Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #87944 > unrolled thread

MX Linux

Started byrbowman <bowman@montana.com>
First post2026-06-14 01:07 +0000
Last post2026-06-14 22:35 -0400
Articles 20 on this page of 71 — 10 participants

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc


Contents

  MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-14 01:07 +0000
    Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-14 00:10 -0400
      Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-14 06:16 +0000
        Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-14 03:19 -0400
          Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-14 18:11 +0000
            Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-14 23:00 -0400
      Re: MX Linux Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-06-14 10:33 +0100
        Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-14 18:20 +0000
          Re: MX Linux Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-06-14 19:45 +0100
            Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-14 23:49 +0000
              Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-15 01:41 -0400
            Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-15 01:34 -0400
              Re: MX Linux Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-06-15 07:23 +0100
                Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-15 07:02 +0000
                  Re: MX Linux The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-15 12:36 +0100
                  Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-16 03:39 -0400
                    Re: MX Linux The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-16 11:52 +0100
                      Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-16 22:05 -0400
                        Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-17 02:59 +0000
                          Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-16 23:55 -0400
                            Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-17 07:00 +0000
                              Re: MX Linux Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-06-17 08:14 +0100
                                Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-18 04:10 -0400
                                  Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-18 19:26 +0000
                              Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-18 03:20 -0400
                                Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-18 18:45 +0000
                                  Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-19 02:50 -0400
                                    Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-19 16:56 +0000
                                      Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-20 03:41 -0400
                                        Re: MX Linux "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-20 10:19 +0200
                                          Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-21 01:06 -0400
                                            Re: MX Linux "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-21 12:34 +0200
                                        Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-20 17:36 +0000
                                          Re: MX Linux "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-20 20:01 +0200
                                            Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-21 03:19 +0000
                                              Re: MX Linux "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-21 12:29 +0200
                                          Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-21 02:34 -0400
                                            Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-21 06:44 +0000
                                              Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-21 03:35 -0400
                            Re: MX Linux John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-06-17 15:50 -0700
                              Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-18 04:53 -0400
                    Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-16 17:52 +0000
                      Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-16 23:19 -0400
                        Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-17 07:07 +0000
                          Re: MX Linux The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-17 11:06 +0100
                          Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-18 04:02 -0400
                            Re: MX Linux Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-06-18 18:26 +0000
                              Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-19 02:37 -0400
                            Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-18 19:23 +0000
                              Re: MX Linux Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-06-19 04:46 +0100
                                Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-19 05:55 +0000
                                  Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-19 02:56 -0400
                                Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-19 02:59 -0400
                                  Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-19 17:00 +0000
                Re: MX Linux Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-06-15 08:01 +0000
              Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-15 07:00 +0000
          Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-14 23:05 -0400
        Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-14 22:32 -0400
          Re: MX Linux Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-06-15 07:21 +0100
            Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-15 02:50 -0400
              Re: MX Linux Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-06-15 13:19 +0100
            Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-15 06:52 +0000
              Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-16 03:37 -0400
                Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-16 17:00 +0000
                  Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-16 22:40 -0400
            Re: MX Linux Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam2616@zugschl.us> - 2026-06-15 13:09 +0200
      Re: MX Linux 🇵🇱Jacek Marcin Jaworski🇵🇱 <jmj@energokod.gda.pl> - 2026-06-14 11:50 +0200
        Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-14 18:16 +0000
          Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-14 23:04 -0400
            Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-15 06:56 +0000
        Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-14 22:35 -0400

