Frink
Professor
join:2000-07-13
Scotch Plains, NJ
3 edits | Bull
Great new speeds...BUT WAIT...actually try to put it to use, and GET CAPPED! |
|
Angrychair
join:2000-09-20
Jacksonville, FL | Indeed. I wonder how many minutes of consecutive downloading before this 20/2 turns into 1.5/0.256. |
|
Aleck79
join:2003-07-23
College Station, TX | Caps
they are going to get a lot of feedback on the caps...maybe they will see that this is what is killing their market share and losen them, at least a little bit. |
|
pipdipchip
8 Megabits A Second
Premium
join:2003-12-04
Hanover, MN | DOCSIS?
What version of DOCSIS are they using? DOCSIS doesn't.exist.yet? I highly, highly doubt anyone will be getting 20Mbps download speeds.
--
Webmaster of WRT54G.com - Official Microsoft Longhorn Beta Tester |
|
Upandown
@mindspring.com | Cap + Cap is Crap
This is Buld S+**t Just Give me good Prices... I'm ok with 5down 2up... and also here in New yOrk city mmaaaaaannn..deeemmm shi*YT. |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·Comcast
|  Only meaningful for big file transfers
All these new mega speed tiers are only meaningful for the small number of people doing huge file uploading and downloading. For the vast majority of users just browsing the internet and uploading pictures of Mary's graduation these speeds mean nothing. Some day, eventually, if people ever start downloading huge video files and the ISP's aren't capping them on some monthly multiple gigabit basis, these speeds will mean something.
--
My Web Page
Join Red Room Forum |
|
Grumpy
Premium
join:2001-07-28
99999
clubs: | Raising the bar
I'll stick with the old saying: "You can't be too rich, too thin, or have too much bandwidth."
Hats off to OOL for raising the bar a little higher, so that others may follow. |
|
Kayrac
Premium
join:2001-09-29
Rochester, NH
3 edits | comcast no cap so far
at 147gigz so far in july with comcast and no caps.....if i ever got capped i'd simply switch to verizon, i pay them the cash for this, if they don't plan on letting me use my 8megs, they shouldn't offer it
i'd also take my 100$ cable bill elsewhere, ah the loves of choices 
and probably start a smear campeigh vs them, starting here at this major forum :P |
|
jboyo
join:2004-06-10
North York, ON
1 edit | Cynics
While I can see why few people here really care about such speeds now (especially when they cost an arm and a leg) I can just imagine in the near future when full apps are developed to be used soley over a network connection (like I use with my VPN) instead of being installed locally (unless this already exists and Im behind the times)...in my case, for example, pushing huge graphics files over a paltry 3mbs line at home takes forever over the VPN- saving those files back to my work machine also takes SOOOoo long!
I think anything that speeds up the process is excellent (of course, money will be a huge deterent of course) |
|
IMHO
| reply to Angrychair
Re: Bull
The real quesion is, how many sites anyone visits are capable of providing the corrasponding level of connection?
I mean, great, I can download at 100mbs, but do you think for a minute most of the companies out there are capable of providing servers out there with that kind of return connection?
So far, in many cases, I've found servers where I've been where I want to download something (usually a fairly large file say 600Mb or a Gb of data are not quite up to the task to match what my connection is capable.
So, until these companies get thier networks / servers up to snuff, in a lot of cases having these ultra high speed connections is just fluf.
Now could it be those who are the gamers are the ones driving this? Perhaps, so we benefit from this being able to get the faster speeds, but we aren't likely to really see the benefit until the businesses with the associated file servers embrace the new technology also.
Sure, they will embrace it for thier internal systems, but for external systems I sincerly doubt we'll see much. |
|
AcidDevil
join:2002-07-02
7th Layer
| reply to Frink
said by Frink  :Great new speeds...BUT WAIT...actually try to put it to use, and GET CAPPED! Excatly.....I don't care...what marketing crap OOL pulls I still say FIOS here I come.....when they decide to come that is...:D:D
--
"I'n un vecchio palazzo qualcosa che non riusciamo a vedere si sta muovendo....." |
|
markwp2001
Spreadhead
Premium
join:2002-05-25
Long Beach, MS | reply to jboyo
Re: Cynics
Exactly - put the speed in place, the apps and the usage will follow.
