 IowaCowboyWant to go back to IowaPremium
join:2010-10-16
Springfield, MA
 ·Comcast
 ·Verizon Broadban..
| 1 Gbps is overkill 1 Gbps is overkill for residential use. Most residences can function with a 50/10 connection.
The only time you would need 1 Gbps and above is for a data center or a server (which is prohibited in residential TOS).
My computers function fine on the Blast 50/10 and I have at least 5 devices connected to the Internet at any given time (DirecTV Cinema Connectiom Kit, Wii U, iPad/iPad mini, iPhone, Mac Mini, 2 MacBook Pros) although not all devices are online all at once.
The burglar alarm just uses a plain old Verizon landline. Some burglar alarms connect via Broadband. I think for an alarm system, a landline is more reliable as it does not rely on premises power.
--
I've experienced ImOn (when they were McLeod USA), Mediacom, Comcast, and Time Warner and I currently have DirecTV. They are much better than broadcast TV.
I have not and will not cut the cord. |
|
Reviews:
 ·World Lynx
·Cox HSI
| said by IowaCowboy:1 Gbps is overkill for residential use. Most residences can function with a 50/10 connection.
The only time you would need 1 Gbps and above is for a data center or a server (which is prohibited in residential TOS).
My computers function fine on the Blast 50/10 and I have at least 5 devices connected to the Internet at any given time (DirecTV Cinema Connectiom Kit, Wii U, iPad/iPad mini, iPhone, Mac Mini, 2 MacBook Pros) although not all devices are online all at once.
The burglar alarm just uses a plain old Verizon landline. Some burglar alarms connect via Broadband. I think for an alarm system, a landline is more reliable as it does not rely on premises power.
My horse works just fine for getting me place to place...what do I need that new fangled auty-mobile for? Way overkill....
My icebox that the iceman comes by every other day to fill with ice works just fine keeping my food cold. Don't need that new-fangled electricity to run stuff...way overkill....
Wonder how many people have said stuff like that in the past when new technology came out to make our lives easier?
 |
|
| reply to IowaCowboy
Why is this still a talking point. First off, you cant determine what someone else NEEDS. Secondly, who's to determine what you can and cannot have within your home. I wouldn't call my home setup a data center but is certainly NOT just a server.
Some of us absolutely need and will take full advantage of a REASONABLY priced 1Gbs connection. I currently have 8 VM's folding, the larger the pipe the more VM's I'd spin up. This is just one of the MANY ways I'd take advantage of fiber access.
I live in the 4th largest city of the USA (downtown might I add) and I can't get anything other than Comcast or U-Verse. No fiber...anywhere..in the entire footprint of the 4TH LARGEST CITY IN THE UNITED STATES...its retarded. |
|
IowaCowboyWant to go back to IowaPremium
join:2010-10-16
Springfield, MA Reviews:
·Comcast
·Verizon Broadban..
| What you are using is not the typical residential use of an Internet connection. And like I said yesterday about the grandma getting kicked off Comcast for too many calls, is not typical of residential use.
If someone needs a heavy dury connection for servers and data centers, then they should purchase a business grade connection.
As for faster speeds, DOCSIS 3.1 looks to be promising.
The days of companies and power users paying more for telecommunications is nothing new. Call centers have to pay the phone company more than a residential user and its been this way since the phone was invented.
I use about 30 to 50 GB per month.
To sum it up, it boils down to the contract that the user has with their ISP, if it says normal residential use then you can't use it for a data center or server although most (if not all ISPs) will gladly sell you a business grade connection with no caps and more open ports.
--
I've experienced ImOn (when they were McLeod USA), Mediacom, Comcast, and Time Warner and I currently have DirecTV. They are much better than broadcast TV.
I have not and will not cut the cord. |
|
1 edit | reply to moddestmike
Even Google Fiber won't let you host servers unless it is for a game or something. If you can't host servers, I really don't see how anyone could even come close to using Gigabit pipes. They don't want you to actually use the pipes they are providing, because providing gigabit pipes for $70 per month and allowing them to use it isn't economical. |
|
coma9
join:2013-02-05
Lehi, UT | Downloading movies at 1Gbps would be soooo nice... all the computers in my home have gigabit ethernet ports, my router does, my switches do, and even my Docsis3 Modem has a gigabit ethernet port. Why should my Internet connection be the bottleneck? Because they don't offer it? Waiting for a file transfer should be a thing of the past. |
|
| I think you would be hard pressed to find a server capable of delivering 100mbps, much less 1gbps. |
|
| reply to coma9
Double post. |
|
coma9
join:2013-02-05
Lehi, UT | reply to silbaco
Torrent files will upload as fast as the seeders have. I'm not suggesting illegal files, but there are penty of legit and legal files for the taking at gigabit speeds to those capable of it.
I still wouldn't mind paying $120-160 a month for a gigabit connection. Smooth sailing everywhere I go. |
|
| reply to IowaCowboy
As was 7mbps DSL when it first came out.
Cloud Storage sounds much better when I've got a gig pipe to it.
Steam Game install time?
doing an ONLINE backup and having it complete before the data is out of date?
Many homes/people get buy with 10mbps just fine, but some people want to do more, plus how will you know what to do with it when you can't get it?
Build it and they will come. |
|
coma9
join:2013-02-05
Lehi, UT | said by buzz_4_20:Build it and they will come.