Page 3 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4  Next page →


#88054

Fromc186282 <c186282@nnada.net>
Date2026-06-18 04:53 -0400
Message-ID<2fKcne8jWrasL673nZ2dnZfqn_adnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#88042
On 6/17/26 18:50, John Ames wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Jun 2026 23:55:26 -0400
> c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote:
> 
>>> It works on the eeePC but there are obvious limitations because of
>>> the hardware. I'll put 26 up in a VM on the Thinkpad T480 to give
>>> it a fairer trial.
>>
>> Can you still GET an eeePC ? Mine fell about three floors onto
>> concrete ....
>>
>> It was a GREAT little laptop though !
> 
> Absolute tanks. Mine fell from the roof of my car onto a freeway on-
> ramp at ~20 MPH and came out with no worse than a lightly-cracked and
> heavily-scuffed case, lasted another ~8 yrs. before succumbing to a
> board failure. Bought another used, which has been chugging along ever
> since, though it's in need of a replacement PSU jack and battery ATM.
> 
> Nobody but *nobody* solved the laptop-hinge problem like Asus did on
> those first couple Eee generations. Oneathesedays, maybe when this one
> gives up the ghost, I oughta figure out how to rip out the guts and
> stuff a little ARM SBC in there...
> 

   The three-floor drop totally KILLED mine alas.

   Was using it to align some roof-line security
   cameras and .....

   But, regardless, it WAS a great little laptop
   and ran Linux perfectly.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#88009

Fromrbowman <bowman@montana.com>
Date2026-06-16 17:52 +0000
Message-ID<n9dgqaFeu80U2@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#88001
On Tue, 16 Jun 2026 03:39:44 -0400, c186282 wrote:

>    Well, mirrors, it's not just YOUR speed, it's how well their software
>    delivers, how much bandwidth THEY have and how much they allocate to
>    any one user.

I go the StarLink kit yesterday and set it up. speedtest.net shows 41 Mbps 
down, 21 uo. The Verizon wireless shows 10.5 down, 0.21 up. 

speed.cloudflare.com may be more realistic and shows 30/10 for StarLink, 
3.32 Mbps/221 kbps for Verizon.

That's from the Fedora box. The speed test from the StarLink app show 101 
Mbps down. The SUSE laptop showed 105 down. 

The app shows no obstructions and the dish is oriented correctly. Despite 
the varying speed tests it is faster than Verizon. 

I also moved the Fire TV to StarLink. Neither SUSE or Fedora has a large 
update so I can't get a feeling for that difference. The Mint laptop 
updated and seemed a little snappier. It's showing 46.4 down, 11.2 up.

The router does have an Ethernet port. I'll pick up a cable and see if the 
WiFi chips in the different machine are the difference. That may also 
allow me to create a bridge for the VM.

I'll run the two in parallel for a while but faster speeds and $40 / month 
makes MuskNet attractive for me.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#88022

Fromc186282 <c186282@nnada.net>
Date2026-06-16 23:19 -0400
Message-ID<6UydnRO_f_Xqj6_3nZ2dnZfqnPWdnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#88009
On 6/16/26 13:52, rbowman wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Jun 2026 03:39:44 -0400, c186282 wrote:
> 
>>     Well, mirrors, it's not just YOUR speed, it's how well their software
>>     delivers, how much bandwidth THEY have and how much they allocate to
>>     any one user.
> 
> I go the StarLink kit yesterday and set it up. speedtest.net shows 41 Mbps
> down, 21 uo. The Verizon wireless shows 10.5 down, 0.21 up.

   Useful info !!!

   SINCE they seem to have added an antenna, my 5G speed
   has been vastly better than before ... fast.com shows
   23 and 37 mbps now ... used to be like THREE at best,
   worse than my old DSL. So NOW I feel like I'm getting
   what I paid for ... over a year later ....

   CloudFlare sez 28 ... but it's not picking very local
   servers for testing.

   In any case, yer StarLink speed is "very usable" except
   maybe for 8k streaming. I never do that anyway. No, not
   cable/fiber gigabit+, but not sure WHO really needs that
   much speed - online gamers or a medium biz maybe ?

   Really really MAY pay for StarLink as an "auxillary/emergency"
   connection. NOT sure I've seen an "unlimited" acct category
   however - but for an 'emergency' I don't NEED that.

   Elon needs to start deploying WORKING StarLink-NextGen
   sats during his StarShip tests. THAT much seems to
   work OK.

