Topic 'Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0' in forum ''

Topic 'Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0' in forum '' - dslreports.com http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21974094 en Fri, 10 Feb 2012 18:34:35 EDT Fri, 10 Feb 2012 18:34:35 EDT Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-22152962 said by cdru:

said by jadebangle:

Its always 10/1, 20/2, 30/3 massive on the download side, pathetic on the upload side

Please give an example where 2 or 3mbit upload isn't adequate for a residential connection.

Yes, you may be uploading all those 8megapixel images to flickr or posting your kids 2 hour birthday party video to youtube. All those things can benefit from faster speeds and would be nice, but 2 or 3mbits is adequate.

Don't get me wrong, faster is always nicer, but the overwhelming majority of users barely use their upstream now.
2 - 3Mbps would be ok if users actually every got anything close to that. Upstream on Cable is a joke. They want it to be treated just like TV, Asymmetrical communications. This is not what the Internet is about. I should be able to run whatever service I want, included web/mail/ftp on my Internet connection. Furthermore, I think we would see a lot more upstream usage, if we actually had high speed upstream connections. Saving your files to the cloud, gaming, streaming HD content etc. I think it's very short sited to say "users only need x" when we don't have any idea what users really want. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-22152962 Mon, 30 Mar 2009 14:30:35 EDT Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21982933 said by cdru:

Show me a graph of your past 24 hours of bandwidth usage with your upload pegged at your service's limit and you can prove your point. Show it at anything less then near 100% utilization and you help support mine.The relevance of the point doesn't hinge solely on 24/7 use of the upstream bandwidth, rather, whether functionality which occurs sporadically is contingent on there being even more upstream bandwidth than there is.

The assumption you're making here is that the average amount of stuff someone uploads can be easily spread out over the course of a day inside that 1-2 megabit window, comfortably. That doesn't always apply.

For example, I use a number of wireless networked security cameras for offsite monitoring, both at my house, other peoples houses (ones that I've recommended and setup for family, friends, e.t.c.). These things do MPEG4 640x480 streams, and a normal to high quality compression ratio uses at least 1.2-2 megabits. If you switch to MJPEG (for compatibility), that falls off even more. If you have more than one person viewing at a time, you're just guaranteeing a headache. Given the fact that I have 3, and another property has 4, you'll see that it often isn't possible to comfortably (at about 10 FPS) view more than two at a time. In situations like this (I guess another example would be placeshifting with a slingbox) the user doesn't have the convenience of simply letting the accrued bandwidth nicely integrate over the span of several hours. They need it, and they need it fast.

When I get home, if you really care, I'll show you my last 24 hours of usage pattern so you can see how viewing the camera immediately saturates both the "powerboosted" 3 megabits of upstream, and then the sagged 2 megabits that comes after.

said by cdru:

I agree that if the bandwidth is available, then uses will come up for it. But I disagree that demand always grows to fill available space. If that was the case then everyone would be demanding their ISPs increase their upload speeds. But the majority of us still sit here with very asymmetrical connections. Why? Because people tolerate it because it meets their needs for what they want to pay.

If they wanted faster, symmetrical speeds then they would go with a plan that offered them, if available (e.g. FiOS's 20/20 plan), or be demanding them if they weren't available. But most residential customers don't want to pay the premium to they go on their merry way.

I think we're going to just have to disagree here. The example you give of FIOS is an entirely different and (from a penetration point of view) exotic newcomer. Trust me, as an optical engineer, I recognize the fact that FIOS and FTTH are so clearly the way to the future, but the current asymmetric offerings of the cable networks (which, ironically as you know is Hybrid Fiber Coax, I love fiber...) are endemic because of the narrow return bandwidth in the DOCSIS 1.x and even 2.0 (and even, arguably, the 3.0 spec as the article suggests).

It seems like, if the bandwidth is there, people will find a use for it eventually. That's what I mean when I say that it always grows (albeit sometimes slowly) to fill that space.

said by cdru:

And by the way, billg never said the remark regarding 640k being enough.

