 jester121Premium
join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL | reply to gpmoo7
Re: AVG off 11.4 GB/month shows caps not out of line The data doesn't support that supposition at all. |
|
gpmoo7
join:2009-01-03
Montreal, QC | said by jester121:The data doesn't support that supposition at all. Which data? It's clear that the future is unlimited bandwidth for every one. That's it.
The future is FTTH starting à 100 Mb/s and going over Gb/s in a few years (that's a reality in some country, not in Canada).
All this bandwidth will be used by everyone ...
Of course, today, in Canada, people are stick to their 7Mb/s throttled Internet access with limited bandwidth so they just do IM, mails and Facebook ... who is going to rent an HD movie with this kind of Internet access ? |
|
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 | I'm pretty sure that the sample size was big enough that caps weren't an issue. Everyone except mobile broadband providers have caps much higher than 11.4GB. |
|
 MattAll noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | reply to gpmoo7
said by gpmoo7:said by jester121:The data doesn't support that supposition at all. Which data? It's clear that the future is unlimited bandwidth for every one. That's it. The future is FTTH starting à 100 Mb/s and going over Gb/s in a few years (that's a reality in some country, not in Canada). All this bandwidth will be used by everyone ... Of course, today, in Canada, people are stick to their 7Mb/s throttled Internet access with limited bandwidth so they just do IM, mails and Facebook ... who is going to rent an HD movie with this kind of Internet access ? I've got access to a gigabit connection and a couple of 100Mbps ones. I can't find anything to tax the 100Mbps connection, much less the 1Gbps. There won't be a need for that type of bandwidth to the home for a lot longer than a couple of years, although I'd LOVE to be able to purchase one at a reasonable price right now.
--
"What is conservatism? Is it not adherence to the old and tried, against the new and untried?" - Abraham Lincoln |
|
gpmoo7
join:2009-01-03
Montreal, QC
1 edit | reply to iansltx
said by iansltx:I'm pretty sure that the sample size was big enough that caps weren't an issue. Everyone except mobile broadband providers have caps much higher than 11.4GB. Yes but 11.4GB is a worldwide average including countries where Internet is almost not used ... so the average in ... let's say, the G8 countries (Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, UK, US) should be more like 30GB or more ... (I hope  ) |
|
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 | I'm pretty sure that Cisco picked twenty relatively high-profile broadband providers. Also, 11.4 GB per connection seems to be about right... |
|
 tubbynetreminds me of the danse russePremium,MVM
join:2008-01-16
Chandler, AZ | said by iansltx:I'm pretty sure that Cisco picked twenty relatively high-profile broadband providers. not quite an assumption i'm willing to make. i would assume that most of these isps would have to have a working relationship with cisco, in the form of account managers and sales engineers. through these relationships, cisco would pitch the box that collects the survey data onto the isp network.
a company that is running juniper switch/routers utilising alcatel dslams or motorola cmts units is not going to have the working relationship/trust with cisco to say "sure, through that big box collecting data into the network". in fact, just like there is an mac vs. windows debate, there is the same in the enterprise/service provider space with juniper and cisco (and some others like force10). some people patently refuse to run c* gear because they only like j* gear. from an issue of interoperability, it makes sense to stick with what you have, but i digress.
at any rate, if the isp does not have a working relationship with cisco, they aren't going to be part of this survey. i would say that this cuts out a good chunk of isps from the mix.
q.
--
"...if I in my north room dance naked, grotesquely before my mirror waving my shirt round my head and singing softly to myself..." |
|
gpmoo7
join:2009-01-03
Montreal, QC | reply to Matt
said by Matt:I've got access to a gigabit connection and a couple of 100Mbps ones. I can't find anything to tax the 100Mbps connection, much less the 1Gbps. There won't be a need for that type of bandwidth to the home for a lot longer than a couple of years, although I'd LOVE to be able to purchase one at a reasonable price right now. That's the future of broadband Internet. Isn't great to know that the speed is not an issue because you can't find anything to use it all?
100 Mb/s today is like a virtually unlimited speed!
Tomorrow, HDTV will go IPTV with 20 Mb/s for an HD channel and multiple channels through the same Internet access ...
This tomorrow is going to happen sooner than you think ... at least in countries where unlimited bandwidth and 20 Mb/s is for everyone today (even if you doesn't think you need it ) and FTTH on his way.