> speed.cloudflare.com may be more realistic and shows 30/10 for StarLink,
> 3.32 Mbps/221 kbps for Verizon.
> 
> That's from the Fedora box. The speed test from the StarLink app show 101
> Mbps down. The SUSE laptop showed 105 down.

   Note company apps ALWAYS exaggerate the shit
   out of the speed  :-)

> The app shows no obstructions and the dish is oriented correctly. Despite
> the varying speed tests it is faster than Verizon.
> 
> I also moved the Fire TV to StarLink. Neither SUSE or Fedora has a large
> update so I can't get a feeling for that difference. The Mint laptop
> updated and seemed a little snappier. It's showing 46.4 down, 11.2 up.
> 
> The router does have an Ethernet port. I'll pick up a cable and see if the
> WiFi chips in the different machine are the difference. That may also
> allow me to create a bridge for the VM.
> 
> I'll run the two in parallel for a while but faster speeds and $40 / month
> makes MuskNet attractive for me.

   My 5G router has a couple of hardwire ports. Alas,
   and I've TRIED, they won't access the net. Anyway,
   as said, my house is very wiring-unfriendly regardless
   and I'm way too old to try to squeeze into tiny spider-
   infested cracks and crevices in the 'attic'. WiFi
   extenders work.

   What's NEEDED is a "centipede-bot" - maybe an inch
   across and 12-16 long, capable of getting into most
   any crack and dragging at least a pull-wire behind.
   I can kinda see the mechanics and software, the
   power supply is a bit more iffy ... might have to
   have a supply cable attached to its butt.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#88031

Fromrbowman <bowman@montana.com>
Date2026-06-17 07:07 +0000
Message-ID<n9eve5Fm4idU2@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#88022
On Tue, 16 Jun 2026 23:19:35 -0400, c186282 wrote:

>    Really really MAY pay for StarLink as an "auxillary/emergency"
>    connection. NOT sure I've seen an "unlimited" acct category however -
>    but for an 'emergency' I don't NEED that.

I went for the basic residential that they claim up to 100 mbps. They 
tweaked the plans after the IPO but mine is $55/month and no upfront cost 
for the dish, router, and power supply. The hardest part of the 
installation was drilling the 5/8 hole for the ethernet cable. The 50' 
ethernet cable. Just what I needed another big ball of wire. There are 
different mounts but I'm using the 'kickstand' that comes with the dish. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#88038

FromThe Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>
Date2026-06-17 11:06 +0100
Message-ID<110trjj$1os2e$6@dont-email.me>
In reply to#88031
On 17/06/2026 08:07, rbowman wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Jun 2026 23:19:35 -0400, c186282 wrote:
> 
>>     Really really MAY pay for StarLink as an "auxillary/emergency"
>>     connection. NOT sure I've seen an "unlimited" acct category however -
>>     but for an 'emergency' I don't NEED that.
> 
> I went for the basic residential that they claim up to 100 mbps. They
> tweaked the plans after the IPO but mine is $55/month and no upfront cost
> for the dish, router, and power supply. The hardest part of the
> installation was drilling the 5/8 hole for the ethernet cable. The 50'
> ethernet cable. Just what I needed another big ball of wire. There are
> different mounts but I'm using the 'kickstand' that comes with the dish.

An extremely affordable service then.


-- 
Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have 
guns, why should we let them have ideas?

Josef Stalin

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#88045

Fromc186282 <c186282@nnada.net>
Date2026-06-18 04:02 -0400
Message-ID<2fKcnfIjWrbDO673nZ2dnZfqn_adnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#88031
On 6/17/26 03:07, rbowman wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Jun 2026 23:19:35 -0400, c186282 wrote:
> 
>>     Really really MAY pay for StarLink as an "auxillary/emergency"
>>     connection. NOT sure I've seen an "unlimited" acct category however -
>>     but for an 'emergency' I don't NEED that.
> 
> I went for the basic residential that they claim up to 100 mbps. They
> tweaked the plans after the IPO but mine is $55/month and no upfront cost
> for the dish, router, and power supply. The hardest part of the
> installation was drilling the 5/8 hole for the ethernet cable. The 50'
> ethernet cable. Just what I needed another big ball of wire. There are
> different mounts but I'm using the 'kickstand' that comes with the dish.


