but there you go.

[danthebangerboy]

This is what i mean about mine, three (3) and huawei both say that this thing should run at 3.6mb per second, but according to speedtest i can only get a d/l speed of 0.61...

http://www.speedtest.net/result/527390932.png (http://www.speedtest.net)

And then, if i actually try and download something the speed is nearly ten times worse than what speedtest says my upload speed is...

http://www.lfsforum.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=89340&stc=1&d=1248814459

So, all the way from a 'possible speed' of 3.6meg, and it actually works at about 70k, 51 times slower FFS!!!

Barely better than dial-up, actually, scratch that, it's worse, dial-up would be more stable!

How can they get away with quoting these big numbers that are nothing but lies.

[NotAnIllusion]

Actually that's about 6.4 times less than the 3.6 because you've mixed up the units. 3g is far from a WLAN+DSL/cable. If you want performance from your internets, you shouldn't be depending on 3g. 100 kB/s downstream was a reasonable figure for me when I used 3g :shrug:

[danthebangerboy]

did i mix my units up,

I read it as, 3.6mb to start with, speedtest said 0.6mb (600kb). which is 6 times worse, then the actual speed of a download is 70kb, which is nearly ten times slower than that, which is how i got my 51 times worse.

But, bits and bytes, f--k knows lol!

I know that 3g deffo isnt the way for good internet but even 8 times slower than advertised when in a 3g area (which i am) is still pretty shocking i thought, maybe i expect too much. :shrug:

I am looking at getting a proper connection, but with BT wanting to charge me a one off connection charge of nearly 200 quid, and no other ISPs willing to give me an internet package without an existing line i'm pretty much screwed!

[NotAnIllusion]

3.6 Mbps => 3.6 / 8 = 0.45 MB/s (450 kB/s)
450 kB/s / 70 kB/s = 6.42

[danthebangerboy]

Err, i see now i think, you need to divide the Mbps value by 8 to give you the MB/s value, i thought that Mbps and MB/s were two different ways of writing the same thing, oops! :hide:

[The Very End]

That's a mistake many people do, so you should not feel ashamed :)

[NotAnIllusion]

Mbps is "megabits per second" and can also be written as Mbit/s
MB/s is "megabytes per second"
kB/s is "kilobytes per second"

One byte is 8 bits, so divide Mbps by 8 to get MB/s and vice versa. 0.45 MB/s looks clumsy, so you can write it as 450 kB/s (MB/s * 1000).

Usually you'll find that the below is used, but people tend to slack and use the wrong things here and there. Like a small 'm' (milli) instead of 'M' (mega) and confuse bits and Bytes.
b = bit
B = byte
k = thousand
M = million

[pik_d]

I use WiFi for my computer since the router is in my roommates room and I race almost exclusively in FOX servers and leagues. If you want I can provide replays of me racing (and very very close racing, if I were jumping about to everyone else they surely would have crashed many times over) to prove that (not all) wireless is the horrible spawn of satan that it was proclaimed to be (albeit 3 years ago).

If anyone expects me to ask every race "am I lagging" then they are out of their fool mind. If airio (the true spawn of satan) tells me I'm lagging I check then to see if other people see me lagging or if it was just one spike. I've had people tell me I'm lagging before and guess what, most of the time it was because I forgot to turn off utorrent or my roommate was downloading something.

[pandera]

I don't think the problem still exists with the new WiFi hardware, but with the old one I did always use the cable

[Jakg]

I know its not exactly the same, as it is 3g internet, but it is wireless so kind of related to this...

What really pisses me off is the fact that all the documentation that came with my huawei e156g dongle says that it can run at 3.6mbps on the fastest (3g) network, which quite frankly total bollocks to be fair, as i can always pick up a 3g signal, usually between 2 and 5 bars, with 5 being full signal, and i have never had the upload speed go any faster than about 600kbps and download of about 5kbps regardless of weather i have full signal or only 2 bars.

So why is the so called available speed allowed to be, well, seemingly made up by the ISP, as i know of a few other people on other forums who have the same dongle as me and the best speed any of them have seen via a speed test is about 790kbps and 6kbps respectively, and he lives in central london on the top floor of a tower block with flat out full 3g signal all the time, which is still nowhere even remotely close to the 3.6meg quoted speed.Using MobilePartner on my friends e160G (which is very very similar to the e156g) I get 3.6 MBPS in Needham Market no less.

Yet to get a decent speed on O2 3G using my ZTE 627 in East Anglia - at home I get dialup which is ok as a backup stable connection but even in Ipswich etc I still ONLY get dialup :(

At work as we sell mobile broadband I have run coverage checkers for the big 3 networks for most places in Suffolk - I think i've only ever had one T-Mobile come back as having any coverage even though my phone on T-Mobile gets coverage in tons of places.

Saying that, however, I was on holiday in Aldeburgh recently and took both my phone (rooted and tethered) and my O2 SIM expecting to get internet on at least one, and not only was their no 3G signal, Orange, T-Mobile, O2 and sometimes Vodafone all had pretty much no coverage at all.

Wireless ROCKS. My phone picks up emails faster than 3G even when it's in my pocket or on my desk, I can turn my laptop on anywhere in the house and surf the web - it's so simple. But Once you need high bandwidth (ethernet = 12 mb/s, WiFi within 3 feet of router = 2 mb/s) or low latency / packet loss (i.e. gaming) all sorts of issues crop up.

