Re: More internet speedometer nonsense in

Re: More internet speedometer nonsense in http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r19878496 en Wed, 02 Dec 2009 22:21:10 EDT Wed, 02 Dec 2009 22:21:10 EDT Re: More internet speedometer nonsense http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19888949 patcat88 :

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.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19888949 Mon, 28 Jan 2008 12:35:53 EDT Re: More internet speedometer nonsense http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19888212 Dogfather : 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.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19888212 Mon, 28 Jan 2008 10:31:52 EDT Re: More internet speedometer nonsense http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19887818 patcat88 : 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.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19887818 Mon, 28 Jan 2008 09:03:00 EDT Re: More internet speedometer nonsense http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19885589 Tzale :

said by Tzale

said by Dogfather

:

There is diminishing returns in bandwidth. There is only so much video, so many Jetsons videophoning, so much gaming, so much everything a single household can do and by no stretch of the imagination does it require 1Gb deployments now.

-

You mention FiOS, you do realize that current FiOS deployments don't do ANYWHERE close to 1Gb to the home right?

Right now they're splitting 622/155Mb with 32 users and even the latest GPON will only up that to 1.2Gb for 32 to 64 users. That is how advanced current compression technology is and why you guys should understand that to demand 1Gb PER user is simply dumb.

So let me get this straight. All you guys along with the internet speedo guy want cities who can't afford to fill pot holes to immediately deploy residential services 25X faster than the LATEST technology used for FiOS deployments and 50X faster than the previous generation FiOS deployments.

Uh, okay.

I'm an Amateur Radio operator (radio nut / geek) and I seriously doubt that wireless will ever be able to replace fiber optics / copper... Sure, we can have things like bluetooth or wifi, but for connecting thousands of people to an ISPs network.... I just don't see wireless being able to support that. You can't bend the rules of physics. There is only so much radio bandwidth and so many users you can pack into that area. And LOS is really required for any plausible wireless solution. Non-LOS solutions are not viable for connecting 10,20,30,40 thousand people at a time.
In the future, the wires in our homes will probably all be wireless.. But the last mile solution is just too damn hard to create a wireless solution.. We are working on it with cell phones, but even then there is serious limitations compared to POTS.

-Tzale
--
Neoconservatives (G.W.B) are not real conservatives. A conservative believes in defending the Constitution. First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win. - RON PAUL 2008 »www.usconstitution.net/const.html
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19885589 Sun, 27 Jan 2008 20:00:19 EDT Re: More internet speedometer nonsense http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19883574 Dogfather : Again, there is diminishing returns on bandwidth. There comes a point just like personal computer speed that more doesn't get you anything.

Case in point. I would bet money that you don't run a multi-million dollar super computer in your basement. Or even a top of the line Intel Extreme 45nm machine with all the bells and whistles.

Why not?

Certainly some day you will need that horsepower. Hell, my modern Mac Pro will kick the living crap out of a 15-20 year old Cray any day of the week so should I have bought the Cray back then?

The point is technology ALWAYS gets faster and cheaper and it's ALWAYS better to wait as long as possible and only then when you must buy and deploy, you get the absolute best value.

To use 1990's technology to solve a problem some here are claiming may come in 2030-2050 is silly. Come on, the direction that the information age is going is a wireless one. You want to use 1990 wireline to solve a non-existant problem in a wireless future?

Use 2030 technology to solve a 2030 problem in 2030.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19883574 Sun, 27 Jan 2008 13:35:51 EDT Re: More internet speedometer nonsense http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19883550 Dogfather : 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.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19883550 Sun, 27 Jan 2008 13:32:18 EDT Re: More internet speedometer nonsense http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19883334 Ulmo :

said by Dogfather

:

And anyone who challenges him here or elsewhere he immediately insults and is lectured that they are just jealous of his genius. Why anyone listens to him is a mystery.

He may be a nutcase, but you sound a ghost of a bit like you're still using a POTS modem (56k or less) and not complaining about it.

