Reviews:
 ·AT&T U-Verse
| There *is* a market for slower broadband The reality is that there are plenty of people for whom a fast connection is a waste of money. Granny has no need for 50M, she can get her email on 1.5M as well. I know plenty of people who stick with DSL although faster connections are available.
Personally I had 30/5 OOL, moved and got 18/2 through Uverse - then downgraded to 12/2 for $20 less/month. The reality is that for 99% of use there is no real-life difference when you get past the 6-7M mark.
Unless you are a heavy gamer that isn't willing to throttle down the pr0n downloads while playing or you have a family where 3-4 people have no life, anything faster than 3M will do just fine. | |
|
 Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
 ·Mediacom
 ·T-Mobile US
| Re: There *is* a market for slower broadband that does not justify bumping everybody into slower speeds. Faster speeds should be encouraged and even mandated. You never know if anything comes up in next two years that requires a connection faster than 6 Mb.
And there is a plenty of applications already that utilize faster connections:
- downloading files including videos, music, programs, etc (if you download a lot there you go)
- videoconferencing
- sharing (yeah do really all those 3 people who stay in house to use internet have no life because there is a storm outside? lol)
- satellite imaging, maps (google earth, etc) | |
|
 | Reviews:
 ·Frontier Communi..
| Re: There *is* a market for slower broadband said by chgo_man99:Faster speeds should be encouraged and even mandated. Why should it be 'mandated'? Got no problem with it being encouraged but if somebody has a slow connection and is happy with it why should they be compelled by the telco or government to upgrade?
I have relatives that still use dialup even though broadband is available to them. I've offered to help them set up broadband and they want nothing to do with it. Their loss I suppose but why is this something worth getting regulatory bodies worked up over? | |
|
| | Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
·Mediacom
·T-Mobile US
| Re: There *is* a market for slower broadband because it stimulates innovations.
Just like tax cuts for millionaires encourages people to invest or keep a large cash in bank accounts, which in turn is used by banks to issue loans to us on education, car payments or mortgage. It's not just investor's money or bank's profits.
Internet at the beginning was ARPNET only used for military operations but later it found use in educational institutions, later hospital networks until it got home. It was first a government project that later became privatized mainly by telcos.
I am sure they were government initiatives, mandates, not just private business and market demand that stimulated the growth of the Internet worldwide. | |
|
| | | | said by Crookshanks:said by chgo_man99:Faster speeds should be encouraged and even mandated. Why should it be 'mandated'? Got no problem with it being encouraged but if somebody has a slow connection and is happy with it why should they be compelled by the telco or government to upgrade? I have relatives that still use dialup even though broadband is available to them. I've offered to help them set up broadband and they want nothing to do with it. Their loss I suppose but why is this something worth getting regulatory bodies worked up over? Because it actually costs less to maintain a fiber line than a copper line, and a granny using only e-mail is not going to be overwhelmed by extra speed. That extra speed doesn't cost the ISP any money if it's not being used, so they should offer high speeds to everyone. | |
|
| | | here we go again; bringing in the Gov't to mandate and regulate something that works fine.  | |
|
| | | | Re: There *is* a market for slower broadband no, not everything works fine or will. thats why we have gov. competition in most countries did not grow from anarchy. There is plenty of things plotted against natural competition. | |
|
| | | | | Re: There *is* a market for slower broadband no. the gov't does NOT create compeition. they actually make things WORSE. mandate something to be done- higher taxes come from it. Everyone wants POTS service and Internet? You get the USF on everything. And we all know where that money goes. And it's not to build anything out or to support a network- gotta make the share holders happy. | |
|
| | | | | | Re: There *is* a market for slower broadband I was not talking about the U.S only. | |
|
| | |
| | | | | Re: There *is* a market for slower broadband your dial-up would work fine- you have a phone line- mandated by the gov't. The gov't mandated you have it- you get it and all the "taxes and fees" that come along with that. They mandated you to be able to use it for your internet and guess what you got it. you also got a choice of dial-up providers. it works. so yes in your case gov't regulation and mandates did work. The gov't can't force them to offer you HSI nor anything else but your phone line since the USF is suppose to pay for that service to be maintained- but doesn't. they just pocket that money. | |
|
| | | | Reviews:
·Air Advantage
 ·HughesNet Satell..
| Re: There *is* a market for slower broadband said by hottboiinnc:your dial-up would work fine- you have a phone line- mandated by the gov't. The gov't mandated you have it- you get it and all the "taxes and fees" that come along with that. They mandated you to be able to use it for your internet and guess what you got it. you also got a choice of dial-up providers. it works. so yes in your case gov't regulation and mandates did work. The gov't can't force them to offer you HSI nor anything else but your phone line since the USF is suppose to pay for that service to be maintained- but doesn't. they just pocket that money.
my point was that the government has done nothing to prevent large monopolies of phone and cable companies that has resulted in no competition, which has resulted in poor service and high prices and lack of high speed internet options for millions of people | |
|
| | said by cowboyro:Unless you are a heavy gamer that isn't willing to throttle down the pr0n downloads while playing or you have a family where 3-4 people have no life, anything faster than 3M will do just fine.
