dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
171

battleop
join:2005-09-28
00000

1 recommendation

battleop

Member

What applications REQUIRE 1Gb today or anytime soon?

What is it that REQURES 1Gb for the normal user (if you are reading this you are likely not a normal user) today or in the next 5 years?

toby
Troy Mcclure
join:2001-11-13
Seattle, WA

4 recommendations

toby

Member

Do you understand that if you download xxxxxx MBytes from a site, it takes you xxxxxx minutes/seconds.

The Faster the connection, the quicker you get it.

It doesn't have to be a continuous data connection, doesn't have to be streaming.
BlueC
join:2009-11-26
Minneapolis, MN

BlueC

Member

Are you really going to notice it with most applications? 1 second versus 2 seconds? Keep in mind, there are a lot of websites (all but the very large ones) that are still only on 1gbps ports. You won't squeeze much out of them. I have a hard time fully utilizing 100mbps, I'll only see it with a quick initial buffer (lasts a few seconds) with Netflix, along with downloading updates from Adobe, Microsoft, etc. Even then, it's quick, 1gbps wouldn't really save me much time.

The only true advantage will be with extremely large files (e.g. 1080p or 4k movies, but not streamed). Streaming might buffer a bit quicker, but how does that honestly benefit the end-user? Netflix will already buffer more than necessary @ 100mbps.

Nothing wrong with wanting 1gbps, but it's not exactly a realistic demand for today. This might change a year from now, or 3 years from now, when utilization increases.

I'd say latency could be better with some ISPs before an increase of speed is noticed. Better connectivity from the core, more direct connectivity to commonly used applications (Netflix comes to mind).
dlewis23
join:2005-04-18
Boca Raton, FL

dlewis23

Member

said by BlueC:

The only true advantage will be with extremely large files (e.g. 1080p or 4k movies, but not streamed).

Downloading PS4 and Xbox One games at 30 - 40 GB is were having more then 100 Mbps really helps out.

battleop
join:2005-09-28
00000

battleop to toby

Member

to toby
"The Faster the connection, the quicker you get it."

That's great if the far end can match your speed. More often than not the far end doesn't match. I've got 10Gb in the office and 1Gb at home. 99% of the time I still have to wait on downloads because the far end can't match my end.

morbo
Complete Your Transaction
join:2002-01-22
00000

morbo to BlueC

Member

to BlueC
said by BlueC:

The only true advantage will be with extremely large files

Yes, that's a real, realistic need that exists now. It isn't some future need.

noc007
join:2002-06-18
Cumming, GA

noc007 to battleop

Member

to battleop
No business is going to bother putting out a prodcut or service that will need that kind of speed if such a small percentage of the userbase are the only ones capable. Off the top of my head, I can think of two things that would benefit from gigabit right now: mutiple media streams/IPTV and backups to a provider.

It takes over a month to seed my data with a new backup provider. With faster speed and no caps, I can do that in a more reasonable amount of time. I take a bunch of photos and videos of my offspring and family for posterity and that consumes a lot of space. It shouldn't take an 40min to backup one five minute video.

I don't like ads and I'm more inclined to consume TV differently than what the media companies have been comfortable with over the past few decades. Better options are out there legally and multiple streams of that content can saturate what I can affordably get now.

People don't get the higher speeds because it's not affordable. I do agree that there are many right now that don't need a faster connection, however we're at a chicken and the egg scenario. People don't get the higher speed because they can't afford it or they may not know of anything that will benefit from it. No one wants to do anything that would require such a pipe because hardly anyone has it; imagine the innovation that is stifled or put on hold because of it. Additionally, it needs to be affordable; anyone can get gigabit internet right now, but they need to have enough money in order to get it.
shmerl
join:2013-10-21

shmerl to battleop

Member

to battleop
Plan 9 kind of system?
BlueC
join:2009-11-26
Minneapolis, MN

BlueC to dlewis23

Member

to dlewis23
said by dlewis23:

Downloading PS4 and Xbox One games at 30 - 40 GB is were having more then 100 Mbps really helps out.

Can Sony and Microsoft support 1gbps from the end user? I rarely, if ever, see the full 100mbps from Sony on my PS3.

battleop
join:2005-09-28
00000

battleop to noc007

Member

to noc007
"No business is going to bother putting out a prodcut or service that will need that kind of speed if such a small percentage of the userbase are the only ones capable"

Ever hear of a company named Netflix or Youtube? They built their businesses in a time where there were few connections that were more than 10Mb at best. As the demand for these things have risen so has the choice in faster connections.