I remember when 300bps was more than sufficient for the needs that I was meeting with my computer. (It certainly wasn't enough for the needs I wasn't meeting with my computer.)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19883334 Sun, 27 Jan 2008 12:44:51 EDT Re: More internet speedometer nonsense http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19883328 bogey780 : 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.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19883328 Sun, 27 Jan 2008 12:43:35 EDT Re: More internet speedometer nonsense http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19883128 patcat88 : 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.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19883128 Sun, 27 Jan 2008 12:03:03 EDT Re: More internet speedometer nonsense http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19882861 Dogfather : Sorry, I knew GPON was quicker but not 1Gb dedicated so I did a quick DSLR search and saw Karl article mentioned 1.2Gb. But still that 2.4 is spit by 32-64. At best that's a 75Mb dedicated connection and that is supposed to be revolutionary. They're currently doing far less than that and it's revolutionary.

Internet Speedo guy wants more than 10X the latest generation speed, and in some posts here and elsewhere more than 100X that latest generation speed. In one of his posts he was talking about 10Gb dedicated residential connections. Make no mistake, he's not talking about making sure that cities don't deploy DOCSIS 2.0 topology, he's talking 1-10Gb to the home.

That's crazy, to the point you can't even take him seriously. But given he wanted a government agency to add residential broadband weights and measures enforcement, expecting telcos and cable operators to offer an SLA with their $15 service I stopped taking him seriously a while ago.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19882861 Sun, 27 Jan 2008 11:04:04 EDT Re: More internet speedometer nonsense http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19882706 Done_Posting :

said by Dogfather

:

Right now they're splitting 622/155Mb with 32 users and even the latest GPON will only up that to 1.2Gb for 32 to 64 users.

I don't disagree with any particular point you're making, but I wanted to correct a slight error before it perpetuates itself. You're good on all your numbers except GPON bandwidth. Standard GPON is the equivalent of OC-48 on its downstream (2.4 Gbps). It's the upstream that runs at 1.2 Gbps.

Also, for anyone who cares, 10G-EPON is being currently in development. That'll yield 10 Gbps per 32 or 64 way split! :D

- Tate

--
Happiness is an OC-48 in your basement...]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19882706 Sun, 27 Jan 2008 10:21:46 EDT Re: More internet speedometer nonsense http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19882642 Dogfather : It's not going to be exponential for that long. It's exponential when you go from Cu to glass, after that it's simply incremental.

And if for some reason 1Gb slowly comes into demand then you do it THEN, in 20 or 30 years. You don't spend hundreds of billions on deployment today for use 20-50 years from now when technology would have advanced including compression and WIRELESS technology.

My point is if you can't even conceive of what would need that much bandwidth how can you come close to saying what is the best way to deliver that bandwidth. I mean, we know what the HDTV standard are. We do lossless audio and low bitrates. There is only so much commerce to be done and it doesn't need 1Gb residential to do it.

I see 2028 being a WIRELESS era. In 2-3 decades 1Gb wireless from the balloons or solar planes we read about here from time to time could be extremely simple. We've also seen advances in non-LOS wireless.

My point is you are using 1990's fiber technology which is currently VERY expensive during a time of economic hardship to solve an issue that MAY occur 20-30 years from now.

And you should all be remined about Carlini's previous rantings. It wasn't about 1Gb local backbones, it was 10Gb RESIDENTIAL services and he cites demands like buying a movie in a few seconds (completely ignoring streaming technology). Oh yeah, that's worth hundreds of billions. »Re: Not this idiot again...YES Captain Obvious]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19882642 Sun, 27 Jan 2008 09:58:05 EDT Re: More internet speedometer nonsense http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19882618 Tzale :

