| reply to openbox9
Re: Deceptive advertising said by openbox9:Not really. Cable has a lot more headroom and flexibility with the ability to grow capacity when needed.
Sure. That capacity is NEEDED BEFORE you sell stuff. Do not sell stuff you cannot deliver. |
|
openbox9Premium
join:2004-01-26
japan
kudos:2 | Not it's not. If networks were built to full capacity before selling service, we wouldn't even have a nationwide POTS today. It is not feasible to build 100% capacity. |
|
 espaethDigital PlumberPremium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
kudos:2
 ·Vitelity VOIP
| reply to WernerSchutz
said by WernerSchutz:Sure. That capacity is NEEDED BEFORE you sell stuff. Do not sell stuff you cannot deliver. Or maybe people need to better understand exactly what it is they are buying.
Insurance companies, for example, can't cover 100% of policy holders filing a claim for their max limits. If that were the case then having $1 million in health insurance coverage would require $1 million from each policy holder. |
|
1 edit | . |
|
|
|
1 edit | reply to espaeth
said by espaeth:said by WernerSchutz:Sure. That capacity is NEEDED BEFORE you sell stuff. Do not sell stuff you cannot deliver. Or maybe people need to better understand exactly what it is they are buying. Insurance companies, for example, can't cover 100% of policy holders filing a claim for their max limits. If that were the case then having $1 million in health insurance coverage would require $1 million from each policy holder. You have to design your network in a reasonable manner vs. what you advertise. Expecting to deliver 13% of what you advertise is not realistic.
Comparing your expectation of services to the insurance industry plagued with rip offs and lawsuits is not what one should strive to provide their customers. |
|
espaethDigital PlumberPremium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Vitelity VOIP
| said by WernerSchutz:You have to design your network in a reasonable manner vs. what you advertise. Expecting to deliver 13% of what you advertise is not realistic. It is when you look at every publicly available traffic study, and see that they show the capacity provided vastly exceeds the average demand for broadband services. Health insurance works because most people are healthy. Unmetered high-speed burst broadband service works as long as most people don't hammer their connections.
said by WernerSchutz:Comparing your expectation of services to the insurance industry plagued with rip offs and lawsuits is not what one should strive to provide their customers. That's the nature of business in general, not just the insurance or broadband industries. It's impossible to keep 100% of people happy, in any industry. |
|
openbox9Premium
join:2004-01-26
japan
kudos:2 | said by espaeth:Unmetered high-speed burst broadband service works as long as most people don't hammer their connections. Simultaneously. Networks aren't built for 100% load because the economics prevent it. ISPs actively monitor usage patterns and loads and add capacity when necessary to handle average load. Sadly, mMany people don't understand, or like that answer. |
|
| said by openbox9:said by espaeth:Unmetered high-speed burst broadband service works as long as most people don't hammer their connections. Simultaneously. Networks aren't built for 100% load because the economics prevent it. ISPs actively monitor usage patterns and loads and add capacity when necessary to handle average load. Sadly, mMany people don't understand, or like that answer. This is a rather misleading statement. ISPs have extremely consistent usage patterns that grow annually at highly predictable rates. They plan on provisioning for a specific consistency of service. With DOCSIS 3 cable ISPs can provision for 50 mbps 95% of the time, or 100 mbps 90% of the time.
When enough people begin to use increasing amounts of bandwidth leading to congestion at a node, the ISP predictably splits that node. They have all sorts of wonderful prediction algorithms and statistics to ensure a very specific level of service.
Provisioning for lower quality costs less, and for higher quality costs more. It's not a "gamble" on their part, and the situation with Clear is not analogous. |
|
| reply to espaeth
said by espaeth:said by WernerSchutz:You have to design your network in a reasonable manner vs. what you advertise. Expecting to deliver 13% of what you advertise is not realistic. It is when you look at every publicly available traffic study, and see that they show the capacity provided vastly exceeds the average demand for broadband services. Health insurance works because most people are healthy. Unmetered high-speed burst broadband service works as long as most people don't hammer their connections. said by WernerSchutz:Comparing your expectation of services to the insurance industry plagued with rip offs and lawsuits is not what one should strive to provide their customers. That's the nature of business in general, not just the insurance or broadband industries. It's impossible to keep 100% of people happy, in any industry. It certainly is possible, however, to keep 99% of the people happy. It just costs more money. Without competition cable ISPs are satisfied with providing minimal investment into their network- just enough to prevent churn to the lower quality DSL competitor. Sometimes they don't have any competition.
Usage patterns are extremely predictable and follow a very consistent shape when graphed. With FTTH networks, speed is basically guaranteed 100% of the time. Cable can guarantee speeds a certain amount of time based on how much they're willing to monitor node congestion and invest in splits. |
|
openbox9Premium
join:2004-01-26
japan
kudos:2 | reply to sonicmerlin
What is misleading? You appear to agree with my statement. I do agree that Clearwire's situation is different, and I stated as such in a different post. |
|
| reply to espaeth
But insurance companies do the math with actuary tables and know what the normal amount of claims will be.
ISPs need to get their heads out of the same and see that streaming TV/movies isn't going to slow down, it's only going to increase.
In fact, that has been the history of the Internet: usage has always only ever increased. The more people, devices, services, etc. you put on it, the more usage will increase.
Charge a fee to cover your costs plus growth, duh. |
|
| said by jjroysdon :But insurance companies do the math with actuary tables and know what the normal amount of claims will be.
ISPs need to get their heads out of the same and see that streaming TV/movies isn't going to slow down, it's only going to increase.
In fact, that has been the history of the Internet: usage has always only ever increased. The more people, devices, services, etc. you put on it, the more usage will increase.
Charge a fee to cover your costs plus growth, duh.
As has been pointed out before, the cost of bandwidth to them has remained largely consistent for several years: $1/month/customer. Bandwidth growth year over year has remained at 30%, even trending a little lower recently. Meanwhile Moore's Law increases router and core network capacity at about the same rate. |
|
