dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
16
share rss forum feed
« 1760 feetaerial fiber »
This is a sub-selection from pathetic

Crookshanks

join:2008-02-04
Binghamton, NY
reply to ArrayList

Re: pathetic

said by ArrayList:

only 305mbps over fiber? wtf is that?!

You're seriously griping about 300+mbit/s service? Get some damn perspective! Most home LANs are still 10/100. They are offering three times that bandwidth, for an internet connection, what the hell is the problem?

The only question I'd ask is why it isn't being offered as a symmetrical product? Hell, I'd rather have 100mbit/s symmetrical than 305/65, but that's just me. Perhaps they don't want to rock the traffic balancing boat and muck up their peering arrangements? That could theoretically be an issue with the bittorrent kiddies, though one has to wonder if there are enough of them to make a significant difference. Are people who aren't willing to pay for movies/software/etc really willing to pay $300/mo to help others avoid paying?

And yes, I know, there are legal uses for bittorrent, but every legal swarm I've ever joined was already seeded to the point that I couldn't even contribute my full ADSL bandwidth, let alone the speed we're talking about here.


MovieLover76

join:2009-09-11
kudos:1
Most home lans are still 10/100? I haven't seen a router or even an onboard ethernet port on a motherboard that doesn't support gigabit in quite a few years, among those that actually go to the trouble of building a home lan, and don't just rely on slower wifi as most people do.

I think most of us (myself included) have upgraded to gigabit by now.


battleop

join:2005-09-28
00000

1 recommendation

"Most home lans are still 10/100?"

Absolutely. DSLR and it's readers do NOT represent the majority of homes it represents a very small section of what people really have.
--
I do not, have not, and will not work for AT&T/Comcast/Verizon/Charter or similar sized company.


battleup

@charter.com
As far as I've seen any router made in the past few years (computers also) is going to have GbE on it. DSLR may not be representative but someone who is going to buy a 300mbit package is going to know they need more than a 100mbit switch, router or NIC card, not to mention unless you really haven't upgraded anything in your house in the past few years your computer equipment will support it too.

You always seem to hate on DSLR and yet post here all the time. What gives? Are you just that thick that you feel the need to let it be known how much you dislike this website... on this website?

iansltx

join:2007-02-19
Austin, TX
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·Verizon Online DSL

2 recommendations

He runs an ISP...and adds a dose of reality to some of these topics. Like the fact that most folks don't care about more than a few megabits per second, as long as those few megabits are reasonably low-latency and jitter-free...and are usable 24x7 to most of the Internet.

Also, there are still routers made in the past six months that are only 10/100. They're also less than $30 apiece. Cheap computers...same thing. Granted, if you're paying $300 per month for an internet connection your stuff is probably all gigabit, but I'll let you in on a secret: there's a very, VERY small percentage of the Internet that can run at 300M down. This is from experience...I've used Mac Pros running Windows 7, tied to a campus network (good peering and transit) at a gigabit, with 10G to the peering point and 10G pipes to places where they were needed...and gotten less than 300 Mbps on every speed test I came across. This is with high-end Cisco gear on every hop, no throttling and no congestion (the entire campus averages 300-400 Mbps at this point, and that's with a supercomputer or two).

As much as I think gigabit symmetric on GFiber is cool, you'll find that even 300M is next to impossible to max, and will be for the next two or three years. 100M is about the fastest residential connection where you aren't running headlong into diminishing returns.

jjeffeory

join:2002-12-04
USA
reply to MovieLover76
I've been on gigabit for several years and put everyone I help on gigabit as well.

jjeffeory

join:2002-12-04
USA
reply to battleop
You know, I frequent another specialized website that's music related and people over there also say that the people on THAT website do NOT represent the majority of people, yet when you go out to shows and talk... The opinions between the lay people and the forum posters frequently align...

So funny though that you said this today...


NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:12
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC

2 recommendations

reply to MovieLover76
said by MovieLover76:

I think most of us (myself included) have upgraded to gigabit by now.

I checked the cost of upgrading to gig LAN. I will upgrade as I retire 10/100 hardware and replace it with 1000 hardware, and not one ms sooner.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum

34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON
The equipment is ridiculously cheap nowadays.


dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:4
reply to Crookshanks
said by Crookshanks:

said by ArrayList:

only 305mbps over fiber? wtf is that?!

The only question I'd ask is why it isn't being offered as a symmetrical product?

To avoid bastardizing their LUCRATIVE biz product. Why do you think D3 upload rates are so chintzy? with bonding on most cable providers its to safeguard biz revenues.
--
Despises any post with strings.

Crookshanks

join:2008-02-04
Binghamton, NY
reply to battleop
said by battleop:

"Most home lans are still 10/100?"

Absolutely. DSLR and it's readers do NOT represent the majority of homes it represents a very small section of what people really have.

I'd say that close to half of the small businesses I work with are still 10/100. They may use gigabit to link switches together, or to plug their servers in, but the workstations are still plugged into 100mbit/s ports. And why not? Gigabit switches are becoming more and more affordable, but fast ethernet switches are cheaper yet, and they comfortably meet the needs of many customers.


battleop

join:2005-09-28
00000
It's hard to convince a customer they need a gigabit switch for a network that's total usage isn't even 10mb.
--
I do not, have not, and will not work for AT&T/Comcast/Verizon/Charter or similar sized company.


ArrayList
netbus developer
Premium
join:2005-03-19
Brighton, MA
Reviews:
·RCN CABLE
·Comcast
reply to iansltx
said by iansltx:

As much as I think gigabit symmetric on GFiber is cool, you'll find that even 300M is next to impossible to max, and will be for the next two or three years.

Not sure about you, but last I checked things can change quite a bit in 2 or 3 years.

iansltx

join:2007-02-19
Austin, TX
kudos:2
Yep. $20 says that 24 months from now you still won't need 300M for 99% of web sites. Of course, that's mostly because there will still be people who can't get 50M at that point.

jcremin

join:2009-12-22
Siren, WI
kudos:3
said by iansltx:

Yep. $20 says that 24 months from now you still won't need 300M for 99% of web sites.

I'll go a step farther and say that over 90% of the population won't have a need for 100 Mbps by the year 2020.

In other words, I'm saying that I believe less than 10% of the population will have any real need for even 100 megs for at least 8 more years.


ArrayList
netbus developer
Premium
join:2005-03-19
Brighton, MA
it kinda sucks when things go good for awhile then they just peter out. Seriously, what stopped the growth of broadband?

Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO
Cable and Teleco greed with a splash of incompetent government representation is what stopped broadband.