Interesting... I learn something new every day. I had no idea that actually wasn't him. I guess he just gets a bad rap for it.
--
"Some people never see the light till it shines thru bullet holes." -Bruce Cockburn

I'm testing Gmail's spam filters: Broadbandreports1@gmail.com
Spam: 12900+ messages currently using 406 MB.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21982933 Thu, 26 Feb 2009 20:20:20 EDT Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21980812
Then I would suggest you do the wise then and back it up locally and then either have it delivered offsite or take it offsite with you.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21980812 Thu, 26 Feb 2009 13:37:56 EDT Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21980803
I work for a multibillion dollar worldwide company and we do not even provide this kind of bandwidth to our remote users. I don't see it being very wide spread amongst much smaller companies with a remote work force not even close to ours.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21980803 Thu, 26 Feb 2009 13:34:29 EDT Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21979474 Then they'll see the true cost of a real High speed business connection.
ComCast business is starting to offer higher speed commerial lines to traditional core business areas, but it may be a while before they offer that in all residental areas.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21979474 Thu, 26 Feb 2009 09:15:39 EDT Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21979205 said by Nerdtalker:

The whole point is that demand always grows to fill the free bandwidth. By always, I mean always.Show me a graph of your past 24 hours of bandwidth usage with your upload pegged at your service's limit and you can prove your point. Show it at anything less then near 100% utilization and you help support mine.

I agree that if the bandwidth is available, then uses will come up for it. But I disagree that demand always grows to fill available space. If that was the case then everyone would be demanding their ISPs increase their upload speeds. But the majority of us still sit here with very asymmetrical connections. Why? Because people tolerate it because it meets their needs for what they want to pay.

If they wanted faster, symmetrical speeds then they would go with a plan that offered them, if available (e.g. FiOS's 20/20 plan), or be demanding them if they weren't available. But most residential customers don't want to pay the premium to they go on their merry way.

And by the way, billg never said the remark regarding 640k being enough.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21979205 Thu, 26 Feb 2009 07:39:40 EDT Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21978539 with respect to throttled upload speeds impairing
download speeds to due the need for ACKs from
the receiver. In older TCP/IP implementations
this was indeed the case but modern mechanisms
like cumulative and selective ACKs (in which
you send a single ACK indicating the receipt
of a large window of packets) have dramatically
reduced the impact. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21978539 Thu, 26 Feb 2009 00:10:22 EDT Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21978528 said by cdru:

said by jadebangle:

Its always 10/1, 20/2, 30/3 massive on the download side, pathetic on the upload side

Please give an example where 2 or 3mbit upload isn't adequate for a residential connection.Ever upload raw video footage?
ever do video conferencing[the more upload, the better the quality]
there ARE LEGIT uses for upstream bandwidth BESIDES stealing movies, music and software
--
When I gez aju zavateh na nalechoo more new yonooz tonigh molinigh - Ken Lee]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21978528 Thu, 26 Feb 2009 00:09:01 EDT Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21976799 said by cdru:

Servers are almost always forbidden from a residential connection. Whether the provision of the TOS is enforced or not is another topic. Another arbitrarily harsh line-item in a TOS/AUP that nobody really cares about.

Even worse, the whole client-server model is starting to become very very unclear given the progression to cloud / push aware services.

For example, if I use a cloud model for managing my email, contacts, notes, office documents, e.t.c. (similar to Palm's synergy), the server often acts as the served, and the other way around conversely.

See, the whole reason that the line item is even in the TOS is because DOCSIS 1.x and 2.0 both had very a-symmetric speeds for downstream and upstream. (9 and 27 megabits, respectively). Granted, the cable ISPs have built out these systems so that the typical ratio for down:up channels is 1:6, but the point I'm making is still valid; return path is nowhere near as fast. Well, what's an easy way to keep this uncongested? No servers.
--
"Some people never see the light till it shines thru bullet holes." -Bruce Cockburn

I'm testing Gmail's spam filters: Broadbandreports1@gmail.com
Spam: 12900+ messages currently using 406 MB.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21976799 Wed, 25 Feb 2009 18:34:30 EDT Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21976764 said by cdru:

Please give an example where 2 or 3mbit upload isn't adequate for a residential connection.
Oh please, don't be so absurd. First of all, it's precisely this kind of thinking which drives me crazy. Second of all, the burden to build-out networks isn't in the hands of the consumers to prove that they need more before ISPs deliver it. I guarantee in a few years, you're going to look back and think, jeez, I sound a lot like Bill Gates in that oft-too-repeated quote of his about a certain amount of RAM being more than enough for just about anyone.

