Losing internet connection

polremy · Post by **polremy** » Mon 20 Sep 2010 20:06

Ours went off for no reason this afternoon.
Well, I presume it was for no reason - Mr. PR was using the computer at the time so I blame him.
It was off for four hours.
In that time I tried phoning Orange on 3900 but just couldn't get anywhere.
All sorts of messages and numbers were quoted and my mind went blank.
Just put the phone down and burst into tears.
Bit melodramatic I know and girly too but then I do have a bit of a bad throat and cold at the moment so that's my excuse.
Question here. What should I do if it happens again?
I gather there is an English helpline. Does anyone know what it is please?

Sav · Post by **Sav** » Mon 20 Sep 2010 20:34

Hi polremy

Try this

http://www.orange.com/en_EN/tools/contact/index.jsp

Cheers Sav

Allan · Post by **Allan** » Mon 20 Sep 2010 23:27

The English language helpline is very good, much quicker response than the normal numbers.

Bear in mind that the staff at help-lines generally follow a scripted process which amounts to not much more than turn the router off and back on again.

Bear in mind that ADSL (telephone broadband) is not a robust technology, I use my internet connection here constantly for my business and it fails every few days, sometimes for minutes occasionally for a few hours. So if this is the first time your's has failed then you have been incredibly lucky.

My advice if it fails is just wait a while and it will probably come back, if not call the helpline, they can test the line and report any failed equipment in the exchange and if necessary send an engineer to your premises.

I would stress however that most failures are temporary and there is nothing you or anyone else can do at your end. I normally find that drinking a bottle of wine leaves enough time for it to work again or remove any interest you had in using the internet anyway.

If however you have plugged any new phones in at home then unplug them and try again. A phone without an ADSL filter will stop an internet connection

blackduff · Post by **blackduff** » Tue 21 Sep 2010 00:12

polremy
I have had my orange running 100%, all of the time. I'm not sure what is happening chez vous but orange is okay. Maybe you can check with the travelling people in your area to see if they've carried this away. Hmmmm!

Blackduff

Serge · Post by **Serge** » Tue 21 Sep 2010 08:35

Robert Ferrieux wrote:Why don't you all get MACs? Never any problem, no viruses, no hiccups, no tantrums, no sulking.
I have a MAC OS X 10 6 4 Snow Leopard which goes like lightning…
RF.

:D:D

Allan · Post by **Allan** » Tue 21 Sep 2010 09:28

Serge wrote:
Robert Ferrieux wrote:Why don't you all get MACs? Never any problem, no viruses, no hiccups, no tantrums, no sulking.
I have a MAC OS X 10 6 4 Snow Leopard which goes like lightning…
RF.

:D:D

How would that help with an internet connection not working, that's like saying buy a Renault and all traffic jams will disappear.

There are fewer Viruses for Macs, amongst other reasons because there are a lot fewer Macs to target than Windows PCs and a lot fewer software developers with the skills to write viruses for the Mac platform.

But if the Mac is as wonderful as its proponents claim then why does it have such a small share of the market?

sue and paul · Post by **sue and paul** » Tue 21 Sep 2010 10:23

The English speaking Orange no is 09 69 363900

Our ADSL phone became disconnected, incidentally at the same time as our hard drive packed up. So we associated one with the other, and put up with no free phone line for a week or so. No long chats with my buddies back in the old country. Enough to make you weep. I feel your pain Pol. Then my bro gave us the number, which had worked for him, in the Lot, and worked for us too. Brilliant assistance

polremy · Post by **polremy** » Tue 21 Sep 2010 10:49

Thanks, everyone.
Was feeling a bit sorry for myself yesterday and was waiting for important news too.

russell · Post by **russell** » Tue 21 Sep 2010 16:10

Allan wrote: There are fewer Viruses for Macs, amongst other reasons because there are a lot fewer Macs to target than Windows PCs and a lot fewer software developers with the skills to write viruses for the Mac platform.

The reason that MACs don't get viruses is that, like Linux, the MAC OS is based on UNIX. UNIX was designed from the ground up with security in mind while Winoze was designed as a single user system and the security has been bolted on afterwords.

Agreed it doesn't help when your ADSL connection is down!

Russell

Allan · Post by **Allan** » Tue 21 Sep 2010 16:24

russell wrote:
The reason that MACs don't get viruses is that, like Linux, the MAC OS is based on UNIX. UNIX was designed from the ground up with security in mind while Winoze was designed as a single user system and the security has been bolted on afterwords.

Russell

Cobblers! first of all Linux is in the public domain and was written by a zillion people, anyone who seriously believes that at least some of them didn't program in there own back door is living in a fantasy world.

