| Capt Obvious... So this ranking, won't it stir the pot of "using our tubes"?
--
Splat |
|
|
|
| No benefit So the super duper speeds of FTTH have...no practical benefit. Comcast with the HFC plant outranks FIOS. Yet geeks complain about "slow Internet."
We've seen what happens when there is massive capital investment where it had no practical benefit: dotcom bubble and housing bubble. Now people say we should have fiber everywhere so that we can get...speeds slower than Comcast.
Let Google have at burying fiber everywhere but keep government out of this. |
|
 RWSI
join:2012-11-27
Albuquerque, NM
 ·Roadrunner Wirel..
| Bandwidth You can only still download as fast as the sender has available bandwidth. Google may have the fastest to whatever but there is port blocking and traffic shaping going on behind the scene. Do any of these providers protect you the consumer from now easier then ever attacks against the user?
The real fact is bandwidth costs money and you the consumer will eventually pay! |
|
| Save it How about they take the money they spend on worthless rankings and spend it on more streaming CONTENT!! |
|
Reviews:
 ·ProLog
 ·Verizon Online DSL
 ·voip.ms
| Nice data, no value however So, if my ISP is low on the list and I want to change, what number do I call to have google fiber installed in my house in Andover, Nj?
I also doubt this will make any ISP spend a bundle upgrading their plant to be better than anyone else. If there were true competition that would happen however in most areas one cable co and one telco usually has the franchise for the town.
--
The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits. |
|
| reply to cableties
Re: Capt Obvious... No news here. The only thing is Netflix but everything is else hasn't changed much  in those rankings.
--
Illegal aliens have always been a problem in the United States. Ask any Indian. Robert Orben
|
|
 TSWYOPremium
join:2003-05-03
Cheyenne, WY
·Optimum Online
| reply to RWSI
Re: Bandwidth Bandwidth costs virtually nothing. I have leased space in colo and pay $3.60 per Mbps (using quality providers) on a larger commit that would be a lot cheaper. I push TB's worth of data a day. The ISPs complaining is just a money ploy for themselves. |
|
 BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | reply to FastLearner
Re: Save it said by FastLearner:How about they take the money they spend on worthless rankings and spend it on more streaming CONTENT!!
Um...they are. |
|
BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | reply to pende_tim
Re: Nice data, no value however Well I have Charter and at&t in my area so yeah these ranking might matter to both of them since one is clearly better than the other. |
|
 RobIn Deo speramus.Premium
join:2001-08-25
Kendall, FL
kudos:3 | reply to massysett
Re: No benefit For those of us who are pushing FTTH, we do so for the following reasons, none which are factored into Netflix's rankings:
1. FTTH provides for a more stable connection, with fewer interferences between the customer and the ISP.
2. FTTH provides more symmetrical speeds, or at least, faster upload speeds.
3. The cost to run FTTH has decreased significantly, and allows for much more expansion in the future without major infrastructure changes.
4. Our doctors tell us to eat more fiber, well, we want more fiber. 
5. If you're going to rebuild a major highway, it would make economical sense to lay fiber optics at the same time. The cost is so minimal.
--
CheckSite.us | YourIP.us | Reverseip.us |
|
rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO | Do WiFi Routers Have Impact? I'm curious if these rankings consider the quality of the link's last ~200 feet. WiFi has to be used by a majority of folks. Does that skew the results? |
|
Reviews:
·Frontier Communi..
| reply to TSWYO
Re: Bandwidth Bandwidth and data are not one and the same. Higher bit/s connections (e.g., 10mbit/s vs. 100mbit/s) require more infrastructure on the backend than lower bit/s connections. The actual bytes sent across such a connection is less important (though it matters somewhat with a shared last mile) than the promised data rate.
There's also a difference between a co-location center and residential last-mile connections. The former provides economy of scale and requires scant infrastructure investment. The latter requires infrastructure from the ISP all the way to your doorstep. |
|
rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO | Subscriber Counts What are the subscriber counts for the respective services? While Google Fiber is #1, how many customers do they serve? Will their figures change as subscriber counts rise? Granted, they have an undisputed last-mile capacity advantage but at some point, the bandwidth aggregates and if they don't manage it well, they could fall from grace. |
|
brad
join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON | reply to Rob
Re: No benefit said by Rob:For those of us who are pushing FTTH, we do so for the following reasons, none which are factored into Netflix's rankings:
1. FTTH provides for a more stable connection, with fewer interferences between the customer and the ISP.
2. FTTH provides more symmetrical speeds, or at least, faster upload speeds.
3. The cost to run FTTH has decreased significantly, and allows for much more expansion in the future without major infrastructure changes.
4. Our doctors tell us to eat more fiber, well, we want more fiber.
5. If you're going to rebuild a major highway, it would make economical sense to lay fiber optics at the same time. The cost is so minimal.
All of these things are a no brainer, especially #1 and #2. DOCSIS even with DOCSIS 3.1 still has a pretty bad achilles' heel. |
|
rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO | reply to BF69
Re: Nice data, no value however No doubt Charter wins in the ranking vs. AT&T DSL but other than buffering faster, what story does the rankings tell in terms of watching the content? Once the stream starts playing, can the sub tell the difference between 1.4Mbps provider and a 2.1Mbps provider? |
|
| reply to massysett
Re: No benefit Yet your shortsightedness does not allow you to see past your nose.
The expandability of fiber far outweighs that of cable and once it is installed can do so without major infrastructure changes. Which is why ALL cable systems use fiber in the core of their network. |
|
| reply to cableties
Re: Capt Obvious... Google Fiber , a "major ISP". Hysterical. I wonder if they even have 1000 customers yet. |
|
 fuziwuziNot born yesterdayPremium
join:2005-07-01
Atlanta, GA | mobile rankings Interesting that on the mobile front, T-Mobile ranks above AT&T and Sprint. I guess their LTE offerings don't help them much.
--
Teabaggers: Destroying America is Priority #1 |
|
| More Netflix BullSh*t.... So how can you rank Google who has almost no customers over someone like EPB who has thousands of customers with a minimum package of 50/50?
--
I do not, have not, and will not work for AT&T/Comcast/Verizon/Charter or similar sized company. |
|
| reply to rradina
Re: Nice data, no value however You would think not but I think that depends on the player as the BluRay player I have does no buffering whatsoever and it gets on my nerves. Is that a player, ISP or netflix problem?
On my uVerse account there have probably been 40+ times I have been buffered while watching and I have probably watched less than 150 hours which is a pretty poor % if you ask me.
Could be a player issue as I had to buy this player as I have a space issue with where it is going. Once I have alternatives I will be looking at that as a buying decision as it is ridiculous that once you select a movie to play it is not fully downloaded as soon as it can be for uninterrupted viewing and good FF / RR features.
Maybe with the ridiculous content licensing they can't buffer the material at all. |
|
