OptimumOnline → Re: FiOS Updates Speed.. What will CV do to counter?

Give me one legitimate reason you need 65 Mbps upload at home...torrents or "servers" don't count.

And why exactly are torrents or servers not legitimate reason for faster upload?

Backing up my hard drive to an online backup service (aka "the cloud").

Oh I'm sorry I wasn't aware there were online backup services out there that require 65 Mbps upload...

It's nice for that initial backup, but after you initially back up your HD do you have that many files changing that need to be uploaded to a backup storage that 65 Mbps would really help (assuming you have it set up to back up files while idle and not just arbitrarily whether in use or not).

Not that I'm against faster speeds, but I don't think they're going to do a drastic revamp of speeds now, and I don't think that CV necessarily needs to compete with their top speed tier at this time.

Why does it have to "require"?
With your logic you should just go back to dial up because no service "requires" specific bandwidth. It's 'for optimal performance'.
Stop being Jealous Nancy. You are acting like an AT&T exec.

Don't know why they wouldn't count but I work from home a lot editing video files and then uploading them to the streaming server at work and need all the upload I can afford (have 35/35 on Verizon now). That was the only reason I left OOL for FIOS was the upload speeds available.

well if you need 65mbit upload, you should prolly just switch to Fios....who cares what cablevision is going to do. If you "need" it, then just switch if the 15mbit upload on Ultra isn't enough.

His logic is basically implying Cablevision is worthless until one of their tiers has 65 Mbps upload like fios has...when in reality 99.9% of Cablevision customers would never even come close to spiking that high transmit.

What do I have to be jealous of? You act like I give a shit about someone elses upload speed. I have enough patience for the one or two times I do offsite backups to let it go overnight and have it be done in the morning. First world problems eh?

I'm sure people said similar things about 28.8 kbps dial-up modems. "Who would ever need 28.8 kbps?!"

then why do you bother posting in this thread? just to troll?

The 50/25 tier [was symmetric 25mbps] is a legitimate tier, competing directly with Cablevision's Boost Plus.

It's slightly more expensive, but if you're already paying for Boost Plus and do not bundle. 50/25 is worth the small price difference. For example, I pay $65. I would consider anything with a realistic upstream as direct competition to Boost Plus, especially those of us who pay full price.

I believe they quoted $69 for 50/25 after the price hikes. I really enjoy CV and decry Verizon's billing and support department. At least with CV I can reach someone in North America, and not Mumbai. Trying to get credit from them is like pulling teeth.

So basically those of us who do use 2mbps or even 8mbps would be very happy with Boost Plus - I have a feeling this will spur upstream binding.

I like my server. I like my cloud backup and I like having a decent amount of upstream.

What's the debate about? Some of us mostly download, and some of us enjoy legal torrents, foreign torrents, friends and skyping while uploading. There should be no stigma attached to uploading.

--
Don't feed the trolls.
Dave

PS Why the upstream stigma - get over it, there's no shortage of bandwidth, and CV will likely start binding upstream channels and raise their tier's upstream.

Hi oldtimers!

My first modem was a 300/600 baud in 1983 :) I helped write a simple AT command set. My first real modem was a 1200baud Hayes!

I ran a 16 line chat board which also had several high speed nodes. My BBS was one of the first in the Brooklyn area that was multi-node. Most nodes were 2400 baud, however I had Zoom modems. I remember a sysop program which had a user upgradable 24,000 bp/s.

These BBS's will be the initial boards using Zoom Telephonics VFX24K 24,000bps 
V.Fast Class modems. 
 
In November/December of 1993 these boards will have at least 1 line 
running at 24,000 kbps subject to a user upgradable to ITU-T V34
 
If you are a sysop and would like to be involved with Zoom Telephonics 
Sysop Purchasing program please send a fax to Dan Vassily at Zoom.
617-423-9231, or  617-423-3733 or CIS 71333,1527.
 

Dave's blast from the past! Thanks for the memories. I remember shotgunning two 56K Sportsters. 10kbps/5 kbps - The poor man's cable! :)

Congrats! I never break 60 on the upload.. tops is 59.40mbits, upload is about the same-- router based.

Anwhoo.. Verizon will proably be more for 50/25 stand-alone, more like $75 not $70 plus an installation fee.

Right now, boostplus is $44.90 when switching carriers as a *NEW* customer. Remember, OOL is normally $49.95 so off promotion boost is $65, so compare apples to apples. FIOS off promotion, which is basically ALL stand-alone products and services will be the highest price outside of a *CONTRACT*. YMMV, but new customers are always an incentive, just not as much these days.

$44.90 for 50/8 vs $75 for 50/25 is a $30+ savings and if you don't need the extra upload for a year.. kudos to your savings. which will happen first? Verizon lowers prices or cablevision upps the upload speed?

IMO, Verizon will blink on their recent price hikes (particular, NYC).. if only for triple play. It would take cablevision upping speeds again to make Verizon do better deals on stand-alone pricing. IF CV wants to up my speed for free.. I'll take it.. for sure..

