JTR
join:2012-05-19
Carbondale, IL Reviews:
 ·Mediacom
| Interesting... I wonder what TWC and AT&T will come up with to counter Gfiber... And how many people opt to go with the 5/1 plan.
It'll be amusing to see the result of all these people having gigabit connections. Botnet operators are probably very excited right now... Of course, once consumers realize that their gigabit connection only downloads at a fraction of that speed from the majority of sites/servers out there, the result of that will be interesting to see. |
|
 tiger72SexaT duorPPremium
join:2001-03-28
Saint Louis, MO
kudos:1 | said by JTR:I wonder what TWC and AT&T will come up with to counter Gfiber... And how many people opt to go with the 5/1 plan.
It'll be amusing to see the result of all these people having gigabit connections. Botnet operators are probably very excited right now... Of course, once consumers realize that their gigabit connection only downloads at a fraction of that speed from the majority of sites/servers out there, the result of that will be interesting to see.
Most people won't care that their speeds to most websites are only a fraction of the peak. The idea is to shift away from the residence being a bottleneck.
--
"What makes us omniscient? Have we a record of omniscience? ...If we can't persuade nations with comparable values of the merit of our cause, we'd better reexamine our reasoning."
-United States Secretary of Defense (1961-1968) Robert S. McNamara |
|
|
|
JTR
join:2012-05-19
Carbondale, IL Reviews:
·Mediacom
| said by tiger72:said by JTR:I wonder what TWC and AT&T will come up with to counter Gfiber... And how many people opt to go with the 5/1 plan.
It'll be amusing to see the result of all these people having gigabit connections. Botnet operators are probably very excited right now... Of course, once consumers realize that their gigabit connection only downloads at a fraction of that speed from the majority of sites/servers out there, the result of that will be interesting to see.
Most people won't care that their speeds to most websites are only a fraction of the peak. The idea is to shift away from the residence being a bottleneck. If consumers realize that Gfiber will download no faster than 100Mbps cable, and if TWC plays their cards right... Google won't have as many customers then. |
|
| reply to JTR
said by JTR:I wonder what TWC and AT&T will come up with to counter Gfiber... And how many people opt to go with the 5/1 plan.
Superfast Vapor-wire. |
|
 LightSPremium
join:2005-12-17
Greenville, TX | reply to JTR
Uhm, and why wouldn't it download faster than 100mbps cable? |
|
| reply to JTR
Yea, because TWC will offer them 100Mbps for $70.
They don't even offer anything beyond 50/5 at the moment. It's funny to see how people have such an irrational hatred of Google. |
|
JTR
join:2012-05-19
Carbondale, IL Reviews:
·Mediacom
| reply to LightS
said by LightS:Uhm, and why wouldn't it download faster than 100mbps cable?
Most content servers are on gigabit lines, and they employ QoS/throttling to ensure everyone gets decent speeds - you won't be downloading at 1Gbps from them. Thus, the majority of servers won't even do 100Mbps. Even the servers with SSDs and 10Gbps lines throttle connections. Heck, when I last tested it, YouTube's CDN maxed out at 70Mbps - when downloading a large 4K video. You'll only see 1Gbps from a few CDNs, some speedtest.net servers, and private dedis. |
|
JTR
join:2012-05-19
Carbondale, IL Reviews:
·Mediacom
| reply to osravens
said by osravens:Yea, because TWC will offer them 100Mbps for $70.
They don't even offer anything beyond 50/5 at the moment. It's funny to see how people have such an irrational hatred of Google.
They claim they're going to compete. Only time will tell what their plans will be. |
|
| reply to JTR
It will be interesting to see what Google does beyond a dumb raw pipe. The DVR has APIs for Android so that 3rd parties can develop their own DVR functions on the Android/Nexus7 remote rather than inside the DVR. That's a mini paradigm shift.
Google has the ad ecosystem to do relevant ads/responses from the Android based remote. They'll be able to cross reference viewing habits with other Google services... like people who buy whatever product via Google wallet are watching these shows. They could have embedded links in ads that take you straight to the product (on Nexus remote) that can be instantly bought with Google wallet. This may encourage impulse buys that trad TV advertisers can only dream of. Shows and documentaries could have embedded links on Android-based remote to show more info in browser. Actually iPhone will be supported too as a TV/DVR remote.
Trad cable/sat can do this to some degree but Google could take this to levels others just don't have the ecosystem for. |
|
 aaronwtPremium
join:2004-11-07
Woodbridge, VA
 ·Verizon FiOS
| reply to JTR
said by JTR:said by tiger72:said by JTR:I wonder what TWC and AT&T will come up with to counter Gfiber... And how many people opt to go with the 5/1 plan.
