MN Broadband Task Force Debates 1 Gbps Speeds - Providers say that's too fast to demand that they keep up
Links: home · search · speed test · login · more ·
Links: New Topic
Forums »
sousademiami @ 6th Aug 04:55PM:
How about...
100Mbps by 2015?
That seems reasonable, no?
EDIT: 100Mbps Up and Down, available at a reasonable price, to everyone in the state.
--
OASAASLLS
reply
ninjatutle @ 6th Aug 05:04PM:
umm
Will my 5400RPM laptop drive be able to handle this?
reply
qazwsx2 @ 6th Aug 05:24PM:
Re: How about...
said by sousademiami :
100Mbps by 2015?
That seems reasonable, no?
EDIT: 100Mbps Up and Down, available at a reasonable price, to everyone in the state.
1 Gbps speeds to be available throughout the state by 2015
reply
tiger72 @ 6th Aug 05:30PM:
Comcast and Qwest?
... over 10 years? HAHA how about 50 years for those two providers...
reply
BIGMIKE @ 6th Aug 05:31PM:
Re: How about...
It's just a pipe dream.
reply
sousademiami @ 6th Aug 05:41PM:
Re: How about...
said by qazwsx2 :said by sousademiami :
100Mbps by 2015?
That seems reasonable, no?
EDIT: 100Mbps Up and Down, available at a reasonable price, to everyone in the state.
1 Gbps speeds to be available throughout the state by 2015
Maybe you missed the "How about..." I was not trying to reiterate the 1Gbps, I was suggesting that 100Mbps is more realistic.
--
OASAASLLS
reply
swhitney2003 @ 6th Aug 05:52PM:
Re: How about...
100mbps seems much more likely than 1gbps, at the rate isp's are upgrading infrastructure to support higher speeds. Props to Minnesota though for actually attempting to get something going.
reply
dynodb @ 6th Aug 05:56PM:
And where's my flying car?
While they're at it, can they form a task force to create a strategy to deliver flying cars that get 100 mpg? If it weren't for the greedy auto manufacturers and oil companies we'd have them in 8 years :uhh:
This quote is telling:
“The providers and some other folks say, ‘let’s make sure that the capacity follows the demand, rather than the other way around,’” said Kelley.
Umm... yeah? Providing capacity for which there isn't a demand isn't a terribly profitable model. It doesn't take a whole lot of moral courage to make demands when someone else would actually have to spend the money to meet them.
As with cars, so goes broadband: Speed costs money- how fast do you want to go? Fast, cheap, reliable- pick two.
reply
willyjack @ 6th Aug 05:57PM:
Re: How about...
said by qazwsx2 :said by sousademiami :
100Mbps by 2015?
That seems reasonable, no?
EDIT: 100Mbps Up and Down, available at a reasonable price, to everyone in the state.
1 Gbps speeds to be available throughout the state by 2015
Don't stop there! I say 10 Gbps if they want to be REALLY competetive. ;)
reply
Lazlow @ 6th Aug 06:00PM:
MN is correct.
I hope they stick to their guns on 1 Gbps. Investing in 100 is just short sighted. A lot of countries already have symmetrical 100 widely available. Most of the data centers I work with do not even bother putting in 1 Gbps systems but jump directly to 10 Gbps systems, they understand that they could get by with 1 today but in a relatively short period of time they will be hitting their heads again. 1 Gbps systems have been around long enough now that they are not at the high premium that the 10 Gbps systems are still at.
reply
sapo @ 6th Aug 06:01PM:
Re: umm
Maybe not your current one but your 2015 drive maybe.
reply
patcat88 @ 6th Aug 06:11PM:
Re: How about...
Having a 1 gbps connection obviously means oversubscription, and you'll rarely be able to get that speed.
The internet is made of 10gigabit and 40 gigabit links. 10 users will kill a city. I guess speeds would hover around 60-300 mbit/s real life, and upto 700 mbit/s at night/off peak.
reply
ninjatutle @ 6th Aug 06:32PM:
Re: umm
Lets see, for the past 8 years, 7200rpm has still been the norm on desktop. 7200 for the mobile market has just started to take shape.
reply
sapo @ 6th Aug 06:39PM:
Re: umm
Your point? With necessity comes innovation.
reply
jester121 @ 6th Aug 06:46PM:
Re: MN is correct.
