dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


view:
topics flat nest 
Comments on news posted 2008-11-25 13:07:47: Last week we explored how companies like AT&T use cherry picked data, think tanks and policy groups like the Internet Innovation Alliance to promote the idea that we're facing a horrible bandwidth crisis (aka the "exaflood"). ..

page: 1 · 2 · 3 · next


swhitney2003
Premium
join:2003-06-13
NH

2 recommendations

just wait

Just you wait until there isn't much more internets to go around. Eventually we will have to go out to Californie-way to get some. There will only be one computer, and we'd all have to share.


FFH5
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ
kudos:5

Past statistics don't always show future trends

compiled the latest set of data concerning the growth of Internet traffic
A lot of these predictions that the internet WON'T face much higher bandwidth demand is based on past statistics. But a paradigm break is in process. The past statistics can't recognize the tremendous growth of online high def video that is coming. Those predicting drastic growth may be more prescient than the statisticians looking backward.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page
Ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya punk?


Matt3
All noise, no signal.
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12
said by FFH5:

compiled the latest set of data concerning the growth of Internet traffic
Those predicting drastic growth may be more prescient than the statisticians looking backward.
So the answer is obviously to institute caps? I meant, if bandwidth use is growing as Comcast, Time Warner, and AT&T insist, then clearly capping monthly bandwidth and charging for people who go over that amount is the answer.

ggultra2764

join:2007-09-13
Cambridge, NY
Reviews:
·Verizon Wireless..
·Millenicom
·AT&T Wireless Br..
Yeah, but the trust of the three above is questionable with AT&T bugging the government for teleco immunity from lawsuits, Comcast butting heads with the FCC and angry consumers over P2P throttling and invisible caps, and some of Time Warner Cable's decisions regarding channel packages.


kontos
xyzzy

join:2001-10-04
West Henrietta, NY

Woo Hoo! Free capacity!

said by Karl Bode:

Again, there is absolutely no evidence that Internet growth is accelerating so quickly that carriers can't manage it with modest capacity improvements.
Ah, so as long as the capacity improvements are "modest" The carriers don't have to pay for them. Got it.


fireflier
Coffee. . .Need Coffee
Premium
join:2001-05-25
Limbo
reply to FFH5

Re: Past statistics don't always show future trends

Are you copying this stuff right off of a list of telco talking points?

»Past may not be prelude

Based on present ISP measures, the evil growth of which you speak will never take place since they'll cap the hell out of anything that's not sourced from their own servers.

Assuming tremendous growth of high def video really isn't any more accurate than using past years' data to predict future growth. Who can say with certainty what HD video is actually going to do on the internet.

At least looking at the past--say--5 years is going to indicate whether some sort of non-linear increase is taking place which could be extrapolated. Assuming some kind of 'oh my freaking God the world is going to end because of HD' growth is practically pulling numbers out of one's ass.

If someone has concrete numbers to represent this paradigm shi(f)t you keep referencing, I'm sure many people here would like to see them.
--
Tradition: Just because you've always done it that way doesn't mean it's not incredibly stupid. --despair.com

nath12

join:2008-10-13
Deepwater, MO

revenues

Telcos are just trying to quell free high def video so the can keep the triple play going forward. It's just another ploy to keep revenues up.


jmn1207
Premium
join:2000-07-19
Ashburn, VA
kudos:1

1 recommendation

reply to Matt3

Re: Past statistics don't always show future trends

Caps and ridiculously priced overage charges speak volumes toward most ISP's future business model.

They found a way to increase the transfer speeds in a relatively inexpensive manner, but rather than spend the money on the infrastructure to support these increases, they would rather place a moratorium on the bandwidth consumption limits. They want to impose a freeze on the amount of data that can be transferred. It costs too much money in their eyes. And if they all join forces, this will be the accepted standard and it will not come back to haunt them.

They are trying to make it impossible for innovation to take root. They are crippling one type of service to keep another type alive. This is par for the course with these giant entities that have way too much control and influence in any industry. I wish it were easier to identify and eliminate these nefarious business practices that the RIAA and their ilk seem to employ after they gain too much control.


IHM
Premium,VIP
join:2001-12-18
Hamilton, ON

2 recommendations

The last mile...

Karl forgets that the last mile is the choke point and keeps focusing on undersold backbones. Upgrading the capacity of the last mile is millions of dollars with little to no return.

