How Much Bandwidth Do We Really Need? > Gluttony?

Gluttony?

My daily dose of Youtube is nice now and then, so 1.5 mbit sort of satisfies my needs...but not really.

reply to WasteNot
Well with VOIP you need to have more than 128 kb guaranteed. That connection alone takes 190 kb. If you add in 3 users in a home all using the internet at the same time, then you've easily maxed out 3 Mbps, depending on what you are doing. So for you maybe mroe than 128kbps is not needed but trust me...it is now in the minority of broadband users.

reply to WasteNot
anyone who runs a MS OS or app would surely beg to differ. the last install of xp pro that I did took just 30mins including drivers, etc. but once I got connected to the net boy was I glad to have 15Mbps down- there were hundreds of security patches to download.
--
"I saw Matlock in a bar last night; the sound was off, but I think I got the gist of it..."

And you do these patches daily?

The excuses are getting lame. The old patches routine, Linuxes, baby photo's to granny, etc, etc.

reply to WasteNot
Well there are other applications besides simple browsing that might be able to really take advantage of these kinds of speeds.

For instance, we are just starting to see web based email applications that approach the same kind of interface that you'd get with a mail client like Thunderbird. Part of that is new(ish) technologies like AJAX but part is also having the bandwidth available to deliver email messages (complete with graphics) in near-real time.

So I'd expect to see a lot more applications popping up on the web (OpenOffice for instance). That's something that's been talked about since the '90s, but 50 Mbps starts to make it viable. There are real advantages to not having your work tied to one particular computer after all.

Also, a 10 Mbps connection brings you to the sort of speeds you typically got with a LAN ten years ago. A 50 Mbps connection gets you a much of the way to the typical 100 Mbps LAN most people still have today. So there are all kinds of implications for network storage as well (assuming that these connections eventually become symmetrical).
--
"Think for yourselves and let others enjoy the privilege to do so too."

reply to WasteNot
Personally, I work remotely, and VPN/SSH tunnel in to sites half way across the country on a 3Mbps/512kbps pipe, and it works very well for SSH, Remote Desktop, VoIP (Skype) and even X11.

The issue that I typically have is...not the ability to have higher data rates, but the promotion of higher data rates with caps.

Eg. Is there a need for caps on a 3Mbps connection ?
Companies will promote 10-20Mbps connections, then complain that the lines are being abused, and force a round of caps on all, where the 'low' end user ends up on an insanely low (read wireless like) 5GB/month cap, forcing users to a higher tier, making more profits for the ISP.

Do I really need a higher data rate ? No! But I'd be forced to a higher data rate regardless.
I think anything under 100GB/month for a wired Internet connection is crazy. If you're going to put in a 5GB cap on a line (like TWC is proposing in TX), it should be on a 256kbps-512kbps line ONLY.

100GB cap on a 3MBps line would mean that I use ~1/10th of the total bandwidth in a month, based on a 3Mbps tier.

While I am no bandwidth hog, I do accept a reasonable amount of control.

--
Canada = Hollywood North

reply to WasteNot
128KB? Are you kidding? Pages nowadays can easily top 200KB each (with images, JavaScript, CSS, etc). At 128kbps, that would take 12.5 seconds to load. At 1Mbps, it would take 1.6 seconds.

In addition, I'll often load up multiple pages at once. Either by opening an entire folder of bookmarks in Firefox (e.g. "Morning Websites") or by simply browsing on three or four websites at the same time. This cuts my bandwidth-per-site down. If I try loading four 200KB pages at the same time, it will take me nearly a minute on a 128kbps connection. A 1Mbps connection, however, will have those four pages loaded up in 6.4 seconds.

This doesn't even address online video, downloading updates, or some of the other bandwidth-intensive tasks that can be done (that other posters have touched upon).

Nowadays, I'd say that 1Mbps is the minimum bandwidth for the casual web surfer with higher bandwidths required the more you do online (VoIP, online video, online games, etc).
--
-Jason Levine
Support a children's charity. Buy a calendar. Shooting For A Cause
Jason's Toolbox | PCQandA.com

reply to WasteNot

reply to ninjatutle
Do we really need a car that can go over 60mph? I mean, for people who dont need to drive on the highway often, why do we need a car that can consistantly hit 60mph?

The point is that the extra speed is available when its needed. I may not patch my windows boxes everyday (though it seems like it some days), but when I have to reformat and reinstall, I'd rather be able to do this in 3hrs as apposed to having to wait for a day off and spend all day doing it.

My pc also doesnt need 4gb of ram all the time, but when I load up Google Earth while browsing in multiple tabs in Opera while streaming some musci from another pc with winamp, my ram usage jumps from 900mb to about 3gb. I dont always need it, but its there when I do.

reply to dadkins
Heh, bringing Steam up reminded me that when I reformat/reinstqall again, I'll be downloading about 20-30gb from Steam alone just to reinstall my games.

Which was actually one of the features I fell in love with, I dont have to keep all my disks handy and switch them out over a 2hr period while all my games install. I just install Steam, log in, then download and install the games I want to play. Hell, I dont even have all my Steam games installed right now just to save some space.

I'd be pissed if I got charged hefty overages just because I had to reinstall my legally purchased products.

reply to Boogeyman

reply to ninjatutle
Good call Bono, only music pirates and warez d00ds need fast connections. 768k DSL for everyone!

The only thing lame here is your act - notice I didn't say "getting lame," because it has been since day one.

Sure Jack Sparrow

Sure Spack Jarrow

reply to amigo_boy
Yes, much better analogy.

reply to Boogeyman
or you could make install discs through steam for all your games.

reply to WasteNot
What I'm not understanding here is why anyone would side with the big ISP's on this. the ISP's are simply looking for more revenue and could care less about any of us here.

I was sold a 15/768 line (albeit 'up to') and intend to use it in the manner it was advertised: to download music, movies, and software updates at 'blazing fast speeds, all for just $9.95 more per month'. TW in my area continues to advertise 'questionable' online activities that one could use their product for, and they do it for one reason: to sell it. If they decide to backpedal and begin charging users tolls to do these things, then they'd better prepare for someone to get upset.
--
"I saw Matlock in a bar last night; the sound was off, but I think I got the gist of it..."

reply to en102