From one side of a building to the other side is one thing; a statewide infrastructure is another entirely.
reply
nasadude @ 6th Aug 06:49PM:
Re: How about...
said by qazwsx2 :
1 Gbps speeds to be available throughout the state by 2015
However, this goal relies on the participation of major service providers.
hahahahahahahahahahaha
funniest thing I've seen all day. I can see the major ISPs hitting 100Mbps (at a reasonable price) in a couple of years, then just staying there for the next several.
if the U.S. broadband market doesn't become competitive within 4 or 5 years, I don't see 1Gbps being widely available, at a reasonable price, until 2020 or later.
reply
ninjatutle @ 6th Aug 06:51PM:
Re: umm
There aint going to be a huge leap in speed.
reply
sapo @ 6th Aug 06:54PM:
Re: umm
said by ninjatutle :
There aint going to be a huge leap in speed.
I'm sorry, I forgot your an expert in everything.
reply
fiberguy @ 6th Aug 07:07PM:
Re: How about...
I disagree. Comcast Twin Cities already offers a 50mb connection to the net. They should be able to offer more than double speeds in 7 years. The internet already has gone from 384kbps on average to about 8mb on average for download speeds. 1GB in 7 years MAY be a little tough for various reasons, the economic outlook being a big part of it.. but 500 meg? I think that's perfectly reasonable... and they can do it. They need to get off their collective butts and get a little more fiber in their diet or better use the resources they have. Cable could theoretically dramatically increase their speeds in 7 years with the lines they have... Qwest will have to do some massive upgrades as twisted copper isn't going to do it.
reply
fiberguy @ 6th Aug 07:09PM:
Re: How about...
I think you are not thinking correctly there. 1gb connections wouldn't necessarily kill a city.. rather, people would be able to get on and off the internet MUCH quicker so the time one spends living on the line for their request to complete would be VERY short lived.
reply
fiberguy @ 6th Aug 07:10PM:
Re: Comcast and Qwest?
Well, being that Comcast has increased speeds from 384 to 50mb in 10 years, I'd say a 130X increase wasn't too bad..
reply
plat2on1 @ 6th Aug 07:14PM:
Re: How about...
said by fiberguy :
I think you are not thinking correctly there. 1gb connections wouldn't necessarily kill a city.. rather, people would be able to get on and off the internet MUCH quicker so the time one spends living on the line for their request to complete would be VERY short lived.
and when joe sixpack leaves his peer to peer app open?
reply
fiberguy @ 6th Aug 07:16PM:
Re: And where's my flying car?
Well, Comcast, Verizon, and Cox? Sure.. Qwest? HELL NO! They can't even send techs out to fix cut lines, or bury cables they leave for 1 year on the ground.. Qwest is doing everything it can NOT to send techs out to fix their service and when you DO get a tech to show up, after calling the Corp Office, the techs show up with such attitudes about how Qwest is cutting corners at every turn and tying their hands, etc.
Qwest, sorry to say, won't see anything major as it's not going to be in business much longer. It's a company with no vision or plan for the future except marketing spin unlike never before... How's that "fiber internet" working for Qwest? ... about as popular as "Digital Phone" that transports over the same analog lines for a mile or two?
I will give you that the market has to be able to support the costs, but at the same time, 7 years should still be able to reach at least 500mb. Again, Qwest never will.
Oh, and right now, the capacity is NOT following the demand. This is where I WILL get into the capping debate.. there clearly is a demand while the providers are talking caps.
Sorry to say, but your post doesn't hold water.. it does point fingers in other areas to defer the problem from your own employer. Qwest will never be a big player in anything.
reply
dvd536 @ 6th Aug 07:31PM:
Re: Comcast and Qwest?
said by tiger72 :
... over 10 years? HAHA how about 50 years for those two providers...
Qwest is a joke. somehow i doubt this will *ever* be available in any of their areas
--
When I gez aju zavateh na nalechoo more new yonooz tonigh molinigh - Ken Lee
reply
dvd536 @ 6th Aug 07:33PM:
I can see it now
1gbps with a 40gb traffic cap. meh
reply
karlmarx @ 6th Aug 08:07PM:
Re: MN is correct.
