how-to block ads
|
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
| reply to Dogfather
Re: More internet speedometer nonsense
If your going to use a highway analogy, lets look at highways. When most highways opened, there was no such thing as a traffic jam (holy shit 1.5mbit broadband was fast in 1999).
Now in alot of [urban] areas, there is 4-8 hours of stop and go traffic a day. (Youtube, flash, p2p, PDFs, anything HD, CD/DVD ISOs, miles of HTML and CSS code, usually uncompressed, video conferencing, and peak slowdowns on Cable ISPs and some DSL providers).
Most highways have not been expanded since the 1940s-1960s when they were built, if they were expanded, they were expanded with the "tragedy of commons" philosophy, usually 1 restricted lane is added (ISPs throttling or "Powerboost", implimenting GB caps after a round of speed upgrades).
People grow exponentially, so do their needs, so instead of 1 restricted lane added to the highway, you need to double the size if you want to get it back to the speed/throughput that the highway had on day 1. Most govt just sees highway widenings as reelection ideas, therefore 1 lane is always sufficient, and govt will make traffic engineers write up that more people will drive if they expand the highway, and it will be just as congested as before the widening. If you think like that about broadband, why doesn't cable and DSL go back to 64kbit or 256kbit speeds? Nobody "needs" more, right, since they will just use it up, and it will be "all for nothing"? Heck, why don't we just tear down bridges for steel, that will prevent tragedy of commons right? and stop maintaining roads?
If you don't want economic damage down the road, you will upgrade, if your idea of the future is the same as today, be the Luddite you are. Who needs more than 640K of memory? writing this on a VT100 connected via dialup to a mainframe/minicomputer/BBS?
If you don't want progress, why are you using it right now?
1 gigabit, 2-3 computers p2ping at home, or downloading legal movies can eat it up or watching HD IPTV, if only such a service existed, but until a T3 is standard fare in USA, nobody will invest in DVD quality movie online, and certainly not HD, although perhaps 100-500mbits might be appropriate for the next 2-4 years.
I've used 100mbit ethernet internet connections, 5-7Mbyte per second download. Files (Linux ISOs, OS patches, driver packs, source codes, pr0n) transfer as fast as my HD can write them (near solid green), I have a feeling the fact I use a download accelerator slows my speeds down the most (writing to 4-12 differnt locations on HD at same time), but most websites are configured to only give a couple mbps per connection, if you want to max out your line, you need multiple connections. Atleast 100mbit if not 1 gigabit should be standard. The internet should be one big LAN, let the HDs be the slowest thing in data transfer, not an internet connection. | |
bogey780
join:2004-03-19
Covington, LA
| The problem is that going back to the highway analogy, these builders are building a highway but leaving several dozen feet on each side of the highway vacant so if the need for growth is there they can lay down more asphalt and concrete with little effort.
Once the fiber is run, you've covered 90% of the work for possible upgrades.
I can Cat5e all over my house years ago and set up a 100BaseT ethernet. Around last year I bought a gigabit switch and upgraded it to 1000BaseT ethernet. It's not like I had to rip out the cable to upgrade. | |
Dogfather
Altitude is your friend
Premium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA
 ·MegaPath
 ·Cox HSI
 ·Verizon FIOS
 ·Cox VOIP
·Verizon west (ex G..
·ViaTalk
·Time Warner VOIP
·RoadRunner Cable
edit:
January 27th, @01:48PM
| reply to patcat88
To use your highway analogy, why spend hundreds of billions widening every single road in the country to 8 lanes in each direction when there aren't traffic jams on every road in every direction.
You deal with the problems AS they arise instead of spending hundreds of billions to deal with non-existant problems that you can't even as yet fathom.
Come on, you're talking 1-10Gb residential.
That is overkill by ANY measure. There is nothing now or 20 years from now that could consume that much bandwidth.
We already know what the HDTV resolution and framerate standards are and nothing is more bandwidth intensive in the home than video. And no, a few HDTV streams even at Blu-Ray bitrates don't consume more than 40-50Mb each. So even in a future of 1080P IPTV, you don't need anything close to 1Gb throughput. P2Ping? Please. Spending billions and billions to deploy infrastructure for the pirates? Yeah, that'll work. You can P2P just fine at 50Mb, you don't need 500Mb to do it. All of these projected services combined don't come remotely close to requiring a 1-10Gb dedicated residential service.
Neither you nor Internet Speedo guy even start to figure out how to pay for this technology which doesn't yet exist.
And when confronted by experts in the technology and finance field, Internet Speedo guy goes on tangents insulting them.