--
United Church of Canada - helping Native Canadians for decades .... |
|
Tzale
Proud Libertarian Conservative
Premium
join:2004-01-06
Sweden
 ·Verizon FIOS
·Optimum Online
| More Bandwidth, Same or More Caps!
While I like and encourage OOL to upgrade its already excellent bandwidth (10mbps/1mbps) to 20mbps/2mbps for the same price, I must say that there are A LOT of people who are having bandwidth problems. There are a lot of people who can't get anywhere near 10mbps/1mbps. I still get 9.5mbps/900kbps, like I did since day one. Another thing is that they will probably continue to cap the connections when someone dare tries to use the upload bandwidth. While I have never been capped, and I have uploaded 1 GB files on multiple occasions, there are plenty of people who HAVE been capped. Also OOL throttled myself and several others a few months ago for only a few weeks. What happened was that after ten minutes or so (sometimes less or more) people downloading non stop at full speed would be capped to 3.5mbps. There was front page news here at BBR and in the OOL forum and people complained and lowered OOLs #1 or #2 rating to a very low bronze rating. A day or two after this, OOL took off the throttling. The throttling was only temporary, it would last for a few minutes after a download ended. The upload caps are what I don't like because you have to call them to get them removed and after three times they can throw you off the network. As long as they become liberal with their bandwidth again and maintain the same quality of service I have and don't make us afraid to use the service, I'll stick with it. But what I think is a problem is that OOL advertises itself as 3X faster than Verizon DSL, and this is NOT true when they cap. So therefore, I conclude that OOL doesn't include capped speeds as there "normal speeds." So if this is true, OOL will probably raise the caps but keep the same or equivalent upload caps like they have now.
I know I will be going to FIOS, but this cable connection will be nice for the time. I know I will be going to FIOS if OOL maintains it's crappy capping policies.
-Tzale |
|
Tzale
Proud Libertarian Conservative
Premium
join:2004-01-06
Sweden
·Verizon FIOS
·Optimum Online
| reply to IMHO
Re: Bull
said by IMHO:
The real quesion is, how many sites anyone visits are capable of providing the corrasponding level of connection?
I mean, great, I can download at 100mbs, but do you think for a minute most of the companies out there are capable of providing servers out there with that kind of return connection?
So far, in many cases, I've found servers where I've been where I want to download something (usually a fairly large file say 600Mb or a Gb of data are not quite up to the task to match what my connection is capable.
So, until these companies get thier networks / servers up to snuff, in a lot of cases having these ultra high speed connections is just fluf.
Now could it be those who are the gamers are the ones driving this? Perhaps, so we benefit from this being able to get the faster speeds, but we aren't likely to really see the benefit until the businesses with the associated file servers embrace the new technology also.
Sure, they will embrace it for thier internal systems, but for external systems I sincerly doubt we'll see much.
Yes, they will be able to provide it. Look at the current day situation. Several years ago most sites were designed to handle dialup only. Now that broadband is the majority here in America, hosting services are sizing up their packages to provide content to the broadband users. If 20, 50, 100mbps connections become the norm, hosting providers will have no choice but to provide that bandwidth or risk losing business. Bandwidth has NO set price. Bandwidth is not a physical thing. Bandwidth is just an amount of "virtual digital data" that has a set price based on the current day price of residential connections. If 100mbit connections are provided cheaply to residential customers, then hosting providers will have a reason to provide 100mbits to each site. It CAN be done. Slowly, it is happening.
Look at residential broadband. FIOS shook everything up with it's wide scale fiber to the premise project. Now several cable companies are upgrading to 15mbps, 16mbps, 20mbps and 8mbps... We're talking about companies who provided little more than (1.5mbps or 3mbps) just a year ago. Things are changing, this is capitalism at it's finest. You can't get the best EVEN if it is available UNLESS some company has the balls to go out on a limb and provide a magnificent service that is widespread. OOL had 10mbps/1mbps all along since day one. The reason why no one else had a need to upgrade is because OOL only services NJ,NY,CT. Also, Verizon DSL feels the heat of OOL here in the NY area because Verizon can't provide more than 1.5mbps or 768kbps to most people here. That is why in the OOL coverage area 3 out of 4 customers choose Optimum Online over any other broadband service.