How is it any different, then say, the railroads? You do know the rail system in the US would never have been built without massive subsidies. Just tell them DO IT, offer them tax break if you have to, but FORCE THEM to comply.
It's the governments job to build the national infrastructure (see : highway system, railroads, electricity, phone). I fail to see how in the 21st century, the need for high speed internet for ALL doesn't qualify for the same breaks all those other 'technologies' got when they were first starting out. If comcast and quest DON'T want to do it, well then, just let a new company provide service for the entire state, and kick comcrap and qworst out. The states CAN do that you know.
--
The happiest countries are the most secular. The struggle AGAINST corporations is the struggle FOR humanity!
reply
tubbynet @ 6th Aug 07:56PM:
symbiotic action/response will be necessary for ANYthing...
just because a task force is established doesn't mean anything will get done. gig links would be great, but given the heavy handed influence that corporations have over government, is a total pipe dream. 2015 is only seven years or time to lay infrastructure to a state that freezes over for at least a quarter of the year. given that DOCSIS 3.0 spec has just recently been talked about (and gear has only been approved in the past few months), who knows what specs/speeds will be standardized seven years in the future. currently, this is speed is only feasible through fiber offerings, and while it may seem simple for FTTN carriers to roll out "last mile" fiber, i just can't see the justification for gig speeds when not everyone wants (or can fully utilize) such speeds. everyone is asking for high-speed connections, but can you utilize that pipe to even 1/10th of the rated link speed? i have observed a general consensus that most people wanting slightly more symmetric line (10/5, 10/10, 20/20), why not lobby for something a little more attainable, especially when dealing with huge ILECs or MSOs that are unwilling to change (read: give up profit margin)?
--
"Don't hate the media, BECOME the media..." ~Jello Biafra
reply
anon @ 6th Aug 08:02PM:
Re: How about...
said by fiberguy :
I think you are not thinking correctly there. 1gb connections wouldn't necessarily kill a city.. rather, people would be able to get on and off the internet MUCH quicker so the time one spends living on the line for their request to complete would be VERY short lived.
No! The more speed you have, the more stuff you will get.
reply
dynodb @ 6th Aug 08:24PM:
Re: And where's my flying car?
said by fiberguy :
Well, Comcast, Verizon, and Cox? Sure.. Qwest? HELL NO!
Because Comcast, Verizon and Cox all have plans to deliver 1Gbps by 2015, right? And none of their customers has ever had a bad experience, have they?
reply
tshirt @ 6th Aug 08:32PM:
Re: umm
said by sapo :said by ninjatutle :
There aint going to be a huge leap in speed.
I'm sorry, I forgot your an expert in everything.
Actually he is right here, except for EXPENSIVE server drives, going above 7200 is cost prohibitive, expect density (bit per platter inch) to improve, but in the long run, fast mobile solutions will be SSD based.(flash or other)
reply
fiberguy @ 6th Aug 08:39PM:
Re: And where's my flying car?
Again, you direct everything to someone else.. we're talking about the Twin Cities.. Comcast, so you know, is providing 50/5 meg internet.. I'm sure you know since you're in the cities... and Qwest? I JUST saw 1.5/896 as of 2005; cutting edge! I'm STUCK at that speed..
.. further, yes, providers have bad service, but US West/Qwest are experts at it.
I never said that Comcast (which is the only one I will speak of since of the three mentioned, Comcast is the only one that exists) had plans for 1gb service.. but it FAR superior to that of what Qwest offers.. and I think its worth repeating, Qwest is a god awful horrible miserable mistake or a phone provider in the Twin Cities and should be ashamed. Even US Worst was 100 times better compared.
I'd be happy to share my PUC history file with you if you want to see abuse at it's best. After 5 years of never knowing if my service would work today, or if I'd even have my phone number or if someone down the street would have it. I got tired or billing errors every month, for 5 years (ever know any company that says you can only have one set of 8 static blocks but get charged for 2 and get told to "just call in and we'll take it off" that is after an argument)
Seriously.. do NOT get me started about Qwest.. especially because at least the DSL is solid.. and I like the hands off (so far) handling of it.. but EVERY-TIME I pick up the telephone, at LEAST 4 hours of my life is gone! The other providers are nothing to smile at either, but Qwest excels at their ability to drive people insane.
reply
tshirt @ 6th Aug 08:42PM:
Re: How about...
said by sousademiami :
100Mbps by 2015?
