how-to block ads
|
|
Share Topic
 |
 |
|
|
 espaethDigital PlumberPremium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
kudos:2
 ·Clear Wireless
| reply to sonicmerlin
Re: Most profitable quarter ever... what?! said by sonicmerlin:Your post is pure FUD. Internet growth has been incredibly consistent and is extremely predictable. Which is why so many individuals and companies have had issues coming up with a consistent prediction of growth?
...at the end of 2005, John Chambers, the CEO of Cisco, claimed that Internet traffic was growing at about 100% per year Boslet2005, and similar claims are common (e.g., Roberts2006). Chambers also predicted both in 2005 and in a keynote at the NXTcomm conference in June 2007 Chambers2007, Duffy2007 that growth might accelerate towards 300 to 500% per year, and that the internal Cisco corporate network traffic load is currently growing at such rates. On the other hand, in August 2007, Cisco released a pair of white papers Cisco07a and Cisco07b which estimate that worldwide Internet traffic growth has been around 50% per year over the last few years, and project similar growth for the next few years. (See also the article DW2007 that draws on the Cisco white papers and other sources.) Thus even within a single company, and one that plays a central role in making the Internet function to boot, there are wide disparities in growth estimates, between 50 and 100% per year for current growth rates, and between 50 and 500% per year going forward. Source: »www.dtc.umn.edu/mints/
A growth rate of 100% per year means traffic grows 1000-fold over the next 10 years.
A growth rate of 50% per year means 58-fold over the next 10 years.
Those are vastly different numbers to plan for -- and the "killer apps" that would influence growth over the next 10 years are still completely unknown. Just look at the evolution of the Internet in the last 10 years -- who, in 2000, would have predicted the rise of a site like YouTube?
said by sonicmerlin:These ISPs have been making record profits while decreasing capex and network investment annually. With modern technology network congestion has been completely eliminated. "The minimal Comcast throttling is possible because they have essentially solved the p2p upstream congestion issue. Comcast top technical people have described how they've made inexpensive upgrades to 10-20 megabits from the 2 megabits of older systems. Explaining why they are moving slowly on DOCSIS 3.0 bonding, 4 CTO-level execs told Cable Show audiences they have essentially no upstream congestion these days. The speakers were in charge of several of the largest networks in the world. It's amazing how many in D.C., including just about all the cable lobbyists, don't seem to know the progress they've made." "Record Profits" is a bad indicator because it's simply pulling out a single statistic without looking at the whole system. TWC has also had "Record Revnue" coupled with "Record Operating Expenses."
Look at the annual numbers for TWC: »www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE:TWC&fstype=ii
Revenue has gone up, operating expenses have gone up, net income has gone down.
Your quotes are also self contradictory. You appear to be making the argument that broadband ISPs aren't investing enough money in their infrastructure, and then you provide quotes that say they've invested in capacity so much that they've completely eliminated congestion.
DOCSIS 3.0 address the immediate demand for cable operators -- where is the cheap fix for DSL providers? | | |
|
Reviews:
·T-Mobile US
 ·Cox HSI
| DSL providers are not what's up for discussion here, it's cable operators that are, and to be honest Copper was doomed from the beginning and we all know that.
Although Fiber to the Terminal is working quite well for qwest, im getting 40meg down/5mbps up on my "DSL" connection, and would personally never trade it back for Cable. | |
|