I still think WiFi is the answer for laptop users, though.

[The Very End]

Sure the hardware has a lot to say, but the problem is the wireless itself, due to the fact it's air. Sure, it can be very good, and superb for laptops around in the house when you canot be bottered to plug it with a cable just to check your netbank / forum or newspaper page. But it will allways, no matter what, give more latency/lag and similar things compared to cable.

So, as people have pointed out before, wireless is good enough for most things, and very userfriendly. But for games please try, as much as possible to run a wired connection.

And, even if you does not see the lag, the others will ;)

[Keling]

Found some test reports ( All in Chinese, so won't link here. ) of the Huawei E156G. Some say they can enjoy full speed, but some others suffer from 30k. :shrug:

Where you pick up the signal makes much difference.


Off topic: Why only 6Hz refresh rate ? Maybe it's not too bad for internet, but in LAN 20Hz+ is not difficult at all.
Under 6Hz you have to wait at least 167ms to get the next package, and under 4Hz it's 250ms. A 50ms ping is not big compared to this.

[Jakg]

@ Dan - the 3G dongles go for nothing on the 'bay btw. I got my ZTE 627 for £5 from 3dongle4free.co.uk (they now charge £10), you can get the e220 or e160g for a similar amount from eBay.

Have you tried using Mobile Partner? 3 take their original software and rape it ruining both the signal and speed, in the same way networks **** up their phones OS's. If you download Mobile Partner for the right device (you can grab them from the DC Unlocker site) it should work if you put the right APN settings in.

You can get a similar bit of kit for ZTE devices - but I never got it working and am stuck using a modified version of Telstra's connection manager.

[pandera]

Sure the hardware has a lot to say, but the problem is the wireless itself, due to the fact it's air. Sure, it can be very good, and superb for laptops around in the house when you canot be bottered to plug it with a cable just to check your netbank / forum or newspaper page. But it will allways, no matter what, give more latency/lag and similar things compared to cable.

So, as people have pointed out before, wireless is good enough for most things, and very userfriendly. But for games please try, as much as possible to run a wired connection.

And, even if you does not see the lag, the others will ;)
we are racing a lot with friends so doing some regular tests won't be a real problem, will check it, because it made me curious :)

I've switched from cable to WiFi after changing my laptop for a new one and none of my friends have complained about the lag since

but the old one was simply impossible to use, that's a fact

[The Very End]

Be sure to enable the latency thing inside the game, I don't remember the command for that, something about ctrl+shift+8 if I guess right, canot check since I'm not at a computer with LFS installed.

Do various test, and make sure your friends can see your car at all times, see if there are drop-spots, times where it does lag every now and then.

And one more thing, the test should be done online with random people around the world, if all your friends are living very nearby the difference probally is slim, but then again then we're moving over to the distance between players and shouldn not be rellevant in this case.

Just try a lot, and make sure everyone has the latency thingy running :)

Also be sure that your computer runs LFS without no problems at all. If your computer has a hard time running LFS, overheats or similar, it will aswell lag and cause other problems.

[dawesdust_12]

This is what i mean about mine, three (3) and huawei both say that this thing should run at 3.6mb per second, but according to speedtest i can only get a d/l speed of 0.61...

http://www.speedtest.net/result/527390932.png (http://www.speedtest.net)

And then, if i actually try and download something the speed is nearly ten times worse than what speedtest says my upload speed is...

http://www.lfsforum.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=89340&stc=1&d=1248814459

So, all the way from a 'possible speed' of 3.6meg, and it actually works at about 70k, 51 times slower FFS!!!

Barely better than dial-up, actually, scratch that, it's worse, dial-up would be more stable!

How can they get away with quoting these big numbers that are nothing but lies.

You're wrong. Your "3.6meg" that you say, is probably 3.6megabits/second, which works out to be about 450 kiloBYTES per second. Sure you're not upto your full connection, but you've been mislead by megabits vs megabytes.

Also, it's not faster than dialup as a 56k modem produces transfer rates of 7 kiloBYTES per second, as the "56k" part is 56 kilobits.

EDIT: I must not have refreshed recently, seeing when I first started this post, all the other ones weren't here...

[PLAYAPIMP]

im on wifi and i think im fine :schwitz:

http://www.speedtest.net/result/528033516.png (http://www.speedtest.net)

[SparkyDave]

Be sure to enable the latency thing inside the game, I don't remember the command for that, something about ctrl+shift+8 if I guess right, canot check since I'm not at a computer with LFS installed.


Its Shift+F8 :)

Network debug mode :)

Very interesting thread this one, I have never liked or trusted wireless as so many things can interfere with the signal.

SD.

[The Very End]

Its Shift+F8 :)

Network debug mode :)

Very interesting thread this one, I have never liked or trusted wireless as so many things can interfere with the signal.

SD.

Thanks for the info :)

One thing that is the main problem, as you say, is the interference. Lets say your living in a wall-to-wall appartment. If your neightbour buys a baby caller (the one that let you hear what happens on the bedroom while your sitting watching TV in the living room and just don't care) , your basically ****ed. In my work, I have had so many cases where things like these nasty shitcallers have ruined the network for the ones that own it, aswell as their neightbour. The main reason to this is that most wireless things are running on the very same frequence noways, that means that sooner or later something will interfer with eachothers and all hell is lose. You can of course try to change the channel on the router, but at most times it will help little or nothing, tho little can be a difference it does not help if you get kicked out of the net each time the baby caller is turned on.
You can try buying these fancy new routers, they runs on a little different frequence, but that does not mean your safe, and it costs LOADS of money, and if you got a lot of interfering stuff around it still will have problems.