That seems reasonable, no?
EDIT: 100Mbps Up and Down, available at a reasonable price, to everyone in the state.
Sounds more reasonable, depending on the definition of "everyone".
every cardboard box vs every residence, business, etc?
and who determines "reasonable price"? (is it a viable return for private business or only subsidized, approved concerns?
reply
sapo @ 6th Aug 08:45PM:
Re: umm
All I can say is, if there is a need, there will be someone supplying it. The actual technology powering it is irrelevant. If for some reason people needed to process 1 gbps to their laptops a solution would be made to accommodate that, 2015 is not tomorrow and it definitely isn't impossible. If there is no demand in the market for it then it won't happen, oh well, doesn't matter.
reply
dynodb @ 6th Aug 09:23PM:
Re: And where's my flying car?
said by fiberguy :
Again, you direct everything to someone else.. we're talking about the Twin Cities..
You're the one that brought up Cox, Verizon, etc- not me.
If you're so dissatisfied with Qwest, choose another provider. Problem solved. But before you do, I suggest you check out the forum of that provider, where you will no doubt find people who've had much the same experiences as you.
reply
kherr @ 6th Aug 09:33PM:
And ATT .....
... will be stuck at 6Mb. Where's the fiber ....
reply
anon @ 7th Aug 12:05AM:
Re: And where's my flying car?
Qwest has 20Mb fiber now in select areas of the cities. I'm not sure of the details(FTTH?/FTTN?) I just saw the pamphlet at cub foods the other day. Qwest is at least starting to realize that fiber is going to be necessary. I refuse to lease their copper however.
reply
pspcrazy @ 6th Aug 10:07PM:
Re: How about...
While that is somewhat true IMO there is a limit to how much stuff people could collect on their hard drives lol. I'd pay 240 a month easy for a gigabit connection. 350 mabye lol. Paxio currently offers cap free gigabit connections for 200 a month atm I believe, may be a bit higher need to check again. If they have it why shouldn't the rest of the U.S also have it?
reply
jaa @ 6th Aug 10:34PM:
Re: How about...
100mbps seems like a good goal for 2010. 1gps for 2015 is reasonable.
reply
fiberguy @ 6th Aug 11:40PM:
Re: And where's my flying car?
I have services in Verizon, AT&T, Comcast, TimeWarner, Charter, MediaCom, and Cox in addition to Qwest, and quest ranks on THE top for HORRIBLE service from the lines on the poles to the people on the phone.
So listen, company man, I just told you that the DSL is rock solid, so get off your high horse. The people and their attitudes suck. I did leave Qwest except for the DSL, thank you, and my service improved.
In the cities, I've lived in three areas and all had the same issues - all boils down to poor service.
I can tell you this.. when a cable sits on the ground and I call up Comcast, they bury it. When I called Qwest - over the last 4 years, their cable still remains laying on the ground in my back yard - where I didn't bury it myself - and they refuse to do anything about it.
No, I tell you, if this was a single situation over one of two attempts, that's what I call expected.. your luck is going to pull some bad people. BUT, when I get transferred to several departments, supervisors, and maintenance departments, only to get not one, by 7 techs come out and say "we're not going to do anything about that" I call it a company wide problem.
Instead of depending, or ATTEMPTING to defend Qwest, maybe you should spend a little time sending someone my way to get it resolved. But, I'd rather think that I've said enough, even here at BBR, that goes further to know that Qwest reps/people just don't care about their job and it starts from the top down.
Since you're here representing Qwest, I have to say your post that says "yea, we're bad, but so are others too, so we must be good" attitude sux. You and your company should be ashamed.
reply
fiberguy @ 6th Aug 11:45PM:
Re: How about...
said by plat2on1 :said by fiberguy :
I think you are not thinking correctly there. 1gb connections wouldn't necessarily kill a city.. rather, people would be able to get on and off the internet MUCH quicker so the time one spends living on the line for their request to complete would be VERY short lived.
and when joe sixpack leaves his peer to peer app open?
