Alternative to Virgin Media

ejb2004

I have been a Virgin Media/NTl BB customer for several years but find it very slow and unreliable. We have Sky TV and Sky Talk however I don't think my PC is wireless and our BT Socket is in the hallway whilst my PC is in the dining room so I believe I would need the router in the hall and a cable somewhere to link this and PC. Can someone please confirm if this is true and/or if I have any other options? Many thanks.

macman

You can either run an extension socket (a proper cabled socket, not a trailing lead) into the dining room, sit the router next to the PC and connect by ethernet cable (your PC needs to have a network port for this, which it should already have if it's not more than about 5 years old). Ideally you plug your router into the BT master socket for the best speed, but it will still work perfectly well on an extension.
Or place the router in the hall and use a USB or PCI wireless adaptor on the PC to connect wirelessly.
I would favour the first option, as wireless has no advantage if you can use ethernet, which gives a more reliable connection without security worries.
PS: don't you already have a BT socket near your TV/PC-as most Sky boxes are plugged into the BT line (at least they are for the first 12 months as required by contract, unless you pay extra to opt out)?

BernardM

There is a much better alternative to this, I will just link rather than type as its all explained very well here.http://www.devolo.co.uk/uk_EN/produkte/dLAN/dlan200aveasysk.html
http://www.devolo.co.uk/uk_EN/spezial/flashstart.html
If you are worried about security and also possible side effects of emr exposure from the wireless signal (which unfortunately people don't seem to think about), which may be worse than a mobile phone as your may spend considerably less time on a mobile phone, I would buy one of these.

Marty_J

BernardM wrote: »

If you are worried about security and also possible side effects of emf exposure from the wireless signal (which unfortunately people don't seem to think about), which may be worse than a mobile phone as your may spend considerably less time on a mobile phone, I would buy one of these.

I remember reading you'd have to sit with a wireless router strapped to your head for a year to get the same dose of radiation as you'd get from a 10 minute mobile phone call.

Wifi signals are a lot weaker than mobile phone signals. It's a total non-issue.

That's not to say homeplugs aren't worth considering though.

BernardM

That may be so Marty but the more research I read on the dangers of electromagnetic radiation (EMR), from mobile phones and especially from wireless networks installed at home, the more convinced I am of the importance of creating an electromagnetic free home environment. Did you know that Sir William Stewart, the chairman of the Health Protection Agency, wants pupils to be monitored for ill effects from the networks which are being installed in classrooms across the nation. Personally, I wouldn’t want myself, or my children, to be permanently exposed to such signals.

The big problem with wLANs is that, unlike your mobile phone, they are on and broadcasting, 24 hours a day. The signal also has to be very strong, which is why you can often pick up a wireless network from two houses away, and it gives off radiation similar to emissions from mobile phones and phone masts.
If you have a cordless phone base right by your bed or on your desk at work, you could be exposed to up to 5 µT from pulsed fields for several hours a day. I got rid of my cordless Dect phone also and went back to a corded. You may disagree with this but at least we have a choice.

Heres a few articles I remember reading
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-wellbeing/health-news/wifi-children-at-risk-from-electronic-smog-445725.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/leading-articles/leading-article-hitech-horrors-445672.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-wellbeing/health-news/danger-on-the-airwaves-is-the-wifi-revolution-a-health-time-bomb-445732.html

DCFC79

I use a router and so do many other people I know and we arent affected at all

BernardM

ejb2004 wrote: »

I have been a Virgin Media/NTl BB customer for several years but find it very slow and unreliable. We have Sky TV and Sky Talk however I don't think my PC is wireless and our BT Socket is in the hallway whilst my PC is in the dining room so I believe I would need the router in the hall and a cable somewhere to link this and PC. Can someone please confirm if this is true and/or if I have any other options? Many thanks.

Try and see if you can get o2 broadband rather than sky, they have fast unlimited use speeds in the country cheaper rates if you also have a mobile contract or PAYG with them.

BernardM

DCFC79 wrote: »

I use a router and so do many other people I know and we arent affected at all

Thats good to know, but did you read this article.
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-wellbeing/health-news/the-school-that-took-on-mobile-phone-companies-445731.html

macman

I'd be interested to know how many of the concerned parents at this school have stopped their kids wandering around all day with mobiles clamped to their ears?
Surely the greater radiation risk is with a device held constantly to the skull, not with a mast hundreds of yards away that is transmitting in a broad arc?

Marty_J

BernardM wrote: »

That may be so Marty but the more research I read on the dangers of electromagnetic radiation (EMR), from mobile phones and especially from wireless networks installed at home, the more convinced I am of the importance of creating an electromagnetic free home environment.

Good luck with that. You might be needing some lead-lined wallpaper.

Did you know that Sir William Stewart, the chairman of the Health Protection Agency, wants pupils to be monitored for ill effects from the networks which are being installed in classrooms across the nation. Personally, I wouldn’t want myself, or my children, to be permanently exposed to such signals.

So because they're testing to see if there any ill-effects, that means that there are ill-effects?

The big problem with wLANs is that, unlike your mobile phone, they are on and broadcasting, 24 hours a day. The signal also has to be very strong, which is why you can often pick up a wireless network from two houses away, and it gives off radiation similar to emissions from mobile phones and phone masts.

The signal is not "very strong", it's very weak. Think about the range mobile phones have, and then the range wifi has. One is clearly a lot weaker than the other.

If you have a cordless phone base right by your bed or on your desk at work, you could be exposed to up to 5 µT from pulsed fields for several hours a day. I got rid of my cordless Dect phone also and went back to a corded. You may disagree with this but at least we have a choice.

Heres a few articles I remember reading
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-wellbeing/health-news/wifi-children-at-risk-from-electronic-smog-445725.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/leading-articles/leading-article-hitech-horrors-445672.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-wellbeing/health-news/danger-on-the-airwaves-is-the-wifi-revolution-a-health-time-bomb-445732.html

Whilst those articles might shift a few papers, I'm going to have to come down on the side of the majority of the scientific community and the WHO, and say that there's no evidence wifi has a detrimental effect on human health.

BernardM

Thats the point I'm making. If the head of the HPA doesn't know. It makes sense to find out don't you think.