The whole point is that demand always grows to fill the free bandwidth. By always, I mean always. It's simple really, what the whole argument centers around is a classical chicken-or-the-egg type question. Will web technologies that need more bandwidth pop up and wait around until speeds are adequate, or will developers make software which works under the current state of penetration and then become prevalent enough that more bandwidth becomes necessary as it gains popularity.

The answer should be so obvious.
--
"Some people never see the light till it shines thru bullet holes." -Bruce Cockburn

I'm testing Gmail's spam filters: Broadbandreports1@gmail.com
Spam: 12900+ messages currently using 406 MB.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21976764 Wed, 25 Feb 2009 18:28:50 EDT Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21976598 said by cdru:

I've streamed video and audio from home numerous times when I had a 2mbit fios connection without issues. Sure it wasn't 1080p HD with 7.1 surround sound, but picture quality and sound was more then adequate.

As I originally said, faster is always going to be nicer. My point was that for an overwhelming majority of customers, 2 or 3mbit is significantly more then what they need. That video quality might be good for a computer screen, but some people stream to TVs and without the bandwidth the video quality looks worse as the display gets bigger. HD streaming is the future and eventually it's all anybody will use.

I realize that we can access anything even with slow upload speeds if we have the patience, but more bandwidth intensive apps are time sensitive now. A dial up modem isn't gonna cut it anymore.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21976598 Wed, 25 Feb 2009 17:47:26 EDT Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21976156

--
My Anime Site - AnimeCrazy.net]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21976156 Wed, 25 Feb 2009 16:21:34 EDT Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21975584 said by Fanfoot :

So... 160GB of data to be backed up at 2Mbps would take what, 640,000 seconds, or 177 days or about SIX MONTHS to back up. And during this time my data won't be protected. And that's assuming my connection is perfect and I don't use it for anything else.

So if I upgrade my computer every 2 years, my data will only be protected 75% of the time at BEST.
Actually about 7 days, not 177.

(edit) CDRU beat me to it....faster at math I guess!
--
Jay: What the @#$% is the internet???]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21975584 Wed, 25 Feb 2009 14:47:44 EDT Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21975574 said by Fanfoot :

My iPod is 160GB. It is nearly full. It has music, photos and videos on it that I would not want to lose under any circumstances.Ok. Fair enough. I bet your iPod doesn't get 160GB of new content constantly though. I bet a good portion stays the same for some lengthly period of time so it really don't have to be backed up from scratch.

Every so often I switch computers. The way Carbonite works right now is I abandon the old backups and do new ones. Or at least this is what happened last year when I did this.

I don't believe Carbonite allows you to restore a full system from their service. You have to have at least a functional system first before restoring files, don't you? So you really only need to backup what is essentially your "data" files. You shouldn't have to restart your file set. Besides, when you discard an old backup, isn't that leaving you vulnerable until a new backup is complete?

So... 160GB of data to be backed up at 2Mbps would take what, 640,000 seconds, or 177 days or about SIX MONTHS to back up.

Actually, that would be about 177 hours or a little over 7 days. Math's hard I know.

And during this time my data won't be protected.

Even if you had a 10mbit connection, your data wouldn't be protected for 1.5 days. The safest thing would have been to leave your existing file set backed up until you completed your new one and verified it was valid, then delete the old one. That way you would never have to be without a backup in case something should happen to it. But under that method you really wouldn't be limited to any time limit as you'd always be protected, so I can see why you went with that way to support your argument. A wise person with limited bandwidth would have probably just backed up the changed files to begin with, which is how carbonite works by default, isn't it?

So if I upgrade my computer every 2 years, my data will only be protected 75% of the time at BEST.

And its just "C-R-A-Z-Y" for anybody to want more than 2Mbps?

No, but it's c-r-a-z-y to base an entire argument on a miscalculation. Plus I never said there was NO need for it, just that 2 or 3 mbits is ADEQUATE for an overwhelming majority of customers.

You know how stupid you're going to sound in a few years right crdu?