Maybe that will tell you why I am against residential people using last mile connections for servers.. they need to be in data centers where they belong.
reply
fiberguy @ 6th Aug 11:46PM:
Re: How about...
said by SillyRabbit :said by fiberguy :
I think you are not thinking correctly there. 1gb connections wouldn't necessarily kill a city.. rather, people would be able to get on and off the internet MUCH quicker so the time one spends living on the line for their request to complete would be VERY short lived.
No! The more speed you have, the more stuff you will get.
No.. not necessarily.. I've got 50 meg internet speeds and I still use the internet the same way. Not everyone on the internet will use more.. they will just get done faster. SOME will use more... to which, maybe the should google "obsession" and correct their problem.
reply
iansltx @ 7th Aug 02:34AM:
Re: And where's my flying car?
*pukes*
Qwest is FTTN crap. Crap, I tell you. Their backbone network isn't even that great, at least that's what it seems like.
Anyway, their "fiber" stops at the CO\RT. If there. I'm almost within WiFi distance of my OC-3 powered college campus as I speak, and guess what Qwest's speeds are here? That's right, 5 mbps, available for the freakishly high rate of $46.99 per month since I don't need a landline.
Oh, and $46.99 doesn't include taxes and fees. Let's see how much the bill is with those little goobers.
Anyhow, guess what the upload is for ALL of their pacages, except for their patheric 256/128 joke that they call broadband? 896k. 3/5/7 Mbit (depending on location...here I get 5)? 896k. 12 Mbit? 896k. That's a $57/month connection *if* you can get it and *if* you don't count taxes and fees (no landline of course). 20 Mbit? Say it with me...896k. This is a $110 + tax connection if you don't want a landline. Puh-the-tic. Keep in mind that in the location in question they have a HUGE building where folks work and the CO is etc. They provide internet to the city and to my school (2 Gbit runs into a POP, along with 10 Gbit from other sources, then goes into my school's OC3).
And they leave everyone with freakin' interleaved (75ms if you're VERY lucky, otherwise 90-100ms), 5 Mbit DSL.
I'm gonna test their service for a bit, but I don't think I'll be able to stand it. Seems like uploads don't get over about 700 kbps nor downloads above 3.5 Mbps. Of course Qwest wouldn't overprovision the line so that real-world speeds of 5 Mbps would be possible, no waaaay. Geesh.
I'm not in the Twin Cities but Qwest is still awful. Oh, and the other option here? Comcrap. The apartment I'm in has had Comcst internet before, but they seem to want a $50 pro installation fee...for what? Gonna try to get them to stop that foolishness tomorrow...o and they're expensive as all get out, $55 a month for 6/1, $63 for 8/2. RR back home? $45 for 7/512, $60 for 15/2.
Diss-gusting.
God help MN, help them to find a HSI provider that's willing to invest in the network enough that even a 100 Mbit down, 10 up connection would be available for $100 per month or less in a year or two. At that point there's progress toward a gigabit connection to all, but that's gonna be a bit of a harder task...
reply
iansltx @ 7th Aug 02:36AM:
Re: And ATT .....
At 10 Mb of course, in the interest of uniformity across product lines.
reply
MrMoody @ 7th Aug 08:23AM:
Re: symbiotic action/response will be necessary for ANYthing...
said by tubbynet :
just because a task force is established doesn't mean anything will get done.
Correct. The "task force" is a boondoggle, from one of the top boondoggling states.
--
Electile Dysfunction: the inability to become aroused over the choice for President put forth by either party.
reply
sousademiami @ 7th Aug 08:23AM:
Re: Comcast and Qwest?
They haven't made it anywhere near 50Mbps here.
--
OASAASLLS
reply
fiberguy @ 7th Aug 01:07PM:
Re: Comcast and Qwest?
said by sousademiami :
They haven't made it anywhere near 50Mbps here.
Yea, thanks for that update. Being that 50meg services are just starting to see the market, you're telling me the obvious why? The fact remains that 50mb has been hit which demonstrates where they came from and where they are at now.
reply
sousademiami @ 7th Aug 01:12PM:
Re: Comcast and Qwest?