   This is all Very Useful Info !!!

   Oh, DID buy some long concrete drills lately ... in case
   I needed (may SOON need) a DISH TV connection. Could also
   drill for StarLink.

   Oh ... sounds like there's an outdoor antenna of
   sorts. HOW big ? WHERE does it point (if anywhere) ?

   My old old Comcast wire comes in from a pole on the
   side of my property. In the late 70s it went over
   small trees/bushes. Since then, they grew into HUGE
   trees and bushes. I'd attach a photo but it's TOO
   depressing.

   Tree company said $2500+ minimum to clear a new path
   and would NOT guarentee the wire would not be destroyed
   in the process. Basically a bunch of quasi-legals going
   nuts with chain saws. Took nearly a MONTH to get someone at
   Comcast who COULD understand that the physical wire was
   broken, NOT in their diags book. Kept wanting to replace
   my box. NOT the problem ! "Cable" doesn't work without
   the damned CABLE.

   Clue - be CIVIL and POLITE with the techs in Bangalore
   and they will, eventually, boost you to a US tech who
   will immediately understand the issue and send a crew.

   Now it's under a huge mass of tree limbs, then finally
   up to where I bungee-corded it to a taller tree. Horrible.
   Not viable for the future. Amazed it's lasted THIS long.

   After - DISH TV. Much cheaper than $2500+

   DO love conventional channel surfing. All-Net
   programming doesn't really offer that.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#88063

FromCharlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>
Date2026-06-18 18:26 +0000
Message-ID<MLWYR.161412$Hs3.46676@fx35.iad>
In reply to#88045
On 2026-06-18, c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote:

>    Tree company said $2500+ minimum to clear a new path
>    and would NOT guarentee the wire would not be destroyed
>    in the process. Basically a bunch of quasi-legals going
>    nuts with chain saws. Took nearly a MONTH to get someone at
>    Comcast who COULD understand that the physical wire was
>    broken, NOT in their diags book. Kept wanting to replace
>    my box. NOT the problem ! "Cable" doesn't work without
>    the damned CABLE.

BTDT after construction workers across the street tore out
our connection.

>    Clue - be CIVIL and POLITE with the techs in Bangalore
>    and they will, eventually, boost you to a US tech who
>    will immediately understand the issue and send a crew.

Also, be patient and persistent.  Try to resolve one
problem at a time, and be prepared to call back another
time if you can't get the tech to look at a second problem.
Think of it as a process of stepwise refinement.  Have a
phone on which you can comfortably stay on hold for an
hour or so, and call when you have other stuff you can
do while you're waiting.  When you do get a live person
on the line, keep him there until you've resolved as much
as you can without losing your cool.

Be sure you have time to spare before starting.

-- 
/~\  Charlie Gibbs                  |  No artificial
\ /  <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>      |  intelligence was
 X   I'm really at ac.dekanfrus     |  used in the creation
/ \  if you read it the right way.  |  of this post.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#88084