It's easy to claim to want a bazillion petabytes to every home and 20 chickens in every pot.
It's quite another to actually come up with WHY that should be and even harder to come up with HOW it can REALISTICALLY be done and who should do and pay for it.
Come back when you have those plans.
Remember, Internet Speedo guy is wanting depending what what work from him you read, anywhere from 50X to 500X the home connection capacity currently offered by Verizon FiOS. Yes, you read that right. He wants 50-500X the capacity of FiOS.
Tell us all:
Exactly what current technology you would use 'cause as it stands now, the technology need to do this type of RESIDENTIAL deployment doesn't yet exist.
About how much it would cost to provide this 1-10Gb universal deployment. Verizon is spending over $20B to hit only 1/2 their footprint with 1/50 to 1/500th the speed.
Who you expect to deploy it
How it would be paid for
And roughly how long before whoever pays and deploys it gets a return on what I would guess to be a multi-trillion dollar investment.
Without answers to these fundamental questions, even bringing up the topic is silly. | |
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
| Hmmm, then why did Verizon go with BPON instead of GPON? Why does there nothing faster exist? Chicken and the egg problem? No telco will want to upgrade, so why should any company R&D a faster product?
Next, 1 gig residential dedicated is not possible, I said in an earlier post that will have to be overprovision/contention. Next 10 gigabit, um, not possible. Most internet exchanges push only a couple 10G connections through them (I'm ignoring p2p, p2m, private lan/man/wan/vlan services offered by backbone providers to businesses, none of those every touch the internet). Even Amsterdam pushes only 300-400Gbps on an average day. 10G is unreasonable, you can't stream that through the internet today. 1 Gigabit is reasonable, »en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UHDTV thats the future, lets plan for it now. Or are the luddities going to say, nobody every needed HDTV, or color TV, or anything more than the radio. | |
Dogfather
Altitude is your friend
Premium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA
·MegaPath
·Cox HSI
·Verizon FIOS
·Cox VOIP
·Verizon west (ex G..
·ViaTalk
·Time Warner VOIP
·RoadRunner Cable
edit:
January 28th, @10:43AM
| It's price for what you get. BPON was affordable and permitted them to deploy. Companies upgrade all the time. See many companies still running 80286s? And it doesn't matter what YOU say in earlier posts, this article is what Internet Speedo guy wants and thats DEDICATED 1-10Gb residential service. Even 1Gb shared to the home is not fiscally possible. Residential inside equipment can't even do 1Gb. I put two Gb machines right next to each other and they won't do near 1Gb/s. The technology isn't affordable and not needed now nor for the foreseeable future.
You deploy it ONLY when there is some demand for it. As we see from cable operators who started with CDLP, then went DOCSIS 1, then 2 now 3, you deploy what you can deploy and upgrade when demand is there to upgrade. You can add to this problem of non-existent technology that there is ZERO money available for these luxuries. No one claiming demand for 1Gb residential service and proved that there is a demand for it. Nor have they even STARTED to explain what technology would be used, who would deploy it or who would pay for it. And no, you can't say because OC192's exist, that you can put an OC192 in every home, that is unless you want to tell us who is going to pay for it and where the money comes from and what the monthly service fees would be cause last time I checked, the prices for all of those were SKY high. You talk about these corporations having 10Gb connectivity...yeah, like UPS who has tens of thousands of employees or xTech who is doing credit card processing 24/7 with huge endless racks of OS X servers.
There are NO services that people would use that would even approach 1Gb throughput. Not pirate driven P2P, not multiple 1080P HD streams, not anything.
Let me ask you. Do you have a super computer in your basement? Shouldn't you be planning for the future? Certainly some day you will need that much computer horsepower. My modern Mac Pro is much faster than an older Cray and the argument you make is that I would have been better off buying the Cray back then.
It's nonsense. Technology gets faster and cheaper with time and you ALWAYS wait to buy and deploy technology until you can not wait a moment longer. And we can wait decades and decades and decades before 1Gb would even be close to in any consumer demand.
If you think 1Gb is doable, go get some investors and go to it. If Verizon can't even upsell people from 5Mb to 15Mb, you think you're going to upsell them to a $1000/mo 1Gb Cogent like connection? LOL. Yeah, right. | |
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
| said by Dogfather  : If Verizon can't even upsell people from 5Mb to 15Mb, you think you're going to upsell them to a $1000/mo 1Gb Cogent like connection? LOL. Yeah, right. If thats the case, then your right. | |
|