Well since we're talking here about getting everyone in a state to a speed of 1Gbps, I'd say that isolated speeds of 50Mbps in certain areas really don't matter one G-- Damn bit.
--
OASAASLLS
reply
dynodb @ 7th Aug 03:15PM:
Re: And where's my flying car?
said by fiberguy :
Since you're here representing Qwest, I have to say your post that says "yea, we're bad, but so are others too, so we must be good" attitude sux. You and your company should be ashamed.
I don't "represent" Qwest in any way, shape or form.
Go back and read your barely coherent rant above (and yes, it was a rant). Then go consider the topic of this thread, which has nothing to do with whatever individual cable issue you might be having.
Perhaps then you'll realize that I am not the one out of line here.
reply
dynodb @ 7th Aug 03:21PM:
Re: And where's my flying car?
said by iansltx :
*pukes*
Qwest is FTTN crap. Crap, I tell you. Their backbone network isn't even that great, at least that's what it seems like.
And you know this despite not actually, you know, using it?
Also, FTTN connections ride a different backbone network than the non-FTTN connections, despite what you think it "seems like".
reply
iansltx @ 7th Aug 05:31PM:
Re: And where's my flying car?
Are the connections FastPath? No, so latency will be the same abysmal amount.
Their "fiber" stuff is DEFINITELY FTTN, whether it's ADSL2+ (their "fiber fed" advertising) or VDSL (Qwest Choice, not aailable in most areas). Qwest has no FTTP presence like VZ\ATT do.
As such, upstream speed is limited to less than a megabit. Patheric.
Also, what backbone, pray tell, do Qwest FTTN connections use that copper-fed DSLAMs don't? Last I checked both services are interleaved, both use ADSL/2+, and both use Qwest's internet backbone. The only difference is that instead of...I guess...a DS3, fiber-fed DSLAMs have 100+ Mbit of bandwidth coming to them. A pity how the only manifestation of this fiber is increased download speeds; no latency decreases, no upload increases. It's just the difference between a 7 Mbit connection and a more expensive 12 Mbit connection...and a ridiculously expensive 20 Mbit connection.
Heck, they could fiber-feed their DSLAMs with a 10 Mbit circuit and not be able to provide as much bandwidth as they do now...*shakes head*
I'm typing this from a shared 5/896 Qwest connection, and I'll be testing out another 5/896 connection (unshared), so I at least halfway know what I'm talking about. And I think others here will agree that, aside from a somewhat expensive 12 Mbit tier (finally) and a disgustingly outrageously overpriced 20 Mbit tier, Qwest's fiber is mostly FTTPR: Fiber To The Press Release.
Gimme even U-Verse speeds at decent prices and I'll stop moaning as loudly (UVerse is 1 Mbit up, remember), but the point is that Qwest is relying on ADSL2+ to propel them into the future, when the tech ain't gonna get past 24 Mbit down, 1 up. As opposed to the goal of a gigabit each way.
By the way, do YOU have FTTN Qwest?
reply
dynodb @ 7th Aug 10:06PM:
Re: And where's my flying car?
said by iansltx :
Gimme even U-Verse speeds at decent prices and I'll stop moaning as loudly (UVerse is 1 Mbit up, remember), but the point is that Qwest is relying on ADSL2+ to propel them into the future, when the tech ain't gonna get past 24 Mbit down, 1 up. As opposed to the goal of a gigabit each way.
By the way, do YOU have FTTN Qwest?
I don't have FTTN, but am very familiar with it, including the backbone they use (it's a lot more than 100Mbps).
And you'd be OK with AT&T and their 6M/1M up, but not with something like 7M/896k? It's only a 104k difference on upstream. I don't see much of an advantage in either speed or price with AT&T.
Yes, ADSL2+ is limited to 24M down. However the 1Gbps in a 7 year timeframe alluded to in this article is a pipe dream, especially if they're talking statewide- MN is a pretty big state, most of it rural.
Cable broadband has traditionally offered higher speeds than DSL, usually at a higher price. Yet DSL still remains competitive with cable in terms of subscribers- there are and will continue to be enough people more concerned about price than 50M speed to keep DSL around for quite a while.
reply
fiberguy @ 7th Aug 11:33PM:
Re: Comcast and Qwest?