I don't understand what is so wrong with paying for the bandwidth you use? The "all you can eat buffet" is a terrible business plan unless you're serving garbage to senior citizens. I'd suggest that metered bandwidth would lower prices for most people AND improve network performance.
--
2 Large Bunnies...1 Dead Penguin

SilverSurfer1

join:2007-08-19

1 edit

1 recommendation

said by IHM:

I'd suggest that metered bandwidth would lower prices for most people AND improve network performance.
Metered bandwidth isn't lowering the price of anyone's monthly bill except in the myths peddled by providers & their lobbyists.

sjr

join:2006-08-27
Osseo, MN

1 recommendation

reply to kontos

Re: Woo Hoo! Free capacity!

Interestingly that is how most businesses run. They use part of their profits to maintain and expand their infrastructure. It is what one would call investing in the future. But I suppose if one can only see the next quarters profits one would never expand since that costs immediate money, never mind the payoff down the road in a year or 2 or more. Since the telecom's and cable companies seem to operate in a world of handouts and increasing investor profits every quarter they are not very good at planning ahead.

Qixotl

join:2002-02-08
New Milford, CT

1 edit

1 recommendation

reply to IHM

Re: The last mile...

said by IHM:

I'd suggest that metered bandwidth would lower prices for most people AND improve network performance.
Has anyone actually seen evidence of price lowering by companies that have already started metering bandwidth? Everything I have read about Comcast, Bell Sympatico, TW, and AT&T suggests that the pre-cap prices are staying the same for their packages once the caps are in place. The addition of overage fees can be considered a price increase to some extent. I just don't trust the providers to pass any savings to the customer unless they are forced to do it by real competition or government mandate.


espaeth
Digital Plumber
Premium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
kudos:2

Methodology problem

This report is only using data off public exchanges (mostly international) and university networks. It doesn't take into account private peering, which is by far the most prevalent method of interconnection for the Internet.

Run a few traceroutes to... well.. anywhere. How many times do you see a public exchange in between carrier hops? The interconnection method is to use carrier neutral meet-me facilities in strategic locations throughout the world; the capacity and link performance at these locations remains largely private, and hence cannot be factored into this report.

The other problem with weighting the data heavily with university network exchanges is that the overwhelming majority of university networks are governed by "fair use" policies that rate limit or otherwise restrict high-bandwidth applications like P2P, Skype (particularly when supernode election in an issue), and excessive FTP traffic. Of course traffic growth isn't going to be huge from these networks -- it's already throttled down more aggressively than any public ISP complained about in these forums!


Nightshade
Premium
join:2002-05-26
Salem, OR
reply to FFH5

Re: Past statistics don't always show future trends

said by FFH5:

Those predicting drastic growth may be more prescient than the statisticians looking backward.
I have a very serious problem with that statement and here's why.

I took statistics and probability. If there's anything I learned out of that class is that statisticians look at past data to make predictions about future trends. Without past data, there is no baseline for them to show future trends.

You can't have one without the other. You got to have past data to create any statistical trends at all regardless if the trend is accurate or not, period.
--
Be careful who you vote for, you just might get it.


IHM
Premium,VIP
join:2001-12-18
Hamilton, ON

1 recommendation

reply to Qixotl

Re: The last mile...

said by Qixotl:

said by IHM:

I'd suggest that metered bandwidth would lower prices for most people AND improve network performance.
Has anyone actually seen evidence of price lowering by companies that have already started metering bandwidth? Everything I have read about Comcast, Bell Sympatico, TW, and AT&T suggests that the pre-cap prices are staying the same for their packages once the caps are in place. The addition of overage fees can be considered a price increase to some extent. I just don't trust the providers to pass any savings to the customer unless they are forced to do it by real competition or government mandate.
That's because the current caps are far in excess of what most users consume. If ISP's sold connections and bandwidth separately, my suggestion is that it would cost less for most users. i.e. truly metered bandwidth at $x amount for the connection, bandwidth billed at $y per GB.
--
2 Large Bunnies...1 Dead Penguin


FFH5
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ
kudos:5
reply to Nightshade

Re: Past statistics don't always show future trends

said by Nightshade:

I took statistics and probability. If there's anything I learned out of that class is that statisticians look at past data to make predictions about future trends. Without past data, there is no baseline for them to show future trends.