It'll be amusing to see the result of all these people having gigabit connections. Botnet operators are probably very excited right now... Of course, once consumers realize that their gigabit connection only downloads at a fraction of that speed from the majority of sites/servers out there, the result of that will be interesting to see.
Most people won't care that their speeds to most websites are only a fraction of the peak. The idea is to shift away from the residence being a bottleneck. If consumers realize that Gfiber will download no faster than 100Mbps cable, and if TWC plays their cards right... Google won't have as many customers then. But why would it only download at 100Mb/s? I'm on the FiOS 150/65 tier and I've maxed my download speeds a bunch of times. |
|
| I tested at the Google showroom and was able to get up to about 300Mbps on a single speedtest.net server, which is still great. If doing 4+ parallel tests to various test sites at same time, it was able to pull about 1Gbps. Not bad for $70. |
|
JTR
join:2012-05-19
Carbondale, IL Reviews:
·Mediacom
| said by xenophon:I tested at the Google showroom and was able to get up to about 300Mbps on a single speedtest.net server, which is still great. If doing 4+ parallel tests to various test sites at same time, it was able to pull about 1Gbps. Not bad for $70.
Google must be throttling downloads then... My dedi pulls down a gigabit with a single speedtest. |
|
| reply to JTR
TWC goes against FiOS in many areas. They were very slow to D3 at all, and still aren't fully done on upstream channel bonding yet to get to 50/25.
I won't hold my breath believing they're really going to compete heavily with Google. |
|
LightSPremium
join:2005-12-17
Greenville, TX Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to JTR
That doesn't mean the connection isn't capable of it.
I figured it would be more useful for, say, 3 people doing internet-intense stuff. Three people downloading games, movies, music, all at 100mbps. That leaves you a TON of free bandwidth.
I didn't know you meant single stream only. |
|
brad
join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON | reply to MaynardKrebs
said by MaynardKrebs:said by JTR:I wonder what TWC and AT&T will come up with to counter Gfiber... And how many people opt to go with the 5/1 plan.
Superfast Vapor-wire. More like shills on forums claiming no one wants faster speeds and no one could possibly have any use what so ever for faster speeds. |
|
dra6o0n
join:2011-08-15
Mississauga, ON Reviews:
 ·ITalkBB
| reply to JTR
So long as people can download at least 1MB per second, as most files transferred are about a GB now, then we're pretty much fine with it.
To attain a 2MB per second on downloads you need about 15~20Mbps, seeing how that's my broadband internet downstream rate for my Cable Teksavvy internet.
So if you can hit 300Mbps download that's roughly 15 times faster so 30MB per second download?
At first you think of it as residential limit being removed, but that's because at the moment only Kansas has Google Fibe. If they can repeat the same process and connect EACH Google Fibe directly to each other, you jump distance while decreasing the latency even more.
If they can run a New York City installation then connect it with other major cities or state down to Kansas, you will have essentially a 100% fiber route between there? |
|
JTR
join:2012-05-19
Carbondale, IL Reviews:
·Mediacom
| reply to brad
said by brad:said by MaynardKrebs:said by JTR:I wonder what TWC and AT&T will come up with to counter Gfiber... And how many people opt to go with the 5/1 plan.
Superfast Vapor-wire. More like shills on forums claiming no one wants faster speeds and no one could possibly have any use what so ever for faster speeds. Ah man, here it is again, the shill argument! Shall I post my profiles for the other forums I'm active on, will this appease the irrationally suspicious angry shill-accusing mob? |
|
| reply to JTR
It's not at the PON or access point because we did a test to a Google server at another location in KC and it was able to to 1Gbps to one test server. So 1Gbps within the 'fiberhood' but not past Level 3. It may be the way Level 3 routing works and it's not yet fine tuned. |
|
dra6o0n
join:2011-08-15
Mississauga, ON Reviews:
·ITalkBB
| reply to JTR
Actually it's only residential people, that don't see a full use to having access to the internet, especially if its not in a populated urban area.
Small and Large Businesses would love to have affordable super high speed internet, they could be able to host high efficiency servers on their own networks for instance rather than paying a datacenter or a web host to do it for them.
If Google uses it's fiber networks to kill competition for business ISPs on the other hand, things will get really ugly for North American ISPs.
I'm sure there are a few Kansas based businesses who would love to set up business servers on their own city's network, thus residents connects to them instantly. |
|
JTR
join:2012-05-19
Carbondale, IL Reviews:
·Mediacom
| reply to xenophon
said by xenophon:It's not at the PON or access point because we did a test to a Google server at another location in KC and it was able to to 1Gbps to one test server. So 1Gbps within the 'fiberhood' but not past Level 3. It may be the way Level 3 routing works and it's not yet fine tuned.
Wow, how did they manage to screw things up that badly? It sounds like throttling, not an error, but I guess I'll need to wait until the first residential installs are active to judge them on this front. |
|
