 CabalPremium
join:2007-01-21
Austin, TX
 ·Suddenlink
| They aren't incorrect. Current speeds ARE more than adequate for the vast majority of users. Remember, hobbyists reading BBR are far from a majority of users, or even common at that. We are a very small, overly vocal, minority.
--
Interested in open source engine management for your Subaru? |
|
|
|
CorydonCultivant son jardinPremium
join:2008-02-18
Denver, CO | said by Cabal:Current speeds ARE more than adequate for the vast majority of users. Remember, hobbyists reading BBR are far from a majority of users, or even common at that. We are a very small, overly vocal, minority. Ten years ago, 56k was more than adequate for the vast majority of users.
Moving to higher tiers of speed is a little bit of a chicken-and-egg problem at first, but if the barriers to adoption are low enough, applications that take advantage of the higher speeds will quickly appear. The more applications that appear that require a faster connection, the more people will upgrade.
It eventually becomes a virtuous circle, with the companies that fail to jump on the bandwagon (glaring example is AOL) getting left in the dust.
--
My opinions are my own. No-one else would want them! |
|
Gogo1
join:2004-05-27
Brooklyn, NY | reply to Cabal
Exactly. Not sure why that passage of the quote is bolded like it is some ludicrous statement.
Are TWC and ATT doing enough to be able to adapt if, say, there is a sharp increase in bandwidth demand over the next five years? If legit movie downloads or other stuff becomes more popular? |
|
| reply to Corydon
Actually, I'd venture to say it was "acceptable" but not adequate.
At the point you could stream audio it became adequate since most people don't pull down more than low rez video. |
|
 espaethDigital PlumberPremium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
kudos:2
 ·Clear Wireless
| reply to Cabal
I believe that to be a very accurate statement. With most ISPs there is at least 3-4 options for service plans. Many ISPs are seeing subscriptions hover around the bottom 2 tiers for the vast majority of their customer base, which gives them less incentive to expand offerings at the top.
Service providers will develop their network to follow the money. |
|
| reply to Cabal
So I also take it that the Japanese don't need their 100+mbps of internet speed either. I mean, how could an average Japanese citizen possibly use that much bandwidth right?
I sure don't see it that way and neither do they obviously. It looks like certain companies listed above are taking the "el cheapo" way out of dishing out money to upgrade their networks.
Comcast and Verizon are doing the right thing and actually listening to their customers and providing us with faster speeds(yes, I know it's a rare thing). |
|
 NightfallMy Goal Is To Deny YoursPremium,MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI
 ·Site5.com
·Comcast
 ·Callcentric
| reply to Corydon
said by Corydon:said by Cabal:Current speeds ARE more than adequate for the vast majority of users. Remember, hobbyists reading BBR are far from a majority of users, or even common at that. We are a very small, overly vocal, minority. Ten years ago, 56k was more than adequate for the vast majority of users. Moving to higher tiers of speed is a little bit of a chicken-and-egg problem at first, but if the barriers to adoption are low enough, applications that take advantage of the higher speeds will quickly appear. The more applications that appear that require a faster connection, the more people will upgrade. It eventually becomes a virtuous circle, with the companies that fail to jump on the bandwagon (glaring example is AOL) getting left in the dust. Actually, 10 years ago 56k wasn't adequate at all. Which is why companies like @Home were expanding fast. Consumers were just starting to get used to the idea of a always on broadband connection back then. Back in 1996-1997, people were questioning the need. But I digress....
These applications are just now starting to come around. Look at Slingbox for instance. I could think of more devices that are on the horizon that could benefit from increased upstream bandwidth.
However, as a whole, right now a majority of users are indeed happy with their connections. A vast majority of them don't need high speed low latency connections. The people here on BBR are a different breed however. |
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
kudos:2 | reply to defaultPlay56
said by defaultPlay56:So I also take it that the Japanese don't need their 100+mbps of internet speed either. I mean, how could an average Japanese citizen possibly use that much bandwidth right? What do the Japanese utilization rates look like? The answer to your question depends on the answer to my question. |
|
 MattAll noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | reply to Cabal
said by Cabal:Current speeds ARE more than adequate for the vast majority of users. Remember, hobbyists reading BBR are far from a majority of users, or even common at that. We are a very small, overly vocal, minority. I get complaints all the time from people who hate how long it takes to send pictures via email. They don't know WHY it's taking so long and once I explain that it's because Time Warner cable or AT&T don't give them much in the way of upstream speeds, they understand ... and usually aren't very happy. The majority of people just accept it as "How things are". They don't understand that it doesn't HAVE to be that way.
My GF thought her 5Mbps/384Kbps Road Runner was just fine until she moved in with me and saw how much faster and easier it was to do things with 2Mbps upstream. |
|
 RARPSL
join:1999-12-08
Suffern, NY | reply to Cabal
said by Cabal:Current speeds ARE more than adequate for the vast majority of users. Remember, hobbyists reading BBR are far from a majority of users, or even common at that. We are a very small, overly vocal, minority. You have to distinguish between instant speed needs and sustained speed needs. A faster instant speed gets you on and off so others can use the network while you do stuff that does not need access to the net. Once you have downloaded a page, you can sit there looking at it. Getting the page in 5 seconds as opposed to 50 seconds (for example on a Dial-Up line) makes you more productive.