Since Comcast has THE largest foot print in the state with homes passed of about 1.5 million and a customer base of about more than half of that, I'd say it DOES matter one G-- damn bit.
You don't know of what you speak when it comes to the Minnesota market. Comcast covers the majority of the state's population.
reply
fiberguy @ 7th Aug 11:35PM:
Re: And where's my flying car?
Sorry, but you, unlike others, actually do speak and give information out regarding Qwest,.. you actually work for them and obvious have a pretty good position with them.
Again, I remain, your attitude here commonly reflects that of the real world of Qwest.. I pay part of your salary.. remember that.
reply
iansltx @ 8th Aug 01:46AM:
Re: And where's my flying car?
AT&T's highest UVerse tier is 1.5 Mbit, not 1 Mbit. I could care less about 104 kbps difference, however if it's the difference between getting 1.5 Mbit up and NOT getting 896k up...well, yeah.
As far as the backbone, how much b\w are they pmping into fiber-fed DSLAMs? Inquiring minds wanna know. Sounds like UVerse is pushing in GigE to the VRAD for their services...
Again, I'd rather have a solid connection with a good amount of upload (megabit-plus real world) than some crazy-fast download speed but with 40ms of latency tacked onto every transaction.
Also, Qwest seems to be quite uncompetitive about pricing from what I've seen. I don't need phone service so it's $40 for 1500/896 or $47 for 5000/896 with real-word speeds of much less than that. Cable is $10 more for 6/1 where there's overprovisioning to make sure you get those speeds and $8 more than that for 8/2. This is in an essentially uncompetitive market, ehere Qwest is the only other residential option, and a bad one at that.
Sure, DSL at $20-$35 a month can get away with 768-3000k down and 128-384k up, but we're talking about around a dollar a day for broadband. Qwest? Notsomuch. Heck, in some areas cable providers have a $40 "dry" package that pushes 10 Mbit down and 1.5 up (Insight). For $50 (less, mind you, than the 12/896 fiber-fed Qwest connection where that's available) you can get 20 Mbit internet. That's half the price of Qwest's FTTN ADSL2+ service, and with Qwest you gotta tack on an extra ten bucks for not adding phone service to the mix!
So if Insight customers in KY are getting 20 Mbit/s for $50 now, and DOCSIS 3 allows for 100 Mbps in less than 12 months, and GPON allows the same right now, why can't there be a speed increase up to 1 Gbps over the next 7 years? Following Moore's law and starting off with 50 mbit service, you end up with well over that...
reply
sousademiami @ 8th Aug 08:02AM:
Re: Comcast and Qwest?
I'm with Comcast too, do I have those speeds? No. So it appears you are the one missing something.
--
OASAASLLS
reply
tiger72 @ 8th Aug 09:51AM:
Re: Comcast and Qwest?
When was 384kbps the fastest you could get with Comcast?
reply
jp10558 @ 8th Aug 03:01PM:
Re: How about...
Sure, if you use the internet the same way, then you will not use more. That's quite the truism. But I'm sure we see places for where the internet can be used differently, from serving content from home (pics for family and friends), videoconferencing, SAAS (maybe even via ssh + X Forwarding at those speeds), real software rental via SoftGrid, video delivery a la iTunes, Joost, etc.
Your ISP will be able to bundle IPTV, and you'll be able to have realistic network HDs via CIFS, NFS, various propriatery stuff etc. Much bigger possibilities for Amazon S3 etc.
You could, of course, keep doing text e-mail, DSLR and a few other websites, but then, is it really *faster* over 50Mbit? At a certain point, all speed increases become "instant" for text transfer. That's speed is somewhere around 512Kbit for anything but books IMO.
--
Opera 9.51(Build 10081); Windows XP Pro SP3;Intel C2Q6600; 3GB DDR2 1066; 1M/128k DSL; Antivir Personal; Comodo Firewall Pro 3;Proxomitron 4.5j Sidki 2008beta,GPG ID:0x0A1C6EE3
reply
Thank you for using lo-fi dslreports.com - report bugs
© 99-2008 silver matrix LLC