Fromc186282 <c186282@nnada.net>
Date2026-06-19 02:37 -0400
Message-ID<-4mcnbL8UPcBfqn3nZ2dnZfqn_ednZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#88063
On 6/18/26 14:26, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2026-06-18, c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote:
> 
>>     Tree company said $2500+ minimum to clear a new path
>>     and would NOT guarentee the wire would not be destroyed
>>     in the process. Basically a bunch of quasi-legals going
>>     nuts with chain saws. Took nearly a MONTH to get someone at
>>     Comcast who COULD understand that the physical wire was
>>     broken, NOT in their diags book. Kept wanting to replace
>>     my box. NOT the problem ! "Cable" doesn't work without
>>     the damned CABLE.
> 
> BTDT after construction workers across the street tore out
> our connection.
> 
>>     Clue - be CIVIL and POLITE with the techs in Bangalore
>>     and they will, eventually, boost you to a US tech who
>>     will immediately understand the issue and send a crew.
> 
> Also, be patient and persistent.  Try to resolve one
> problem at a time, and be prepared to call back another
> time if you can't get the tech to look at a second problem.
> Think of it as a process of stepwise refinement.  Have a
> phone on which you can comfortably stay on hold for an
> hour or so, and call when you have other stuff you can
> do while you're waiting.  When you do get a live person
> on the line, keep him there until you've resolved as much
> as you can without losing your cool.
> 
> Be sure you have time to spare before starting.

   Comcast is DIFFICULT to deal with. It's TOO big now.

   They've also outsourced TOO much.

   It's also TOO fuckin' expensive ... almost HOPING
   my wire finally breaks so I can get a dish. Checked,
   same line-up for less than half the price.

   Anyway, dealing with the Indian tech brigade - they
   REALLY don't KNOW much of anything ... clearly have,
   and quote exactly, some manual they were given.

   However, they DO respond to courtesy, civility and a
   bit of patience. Do NOT get angry, do NOT cuss them,
   you'll get NOWHERE. Gotta kind of manipulate/guide
   the 'conversation' so you can get to a USA tech.
   "Who CAN I reach who will more exactly understand
   my particular service problem ?".

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#88066

Fromrbowman <bowman@montana.com>
Date2026-06-18 19:23 +0000
Message-ID<n9iuthFaeprU2@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#88045
On Thu, 18 Jun 2026 04:02:36 -0400, c186282 wrote:


>    Oh, DID buy some long concrete drills lately ... in case I needed
>    (may SOON need) a DISH TV connection. Could also drill for StarLink.

Lucky me, no concrete. A 5/8 spade and 5/8 hole saw got the job done. The 
boot on the connector just fits. 

>    Oh ... sounds like there's an outdoor antenna of sorts. HOW big ?
>    WHERE does it point (if anywhere) ?

23.4 x 15.07 in 

https://www.starlinkinfo.com/starlink-dish-size

There are several options but the Standard 4 is the latest. It comes with 
a kickstand. There are other mounting techniques but I have a flat area 
where the kickstand works well. So far I laid an old bike battery on the 
kickstand but there are two holes in the kickstand. I'll see how it works 
but may mount it to a piece of plywood I had laying around and add a few 
more batteries for more weight. Bikes tend to go through batteries so I 
have a good supply.

There is a phone app that's used to set it up. Even without the dish the 
app allows you to scan the sky and determine a suitable area. Unlike the 
geosynch dishes in the northern hemisphere you point it north. I initially 
pointed it a 45 degrees. The app has an alignment page that said it was 
good. If not, it shows the correct alignment.

You can also connect to 192.168.100.1.  That's a little more detailed and 
said 30 degrees would be better. I didn't notice much improvement for 
download speeds, ping times, or latency.  

speedtest.net shows 40 Mbps down on the older Dell box with Fedora, 101 
Mbps on the Lenovo T480 with Leap 16. I'm thinking the difference is the 
older WiFi chip. I've got an Ethernet cable coming today to see if a 
direct connection gets it up to full advertised speed. 

Someone asked how much people were downloading a month on the starlink 
subreddit. Many said they were using 1+ TB. Games, continuously streaming 
4K, and so forth. With my current Verizon 100 GB plan I've only gotten 
emial that I was getting close a couple of times, but I did watch the 
usage and deferred iso downlads or release updates to the end of the month 
period.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#88078

FromAndy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk>
Date2026-06-19 04:46 +0100
Message-ID<n9jscbFfb1bU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#88066
rbowman wrote:

> speedtest.net shows 40 Mbps down on the older Dell box with Fedora, 101
> Mbps on the Lenovo T480 with Leap 16. I'm thinking the difference is the
> older WiFi chip. I've got an Ethernet cable coming today to see if a
> direct connection gets it up to full advertised speed.