said by Dogfather

Nope... We think that cities that are deploying broadband solutions should consider the exponential growth of bandwidth demands. It only makes sense to do it right the first time... Prior to FIOS, DOCSIS cable networks were designed around ~38mbps or so download bandwidth. BPON is over 600mbps, so there is definitely a lot more to go around.. With GPON, 1,200mbps is a major amount of bandwidth for 32 homes. We don't need 1gbps per home today, but to future proof any networks being designed today, they should be able to handle 1gbps+ so that each user can have the bandwidth required in the future. We all know that in the future there will probably be very lifelike media that will require immense amounts of bandwidth, think 3D virtual reality type media... I don't think we're far off (20 years or so) from a computer that we can control using just our thoughts and a pair of virtual reality goggles... Could you imagine visiting BroadbandReports in 2028 and being able to see each other in person, like we were standing next to each other?? Now that would be pretty cool. It's hard to envision what is going to happen in the future, but some people try... And if history continues down the current trend, we generally exceed those peoples dreams.

-Tzale
--
Neoconservatives (G.W.B) are not real conservatives. A conservative believes in defending the Constitution. First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win. - RON PAUL 2008 »www.usconstitution.net/const.html
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19882618 Sun, 27 Jan 2008 09:48:14 EDT Re: More internet speedometer nonsense http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19882574 Dogfather : There is diminishing returns in bandwidth. There is only so much video, so many Jetsons videophoning, so much gaming, so much everything a single household can do and by no stretch of the imagination does it require 1Gb deployments now.

-

You mention FiOS, you do realize that current FiOS deployments don't do ANYWHERE close to 1Gb to the home right?

Right now they're splitting 622/155Mb with 32 users and even the latest GPON will only up that to 1.2Gb for 32 to 64 users. That is how advanced current compression technology is and why you guys should understand that to demand 1Gb PER user is simply dumb.

So let me get this straight. All you guys along with the internet speedo guy want cities who can't afford to fill pot holes to immediately deploy residential services 25X faster than the LATEST technology used for FiOS deployments and 50X faster than the previous generation FiOS deployments.

Uh, okay.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19882574 Sun, 27 Jan 2008 09:36:32 EDT Re: More internet speedometer nonsense http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19882559 Dogfather :

said by patcat88

:

If its beyond overkill it means that you can do contention, which is essential to any residential internet provider. Also the amount of growth 1 gig would allow will last alot longer than Mbps upgrades by a couple of them that is done today.

There is no demand for it, no money for it, no technology for it. Even Verizon's latest deployments aren't capable of it.

You want flying cars now when the freeways are empty. Build the flying cars when there is a NEED for flying cars.

A bunch of technology fans who don't seem to understand technology; the longer you wait, the cheaper it gets.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19882559 Sun, 27 Jan 2008 09:31:55 EDT Re: More internet speedometer nonsense http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19882554 Dogfather : Sorry no, 1Gb residential broadband is not as essential as hospitals, police and fire departments. I'm in Orange County, CA, one of the very first areas and the first Cox area to get residential broadband just over 10 years ago. You don't go from complete non-existence to absolute necessity in 10 years.

And comparing a want of 1Gb residential broadband to police and fire protection is just dumb.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19882554 Sun, 27 Jan 2008 09:30:03 EDT Re: More internet speedometer nonsense http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19882518 Tzale :

said by Lazlow

:

Yep and who will ever need more that 640K?

People who do not think ahead are what is screwing things up on a regular basis. When these entities install this stuff they are going to have to live with it for the next twenty years. If you look at the rate bandwidth has exploded in just the last five years you will see why thinking in gigs is the the only reasonable way to go.

Video conferencing is already becoming a big deal and is not likely to go away. Before anyone says not for in the same city, think again. A lot of people do not have the time to be running around town for meetings any more, but they still need to be able to read the visual cues people give off to evaluate what is actually going on. It also simplifies setting up meetings with short notice.

Video is also beginning to be used in many maintenance departments, so the people who can evaluate a problem do not have to be running all over the place. Experienced personnel can often just glance at a situation and immediately see the problem. They can then tell the less experienced to just replace the X. Saves time, saves money.

Exactly...

Look at hour far we have come today.. From 56k (hell how about 300 baud????) to 15 - 50mbps now for many home residential connections.
If we continue down this road, we'll be stuck with the same limitations 56k had (century old copper phone lines not meant to carry data)... Luckily, some are doing it right, such as Verizon FIOS... Built the network right NOW, so 5, 10, 20 years down the road, the network will only need minor upgrades and not complete rewiring.