But will be interesting to see if there are any noticable differences when we're taking the tests with wired connection and wireless :)

[pik_d]

I did a quick test to see how much of a point you anti-WiFi guys have. The IP is www.lfs.net's. I did a ping test from the router then did the same ping test from my computer, which is two rooms away from the router. As you can see the minimum, average and maximum are all pretty much identical. at the router and my computer. My WiFi isn't adding any extra latency.

If anyone isn't happy and would rather me do more than 5 rounds let me know. Keep it reasonable though, I'm not taking all day to prove a point.

I would also be interested to see the same sort of test from other WiFi users. Be sure to have the same number of rounds in each test (for statistical accuracy) and the same number of bytes. You can see in my screen shot how to control these.

[The Very End]

I think that we'll need a longer test to simulate a propper situation, let it run for 30 min and let's compare to highest/lowest, avrage and such. I am not sure what the command is, ping blalba -t or something, or was it -l? Haha, I have no clue about that sorry, but there should be a command to let it just run without doing just 5 packages.

[pik_d]

Yes I can make it run indefinitely, but the two tests should have the same number of runs (or very very close) to be statistically comparable. I'd rather keep it controlled.

Edit: I'm gonna do the test again with 100 times.

[The Very End]

Do a 10 min run, please? :) Then we compared the results after 10 minutes with cable and 10 with wired connection.

Oh, and I found what I was looking for :

By default, the XP ping command sends 4 groups of data packets at intervals and reports any successful replies. The '-t' switch sends a continuous stream, only halted by pressing CTRL+C or closing the command prompt window.

[pik_d]

Apparently my router can only do 50 at a time. Whoops. :(

I've gotta go somewhere in a few minutes, I did a 50 test run from the router with the following results:

Round-Trip: 110.6 min, 113.4 avg, 128.7 max (ms)
Packets: 50 transmitted, 49 received, 2% lost

Doing 200 tries from the command prompt, I'll do a 10 minute test later for you TVE.

[The Very End]

Oo That's strange..
Well, for now that have to work. Wish I was home at my equiptment, then I could do the same results. Because I have no doubts that wireless will work close to identically as cable for some people, but I think the mayority will struggle obtiaining the same results.

Come on people, are there anyone that can check this? Do 10 min runs with pinging www.lfs.net (http://www.lfs.net) both with wired and wireless connection.

Go to CMD (by open program in windows), then do ping www.lfs.net (http://www.lfs.net) -t .
When you have runned that test for 10 minutes, press ctrl+c, and it will stop. Compare the results.

Also, I am not sure if it will be an accurate test, since it's sending one and one package each second, instead of a lot each second.. but for now that will have to work and we'll see ;)

Edit : Thanks a lot mate :)
Also, to make the results more easly, write what that is done with wired and what's done with wireless, thanks :)

[pik_d]

July 29th, 2009: The day TVE caused LFSers to DDOS LFS.

Here's the longer results, I'll be back later to do more if it's needed.

[The Very End]

Hehe, I just want to get to boddom in this whole mystery :D Or at least prove that what I tell to the custommers calling to me on telephone isn't completely bullshit :shy:

Great work with showing that command window, maybe you want to just shade out your ipadress or something? :) Either way, now when we have 200 packages (or around 10 mins at least) then line them up in same reply, and point out who's with wired connection, and who's not.

Keep up the good work :thumb:
Edit : oh LOL! I do now realize that if too many does this at same time, the LFS server most likely will crash. But for that we need aalllooooott of people, and we are not going to that, just this harmless test to see if the notice is big or not. Hands up for you, hope more does this so we can see some results we can compare with :)

[dev]

Apparently my router can only do 50 at a time. Whoops. :(

I've gotta go somewhere in a few minutes, I did a 50 test run from the router with the following results:

Round-Trip: 110.6 min, 113.4 avg, 128.7 max (ms)
Packets: 50 transmitted, 49 received, 2% lost

Doing 200 tries from the command prompt, I'll do a 10 minute test later for you TVE.
How come your ping is so high? This is my result of a 10 minute test. Using Acer Aspire One D150 and Asus WL-500W (DD-WRT).

Ping statistics for 213.40.20.2:
Packets: Sent = 58, Received = 58, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Reply from 213.40.20.2: Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 46ms, Maximum = 93ms, Average = 63ms

[SparkyDave]

I think location plays a big part ;)

Ill try this too asap

SD.

[dev]

I think location plays a big part ;)

Ill try this too asap

SD.
Yes I know, but the servers are in Europe right? So it shouldn't make such a difference :shrug:

[NotAnIllusion]

Servers are in Europe, pik_d, is not :D

[pik_d]

Hehe, I just want to get to boddom in this whole mystery :D Or at least prove that what I tell to the custommers calling to me on telephone isn't completely bullshit :shy:

Great work with showing that command window, maybe you want to just shade out your ipadress or something? :) Either way, now when we have 200 packages (or around 10 mins at least) then line them up in same reply, and point out who's with wired connection, and who's not.