Highly likely ... IME the biggest cause of people not getting the speed 
they're paying their ISP for is WiFi.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#88080

Fromrbowman <bowman@montana.com>
Date2026-06-19 05:55 +0000
Message-ID<n9k3uoFd22iU5@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#88078
On Fri, 19 Jun 2026 04:46:10 +0100, Andy Burns wrote:

> rbowman wrote:
> 
>> speedtest.net shows 40 Mbps down on the older Dell box with Fedora, 101
>> Mbps on the Lenovo T480 with Leap 16. I'm thinking the difference is
>> the older WiFi chip. I've got an Ethernet cable coming today to see if
>> a direct connection gets it up to full advertised speed.
> 
> Highly likely ... IME the biggest cause of people not getting the speed
> they're paying their ISP for is WiFi.

The Fedora box is showing the full 100 Mbps with a wired connection. 
Updating VS Code had been a problem with a lot of timeouts but it took 
seconds. The box had also been sluggish with sftp from other machines on 
the LAN but that was also greatly improved. 

The wireless adapter is a Qualcom Atheros from 2014 to match the rest of 
the hardware. It must be tired. It is 2.4 GHz. The Lenovo T480 has a newer 
Intel adapter that connects at 5 GHz and shows 100 Mbps down.

I haven't moved the Beelink to Starlink yet but it's also relatively new 
and probably will get the full speed. 

The 2011 netbook is also a 2.4 GHz connection but it gets 70 Mbps. It's 
not heavily used so that's fine.

I was hoping I could resolve the problem of the VM not being visible on 
the LAN with a wired connection but so far no luck. That's not a big deal 
either.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#88087

Fromc186282 <c186282@nnada.net>
Date2026-06-19 02:56 -0400
Message-ID<-4mcna38UPeRdan3nZ2dnZfqn_ednZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#88080
On 6/19/26 01:55, rbowman wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Jun 2026 04:46:10 +0100, Andy Burns wrote:
> 
>> rbowman wrote:
>>
>>> speedtest.net shows 40 Mbps down on the older Dell box with Fedora, 101
>>> Mbps on the Lenovo T480 with Leap 16. I'm thinking the difference is
>>> the older WiFi chip. I've got an Ethernet cable coming today to see if
>>> a direct connection gets it up to full advertised speed.
>>
>> Highly likely ... IME the biggest cause of people not getting the speed
>> they're paying their ISP for is WiFi.
> 
> The Fedora box is showing the full 100 Mbps with a wired connection.
> Updating VS Code had been a problem with a lot of timeouts but it took
> seconds. The box had also been sluggish with sftp from other machines on
> the LAN but that was also greatly improved.
> 
> The wireless adapter is a Qualcom Atheros from 2014 to match the rest of
> the hardware. It must be tired. It is 2.4 GHz. The Lenovo T480 has a newer
> Intel adapter that connects at 5 GHz and shows 100 Mbps down.
> 
> I haven't moved the Beelink to Starlink yet but it's also relatively new
> and probably will get the full speed.
> 
> The 2011 netbook is also a 2.4 GHz connection but it gets 70 Mbps. It's
> not heavily used so that's fine.
> 
> I was hoping I could resolve the problem of the VM not being visible on
> the LAN with a wired connection but so far no luck. That's not a big deal
> either.

   KVM is not 'local network' friendly.

   With VBox it's checking one little thing.