-Tzale
--
Neoconservatives (G.W.B) are not real conservatives. A conservative believes in defending the Constitution. First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win. - RON PAUL 2008 »www.usconstitution.net/const.html
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19882518 Sun, 27 Jan 2008 09:15:19 EDT Re: More internet speedometer nonsense http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19881797 patcat88 :

said by Dogfather

:

And he wants cities that can't even afford basic needs like education funding and healthcare to do this?

Do you propose cutting city garbage service, or eliminating the fire dept (city can distrbute a fire hose to each house and be done with it) or police too (distribute assault rifle)? Broadband is essential today, its as important as all other government services. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19881797 Sun, 27 Jan 2008 00:48:46 EDT Re: More internet speedometer nonsense http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19881791 patcat88 : If its beyond overkill it means that you can do contention, which is essential to any residential internet provider. Also the amount of growth 1 gig would allow will last alot longer than Mbps upgrades by a couple of them that is done today.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19881791 Sun, 27 Jan 2008 00:46:16 EDT Re: More internet speedometer nonsense http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19881781 patcat88 : No they don't, put the 6 inch drain, then make people buy water from private business trucks to water their lawn, force all houses to be built with rain water catching for grey water, and grey water recycling (zoning code), and if there still is no pressure, have private business come and put temporary storage tanks in each house. If that doesn't work, force the installation of even MORE EFFICIENT shower heads that put out a mist (zoning code/TOS of city water). If that doesn't work, well, you can always have pnumatic toilets/space toilets/airplane toilets/Amtrak Superliner toilets that use have a cup of water and gunshot type suction. You see, its really easy, and financially friendly cough cough environmentally friendly to put that 6 inch pipe in.;-)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19881781 Sun, 27 Jan 2008 00:43:42 EDT Re: More internet speedometer nonsense http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19879528 Dogfather : 10Gb connections are extraordinarily rare, even in business environments. Other than ISPs, only the largest data intensive corporations would purchase such horsepower and that's only because they're handling tens of thousands of employees or doing hugely intensive work like credit card processing.

That's a far cry from a family of 4 with 2, possibly 3 or 4 HDTVs. We know what the video standards will be for the next 20+ years and we know that video is the most bandwidth intensive app there is aside from software sales. And no software sales is worth that type of investment.

Residential 1Gb service is BEYOND overkill, both today and decades from now.

To deploy now would be extremely expensive and would involve today's technology with no possibility of return on their investment in a reasonable time. If 1Gb service was ever in demand it would be MANY decades from now and by then even more advanced technologies would exist making 1Gb deployment faster and cheaper, perhaps even wireless.

It's the same reason few people buy 8 core xeon machines with quad SLI. Why spend 10X the money today when you don't need to. You wait to buy technology until the time you actually need it or are close to needing it and only then you are getting the best value from your investment.

Why the internet speedo guy can't grasp this fundamental concept is a mystery which is why I think he doesn't actually believe a word he says. Everything about it is so obviously wrong that one would could say what he does with a straight face.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19879528 Sat, 26 Jan 2008 16:29:32 EDT Re: More internet speedometer nonsense http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19879454 bogey780 : But the thing is, except for the equipment at the end, where are they "wasting" money? They could buy the affordable equipment now and then in ten years as the need progresses and the technology matures, they can cut over to a higher rate. If they lay the fiber to interconnect everyone across a DS3, then why can't they use that same interconnect a few years later to up the speed?

That's all I'm saying, the physical layer is all they need fret about. Once they've laid the foundation then let the economies of scale sink in.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19879454 Sat, 26 Jan 2008 16:14:45 EDT Re: More internet speedometer nonsense http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19879262 Lazlow : bogey

The point is that 99% of the cities that do something like this get to do it once about every twenty years. No matter what they install they will be using it for twenty years. So they can install a slow system and be using it for the next twenty years or they can install a fast system and be using it for the next twenty years. Either way they will be using whatever they install for twenty years.