-Tzale
--
Electronic Frontier Foundation - Defending Freedom in the Digital World |
|
hescominsoon
join:2003-02-18
Brunswick, MD
·Comcast
 ·Verizon Online DSL
| reply to IMHO
said by IMHO:
The real quesion is, how many sites anyone visits are capable of providing the corrasponding level of connection?
I mean, great, I can download at 100mbs, but do you think for a minute most of the companies out there are capable of providing servers out there with that kind of return connection?
So far, in many cases, I've found servers where I've been where I want to download something (usually a fairly large file say 600Mb or a Gb of data are not quite up to the task to match what my connection is capable.
So, until these companies get thier networks / servers up to snuff, in a lot of cases having these ultra high speed connections is just fluf.
Now could it be those who are the gamers are the ones driving this? Perhaps, so we benefit from this being able to get the faster speeds, but we aren't likely to really see the benefit until the businesses with the associated file servers embrace the new technology also.
Sure, they will embrace it for thier internal systems, but for external systems I sincerly doubt we'll see much.
BT will stuff it..:)
--
God Blesshttp://www.emmanuelcomputerconsulting.com-- carpe ductum -- "Grab the tape" |
|
ExecPro
Premium
join:2002-06-07
Long Beach, NY
 ·BroadVoice
| Signals...
Knowing that signals vastly affect the speeds that you can get from your OOL connection, how can they really say that they will be able to double the speed? I mean, right now they say we can get up to 10Mbps, and even at my old house the most I ever got was 9200Kbps, here at my new dwelling I only get 8000Kbps. Just doesn't seem feasible. At least we know that fiber isn't effected by distance and signals. I think I still would make the switch to FIOS. |
|
Tzale
Proud Libertarian Conservative
Premium
join:2004-01-06
Sweden
·Verizon FIOS
·Optimum Online
| said by ExecPro :Knowing that signals vastly affect the speeds that you can get from your OOL connection, how can they really say that they will be able to double the speed? I mean, right now they say we can get up to 10Mbps, and even at my old house the most I ever got was 9200Kbps, here at my new dwelling I only get 8000Kbps. Just doesn't seem feasible. At least we know that fiber isn't effected by distance and signals. I think I still would make the switch to FIOS. Signals do not affect the bandwidth you get. They do with DSL but not with cable. Cable's speeds are effected by neighbors sharing the bandwidth and / or bad bandwidth management at the CMTS. Nothing to do with signals. If you can get connected, you can get max speeds. Also, just so you know 8000kbps is FINE with OOL. NO ONE can get 10mbps. OOL is capped at 10mbps / 1mbps and due to hardware limitations (the modem) the service can only provide on average 8000-9500kbps because there is a need for overhead.
If OOL were to provide 20mbps/2mbps the max you'd probably receive would be 18-19mbps/1.5-1.8mbps.
-Tzale
--
Electronic Frontier Foundation - Defending Freedom in the Digital World |
|
Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO
| reply to Tzale
Re: Bull
I agree some what, but you overlook that if residential customers are getting 100mbps connections then the server having that same connection is not enough.
A server that gets thousands or even millions of hit an hour will need a lot more bandwidth then 100mbps especially if it is a server that is hosting downloads. In that case even a 1GB connection wont be good enough. Hosting companies would have to have multiple GB connections to host multiple servers.
Bandwidth will continue to increase and continue to get cheaper but 1GB of bandwidth is a lot and expensive right now.
Only time will tell, but for now there are very few that will provide the download/upload to utilize this. Hell, I have 3mb dsl right now and most of the downloads I get are in the 150-200k range. Every once in a while I will find a place that I can download around 300k at, but they are few and far between. |
|
Subaru
1-3-2-4
Premium
join:2001-05-31
Greenwich, CT
clubs: | reply to Tzale
Re: Signals...
Wow.. CV Caps on downloads now? |
|
jwersan
R.I.P. Mom, Brian, Ziggy, and Max.
Premium
join:2004-12-20
Port Jefferson Station, NY
clubs:
·Optimum Online
| reply to Tzale
Re: More Bandwidth, Same or More Caps!
said by Tzale : I know I will be going to FIOS, but this cable connection will be nice for the time. I know I will be going to FIOS if OOL maintains it's crappy capping policies. -Tzale This is the truth!
My take on this is that all it will mean is that OOL will have even MORE issues with node overloading and that they will be capping even more... |
|