I need to stop you here. Try working Remotely on that dsl link. even at 7 mbit it's horrible. I am an Admin and beat my cable modem roughly ! 200 gigs a month and need it to be up during the day when I work remotely.
My streams are constantly in the 5 mbit range and when I open up all the monitoring tools to watch the network and all our customers servers I constnatly burn 12 mbit. Comcast doesn't gripe a bit about it.
But once the afternoon sets in and the kids are home from school. I get next to nothing. But I barely ever need it then.
And when you say 3 to 4 who have no life, you do realize that most people use a hell of a lot of youtube and facebook right ?
Just because it's not your profile doesn't mean every one else is ok with what you have.
--
"It's always funny until someone gets hurt......and then it's absolutely friggin' hysterical!" | |
|
| Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
| Re: There *is* a market for slower broadband said by BosstonesOwn:said by cowboyro:Unless you are a heavy gamer that isn't willing to throttle down the pr0n downloads while playing or you have a family where 3-4 people have no life, anything faster than 3M will do just fine.
I need to stop you here. Try working Remotely on that dsl link. even at 7 mbit it's horrible. I am an Admin and beat my cable modem roughly ! 200 gigs a month and need it to be up during the day when I work remotely. My streams are constantly in the 5 mbit range and when I open up all the monitoring tools to watch the network and all our customers servers I constnatly burn 12 mbit. Comcast doesn't gripe a bit about it. Highly depends on what you are doing. Remote desktop has no issue with 2M upload. Now if you want to pass all the data over the VPN it's your problem.
said by BosstonesOwn:And when you say 3 to 4 who have no life, you do realize that most people use a hell of a lot of youtube and facebook right ? If you're an admin then you should know how much bandwidth they take (hint: not that much). Barely 800kbit/s for youtube average, much less for facebook. Fire up the resource monitor and see the graphs for yourself...
Anyway the point of the thread was that some ISP suggests switching to cheaper lower speed IF YOU DON'T NEED THE HIGH SPEED. | |
|
| | | | Re: There *is* a market for slower broadband Normal remote desktop sessions with decent options like mounting a local cd to the servers reuire about 300 k a second.
HD youtube eats about 140 K a sec. Especially if it's a good stream.
I can check my netflows from my cisco the kids eat through 80 gigs in a month. Especially when they play games and watch hulu.
--
"It's always funny until someone gets hurt......and then it's absolutely friggin' hysterical!" | |
|
| jp10558Premium
join:2005-06-24
Willseyville, NY | You need to consider leaving your management PC on at work and then using something like LogMeIn if you need 12Mbit to monitor your network... | |
|
| | | | Re: There *is* a market for slower broadband Real time graphs still eat bandwidth, and when you have 40 switches and data flows it still eats data , especially when we need a secure remote desktop.
You can't just use Logmein in the corporate world. It's rdp to the monitor server , and to your desktop/workstation, then rdp to what ever your working on.
Lots of sessions eat bandwidth.
--
"It's always funny until someone gets hurt......and then it's absolutely friggin' hysterical!" | |
|
| | | jp10558Premium
join:2005-06-24
Willseyville, NY | Re: There *is* a market for slower broadband Why do you need real time graphs? Don't you have a monitoring system - you can't really be monitoring by having some admin stare at graphs can you? That seems horribly inefficient.
Maybe you do - I don't work in the coporate world so I can't say. But I just get an e-mail if something goes out of bounds - I don't sit there watching graphs.
--
Opera 10(Build 1750); Windows XP Pro SP3;Intel C2Q6600; 3GB DDR2 1066; 1M/128k DSL; Antivir Personal; Comodo Internet Security 3.10;Proxomitron 4.5j Sidki 2009-06-06,GPG ID:0x0A1C6EE3 | |
|
| | said by cowboyro:The reality is that there are plenty of people for whom a fast connection is a waste of money. Granny has no need for 50M, she can get her email on 1.5M as well. I know plenty of people who stick with DSL although faster connections are available.
Personally I had 30/5 OOL, moved and got 18/2 through Uverse - then downgraded to 12/2 for $20 less/month. The reality is that for 99% of use there is no real-life difference when you get past the 6-7M mark.
Unless you are a heavy gamer that isn't willing to throttle down the pr0n downloads while playing or you have a family where 3-4 people have no life, anything faster than 3M will do just fine.
That pretty much hits the nail on the head for any "normal" user, especially if the upload isn't a lousy 128/256k!!
A 3/512 speed would be perfect for most "normal" users.
--
The Firefox alternative.
»www.mozilla.org/projects/seamonkey/ | |
|
|
|