Keep up the good work :thumb:
Edit : oh LOL! I do now realize that if too many does this at same time, the LFS server most likely will crash. But for that we need aalllooooott of people, and we are not going to that, just this harmless test to see if the notice is big or not. Hands up for you, hope more does this so we can see some results we can compare with :)
That's not my IP address, it's the IP address of lfs.net as I said before. If my IP address showed up it'd only be what my router assigns, 192.168.1.119. Good luck getting at me with that.

How come your ping is so high? This is my result of a 10 minute test. Using Acer Aspire One D150 and Asus WL-500W (DD-WRT).

Ping statistics for 213.40.20.2:
Packets: Sent = 58, Received = 58, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Reply from 213.40.20.2: Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 46ms, Maximum = 93ms, Average = 63ms

What is the difference in ping from your computer (in the location where you normally play LFS) and the router?

What I'm trying to show is that there is very little to no ping difference between the two. In my tests the router averaged 113.4ms and my computer averaged 115ms. No one, not even Becky Rose, is going to notice that 1.6ms difference.

The Very End, you might in fact be telling your customers complete bollocks. :D

[SparkyDave]

I have kept the packet size at 56 bytes to show comparative results with Pik_d


Wired ethenet base 10/100
Reply from 213.40.20.2: bytes=56 time=28ms TTL=53
Reply from 213.40.20.2: bytes=56 time=24ms TTL=53
Reply from 213.40.20.2: bytes=56 time=24ms TTL=53
Reply from 213.40.20.2: bytes=56 time=23ms TTL=53
Ping statistics for 213.40.20.2:
Packets: Sent = 50, Received = 50, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 22ms, Maximum = 48ms, Average = 28ms

================================================== ====

Wireless IEEE 802.11g

Reply from 213.40.20.2: bytes=56 time=30ms TTL=53
Reply from 213.40.20.2: bytes=56 time=24ms TTL=53
Reply from 213.40.20.2: bytes=56 time=28ms TTL=53
Reply from 213.40.20.2: bytes=56 time=25ms TTL=53
Ping statistics for 213.40.20.2:
Packets: Sent = 50, Received = 50, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 23ms, Maximum = 59ms, Average = 30ms


Conclusion; wired and wireless,about the same here, thats with everyone in the house sitting still, but I bet if the cat stretches I would lose a packet or two :)


SD.

[pik_d]

That's interesting. In my results and yours the maximum ping time for wireless was about 10ms longer than for wired. It seems like there might be some truth to lag spikes, though 10ms extra is not going to be noticed even in fast paced FOX action.

It seems as if wireless adds an average overhead of 2ms, nothing to start a thread about though.

[dev]

Servers are in Europe, pik_d, is not :D
Haven't noticed the flag :D

What is the difference in ping from your computer (in the location where you normally play LFS) and the router?

What I'm trying to show is that there is very little to no ping difference between the two. In my tests the router averaged 113.4ms and my computer averaged 115ms. No one, not even Becky Rose, is going to notice that 1.6ms difference.

The Very End, you might in fact be telling your customers complete bollocks. :D
I did a few more test. Practically no difference at all :)

[The Very End]

Hehe :p

Well, but I think the problem will be more clearly shown if you run a lit of packages each second, not just one each second. When playing a computer game there is transfered a lot of packages both ways, and I think it will show a more clear result than sending out one and one package. Best thing would be to compare in-game.

Ultimately, if you wireless connection is superb, with great signal and no interference, it should not be that much worse than wired connection, but it still in the longer run will be a little slower than wired connection. The problem here is that most people have interference, and that's causing problems, and with time it will only get worse as more and more things using wiresless stuff and signal today.

But I still rest my case :p Even if it does only show a very very slim different in ping, I think the noticeable effect is when you playing online and many packages goes in/out at same time, not just 1/1 each second.

[Keling]

Did a test at home.

I use Huawei HG522 for both wired / wireless connection. When in wireless mode the computer was placed in another room ( my own bedroom, where I used to play a lot using wireless ). Signal condition was "good" ( not "full" ). No package lost in the test.

　Ping　50 times
　Wireless: Min 354 Max 466 Avg 387
　Wired: 　 Min 356 Max 364 Avg 357

　Ping 100 times
　Wireless: Min 359 Max 562 Avg 404
　Wired: 　 Min 356 max 384 Avg 357

Almost no difference in min ping, but wired is MUCH more stable than wireless. In online play, being stable is as important as being low-pinged, if not more important. A car moving in an unstable way is a bomb.

My answer is, don't use wireless unless it's the only thing avaiable.

Sorry if I lagged you some day online.

[Bean0]

Just to add...

Wifi works on the same frequency range as a wireless TV sender I used to use (2.4GHz).
As it was an audio/video signal, any interference was clearly noticeable whilst viewing the TV upstairs (horizontal lines across the screen, and a horrid noise).

All sorts of things used to cause a lot of interference, the most common would be when the microwave oven was in use, or when someone nearby was using a lawnmower.

I imagine the same things would interfere with a wireless network, and would certainly have an impact on gaming.

[Jakg]

im on wifi and i think im fine :schwitz:

http://www.speedtest.net/result/528033516.png (http://www.speedtest.net)Speed / Ping should be fine, but packetloss is the killer.

[pik_d]

Speed / Ping should be fine, but packetloss is the killer.
This is WiFi, not airport baggage claim. :D

[danthebangerboy]

Hmm, looks like windows 7 makes my internet run faster, as ever since i started using w7 as my OS i have noticed a significant increase in speed.

look...