You can't have one without the other. You got to have past data to create any statistical trends at all regardless if the trend is accurate or not, period.
So did I. And there is no statistical models that project when the knee in a curve may happen. And that is what you can't predict based purely on past trends.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page
Ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya punk?


jmn1207
Premium
join:2000-07-19
Ashburn, VA
kudos:1

1 recommendation

reply to IHM

Re: The last mile...

If it were possible to be charged $0-$100,000 I would love paying for the bandwidth I use. Unfortunately, the stand that most ISP's have taken is to have a high initial set price and then add even higher overage charges on top of this already expensive flat rate.

We will never have a pay as you go model with exorbitant starting costs in place before any usage amount is ever factored into the equation. It's an abusive pricing model and hardly anyone has a realistic alternative.


Nightshade
Premium
join:2002-05-26
Salem, OR

1 edit

1 recommendation

reply to FFH5

Re: Past statistics don't always show future trends

Oh I know. If anything creating statistics is really a combination of mathematical theory and good old fashioned educated guessing. All statistical models will eventually fail, it's just a matter of when and how the data that already exists is modeled. But you still need strong past data to make the predictions. Without that all you really are doing is doing baseless guessing.
--
Be careful who you vote for, you just might get it.


Dogfather
Premium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA

1 recommendation

reply to kontos

Re: Woo Hoo! Free capacity!

They never pay for them, their customers do.


FFH5
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ
kudos:5
reply to fireflier

Re: Past statistics don't always show future trends

said by fireflier:

Assuming tremendous growth of high def video really isn't any more accurate than using past years' data to predict future growth. Who can say with certainty what HD video is actually going to do on the internet.
How about story after story about Apple TV; Roku; Sling; Xbox; PS3 and now the Blockbuster STB being discussed in the BBR story right after this one.

It is anecdotal evidence right now, but it does speak to a change coming and coming very soon. A massive change in user actions in TV watching is being predicted here and everywhere on the net. And the statistics doesn't show it yet, but predictions say it is coming.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page
Ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya punk?


kontos
xyzzy

join:2001-10-04
West Henrietta, NY

1 edit
reply to Dogfather

Re: Woo Hoo! Free capacity!

I'd agree with you in a metered billing price model. With that model, increasing capacity increases revenue (as long as you can get your customers to use the increased capacity).

But that's not where we're at today. Today we have the all you can eat price model.

All you can eat pricing works great when you're adding customers (revenue) faster that you're adding capacity (costs). The ISP bean counters are starting to crap their pants now because customer adds are slowing down while costs continue to rise. Their graphs are showing the cost and revenue lines starting to converge.

All that the study says is that the convergence may not happen as soon.


jmn1207
Premium
join:2000-07-19
Ashburn, VA
kudos:1

2 recommendations

reply to FFH5

Re: Past statistics don't always show future trends

Is this anything like the massive change in user actions with music listening? Are we going to have to suffer through a bunch of control freaks that will stifle innovation and hold firm to an outdated business model until the very end?


funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA
kudos:6

1 recommendation

reply to FFH5
said by FFH5:

compiled the latest set of data concerning the growth of Internet traffic
A lot of these predictions that the internet WON'T face much higher bandwidth demand is based on past statistics. But a paradigm break is in process. The past statistics can't recognize the tremendous growth of online high def video that is coming. Those predicting drastic growth may be more prescient than the statisticians looking backward.
I think we're in the middle of that, now.

Again, folks, know your history or it will come to know you (in a Biblical way).

When the web took off, everything strained under the addition of images,

and then animated images,

and of course demand of the web increased and another cycle was born --

flash and light video and larger images --

multiple computers per household -- more consumers -- more worldwide adoption.

Plus, don't forget that video itself has undergone a revolution. There aren't many 19-inch 4x3 format TV's selling these days.

That's not the future -- that's now. Those that are throttling are throttling the inevitable --

-- they're throttling progress --

-- and more insightful countries are passing us.

How can we invent the technology of tomorrow when throttling ISPs keep us all using the technology of yesterday?

Holy crap!
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
More features, more fun, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...


jmn1207
Premium
join:2000-07-19
Ashburn, VA
kudos:1

2 recommendations

It's simple. Some CEO can make $18 million now instead of $4 million. If the company crashes and burns while crippling an entire industry, certainly the people will bail them out with our taxes. Although the tax payer will still be left with an inadequate, overpriced infrastructure with no other options available.