I don't believe for one second that your taking 40 minutes to backup 5 minute video on 100Mb.
battleop

battleop to BlueC

Member

to BlueC
I see about an average of 50Mb-60Mb when downloading larger files to my PS3.
BlueC
join:2009-11-26
Minneapolis, MN

BlueC to morbo

Member

to morbo
said by morbo:

said by BlueC:

The only true advantage will be with extremely large files

Yes, that's a real, realistic need that exists now. It isn't some future need.

OK, what kind of files are we talking about here?

Microsoft updates? Updating Windows 7 from the base to SP1, along with all the other needed updates, is probably around half a gig, is that a safe assumption?

Let's say it's 500mb. On a 100mbps connection, that will take around 40 seconds at full speed, compared to around 4 seconds on 1gbps (assuming the connecting server can indeed support 1gbps consistently). 40sec vs. 4sec isn't exactly a night and day improvement, unless we've all really lost our patience in life.

The much larger files (e.g. HD movies) are typically streamed, thus not benefiting greatly from larger connections. Stability is most important with those scenarios.
BlueC

BlueC to battleop

Member

to battleop
Sounds about right. I've estimated it at around half the speed of my connection (100mbps), based on file size and time it takes to download.
TheRogueX
join:2003-03-26
Springfield, MO

TheRogueX to BlueC

Member

to BlueC
PS4 and XBox One would greatly benefit from high speed downloads. Their games clock in at 40+GB. 40GB at 20Mbps is 5.6 hours (at 80% capacity). 40GB at 1Gbps is 6.7 minutes.
dlewis23
join:2005-04-18
Boca Raton, FL

dlewis23 to BlueC

Member

to BlueC
I can max my 50 Mbps connection on my Xbox One and PS4. My friend can max his 105 Mbps connection on his Xbox One.

N10Cities
Premium Member
join:2002-05-07
0000000
Asus RT-AC87

1 recommendation

N10Cities to battleop

Premium Member

to battleop
I currently have the Cox Ultimate Tier (150 Mb here in Western Arkansas) and admittedly I very rarely need that full bandwidth. I mainly watch Netflix, Youtube, stream some shows from ABC and other TV networks. Would get by just fine with 1/3 or 1/2 of what I have.

But for large downloads when needed, the bandwidth is there. It is more of a convenience and time saver having the extra capacity than anything else for me.

When downloading games from Steam, I consistently pull down 15 - 20 MB(MegaBYTES) / sec during downloads. Instead of hours, it is minutes for downloading.

I work on PCs on the side and for downloading large service packs and updates, it is a Godsend.

More and more software vendors allow you to download applications instead of ordering CDs or DVDs. Downloading is very convenient as opposed to having to order the media and waiting to have it mailed or driving to the local Best Buy.

Yes, you could do that with a 1 Mb DSL line, but with the fatter pipe, you get it FASTER and can start using it faster.

Once again, convenience.

firephoto
Truth and reality matters
Premium Member
join:2003-03-18
Brewster, WA

firephoto to BlueC

Premium Member

to BlueC
said by BlueC:

OK, what kind of files are we talking about here?

...

The much larger files (e.g. HD movies) are typically streamed, thus not benefiting greatly from larger connections. Stability is most important with those scenarios.

Streamed. Really?

So to share my 4 gig per hour video I create to * anyone... I should stream it? at a lower quality to slow connections?

That's like emailing large files from pop3 clients to pop3 clients. Stupid.

This commercial panacea where users aren't allowed to share their own content that can compete with commercial content is also stupid.

People should have the option to use their data connections as they see fit within the laws as they exist for everyone, not for laws as they exist that only benefit the elite. If people need a high bandwidth connection and that's not available then they should be able to voice this issue without someone else telling them they really don't need it.

morbo
Complete Your Transaction
join:2002-01-22
00000

morbo to BlueC

Member

to BlueC
said by BlueC:

OK, what kind of files are we talking about here?

50GB and up.

I have provided you a clear need that exists for 1Gb pipe now.

iowaman10
@mchsi.com

iowaman10 to battleop

Anon

to battleop
What about a house full of users. One gig mbps is not for the single user it is for when there are many users in the house
mrwiggles
join:2013-06-10
Sherman, TX

1 recommendation

mrwiggles to battleop

Member

to battleop
By your logic, we should remove all sports cars and pretty much any vehicle that has more than 50 hp or 3 gears. I mean, no one at all needs to drive faster than 65 mph, right?

battleop
join:2005-09-28
00000

1 recommendation

battleop

Member

Try another analogy. The one you presented isn't even close to a comparison....

aaronwt
Premium Member
join:2004-11-07
Woodbridge, VA
Asus RT-AX89

aaronwt to BlueC

Premium Member

to BlueC
said by BlueC:

said by morbo:

said by BlueC:

The only true advantage will be with extremely large files

Yes, that's a real, realistic need that exists now. It isn't some future need.