[PLAYAPIMP]

124kb download?? you must be kidding lol i can download 1.3mb speeds easy

[zeugnimod]

124kb download?? you must be kidding lol i can download 1.3mb speeds easy

How much did it grow? :rolleyes:

[PLAYAPIMP]

How much did it grow? :rolleyes:
1.3ft

[The Very End]

Sorry for totally de-railing this topic, but my line is capable to download 3.5mb each second, or 3500kb each second. That means that I roughly should use around 1 second to download a song, and even a HD movie will be downloaded in less than a hour.

Now, my epeen is so enourmous it totally oblirated this thread.

[NotAnIllusion]

So you have have a 28meg line? Also, even 100 meg (12.5 MB/s) downstream is pointless if the sources you're receiving from don't have that kind of upstream bandwidth per connection.

That said, I got over 124 kB/s on 3g, if that's "faster", wtf was it before..? :scratchch

[The Very End]

So you have have a 28meg line? Also, even 100 meg (12.5 MB/s) downstream is pointless if the sources you're receiving from don't have that kind of upstream bandwidth per connection.

That said, I got over 124 kB/s on 3g, if that's "faster", wtf was it before..? :scratchch

That's true, and most sites don't allow that fast download either. Torrent and such are the best way to get maximum speed.

[dawesdust_12]

Hmm, unfortunately having a 3.5 meg connection does not mean you will be able to download an entire song in a second. Your connection speed is measured megaBITS not megaBYTES, so you need to divide by 8 beforehand.

3.5 / 8 = 0.44 (2dp) megabytes per second.

It is still a pretty quick connection though. I am currently pulling 11mbps through my line but the upload is only about 0.7mbps. Not sure whether this is a good speed or not, but neither do I care particularly :P

Actually... In Nordic countries... they tend to have a 3.5 mb/s (read megabytes/second) connection. Heck, me over in Canada has a 2.2 mb/s connection myself. Unthrottled too :).

And I'd trust TVE to know what he's talking about. He works customer support (I think) for an ISP, along with him explaining what you just said earlier in this thread.

[WhackableMole]

Acknowledged and deleted :D

[EQ Worry]

If anyone expects me to ask every race "am I lagging" then they are out of their fool mind. If airio (the true spawn of satan) tells me I'm lagging I check then to see if other people see me lagging or if it was just one spike. I've had people tell me I'm lagging before and guess what, most of the time it was because I forgot to turn off utorrent or my roommate was downloading something.

If Airio reports you as lagging, it really means you are lagging. The measurement is very objective, server data are used for that. Server reports it misses your car position and if there's several such ocurrences in a row and they repeat again and again, then you're noticed, later spectated.

If server misses your car position, then naturally everyone else driving misses that position as well. Server supplies artificial position of your car (based on previous movement) to everyone, correcting it when new data arrive, that's why the car is jumping. An jumping cars are dangerous. :)

Also I'm not sure why you'd call Airio a "true spawn of satan". Too many messages, too much spamming? Turn off for yourself anything you do not need (try the magic Shift+i, maybe twice)! It is about the only InSim that may run completely silently for you (try !silent in latest versions), showing only a few really important messages, such as why you were spectated.

If you're not happy with the lagging check or spinning check or something else, then you should ask admins to change the settings or turn off the appropriate filter. If they are not willing to go that way, certainly it is not Airio's fault.

And yes, using wi-fi leads to lagging. :)

[pik_d]

Yeah, the spamming was the first thing that annoyed me. Why do I have to configure some garbage for a 3rd party app to run on a busy FOX server? I turned a lot of the useless stuff off (left some of the stats stuff on though). There are some messages that I don't even understand why they exist. LFS by default tells you when someone has set the fastest lap, why does Airio need to do the same?

It's also the unnecessary nanny state of mind that it brings with it. Simply the mindset of "You have caused a yellow flag..." (even if I'm the only one within half a mile) is over the top. Does anyone who has just spun around really need to be told that they've caused a yellow flag? Do we really need to protect people from seeing the words "****" and "asshole"? I also once got a DT because I had to "cut" the track twice in one race to avoid other cars. That was really nice, avoid a wreck twice and get a DT for your efforts.

Airio has some good things such as whatever it copied from Lapper and the track rotation feature. It really should have stopped there though.

And thank you for that "using wi-fi leads to lagging" statement. What does it prove, that you can form a sentence? I gave some actual testing data comparing wireless to what the router sees which seems to point out that me using wi-fi adds 1-2ms on average to ping time. Using wi-fi leads to lagging much in the same way that spoons and forks lead to obesity.

[dawesdust_12]

And thank you for that "using wi-fi leads to lagging" statement. What does it prove, that you can form a sentence? I gave some actual testing data comparing wireless to what the router sees which seems to point out that me using wi-fi adds 1-2ms on average to ping time. Using wi-fi leads to lagging much in the same way that spoons and forks lead to obesity.

It's not just that wi-fi adds ping, it is also unreliable. A simple microwave being turned on somewhere in the house can make ping double (at least)... It results in randomly lost connections, delayed packets, and other things. In all fairness, for online gaming 56k is better than Wi-Fi as 56k is rather reliable for packet stream.

[The Very End]

It's not just that wi-fi adds ping, it is also unreliable. A simple microwave being turned on somewhere in the house can make ping double (at least)... It results in randomly lost connections, delayed packets, and other things. In all fairness, for online gaming 56k is better than Wi-Fi as 56k is rather reliable for packet stream.