Cabonite data backp services can accept 100mbit and beyond connections from each customer on the upload... Video files are also becoming much larger in size when you consider they are of the 720 or 1080p variety. Dont' think any and all video files are immediately pirate content.. cause they're not.. there are plenty of legit reasons for UPLOADING compressed HD video files. It's quite possible in the future.. Verizon may do a partnering promotion where you get free hard drive backup service w/ a 150 & 300mbit tier package.. a great reason for them to offer SYMMETRICAL SPEEDS again!

Still doesn't mean you NEED 65 Mbps upload...it just means you're impatient.

Perhaps you'd like to clearly define exactly the bandwidth limits that current users NEED vs their IMPATIENCE. It might be funny to watch you struggle with this, but unfortunately there are larger models of this same debate that both sides of the Congressional aisle struggle over daily. There are those that see a pie and try to divide it JUST RIGHT, while there are those that envision an infinite supply of pies, just waiting to be baked. I know one thing - when I was using 300 and then 1200 baud dial-ups, I could never even DREAM of "needing" much more than PERHAPS 10 times that speed. More would have seen impossible and perhaps "who needs it?".

Need means not possible via other methods or imperitive. You can use 2Mbps upload just fine and even Carbonite slows you down after you've uploaded the first 5GB of data to them, they then throttle you down to 512Kbps or something. For some applications you NEED X bandwidth to make it work as it wont work on Dial-up or slow DSL.

Then there's times like when you want to upload 500GB of DATA and you want it to take 20mins vs 20 days. Now that's impatience and none of your data is critical - yes that 120yr photo of your great great grand mother is not critical, Fact is you can upload that seperately or copy it to a HDD and put it at afriends house till your upload is done if that be the case.

...what?

The problem with the NEED versus WANT argument is that it is irrelevant. CV or any provider must give the customer what they want unless there is no one else providing what the customer wants OR they provide enough other things the customer WANTS that the other provider does not provide. The list of things a customer can want have a large range for different customers and can range from low price, to customer service, to simply not having to change your E-mail Address etc.

Nobody had a concept of High-Definition video, blue ray, and multi terabyte hard drives in 1980s. Betamax was pushing out 400 line resolution on the best equipment available on studio monitors, not standard tv screens which were small and mega expensive. Sure, we knew that things would get better.. but not exactly the specific timeline. Verizon blinked from deploying the bandwdith equivalent of Moore's law, on the upstream as symmetric doesn't seem to be a priority.

At the dawn of Verizon's FTTP/FIOS, we were lamenting how long it would take for customers to see 100/100 symmetrical bandwidth.. Apparently, not 2012.

Online backup. I use Crashplan for the offsite backup of my computers. Upload is everything with these services. Right now if I have a large backup queued and sending my other internet services slow since the requests get caught in the outbound queue. Do a Google search on buffer bloat.

I do online backup and it works fine at 2mbps. At 65mbps that would backup around 20gig an hour. Assume the backup runs for 5 hours in the middle of the night so it does not affect anyone - that would be 100gig a day??

I'm sure some people have a need for that much backup, or a shortened backup window - but a small market segment IMHO.

My daughter uploads 2 GB videos to YouTube. With my 2 Mbps upload (which is really 1.7 Mbps, thanks CV ), it takes over 2 1/2 hours. And during that time, the saturated upload slows my download speed to 2 Mbps.

Being able to upload at a higher speed would be a big improvement and reduce the impact on every other PC in the house.

How many of those does she upload a day? I would just let them upload overnight.

I had no idea youtube videos were that big. A full length movie fits on DVD, which is 4.7Gb.

100mbps upload would be nice - question is the actual impact it would have, which would determine if people will pay for it.

You could get boost plus with 8Mbps Upload

Since she starts the upload, "overnight" for her is when she goes to bed and I get to use the PC. They're so big because they're 1920x1136 MPEG1 video captures at 20,000 kbps. We could re-encode them, but it's easier to upload the video as captured.You could pay for it.

YouTube actually accepts up to 20GB files with some accounts. I've done some very large uploads for long form content.

MPEG1 though is a horribly inefficient codec. Apparently it's not easier to do that given what you're posting.

You should re-encode to H.264 (.mov or .mp4 are good). Given your frame size somewhere between 5000 and 8000kbps would be OK. I'm on boost plus and I have done 1920x1080 at 20,000kbps (I think there 50,000kbps for high quality is a bit overkill.

See YouTube recommended specs.
»support.google.com/youtu ··· guide.cs

Perhaps youtube has an upload application that will allow you to schedule uploads, or limit bandwidth?

Or get a router with QoS. No, I'm not going to pay for it.

Or, implement manual QoS - no uploading to youtube when you are using the computer.

No amount of upload bandwidth is going to solve your issue - once she saturates the upload, it will intefere with you.

How many of those 2gb movies does she upload a day?