As of today, I really think that unlimited 20Mb/s should be available for everyone ... at least in the biggest cities in North America. |
|
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 | reply to tubbynet
Comcast uses Cisco. Pretty sure AT&T does. TWC probably does. Though Comcast doesn't use Cisco on the CMTS side (because their CMTSes don't know how to load balance worth a crap). |
|
Reviews:
 ·AT&T U-Verse
 ·Bright House
| said by iansltx:Comcast uses Cisco. Pretty sure AT&T does. There is very little Cisco equipment in the AT&T Central Offices. What Cisco equipment is there is currently being phased out for Juniper (MX480's and MX960's). The VRAD backbone is Alcatel routers & switches. |
|
MattAll noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | reply to iansltx
said by iansltx:Comcast uses Cisco. Pretty sure AT&T does. TWC probably does. Though Comcast doesn't use Cisco on the CMTS side (because their CMTSes don't know how to load balance worth a crap). Time Warner definitely does.
--
"What is conservatism? Is it not adherence to the old and tried, against the new and untried?" - Abraham Lincoln |
|
jester121Premium
join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL Reviews:
 ·voip.ms
| reply to tubbynet
said by tubbynet:said by iansltx:I'm pretty sure that Cisco picked twenty relatively high-profile broadband providers. not quite an assumption i'm willing to make. i would assume that most of these isps would have to have a working relationship with cisco, in the form of account managers and sales engineers. through these relationships, cisco would pitch the box that collects the survey data onto the isp network. a company that is running juniper switch/routers utilising alcatel dslams or motorola cmts units is not going to have the working relationship/trust with cisco to say "sure, through that big box collecting data into the network". in fact, just like there is an mac vs. windows debate, there is the same in the enterprise/service provider space with juniper and cisco (and some others like force10). some people patently refuse to run c* gear because they only like j* gear. from an issue of interoperability, it makes sense to stick with what you have, but i digress. at any rate, if the isp does not have a working relationship with cisco, they aren't going to be part of this survey. i would say that this cuts out a good chunk of isps from the mix. So be it. Please explain why ISPs using non-Cisco gear would expect to see drastically different results, if they had chosen to collect the same metrics? |
|
tubbynetreminds me of the danse russePremium,MVM
join:2008-01-16
Chandler, AZ | said by jester121:Please explain why ISPs using non-Cisco gear would expect to see drastically different results, if they had chosen to collect the same metrics? the metrics may be the same, but the data outcomes could be drastically affected. again, this is a survey of *20* isps spread across the globe. because of the differences in content, restrictions, cultures, norms, and societal emphasis on technology, it is difficult to put anything into a "cookie cutter". sure, worldwide monthly average consumption is 11 gigs. great. however, that doesn't account for every isp in every part of the country and there is no differentiation between regions of the globe.
while you could make the argument that cisco wouldn't publish these results if they weren't accurate, i contend that the addition of several larger isps in each region and a breakout of each regions monthly consumption would be a better indicator.
q.
--
"...if I in my north room dance naked, grotesquely before my mirror waving my shirt round my head and singing softly to myself..." |
|
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1 | reply to iansltx
said by iansltx:I'm pretty sure that the sample size was big enough that caps weren't an issue. Everyone except mobile broadband providers have caps much higher than 11.4GB. How do you know what?
quote:
Globally, the average broadband connection (primarily residential subscribers and some business users) generates approximately 11.4 gigabytes of Internet traffic per month.
Did they include every 3G phone with a phone-only data plan, or every 3G device with a laptop/tether plan? Did they include dialup users? What about satellite (WB, Hughes)? What about business grade satellite like Inmarsat? What about WISPs that put 200 users on 1 T1 for backhaul where the speed crawls to 100kbitps during peak usage (still better than 19kbitps on rural dialup)? |
|
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1 | reply to Matt
said by Matt:I've got access to a gigabit connection and a couple of 100Mbps ones. I can't find anything to tax the 100Mbps connection, much less the 1Gbps. There won't be a need for that type of bandwidth to the home for a lot longer than a couple of years, although I'd LOVE to be able to purchase one at a reasonable price right now. Bluray is 36mbitps AFAIK. With a 100mbitps at home, I can stream content from my home to anywhere on the globe through a VPN. I'll never need to carry a portable HD around every again. The world is my LAN. |
|
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Comcast
| reply to patcat88
Cisco picked 20 ISPs who were using their equipment. 90% of the WISPs I know of use Mikrotik or similar. You're right in asking what's inside the "20 providers" black box but I'm inclined to believe that Cisco picked wireline or high-speed wireless options (not 3G) for the companies they studied. |
|