Cargidyne

10gigbit connections are fairly common in many environments (business) and yes they pass data at that kind of speed.

As far as I can tell he was not talking about residendtial gigabit he was talking about business gigabit. Most cities have there own network to connect all the city offices.

Yes, almost everyone is aware of how tight moeny is. That is why it is so important not to waste resources on limited technology. Here is a simple example: A town is growing at a good clip. They have a new section going in. They need to run a water line to that section. Now they could run a 6inch main and that would meet the need for the next five years. But since they know the town is growing they install a 12inch main instead. Cities do this every day. The reason they do not put the 6inch main in is that they know that they will just have to dig it up in 5 years and replace it with a 12inch main. So in the long run it is far cheaper to install the 12inch main the first time. Tranfering data is the exact same story. We know how much we are using today, we have a good idea about the rate of growth, we know we cannot afford to do it twice, so what do we install? ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19879262 Sat, 26 Jan 2008 15:38:57 EDT Re: More internet speedometer nonsense http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19878753 Dogfather : Demand precedes supply, not the other way around. If Mr. INet Speedo wants to pay for supply that there isn't demand for, more power to him. I don't see him breaking out his wallet to fund this multi-multi-multi-multi-billion dollar deployment that won't sell. Even the latest multi-billion dollar deployment technologies can't do what he is demanding. FiOS certainly can't. Hell, I can have 2 gigabit computers sitting next to each other and they won't pass data at gigabit speed. Residential gigabit deployment in the current economy combined with a total lack of any demand is beyond insane.

And he wants cities that can't even afford basic needs like education funding and healthcare to do this? Is he unaware of the financial position of the vast majority of city and county seats?

It's totally unrealistic and at the current time, utterly impossible. But this type of nonsense gets what he's really looking for and that is attention. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19878753 Sat, 26 Jan 2008 14:06:20 EDT Re: More internet speedometer nonsense http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19878690 bogey780 : That's fine but even high resolution AV doesn't consume more than a couple megabits.

Businesses invest in their needs today and for the short term future for good reason. Imagine if a hotel manager shelled outtens of thousands of dollars in the early 80s in order to get every room it's own Betamax?

Investing in tech is fine... but don't outlay so much cash on a product that you can not upgrade eventually. As is a lot of fiber or Cat5e can be moved from Mbit equipment to GigE as the need arises.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19878690 Sat, 26 Jan 2008 13:51:38 EDT Re: More internet speedometer nonsense http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19878657 Lazlow : Yep and who will ever need more that 640K?

People who do not think ahead are what is screwing things up on a regular basis. When these entities install this stuff they are going to have to live with it for the next twenty years. If you look at the rate bandwidth has exploded in just the last five years you will see why thinking in gigs is the the only reasonable way to go.

Video conferencing is already becoming a big deal and is not likely to go away. Before anyone says not for in the same city, think again. A lot of people do not have the time to be running around town for meetings any more, but they still need to be able to read the visual cues people give off to evaluate what is actually going on. It also simplifies setting up meetings with short notice.

Video is also beginning to be used in many maintenance departments, so the people who can evaluate a problem do not have to be running all over the place. Experienced personnel can often just glance at a situation and immediately see the problem. They can then tell the less experienced to just replace the X. Saves time, saves money.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19878657 Sat, 26 Jan 2008 13:44:59 EDT Re: More internet speedometer nonsense http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19878496 bogey780 : A psychologist says everyone is crazy. A chiropractor thinks everyone has bad posture. A network guy thinks everyone has slow speeds. Megabit networks aren't really the slowdown for a lot of businesses.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19878496 Sat, 26 Jan 2008 13:11:03 EDT More internet speedometer nonsense http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19878401 Dogfather : And anyone who challenges him here or elsewhere he immediately insults and is lectured that they are just jealous of his genius. Why anyone listens to him is a mystery.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19878401 Sat, 26 Jan 2008 12:52:09 EDT