Dogfather
Premium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA

1 recommendation

reply to kontos

Re: Woo Hoo! Free capacity!

In all models where customers are billed, customers are paying.

There is no evidence that ISPs are seeing a "capacity" crush and when they are forced to turn over evidence, like Bell Canada, it turns out they were lying.

These moves to capping and overage fees aren't about capacity and never have been. They have always been about protecting their video revenues from competitors like Netflix, Amazon, Apple and Microsoft.


espaeth
Digital Plumber
Premium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
kudos:2
said by Dogfather:

There is no evidence that ISPs are seeing a "capacity" crush and when they are forced to turn over evidence, like Bell Canada, it turns out they were lying.
If you focus solely on the Bell table with the percentage of congested links it's easy to say there isn't a capacity issue. If you actually look through the rest of the supporting documentation published here: »The Bell Disclosure! take a closer look at the big document in the zip. The last slide showing exponential growth in the number of ATM cell loss events is most telling. The data could have definitely been packaged better, but it's quite clear that all is not well with the growth of traffic.

said by Dogfather:

These moves to capping and overage fees aren't about capacity and never have been. They have always been about protecting their video revenues from competitors like Netflix, Amazon, Apple and Microsoft.
The companies offering video services are just middle men. They built a distribution system that economically allows content producers to get their product to subscribers. If you convert to IP based services they are still going to get their cut, only it's going to end up costing you more due to the extra costs associated with IP video delivery.

The big problem is that people are expecting that they can drastically increase the usage of their Internet connection while paying the same or less than they pay now. That, I'm afraid, is an unrealistic expectation.


not me 2

@comcast.net
reply to Matt3

Re: Past statistics don't always show future trends

Whether most people would choose to watch TV online is hard to say. It hasn't happened so far and even if everything was available in HD I don't know that would make many more people switch to watching online instead of on their TV. Online viewing is nice for short clips like Youtube carries, but most people will want to watch on their larger TV screen than their laptop or desktop computer has. (Yes, you can connect a PC to the TV but most people don't do that and aren't likely to do it in the near future.) People are creatures of habit and watching shows/movies on the TV is what they are used to and most aren't going to change that viewing habit, especially not if they have more than one viewing at a time.

In either case it probably doesn't matter because monthly usage caps are here and they aren't likely to go away. The caps will keep people from switching to watching large amounts of HD video online even if the cap would allow someone to do so. That's just because most people don't want to risk going over the cap so they will turn to other sources (watch live or recorded TV) instead of watching online.

Lazlow

join:2006-08-07
Saint Louis, MO
not me 2

I think you are VASTLY underestimating the general public. PVRs are very popular, mythtv(among others) is a fairly common thing to see in people under 30 households. Since the computer is already hooked to the TV it usually does not take very long for these people to figure out that they can get media online. It may start out as just finding episodes that were missed for one reason or another, but it soon spreads. If you like one show from a pay channel (say Dexter). If you like a series from overseas (say Kingdom). After a while people soon start to ask themselves why they are paying $60+ for cable when they can get the same media online. While this has been climbing slowly over the last decade(I had my first pvr in 93) it has hit a huge growth spurt since DVRs have become popular (people do not like paying that monthly fee, just like when they got rid of cable boxes the first time).

Lazlow

join:2006-08-07
Saint Louis, MO
reply to espaeth

Re: Woo Hoo! Free capacity!

espaeth

The part you are forgetting (and ISPs are trying to hide) is that the cost per/unit has been and will continue to drop dramatically. We can all see from the stockholders reports that ISPs are making huge profits. Will expanding the capacity of their networks cost a lot of money? Certainly. But if they quit looking at next quarters numbers and instead focus on the numbers over the next few years there will be no issue.

Lazlow

join:2006-08-07
Saint Louis, MO
reply to espaeth

Re: Methodology problem

And why is it that they only use public data? Because the ISPs will not let their data out. Just look how long it took to get bell to release their data. Look the the BS story comcast came up with for the FCC request (oh it would take too many hours, funny how everybody else got it done). One of the rules the new FCC should initiate is transparency. Force the ISPs to show what their data load is. There is absolutely no security risk in doing this. The only risk is that people will be able to see how much BS has been spread and how much greed is actually going on.