   Anyway, good luck with your StarLink ... keep us
   informed. LOOKS to be a good 'backup', sometimes
   'main', net connection. Every old provider is just
   obsessed with 5G links now - often for the worse.
   Wires/fibers are EXPENSIVE.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#88088

Fromc186282 <c186282@nnada.net>
Date2026-06-19 02:59 -0400
Message-ID<n5acnZdUso1Sdan3nZ2dnZfqn_udnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#88078
On 6/18/26 23:46, Andy Burns wrote:
> rbowman wrote:
> 
>> speedtest.net shows 40 Mbps down on the older Dell box with Fedora, 101
>> Mbps on the Lenovo T480 with Leap 16. I'm thinking the difference is the
>> older WiFi chip. I've got an Ethernet cable coming today to see if a
>> direct connection gets it up to full advertised speed.
> 
> Highly likely ... IME the biggest cause of people not getting the speed 
> they're paying their ISP for is WiFi.

   Umm ... my actual WiFi ain't bad - and SOME links are
   over 'extenders'. My biggest prob was the 5G. Just in
   the past week that finally improved - they must have
   added an antenna. Still not "great", but a great
   improvement over what I've had for a year+. "Usable".

   SEVERAL places connections can go wrong alas.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#88102

Fromrbowman <bowman@montana.com>
Date2026-06-19 17:00 +0000
Message-ID<n9latdFmbfkU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#88088
On Fri, 19 Jun 2026 02:59:17 -0400, c186282 wrote:

> On 6/18/26 23:46, Andy Burns wrote:
>> rbowman wrote:
>> 
>>> speedtest.net shows 40 Mbps down on the older Dell box with Fedora,
>>> 101 Mbps on the Lenovo T480 with Leap 16. I'm thinking the difference
>>> is the older WiFi chip. I've got an Ethernet cable coming today to see
>>> if a direct connection gets it up to full advertised speed.
>> 
>> Highly likely ... IME the biggest cause of people not getting the speed
>> they're paying their ISP for is WiFi.
> 
>    Umm ... my actual WiFi ain't bad - and SOME links are over
>    'extenders'. My biggest prob was the 5G. Just in the past week that
>    finally improved - they must have added an antenna. Still not
>    "great", but a great improvement over what I've had for a year+.
>    "Usable".
> 
>    SEVERAL places connections can go wrong alas.

The problem was not the Verizon WiFi hotspot but the WiFi adapter in the 
old Dell box. The newer Lenovo laptop with an Intel 5 GHz adapter works 
fine. The Dell is 2.4 GHz. A wired connection brought it up to full speed.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#87990

FromLawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid>
Date2026-06-15 08:01 +0000
Message-ID<110obhj$6u7d$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#87982
On Mon, 15 Jun 2026 07:23:36 +0100, Andy Burns wrote:

> That's why i tried the USA mirrors too, they are just as fast to me
> as the UK ones, I suspect the problem is the internet connection
> between the USA mirrors (mostly big .edu) and your ISP ...

Is a torrent available? That would spread the bandwidth load among
multiple peers.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#87986

Fromrbowman <bowman@montana.com>
Date2026-06-15 07:00 +0000
Message-ID<n99m7tFrbe7U3@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#87978
On Mon, 15 Jun 2026 01:34:09 -0400, c186282 wrote:

>    Crappy mirrors HAVE become a problem of late,
>    and not just for MX. Set up a generic Deb a few months ago ... again
>    HORRIBLE US mirrors.

I've had problems with VS Code from the MS repository. When I finally get 
it installed I lock the package so updates don't time out on that one.

With Endeavouur the LA mirror always ranked at the top of the list using 
the tool, never worked well in practice. I'd manually remove it from the 
list.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#87974

Fromc186282 <c186282@nnada.net>
Date2026-06-14 23:05 -0400
Message-ID<5CWdnW1P9p258bL3nZ2dnZfqnPQAAAAA@giganews.com>
In reply to#87964
On 6/14/26 14:20, rbowman wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Jun 2026 10:33:51 +0100, Andy Burns wrote:
> 
>> c186282 wrote:
>>
>>> rbowman wrote:
>>>>> I finally got an iso downloaded and installed. From my experience
>>>> the MX mirrors are crap. I finally found one that sowed the download
>>>> in less than an hour instead of hours if not days.
>>>
>>>     Agree about the slow mirrors. It's not you, it's them.
>> I picked a UK one and it was able to saturate my connection, 3 GB in
>> just under 6 minutes
> 
> You're lucky, I don't have the fastest connection but the US mirrors were
> ridiculous. r/MXLinux isn't very active but I did see a post where someone
> wondered why a mirror halfway around the world was better than the US
> ones.