Pot. Kettle. Black. Before calling people stupid, check your own posts. But also consider that I may actually have some intelligence. I didn't seem to have too much problem making it through college with a comp sci degree. Sure the future may be drastically different, but I don't think so. I predict that there will be the same proportional gap between the upload and download speeds as what there is now. But my crystal ball has been a little fuzzy lately. I haven't upgraded to the new hidef ball yet.

How about you post your real name so we can all make fun of you when the future shows up?

Sure. Chris Drudge. Never have kept it a secret. But calling someone out when you yourself are an anonymous coward. I've been around here a few years and plan on being around for a few more. Feel free to come back any time and we can chat about who was right and who was wrong.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21975574 Wed, 25 Feb 2009 14:46:06 EDT Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21975523 said by cdru:

said by jadebangle:

Its always 10/1, 20/2, 30/3 massive on the download side, pathetic on the upload side

Please give an example where 2 or 3mbit upload isn't adequate for a residential connection.
TCP/IP is a handshake protocol. This means that the receiver must tell the sender that the data has arrived successfully arrived and to send more data. Until the sender has been informed of the arrival (at the receiver) of what it has sent, it can/will not send more data. Thus depending on how fast the downlink is at the receiving side, the uplink side (and the actual receiver->sender speed of the connection between the receiver and the sender) must be fast enough to keep the downlink end saturated (ignoring the issue of the need to resend due to receive errors or dropped packets) or the downlink is going to be throttled due to the sender not being told to send more data soon enough. As you increase the download speed, you must increase the upload speed to keep pace or you will be unable to use all of the download speed capability.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21975523 Wed, 25 Feb 2009 14:38:48 EDT Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21975404
Every so often I switch computers. The way Carbonite works right now is I abandon the old backups and do new ones. Or at least this is what happened last year when I did this.

So... 160GB of data to be backed up at 2Mbps would take what, 640,000 seconds, or 177 days or about SIX MONTHS to back up. And during this time my data won't be protected. And that's assuming my connection is perfect and I don't use it for anything else.

So if I upgrade my computer every 2 years, my data will only be protected 75% of the time at BEST.

And its just "C-R-A-Z-Y" for anybody to want more than 2Mbps?

You know how stupid you're going to sound in a few years right crdu? How about you post your real name so we can all make fun of you when the future shows up?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21975404 Wed, 25 Feb 2009 14:18:16 EDT Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21975368
Dude, you need offsite backup. Maybe it didn't matter when all people had on their computers were their old tax returns, but now that you're storing all your music, all your pictures, all your home movies, etc.

And the network needs to evolve as people figure this out.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21975368 Wed, 25 Feb 2009 14:14:09 EDT Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21975116 for the purpose of residental broadband DOCSIS (and in some cases ADSL2) are just fine and will be for years to come.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21975116 Wed, 25 Feb 2009 13:31:03 EDT Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21974915 Why is every single residential ISP except Verizon afraid to give users better upload? with folks such as myself wanting to do off site file backups, or stream high quality audio/video, or perhaps have uses for upstream noone's thought of yet, why not give us at least the option of allowing the technology to do the most it can for those that want to make use of it?
If one lives close enough to a DSLAM to achieve 1Mbit upstream sync, why not allow a user to get that if they want it? I agree, not all users will currently want more upload, but we shouldn't be prevented from getting it just because we don't run a business!
If cablevision can offer a 5Mbit upstream tier over the exact same cable technology I'm currently using with TWC, why isn't TWC offering me the option of a 5Mbit upstream tier? It makes 0 sense if you ask me.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21974915 Wed, 25 Feb 2009 13:00:25 EDT Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21974799 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21974799 Wed, 25 Feb 2009 12:39:09 EDT Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21974739 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21974739 Wed, 25 Feb 2009 12:29:23 EDT Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21974713 said by Phil:

said by cdru:

Please give an example where 2 or 3mbit upload isn't adequate for a residential connection.

Varies from one person to the next, but gaming servers, P2P, FTP server, streaming content from home, online backups, etc.. There are numerous reasons justifying faster uploads.Servers are almost always forbidden from a residential connection. Whether the provision of the TOS is enforced or not is another topic.

I've streamed video and audio from home numerous times when I had a 2mbit fios connection without issues. Sure it wasn't 1080p HD with 7.1 surround sound, but picture quality and sound was more then adequate.

