gdepp
@69.57.x.x | reply to rwhubert
Re: Wow ???
does anyone know the range for this new hong kong 1gb broadband ?? |
|
rwhubert
Bipolar Athlon
Premium
join:2002-07-26
Atlanta, GA | reply to DaMaGeINC
You don't need to do that, dude, it's been done for us! |
|
Liberatarian4tehWin
@hewitt.com | reply to Digital_Boy
That was a very informative post! Gratz to your ability to kill the troll. |
|
Digital_Boy
@sbc.com
| reply to DaMaGeINC
Ah, pardon me, but your blatant display of ignorance was too much to ignore.
China did *NOT* do anything to Hong Kong until the British returned it to them in 1997. Prior to that, Hong Kong was (and still is) one of the most thriving havens of laissez-fair capitalism. As such, there's money to be spent, and businesses that are willing to spend it to future proof themselves. Beijing has been keeping the party's fingers out of HK's pie because they don't want to kill it's economic viability. They've been keeping their PSTN, cellular and data networks up to snuff for the last 20-30 years, so there is plent of fiber in the ground there that has been there for years. The majority of mainland China has almost no copper or fiber in the ground at all. This is why China is going for cellular technology in a big way, since it'd be prohibitively expensive for them to bury fiber to cover all of China.
This gigabit service is offered in Hong Kong only, and only in those buildings where it's wired (I'm guessing in high density urban housing, since that's where the majority of their customer base is) only. I defy you to show me an example of some private citizen outside of HK getting gigabit speeds for $215 a month to their home, say in Shanghai, or any other province of China.
30 years ago, the internet didn't exist outside of ARPANET and a few mainframes at large universities. There weren't cheap, powerful PC's in 80 to 90 percent of American households to fuel the demand for bandwidth like there is now. And all the fiber first laid at the onset of the upgrade to an entirely digital communications network was multimode fiber at first, since that was the limits of the technology in the early 70's. Now single mode fiber is the rule, since it has much better loss characteristics and ultimate bandwidth capacity. |
|
DaMaGeINC
The Lan Man
Premium
join:2002-06-08
Greenville, SC
clubs:
 ·Charter Pipeline
 ·AT&T Southeast
1 edit | reply to rwhubert
--- All I have to say is #@$@ The USA.
--
inc.ath.cx
Have a Networking problem or question? Stop by the Networking Forum and let us help you. |
|
DaMaGeINC
The Lan Man
Premium
join:2002-06-08
Greenville, SC
clubs:
·Charter Pipeline
·AT&T Southeast
1 edit | reply to rwhubert
If our country would have thought of this problem 30 years ago. We all wouldn't be having this discussion. China thought about this about the same time as our cold war. So, while we were building bombs, they were wiring up there country with fiber. So all they have to do, is replace the head-ends to provide faster service. Now, we are run by corp's, so maby we should adopt some Communist thinking. --
inc.ath.cx
Have a Networking problem or question? Stop by the Networking Forum and let us help you. |
|
rwhubert
Bipolar Athlon
Premium
join:2002-07-26
Atlanta, GA
·CYBERONIC INTERNET..
| reply to tcstone
Actually, no, we have slipped to like 13th place! Propaganda dies hard, but the USA is not the most tech country in terms of what is available to consumers. Nor do we have the highest living standard, not for at least the past 30 years. What we have now is not a "democracy" nor technically even a "republic" ... we have a "corporatocracy." Giant corporations control everything, including our governments at the federal and state levels. They can get gigabit pipes installed, we can't even get 10 megabits. Many of us are lucky to get 3 or 5 megabits. |
|