   Try the mirror for "Tribblix/Solaris" - makes
   the MX mirrors look FAST !  :-)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#87969

Fromc186282 <c186282@nnada.net>
Date2026-06-14 22:32 -0400
Message-ID<xFSdna16L8rd-bL3nZ2dnZfqnPidnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#87957
On 6/14/26 05:33, Andy Burns wrote:
> 
> c186282 wrote:
> 
>> rbowman wrote:
>> >> I finally got an iso downloaded and installed. From my experience
>>> the MX mirrors are crap. I finally found one that sowed the
>>> download in less than an hour instead of hours if not days.
>>
>>    Agree about the slow mirrors. It's not you, it's them.
> I picked a UK one and it was able to saturate my connection, 3 GB in 
> just under 6 minutes

   Wow !!!

   Not the same experience in most of the USA - and I've
   tried different mirrors.

   Attempting to download a Solaris deriv called "Tribblix"
   right now. Makes the MX mirrors look super speedy  :-)

   Anyway, MX, try it out. I can't see how you would be
   disappointed - they really did polish-up a jewel.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#87981

FromAndy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk>
Date2026-06-15 07:21 +0100
Message-ID<n99jumFr2lhU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#87969
c186282 wrote:

>    Anyway, MX, try it out. I can't see how you would be

I'm just about to try a move from fedora with gnome, to the kde plasma 
spin, so far only looked at the live DVD but basically every thing works 
and I like the look ... rbowman mentioned xfce which I used to use on a 
less powerful media PC ...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#87983

Fromc186282 <c186282@nnada.net>
Date2026-06-15 02:50 -0400
Message-ID<xFSdnap6L8pePbL3nZ2dnZfqnPidnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#87981
On 6/15/26 02:21, Andy Burns wrote:
> c186282 wrote:
> 
>>    Anyway, MX, try it out. I can't see how you would be
> 
> I'm just about to try a move from fedora with gnome, to the kde plasma 

   Uuuugh ! TRIED it. NOT all that happy. Ultimately
   DUMPED it.

   Others love it more fanatically, so I'm not gonna
   pretend to be the True Prophet. Still, now, you're
   better off with Deb spins and a more simple desktop.
   Just MY experiences.

   I test MANY distros - some in VMs, some bare metal
   Just Too See. Had horrible issues with the latest
   Fedora and UPDATES. GUI or CLI ... they'd all HANG
   about a third of the way through. Some - indeed
   online bug reports - say the same. Some say they
   have few/no probs. Puzzling. Can usually update ONCE,
   then the issues kick in. Fedora USED to be one of those
   "Just Works" distros.

   Deb derivs USUALLY "Just Work".

> spin, so far only looked at the live DVD but basically every thing works 
> and I like the look ... rbowman mentioned xfce which I used to use on a 
> less powerful media PC ...

   "MX" ... it's a gem of a "middle distro" with some
   extra perks thrown in. It's now my go-to for any box.
   Add to it, subtract from it - you can get What You Need
   with minimal trouble. Even more all-compatible than Mint.

   Have several of those "mini-boxes" - BeeLink/BMax - more
   than fast enough for Linux. Always have at least one
   dedicated to nothing - meaning I can test various
   distros bare-metal if they seem worth it.

   Hmm, found a SPARE mini-box in a cardboard box the
   other day. NOT sure why it's there. Yet another one
   I can use for bare-metal testing if I want. "N-90" ?
   Not "speedy", but again Fast Enough for Linux. Even
   Pi-4/5s are often "Fast Enough" depending.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


Page 3 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc


csiph-web