It is true that the architecture of the Mac is less vulnerable ( but not invulnerable ) to viruses but the bigger reasons are:-

1) There are many more programmers for Windows
2) Windows represents a much juicier target
3) The Mac population isn't large enough to provide the critical mass needed for a virus to spread rapidly

It is interesting how faithful to their brand Mac users are, they seem to constantly disparage Windows - it doesn't seem to be the case the other way round. I am sure there is a place for both architectures in the world but I still come back to the same question. If the Mac is so marvellous why do so few people buy them?

russell · Post by **russell** » Tue 21 Sep 2010 17:02

Allan wrote: Cobblers! first of all Linux is in the public domain and was written by a zillion people, anyone who seriously believes that at least some of them didn't program in there own back door is living in a fantasy world.

It is not cobblers and how many are zillions?

A few facts:

Yes it may be theoretically possible to write a virus for a UNIX based system that resides in memory and perhaps is a minor nuisance to a specific program. However, to write to system files on disk and do permanent damage the virus would have to have access to root privileges.

Virus scanners are available for Linux and MAC but their purpose is to ensure that infected emails you receive are not passed on to your Windows using friends.

"1) There are many more programmers for Windows"
Agreed.

"2) Windows represents a much juicier target"
While Windows has over 90% share of the desktop market, Linux has over 99% share of the internet server market, even Microsoft use it on some of their servers. Linux is also used almost exclusively for back office networks in the world's financial establishments. Writing a virus to attack these would give a virus author much greater kudos than writing yet another Windows virus.

"3) The Mac population isn't large enough to provide the critical mass needed for a virus to spread rapidly"
MAC market share is just over 5%, enough for viruses to spread effectively. Linux share of of the mail server market is almost 100%. Every email you receive will have passed through a Linux machine if these machines were infected the virus would spread very rapidly!

I repeat, Windows has security bolted on as an afterthought. UNIX based systems have been written security built in.

Allan · Post by **Allan** » Tue 21 Sep 2010 18:17

russell wrote:
Allan wrote: Cobblers! first of all Linux is in the public domain and was written by a zillion people, anyone who seriously believes that at least some of them didn't program in there own back door is living in a fantasy world.
It is not cobblers and how many are zillions?

Well the list of credits on most versions of Linus is pretty huge and the original kernel is attributed to Linus Torvalds and a loosely knit team of volunteer hackers !!!

russell wrote: A few facts:

Yes it may be theoretically possible to write a virus for a UNIX based system that resides in memory and perhaps is a minor nuisance to a specific program. However, to write to system files on disk and do permanent damage the virus would have to have access to root privileges.

Virus scanners are available for Linux and MAC but their purpose is to ensure that infected emails you receive are not passed on to your Windows using friends.

Can't agree with that, I wont disagree that the Mac operating system is extremely robust but there have been loads of virus attacks on Macs, often spread in pirated applications, the iBotnet trojan is a good example.

russell wrote:
"1) There are many more programmers for Windows"
Agreed.

"2) Windows represents a much juicier target"
While Windows has over 90% share of the desktop market, Linux has over 99% share of the internet server market, even Microsoft use it on some of their servers. Linux is also used almost exclusively for back office networks in the world's financial establishments. Writing a virus to attack these would give a virus author much greater kudos than writing yet another Windows virus.

I agree Linux based systems are widely used as servers, most of these are commercial implementations based on the Linux kernel, your percentages surprise me. Financial institutions generally are much harder targets and are generally not exposed on public networks where viruses can spread.

russell wrote: "3) The Mac population isn't large enough to provide the critical mass needed for a virus to spread rapidly"
MAC market share is just over 5%, enough for viruses to spread effectively. Linux share of of the mail server market is almost 100%. Every email you receive will have passed through a Linux machine if these machines were infected the virus would spread very rapidly!

I repeat, Windows has security bolted on as an afterthought. UNIX based systems have been written security built in.

I think we need to be careful about what we deem a virus, perhaps we should be talking more of security threats, these include viruses,trojans, phishing and all the nasty things that the malevolents of the world dream up. I stand by my original comments that firstly Mac uers are not immune but that they are less vulnerable, amongst other reasons on account of their minority status.

russell · Post by **russell** » Tue 21 Sep 2010 21:21

Allan wrote: I think we need to be careful about what we deem a virus, perhaps we should be talking more of security threats, these include viruses,trojans, phishing and all the nasty things that the malevolents of the world dream up. I stand by my original comments that firstly Mac uers are not immune but that they are less vulnerable, amongst other reasons on account of their minority status.

I agree with you there. There are no Linux viruses in the wild but there are a (very) few trojans. Re., the MAC, the iBotnet you refer to is a trojan, ie., it can not replicate itself it is usually installed when downloading illegal software.

There have been about 3700 contributors to the Linux kernel which is still controlled by Linus Torvalds. I wonder how many contributors there have been to the Windows OS.

Russell

Connect with your social network account

Losing internet connection

Losing internet connection