Are your backups really time sensitive that they MUST get there within a certain timeframe? Do you really have multi-gigabytes of data that must be backed up, in full, very frequently where a differential or incremental backup would suffice?

As I originally said, faster is always going to be nicer. My point was that for an overwhelming majority of customers, 2 or 3mbit is significantly more then what they need. They are using online backup services to backup MAYBE a gig or two of files. They aren't using it to backup their entire divx movie collection they pirated. They maybe have a game server, but it's much more likely they are just a client on someone else's server. For the hardcore pirate, hardcore gamer, or the file backuper with OCD, there are "needs" for faster speeds. But saying that 2,3,5 mbits is pathetic is wrong as the market, as a whole, just doesn't need faster and/or more symmetrical connections.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21974713 Wed, 25 Feb 2009 12:24:43 EDT Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21974697 said by Chris 313:

said by dadkins:

said by Chris 313:

Yes, I agree with that. What happens when you have a backup that's a little over 100GB. THAT would be truely painful, wouldn't it?

EXACTLY!
What if you had two computers... :huh:

Over 200GB! No thanks! Makes me glad I have an external here to do more frequent backups vs what I'd do online with 200GB worth of stuff to back up.

I'd do twice a month on my external if I had that much, while online, I'd do it once maybe every 2-3 months.

Also, you have to be aware of Comcast's combo 250GB cap when doing something that large.

Yeesh!
Heh..

We have file server with 1.8TB data, 3 computers all approaching 800GB on their drives, plus a few external's all needing to be backed up.
Off-site back ups with a typical residential cable/dsl connection is all but impossible, not enough upload as well as silly caps.

as others have said, upload is becoming increasingly needed just to do routine things.. we ourselves do a lot of video and audio here and hate waiting hours to upload a simple 15 min HD vid clip.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21974697 Wed, 25 Feb 2009 12:22:49 EDT Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21974584 said by dadkins:

said by Chris 313:

Yes, I agree with that. What happens when you have a backup that's a little over 100GB. THAT would be truely painful, wouldn't it?

EXACTLY!
What if you had two computers... :huh:
Over 200GB! No thanks! Makes me glad I have an external here to do more frequent backups vs what I'd do online with 200GB worth of stuff to back up.

I'd do twice a month on my external if I had that much, while online, I'd do it once maybe every 2-3 months.

Also, you have to be aware of Comcast's combo 250GB cap when doing something that large.

Yeesh!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21974584 Wed, 25 Feb 2009 12:07:09 EDT Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21974576 said by cdru:

Please give an example where 2 or 3mbit upload isn't adequate for a residential connection. Varies from one person to the next, but gaming servers, P2P, FTP server, streaming content from home, online backups, etc.. There are numerous reasons justifying faster uploads.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21974576 Wed, 25 Feb 2009 12:05:50 EDT Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21974523 said by Chris 313:

Yes, I agree with that. What happens when you have a backup that's a little over 100GB. THAT would be truely painful, wouldn't it?
EXACTLY!
What if you had two computers... :huh:
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21974523 Wed, 25 Feb 2009 11:57:46 EDT Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21974502 said by dadkins:

said by cdru:

Please give an example where 2 or 3mbit upload isn't adequate for a residential connection.

Offsite Backups for one...

3 computers here in this room.
Sure would like to do monthly offsite backups - but at 10-18GB for each computer(that comes to something like 30-54GB), 2mbps would be painful.
I have 2.2mbps(nominal) upload now... but I don't want to trash my connection for hours.

2mbps = 900MB per hour
5 hours = 4500MB
12 hours = 10800MB
24 hours = 21600MB
48 hours = 43200MB

This is under ideal conditions with no other connection usage.

So, for me to backup my machines I would have to possibly upload for 50+ hours and not use the connection for anything else otherwise it will take longer?
Uhm, yeah. :hmm:
Yes, I agree with that. What happens when you have a backup that's a little over 100GB. THAT would be truely painful, wouldn't it?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21974502 Wed, 25 Feb 2009 11:55:07 EDT Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21974468 said by cdru:

Please give an example where 2 or 3mbit upload isn't adequate for a residential connection.
Offsite Backups for one...

3 computers here in this room.
Sure would like to do monthly offsite backups - but at 10-18GB for each computer(that comes to something like 30-54GB), 2mbps would be painful.
I have 2.2mbps(nominal) upload now... but I don't want to trash my connection for hours.

