What You Need To Know About The National Broadband Plan > Actual Speeds

reply to wahoospa

Re: Actual Speeds

I also look at it this way... they'll just stop selling "broadband" service and start calling it something else... as it is, they already call it "High Speed Internet" as well...

reply to fiberguy
Just call it Internet access instead of broadband.. It's not that hard.

The more likely thing is that ISPs that aren't currently providing this 4/1 Mbps of actual throughput will more easily be able to dip into the perverted USF new tax burden AT&T and Verizon executive pension fund CAF

reply to FBGuy
Yeah I'm a Qwest customer, I hope they choke on their own sh!t!! If they were dieing of thirst, I wouldn't give them the sweat from my balls!!! Yeah, I love Qwest!!

tell us how you really feel

reply to fiberguy
Actually, Qwest is probably able to deliver 1 meg up with some tweaking. When Qwest began selling ADSL service, it originally was provisioned at 1024k up, but was changed to 896k 5-6 years ago, as poor line quality is less noticeable at 896k. If any customers still have the same, unrepaired service, 1024k is grandfathered. I'm pretty sure that most of the DSLAM equipment out there can do a 1024k up profile. Maybe some other tweaking can get the thruput close to that.

1024 kbps DSL profile means you'll only get ~850 kbps throughput.

I'm curious as to why they went so aggressive for upload relative to download. Is it for video communications?

The person who said that this would mean big bucks for DSL providers to upgrade might on to something.

Personally I think 7 mbps and 0.5 mbps actual throughput would be a more useful and attainable goal. 4 mbps down isn't even enough for 720p video which is much more important than uploading at 1 mbps IMO.

Could it be that they are more focused more on the communications side of things and less on video delivery since they're not as keen as many are to see the internet replace the traditional crappy cable/satellite tv systems? Thinking about this makes sense as they have considerable control over the content of TV that they wouldn't have with online video...

reply to fiberguy

reply to Tron4Net
i used to live in qwest territory. i was fortunate enough to be able to get cable internet. If I recall correctly it was 3x the speed for the same price.

I don't know how they never saw this coming.

they shouldn't offer the service in areas where they don't even try to compete.
--
sbcglobal.net speedtest result 11/11/09 - 5256kbps

reply to fiberguy
Cable doesn't go 1M up either. I, personally, do not know anyone with an actual, functional 1M up. And this includes a 1M up business cable connection -- TW can and will drop packets above 500k, the best I have ever seen it do is ~900k.

DOCSIS 3.0 and VDSL (aka Uverse) will work at these speeds, but getting the operators to stop shoveling cash into their pockets long enough to upgrade their systems will require putting a gun to their head.

(The office has a T1 and DS3, and they work at full rate 100% of the time. But, they aren't $29.95 a month.)

reply to cramer
Cable doesn't go 1M up either. I, personally, do not know anyone with an actual, functional 1M up. And this includes a 1M up business cable connection -- TW can and will drop packets above 500k, the best I have ever seen it do is ~900k.


I call BS. My home line gets 1 up 15 down consistently. my 2 up 15 down business cable gets that consistently. My 5Mbit and 3 Mbit fiber links get a bit over that consistently. All TW provided.

reply to cramer

reply to bn1221
He COULD be talking locally, but thanks for coming to the defense of Time Warner!