Sustained speeds are those that you have a need for to get the data as you use it (Streaming Video, VoIP, etc.). P2P is a middle ground in that getting the data gets you off the network but in most cases how long you take to get you file is of lesser importance so long as the total time needed is not that speed sensitive.
The ISPs are talking Sustained Speed needs while giving the impression they are talking about Instant Speed needs. |
|
| reply to Cabal
said by Cabal: We are a very small, overly vocal, minority. I'd argue that this site is one of many of a tech savvy "minority." Case in point: Slashdot, Ars Technica et al. Members of this site are small potatoes compared to the others. |
|
MattAll noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | said by SilverSurfer1:said by Cabal: We are a very small, overly vocal, minority. I'd argue that this site is one of many of a tech savvy "minority." Case in point: Slashdot, Ars Technica et al. Members of this site are small potatoes compared to the others. Also, don't discount the fact that we directly influence the purchasing decisions of a lot of people. How many people ask your opinion on things and then directly act based upon your recommendations? |
|
 bencPremium
join:2007-06-17
Glen Carbon, IL
·Charter
| reply to Matt
said by Matt:said by Cabal:Current speeds ARE more than adequate for the vast majority of users. Remember, hobbyists reading BBR are far from a majority of users, or even common at that. We are a very small, overly vocal, minority. I get complaints all the time from people who hate how long it takes to send pictures via email. They don't know WHY it's taking so long and once I explain that it's because Time Warner cable or AT&T don't give them much in the way of upstream speeds, they understand ... and usually aren't very happy. The majority of people just accept it as "How things are". They don't understand that it doesn't HAVE to be that way. My GF thought her 5Mbps/384Kbps Road Runner was just fine until she moved in with me and saw how much faster and easier it was to do things with 2Mbps upstream. Agreed.
A few months back I was selling a truck. A woman called, and asked about pictures, because at the time I didn't have pictures in my ad (I know, I know).
The pictures were originally 1,280 x 1,024. I asked if she used dial-up, since her area code suggested she lived in rural Missouri. She said that she did.
Because I took pity on her, I decided that I would manually scale down each picture to 320 x 256. I didn't like doing so, but I did so because I knew how extremely slow dial-up is.
As far as my own experience, I could use more than 256k upload, but Charter Business HSI is EXPENSIVE.
Hopefully I can switch to AT&T Static IP DSL soon. The monthly cost is slightly higher, but at least I can get much faster speeds with them.
Charter Business HSI:
1.5M/256k, Static IP, 1yr. - $67/mo.
Note: This was the price in May 2007, the price has just got to be better now. If not then Charter can expect to die. The reason I signed up with them is because this part of town can't get DSL.
AT&T Static IP DSL:
6.0M/768k, Static IP, 1yr. - $80/mo. |
|
Reviews:
·Sprint Mobile Br..
| reply to Matt
said by Matt:said by Cabal:Current speeds ARE more than adequate for the vast majority of users. Remember, hobbyists reading BBR are far from a majority of users, or even common at that. We are a very small, overly vocal, minority. I get complaints all the time from people who hate how long it takes to send pictures via email. They don't know WHY it's taking so long and once I explain that it's because Time Warner cable or AT&T don't give them much in the way of upstream speeds, they understand ... and usually aren't very happy. The majority of people just accept it as "How things are". They don't understand that it doesn't HAVE to be that way. My GF thought her 5Mbps/384Kbps Road Runner was just fine until she moved in with me and saw how much faster and easier it was to do things with 2Mbps upstream. I agree with this statement... I have 10/1 right now but I would be happy with like 3/3 or something like that... Wouldn't it be cheaper for the companies to balance the tiers and lower the total bandwidth, wouldn't that end up being less strain on the network... |
|
| reply to benc
AT&T's price for that tier of Business DSL is still 80.00.
If you've been doing 1.5 mbps for so long, you could probably get away with 3.0 / 512 from AT&T for about 59.99. |
|
| reply to Matt
My GF thought her 5Mbps/384Kbps Road Runner was just fine until she moved in with me and saw how much faster and easier it was to do things with 2Mbps upstream.
"You smooth talker, you"....................!!! |
|
Reviews:
·Optimum Voice
·VOIPo
·Optimum Online
·RoadRunner Cable
·Time Warner VOIP
| reply to Cabal
said by Cabal:Current speeds ARE more than adequate for the vast majority of users. Remember, hobbyists reading BBR are far from a majority of users, or even common at that. We are a very small, overly vocal, minority. I can always use more internet speed, always, lol |
|
MattAll noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | said by NYC Girl:said by Cabal:Current speeds ARE more than adequate for the vast majority of users. Remember, hobbyists reading BBR are far from a majority of users, or even common at that. We are a very small, overly vocal, minority. I can always use more internet speed, always, lol Holy Thread Resurrection Batman! |
|