+1. I'd be willing to take my game up a notch. I feel that if everyone already had a 1gbps connection, imagine the online gaming experience. No more bitching about lag! hahaha |
|
Reviews:
 ·Google Voice
·Junction Networks
·Callcentric
·T-Mobile US
 ·AT&T U-Verse
| reply to silbaco
symmetrical 1 Gbps for residential is just right How exactly is it not economical for a remote backup to transfer 50GB in 8 minutes once a week @ 1Gbps, vs. completing the same transfer over the whole day (or even multiple days), still once a week?
If anything, not all backup software is dumb, and transferring 50GB at night at 1Gbps will probably be cheaper for the ISP (on a large scale) than transferring the same 50GB during the day time and the peak times (again, on a large scale; think hundreds or thousands of users).
It's complete bullshit that people don't need 1Gbps residentially, or that it's overly expensive traffic-wise.
You don't have to be running servers for uploading pictures to Google+ or facebook. I don't get how 10Mbps is better than 1Gbps, if the price to deliver 1Gbps to a non-business is obviously very far from astronomical, and without price gouging and the lawsuits from the incumbents, 1Gbps can be had for 100$/mo or even less. |
|
|
|
| Because more likely than not, that backup is going to be done during primetime. That is after all why prime time exists, because it is the most convenient time to do things. With higher speeds also comes higher usage.
You really seem to think it is cheap to offer gigabit internet. It isn't. Especially if you let people use it. Google Fiber is an exception to the rule, not the rule. And they are almost certainly not going to turn a profit on the service. |
|
Reviews:
·Google Voice
·Junction Networks
·Callcentric
·T-Mobile US
·AT&T U-Verse
| said by silbaco:Because more likely than not, that backup is going to be done during primetime. That is after all why prime time exists, because it is the most convenient time to do things. With higher speeds also comes higher usage.
Why on earth would you be doing backup during the primetime? You like your computer to be slow when you're actually on it, using it?
said by silbaco:You really seem to think it is cheap to offer gigabit internet. It isn't. Especially if you let people use it. Google Fiber is an exception to the rule, not the rule. And they are almost certainly not going to turn a profit on the service.
Yeah, right, all those companies that offer 100/100 under 100$, and 1000/1000 at between 100$ and 300$, they all are exceptions, and Gigabit internet isn't cheap.
Whom are you kidding? They aren't offering 1000/1000 at a loss; even Google Fibre at most eats out the loss only of those households that haven't subscribed to the service yet.
Dane of Sonic.net mentioned that bandwidth consumption and internet speed aren't all that related at all. If I had a 1Gbps pipe, which I absolutely do need, my overall traffic consumption won't be all that much higher than with the crappy 20/2 (or whatever) that I have.
I had 100/100 back in my office at the university. It didn't change my total consumption all that much from the 20/2 (or whatever) that I have at home, or 1000/1000 at work.
Heard of Linode? They're offering unmetered 1000Mbps downstream to everyone, and they're doing just fine. |
|
Core0000Premium
join:2008-05-04
Somerset, KY | reply to N10Cities
Re: 1 Gbps is overkill Great comment.  |
|
Core0000Premium
join:2008-05-04
Somerset, KY | reply to coma9
True! At least it would be manageable, as opposed to the crap that happens now. |
|
IowaCowboyWant to go back to IowaPremium
join:2010-10-16
Springfield, MA Reviews:
·Comcast
·Verizon Broadban..
| Re: 1 Gbps is overkill I do have the option of 105/20. When I first got online in 1997, all we could afford at the time was WebTV. I finally bought a computer in 1999 and it was an iMac 333 MHz. My Internet connection was (in 2001) 1.5M/128k, now my MacBook Pro is 2.3 Ghz and my Internet is 50/10 so Internet connections have kept up with technological advances. And when I was young, everyone had one computer (like my mother's generation had the one phone on the kitchen wall) and ISP TOS allowed one computer. Now people have multiple computers.
The real issue with broadband is the digital divide where many people are stuck on dial-up as they live in areas that Cable/Telco won't wire for broadband. My attitude is basically be glad with what you have as many people don't have. I live in an urban area and we have DSL and Cable, but if you go into the rural areas of western Mass, they are stuck at 56K. So my thinking is we should get basic broadband to unserved areas that are still on 56k than bringing Gigabyte connections to areas that have 1 or 2 usable broadband connections. I grew up in Iowa (in the Cedar Rapids metro area) but I am well aware of issues facing rural areas, such as long response from emergency services or lack of infrastructure. I went to summer camp in Monticello (IA) and I did not like the water as it came from a well (I am used to and prefer city water). My late uncle lived in rural Maine back in the early '80s and had the choice of a $10,000 backyard satellite dish or a $10,000 to the cableco for a plant extension. Only if he could see 30 years into the future he should have taken the cableco option as they would have had HSI whereas he took the dish and those are now obsolete as they now have the small directv dishes today.
--
I've experienced ImOn (when they were McLeod USA), Mediacom, Comcast, and Time Warner and I currently have DirecTV. They are much better than broadcast TV.
I have not and will not cut the cord. |
|
 NormanSPremium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:6
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| reply to N10Cities
Re: 1 Gbps is overkill Purely bad hyperbolic analogy. Horse ... ice box ... these went the way of dial-up Internet. Having 1 Gbps Internet is like having a Formula One racer for daily driving needs, when a Ford Taurus or Smart Car will "get 'er done".
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum |
|