OK, what kind of files are we talking about here?

Microsoft updates? Updating Windows 7 from the base to SP1, along with all the other needed updates, is probably around half a gig, is that a safe assumption?

Let's say it's 500mb. On a 100mbps connection, that will take around 40 seconds at full speed, compared to around 4 seconds on 1gbps (assuming the connecting server can indeed support 1gbps consistently). 40sec vs. 4sec isn't exactly a night and day improvement, unless we've all really lost our patience in life.

The much larger files (e.g. HD movies) are typically streamed, thus not benefiting greatly from larger connections. Stability is most important with those scenarios.

That is a night and day improvement. That is an order of magnitude faster.

battleop
join:2005-09-28
00000

battleop to TheRogueX

Member

to TheRogueX
"Their games clock in at 40+GB. 40GB at 20Mbps is 5.6 hours "

At 100Mb that's a little under 30 minutes. MSFT and SONY would have a really hard time trying to keep up on launch day of something like GTA or COD.
BlueC
join:2009-11-26
Minneapolis, MN

BlueC to morbo

Member

to morbo
I asked for the type of files, not size.

50GB is doable on 100mbps, might take a little over an hour, but that's not really the end of the world.
BlueC

BlueC to aaronwt

Member

to aaronwt
30 seconds really makes life all that much better?

morbo
Complete Your Transaction
join:2002-01-22
00000

4 recommendations

morbo to BlueC

Member

to BlueC
50GB is doable on dial up, but that's not the conversation we're having.
BlueC
join:2009-11-26
Minneapolis, MN

2 recommendations

BlueC to firephoto

Member

to firephoto
You're in the minority, embrace it.

There's not enough demand for 1gbps download, let alone upload. I totally agree with what you state, however there are so few consumers out there that would utilize it, it takes significant demand to shift a business decision. After all, you're only paying a tiny fraction of what your ISP takes in as total revenue. Why should they cater to your needs?

I get it, it's 2013 and we should be able to share minimally compresses HD video with our friends and family. However, we have to understand the fact that upgrading infrastructure around the country will take awhile to accomplish.

We can't upgrade everyone to 1gbps and except everyone will pay for the said infrastructure upgrades. At the same time we can't do nothing and just let everything waste. There's a happy (albeit not so happy for some of you) medium that will help move things in the right direction, just maybe not at the same pace that some might demand.

We should have a goal to get everyone to 100mbps before we demand 1gbps. Especially considering the connectivity on the other end hasn't moved up quick enough. Only so many networks have established 100gbps connectivity. There are still many networks only working with 10gbps (or bonded 10G ports), some still working with 1gbps.

When 100G gets cheaper, you will see more advancements on the residential side. That's usually how these things flow. The carriers get larger capacity for less money, it translates to cheaper connectivity for the end user (in the form of faster speeds without having to increase costs).
BlueC

BlueC to morbo

Member

to morbo
So you're basically expecting to be able to download anything you want and have it right away, is that the discussion we're having?

50GB download in just over an hour is not acceptable for today's standards?

How about we define what's considered acceptable.

morbo
Complete Your Transaction
join:2002-01-22
00000

1 recommendation

morbo

Member

The conversation we're having is your statement "The only true advantage will be with extremely large files" and apparently your attempt to say that only certain file sizes or types qualify for your idea of NEED for gigabit connection. Get over yourself.
BlueC
join:2009-11-26
Minneapolis, MN

BlueC

Member

said by morbo:

The conversation we're having is your statement "The only true advantage will be with extremely large files" and apparently your attempt to say that only certain file sizes or types qualify for your idea of NEED for gigabit connection. Get over yourself.

What's wrong with what I stated? It's true that 1gbps is only a significant benefit with large files. More specifically, the most common form of larger files (with the majority of consumers) tends to be streaming HD video. The files themselves are large, but they are streamed to the end user, thus no ability to download them all at once. There are very few consumers who will be benefiting from this, considering we're talking files over 5GB more than likely.

So it is true that certain types of larger files will benefit, considering a portion of them are utilized via a method of streaming, and not downloading all at once.

Perhaps you missed that, but instead chose to fall back on calling me out on some minor detail.