I somehow agree on this. Not sure on the 56k part tho, but it would at least have a stable ping, compared to wireless that might be unstable.
Those packages here and there that are lost with wireless are clearly noticed by the others on the server. Don't you just hate to see that car in front of you warp into..nothing.. for a split second and then coming back to send you on your rocket trip of the life?

[dawesdust_12]

It's simple that 56k will be more stable (and even playable online provided you don't need to download stuff - eg. mrodgers). He says he played LFS for a long time on dialup and had no issues at all, unless he had to download something huge.

[master_lfs.5101]

is a USB dongle or PCI card better.?

[dawesdust_12]

is a USB dongle or PCI card better.?

Personally... All I've heard is bad things regarding USB dongles (Random disconnects, random restarts with "OH HAI, NO DRIVERS KTHX", shitty support if you decide to use linux).

I've always had PCI ones with no issues (even with LFS... except for 1 STCC race... which incidentally enough was what drove me to get wired internet into my bedroom).

[master_lfs.5101]

Personally... All I've heard is bad things regarding USB dongles (Random disconnects, random restarts with "OH HAI, NO DRIVERS KTHX", shitty support if you decide to use linux).

I've always had PCI ones with no issues (even with LFS... except for 1 STCC race... which incidentally enough was what drove me to get wired internet into my bedroom).

I guess i'll have to return that shitty belkin dongle, and buy a PCI Wlan card :(

Im around 200 feet away from the router. Its 3 floors down in my house's basement. Im 3 floors up in my houses Bedroom floor.

[EQ Worry]

Yeah, the spamming was the first thing that annoyed me. Why do I have to configure some garbage for a 3rd party app to run on a busy FOX server?

The answer is of course simple - there are a lot of people and everyone considers as garbage something different. Someone really doesn't want to see anything, racing in Shift+F mode, so he can turn off everything. Some don't care about ranks/licences, so they choose to ignore that data. Admins certainly want to see spectate/kick reasons, while others may ignore such messages. Maybe, just maybe, all these possibilities are one of the reasons why the FOX server is busy.

There are some messages that I don't even understand why they exist. LFS by default tells you when someone has set the fastest lap, why does Airio need to do the same?

Yes, that is valid objection, and the (optional) message is there for 2 reasons: One is there are differences - LFS doesn't say what car was it, which may be important, and LFS also considers only cars on track. The other is simply to have things complete, artificially skipping that info does not feel right to me.

Simply the mindset of "You have caused a yellow flag..." (even if I'm the only one within half a mile) is over the top. Does anyone who has just spun around really need to be told that they've caused a yellow flag?

Yes, this message is the most hated and I'll be updating the code to fight it a bit. But again, it has a purpose - it tells you your safety rating went down a bit (while completing laps and races raise it). Problem is LFS gives you yellow flag even when you are alone on server (sic), so I'll need to add a few more checks to see if it has meaning.

Do we really need to protect people from seeing the words "****" and "asshole"?

Well, that is quite up to server administrators to decide. By default Airio doen't run bad language check, if it is active it means it was turned on intentionally by admins.

I also once got a DT because I had to "cut" the track twice in one race to avoid other cars. That was really nice, avoid a wreck twice and get a DT for your efforts.

Hm, I'm not sure what you mean, because Airio doesn't give any penalties for cutting, just for the reason you mention, it simply may be necessary. AAAH, I know! It was the Remote+ that gave you the penalty - one warning, then penalty, right? Nothing to do with Airio, it is Victor's work - ask admins to run simple Remote (not the plus version).

Airio has some good things such as whatever it copied from Lapper and the track rotation feature. It really should have stopped there though.

Stop there? What would be the point? Why blame me or Airio for giving every driver tens of configuration options (with a very low-profile initial settings) and a hundred+ options to server admins, again most of them inactive by default? If you're not happy with some spectate/kick reasons, ask admins to change the settings. Would you complain to LFS developers because on some servers there is forced cockpit view? I doubt. You would ask admins for change or simply leave.

And thank you for that "using wi-fi leads to lagging" statement. What does it prove, that you can form a sentence?

Right, I apologise, it was just to mention the primary topic of this thread. So I will elaborate a bit now: Yes, wi-fi may add on average negligible 1 or 2 ms, but the problem is the communication is easy to break through interference (turn on a light, car passes nearby, whatever), and then it takes hundreds of miliseconds to reestablish/repeat the what was lost. That is why, in my opinion, wi-fi is not a good choice for online action/sim gaming. And anyone using wi-fi (as I do sometimes) should be aware of this.

[dawesdust_12]

I guess i'll have to return that shitty belkin dongle, and buy a PCI Wlan card :(

Im around 200 feet away from the router. Its 3 floors down in my house's basement. Im 3 floors up in my houses Bedroom floor.

At that distance you might be even ****ed for wireless. You can give it a shot (dunno about a stores open policy), but being that far is for sure a death wish for wifi (I'm only about 100 ft from my router, and only 1 floor (and 2 walls at the most) and I have issues on occasion (if I use Wi-Fi).

[pik_d]

Hah, I had no idea I was complaining to the guy who created Airio. I even went to the Airio thread to remind myself of all the "features" it has and didn't look to see if you posted there.

Hm, I didn't know about the Remote+ thing. It only happened to me on an Airio enabled server just the other day (again, FOX Junkies).