2mbps = 900MB per hour
5 hours = 4500MB
12 hours = 10800MB
24 hours = 21600MB
48 hours = 43200MB

This is under ideal conditions with no other connection usage.

So, for me to backup my machines I would have to possibly upload for 50+ hours and not use the connection for anything else otherwise it will take longer?
Uhm, yeah. :hmm:
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21974468 Wed, 25 Feb 2009 11:48:01 EDT Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21974377 said by jesseb_66:

I bought an hd Camcorder a few months ago we upload all the time. We just had a baby girl and post videos for the fam back East in MP4.
It can take awhile I ussually start uploads before work and let em run from there.
The demand for higher upload is comming.just because you can't think of a need doesn't mean there isn't.
ISP's had better start getting ready.
Home security, control and surveillance controlled via the internet is also on the rise.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21974377 Wed, 25 Feb 2009 11:34:04 EDT Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21974365 It can take awhile I ussually start uploads before work and let em run from there.
The demand for higher upload is comming.just because you can't think of a need doesn't mean there isn't.
ISP's had better start getting ready.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21974365 Wed, 25 Feb 2009 11:32:19 EDT Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21974357 said by cdru:

Even with telecommuting, the necessity to be uploading large files frequency can be minimized with some planning. And if you are constantly needing to transfer large files, maybe telecommuting isn't the best fit for the job.
Try working in video or audio production.

There are people doing that from home and who need all the upload they can get.

In any case the problem is not a broadband class warfare between "residential" and "business" connections because business connections are often based on the same limited DOCSIS and ADSL standards.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21974357 Wed, 25 Feb 2009 11:30:56 EDT Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21974336 said by fifty nine:

On a serious note, a lot of people are telecommuting these days and they need the upload to upload large files quickly.

They probably should be using a business account but I doubt that a telecommuter would be able to afford an OC connection to their home.You don't need an "OC" connection to have a fast connection, but yeah, it's not necessarily going to fit under the definition of a residential connection.

Even with telecommuting, the necessity to be uploading large files frequency can be minimized with some planning. And if you are constantly needing to transfer large files, maybe telecommuting isn't the best fit for the job.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21974336 Wed, 25 Feb 2009 11:26:27 EDT Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21974325
Want to do fast online backups? Want to grab files fro home at high speed when on the road? Want to have a remote desktop experience that's like sitting at the computer? You need better upload speeds.

If FiOS was here, I'd pay the extra money for a 20/20 symmetric connection, no doubt.

Before you say it, no I'm not getting a business line; they still only have 2 Mbps of upload here.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21974325 Wed, 25 Feb 2009 11:25:01 EDT Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21974316
On a serious note, a lot of people are telecommuting these days and they need the upload to upload large files quickly.

They probably should be using a business account but I doubt that a telecommuter would be able to afford an OC connection to their home.

Cable commercial accounts are out because they use DOCSIS.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21974316 Wed, 25 Feb 2009 11:23:06 EDT Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21974266 Charter offer 60/5

So 100/5 or 100/10 would be the ideal next higher tier if offered in the future

correction, the majority of us have fast download, slow upload. Just because many of us have slow upload doesn't mean that we don't use much of it. It just mean that we can't use much of it even if we want to. It would be a lot faster to download then to upload. It is frustrating for many of us that want to upload large file so many of us do not bother

Not all of us just leech most of us do what is convenient so leeching allow us to absorb huge amount of bandwidth.

Its by design...
Is it possible to give us 5/5, 10/10, 20/20 etc on cable internet? sure its possible but it would mean that you can freely upload as much as you download and that is what they are trying to prevent in the first place
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21974266 Wed, 25 Feb 2009 11:17:12 EDT Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21974262 said by fifty nine:

bittorrent

Bittorrent for personal use (e.g. sharing a home video with friends and family) or bittorrent for commercial use, allowing 3rd parties to use (for profit) the ISP bandwidth to share to people you have no relationship with.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21974262 Wed, 25 Feb 2009 11:15:58 EDT Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Not-much-improvement-over-docsis-20-21974216 said by cdru:

said by jadebangle:

Its always 10/1, 20/2, 30/3 massive on the download side, pathetic on the upload side