I have talked to a few of the (FM) guys about their massive nanny-state spectate-fest that they have on their server and the conclusion ended up being that I simply wont race there when it's at Westhill. I have no idea if the spectating stuff is Airio or not, but if it is, please get the Westhill chicane nanny lined up so that it absolutely does not ever spectate people who don't hit the tires. My line takes me over the curb very close to the tires and I get spectated about 25% of the time, even when I don't hit the tires.

Also spectating for spinning. I understand the desire to not mess up other peoples races but I think it's a bit "soft" if you know what I mean. We are racing in a sim, in real life people crash and other people's races get messed up, why protect us from that here? It gives people the mindset that they deserve to have people get out of their way if something goes wrong up ahead. In league races people are normally expected to stay on the track until they have been cleared to spectate. In pick up races people are expected to spectate if they accidentally get a little sideways. You're only encouraging this behavior (which I feel is wrong in a racing environment) by forcing people to spectate under certain circumstances. I remember one time someone asked me after the race "why didn't you spectate" when they hit me AFTER I came to a controlled stop due to an incident. Shit happens, avoiding it is part of racing.

Also if you simply must have that option can you do some checks on how close other cars are? It's one thing to get spectated when you're being followed by 20 cars into T1, but it's entirely something else (and really annoying) when you're not near anyone and you get spectated for "safety".

If you want to have all these features please make sure they don't hurt people who aren't in anyone's way.

[EQ Worry]

Hm, I didn't know about the Remote+ thing. It only happened to me on an Airio enabled server just the other day (again, FOX Junkies).

Yes, they run Remote+ there and you were penalized by this service. I myself do not like the + version much, there are other means to fight deliberate cutting.

I have no idea if the spectating stuff is Airio or not, but if it is, please get the Westhill chicane nanny lined up so that it absolutely does not ever spectate people who don't hit the tires. My line takes me over the curb very close to the tires and I get spectated about 25% of the time, even when I don't hit the tires.

AFAIK this isn't Airio again, it is a standard LFS restricted zone (layout) defined there by FM people, easy to update if it affects your racing line. Airio by default contains only two anti-crasher restricted (spec) zones defined on BL1 and one limited (lap stats not saved) on BL2 for the demo configs, everything else is open. There may be a race path check running invalidating server PBs if achieved by cutting, but Airio usually does not spec/pen people for cutting.

Also spectating for spinning. ... Also if you simply must have that option can you do some checks on how close other cars are?. ... If you want to have all these features please make sure they don't hurt people who aren't in anyone's way.

First thing to know is that again it is an admin-optional check, disabled by default. Second point is it can be configured only for specific tracks, such as SO. I agree that on WE and other wide tracks it is rather useless/frustrating.

But your idea about making sure some of the checks (yellow flag, safety spectating) are not applied if there's no one close around is really cool, I'll add this into final Airio 2.3.3, so that the "true spawn of the satan" is less devilish. But, as you can read above, not all evil comes from Airio. :D

BIG SORRY to everyone for this highly off-topic discussion. I just stumbled across a complaint concerning my tool and I wanted to learn a bit more about the cause and possible solutions.

[WhackableMole]

BIG SORRY to everyone for this highly off-topic discussion. I just stumbled across a complaint concerning my tool and I wanted to learn a bit more about the cause and possible solutions.

No need to apologise - I actually found this to be the most interesting part of this thread, even if it was completely off topic!! :D It is quite refreshing to see the developer to consumer relationship in all its glory ;)

[master_lfs.5101]

At that distance you might be even ****ed for wireless. You can give it a shot (dunno about a stores open policy), but being that far is for sure a death wish for wifi (I'm only about 100 ft from my router, and only 1 floor (and 2 walls at the most) and I have issues on occasion (if I use Wi-Fi).

Hmm.. But this Dell Laptop I'm using right now has an intergrated Wlan card of course. I get a good signal strength most of the time. The router that I have (Default from FiOs) can be connected to 3 houses away, if you have a good modem, but of course we have a password on it. FIBER OPTIC RULES!

Anyways, Ill probably get the PCI then.

[Töki (HUN)]

Since I'm playing LFS, I'm using wireless. The router is about 1m away from the lappy, the router is in another room. I've never had disco issues.

[dawesdust_12]

Hmm.. But this Dell Laptop I'm using right now has an intergrated Wlan card of course. I get a good signal strength most of the time. The router that I have (Default from FiOs) can be connected to 3 houses away, if you have a good modem, but of course we have a password on it. FIBER OPTIC RULES!

Anyways, Ill probably get the PCI then.

Fios isn't so great when you haffto deal with Comcast's great draconian methods of BitTorrent throttling, their new service that replaces DNS errors with... ... ADVERTISING!

Sounds great... 8-)

[Degats]

Im around 200 feet away from the router. Its 3 floors down in my house's basement. Im 3 floors up in my houses Bedroom floor.

At that distance you might be even ****ed for wireless. You can give it a shot (dunno about a stores open policy), but being that far is for sure a death wish for wifi (I'm only about 100 ft from my router, and only 1 floor (and 2 walls at the most) and I have issues on occasion (if I use Wi-Fi).

I think you're over-estimating the distances involved here ;)

200ft is A Long Way. Based on average ceiling heights (in the UK at least - ~10ft) 200ft would mean the height of a 20 storey building.
/pedanticism

802.11g wireless is generally capable of going up to 100ft line-of-sight. Put a wall/floor/cardboard box/person in the way and it's going to reduce that, especially if it's made of something substantial.

For 3 storeys, I'd recommend using Cat5e or power over Ethernet even for only browsing the web for any amount of time. As for gaming, that kind of distance is going to cause a lot of problems over WiFi.

The n spec can handle longer range and higher speeds, but is still susceptible to all the kinds of interference and the affects associated with it as mentioned in this thread.

If you have to use WiFi over that distance indoors I'd recommend getting a PCI card and router that allow you to change the antennae and buy some high gain antennae for both.

[undertaker00]

I'm wireless here (not much option, short of running wires over 3 floors) but I have a good strong signal, and I've disabled QOS packet scheduling.
I'm not particularly UP on this stuff, but following the advice from others definitely got it sorted for me.

QOS often causes problems apparently, withholding packets. Other than poor connections though, I gather this is the primary problem for wireless connections causing visible lag.

Can u tell me where i can find this ? (win7 here)

[arco]

These instructions are for Vista, but the procedure should be the same for Win7.

http://www.itechtalk.com/thread5084.html

[pandera]

I did some comparison between WiFi and LAN by hosting 2 games on my machine
the conditions for WiFi where: ASUS N50Vn, D-Link Di-524, only this one computer in the network at the time, distance from laptop to router: 1,5 m, system Vista. so in general perfect conditions with new hardware and software
6 cars in the race, all of them on cables, all players in the same city

the result: LAGGGGGGGGING like hell, people crashing...

the same people and hardware except for LAN instead of WiFi... smooth and clean session, no lagging for anyone... not a single lag

of course I should repeat it a few times to make it statistically correct but... I don't care, I will simply plug the cable and enjoy smooth racing :)

[Jakg]

From my two experiences trying to use WiFi to game - no. Just no.

[marzman]

I say no to for Wifi. You also ruin other peoples game with lag.

But maybe it works better when you live in the middle of nowhere. I have neighbours and wifinetworks all around me and it's ok to internet on it, but i can't game on it. Sometimes it even stops completly for a few minutes, I think it's the microwave of one of my neighbours (they use the same frequention as wifi, only with a much stronger signal ;) )

[dutchshogun]

Well, i am using wireless since i started playing LFS, and havent really experienced any bad things with it... We havent even got the best of the best connection. We're now running about 420kb/s download, and 45kb/s upload.

Lags which have occured, were 90% not me, so, i'd say:if you have a decent connection, it's ok.

[marzman]

Well, i am using wireless since i started playing LFS, and havent really experienced any bad things with it... We havent even got the best of the best connection. We're now running about 420kb/s download, and 45kb/s upload.

Lags which have occured, were 90% not me, so, i'd say:if you have a decent connection, it's ok.
It's not about download and uplaod it's that it lags sometimes. You are saying that 10% of the lags were you.

If you race with 20 others and you each have the same change of lag that is 5 %.

[pandera]

Lags which have occured, were 90% not me, so, i'd say:if you have a decent connection, it's ok.

You are never sure who is causing the lag during a race, you almost always see it as it's the other guy's fault... during my check it looked like everyone else was lagging but it all changed when I changed my connection...

the cable is cheap and plugging it in takes about 1 second, and using WiFi does not make the racing experience any more modern or cool... it causes it to lag...

[Degats]

it looked like everyone else was lagging

A sure sign that it is in fact you that's lagging ;)

If some but not all seem to be lagging, it's generally an idication that their connection to the server is worse than yours. If everyone else seems to be lagging, then it's almost certainly you, not them.

[skstibi]

The cable is cheap and plugging it in takes about 1 second, and using WiFi does not make the racing experience any more modern or cool... it causes it to lag...

I suppose you have a 30 meter cable you can send me? :shy:

I am using wireless and the other cars don't jump around at all and nobody has complained about lag when I am driving so close that mirrors are touching.
Current wireless signal strength: Low :scratchch

[pandera]

If some but not all seem to be lagging, it's generally an idication that their connection to the server is worse than yours. If everyone else seems to be lagging, then it's almost certainly you, not them.

The server was my machine, so my connection was kind of... perfect ;) We wanted to check if there is any difference betwen WiFi and LAN cable by hosting two games on the same machine with different connections. It was everybody else lagging while trying to connect to a WiFi machine.

the result was simply devastating for WiFi... I did not expect such a difference myself...

I know that hosting a game is quite an extreme example, but if there was no difference between WiFi and cable, than why shouldn't a host with WiFi work?

I suppose you have a 30 meter cable you can send me?
30 meter cable? You are having quite a long distances to anywhere over there in New Zealand :)

[pik_d]

You are having quite a long distance to anywhere over there in New Zealand :)
New thread title: "Is it OK to play LFS from New Zealand?"

[dawesdust_12]

New thread title: "Is it OK to play LFS from New Zealand?"

Answer: Why are you playing LFS?! Aren't there still sheep in New Zealand. :razz:

:hide:

[Darkkness]

I run my ASUS M50SA on vista, over a Linksys WRT160N and don't have any lag issues at all.

[pandera]

I run my ASUS M50SA on vista, over a Linksys WRT160N and don't have any lag issues at all.

The truth is there will never be a total agrement in this thread, because the number of variations of hardware/software/network providers/other factors makes it simply impossible...

But IMO there is one thing we could agree on: if you are on WiFi, and you experience some lagging from time to time, chcek it with the cable first, before blaming others. And if it solves the problem stay with the cable, even if it was from time to time only. Nothing more.