LiberalKing
Intocable
Premium
join:2005-09-12
Bronx, NY
2 edits | FIRST POST they just rolled BOOST OUT which is 30Mbps/2Mbps(im giving it a try as we speak) got capped last week and also suspended.
IMAGINE THIS SCENARIO. 100Mbps/150Kbps | |
|
 
SteveLV702
Premium
join:2004-04-22
Henderson, NV | Re: FIRST POST Cox Comunication here is talking about 100Mbps/25Mbps
Now that would kick ass. | |
|
 | deepblackmag
join:2004-12-27
00000
1 edit | Re: FIRST POST ...Until you read the fine print (thats not actually writen down anywhere) with your 50gig/month cap or risk cancellation / throttling.
The bandwidth has been available for a long time, for dirt cheap. Why dont people start asking the right question? How is it i can buy symmetrical 100mbps with a 2000GB/month cap for under 100$/month from a 13 yr old @ a datacenter, but a big company wont sell that sort of thing to my home?
The technology has existed for years, the problem is the ISPs want to keep all their gold rather than pay their upstream providers for some more GIGE's. | |
|
| | pabster
join:2001-12-09
Waterloo, IA
 ·Mediacom
| Re: FIRST POST Symmetrical 100Mbps dedicated server for under $100 a month with a 2000GB transfer cap? Sounds good. Where can I get this? (And I'm talking UNMETERED 100Mbps, up to that cap.)
But your point is valid. Bandwidth is, relatively speaking, CHEAP. There's no reason that we can't have 100Mbps symmetrical connections, other than Hollywood and the RIAA lobbying against it for obvious reasons. If they had their way, we'd all be on 300 baud modems yet. | |
|
| | | deepblackmag
join:2004-12-27
00000
1 edit | Re: FIRST POST The term unmetered is counterindicated by the per gig bandwidth limit. It is metered, at several terabytes of transfer. The line is still fully burstable to 100mbps though. Most providers offer similar deals on dedicateds. Below is an example from CIhost if your interested in colocation:
One free hour of admin time per month.
3500 GB Transfer Per Month
Free DNS for your machine
8 IPs included
Switched 100Mbps
Physical access control
Private VLAN
Remote Reboot & Power Cycling Device
Standard 4U-19 (7" high x 19" wide) rack space or equipment tray in a secured 144 sq. ft "family" co-location suite inside one of C I Host's data centers. Your machine will be housed inside a SECURED shared co-location area.*
3000W UPS backup (1-110-volt AC plug-in)
Your choice of Dallas, Los Angeles or Chicago!
$99.95 / mon. + $200.00 setup
This is about standard. Im on a plan with another carrier at the moment for 1TB but its better quality bandwidth.
Lets face it, home users would kill for fast bandwidth even if it was cogent. The only multi-tier structure worth persuing is the carrier your traffic goes over. | |
|
| | | | pabster
join:2001-12-09
Waterloo, IA
·Mediacom
| Re: FIRST POST Yeah, I mucked up that one. I should not have even brought up an unmetered 100Mbit because there's nothing in the price range for that level of service.
That $100/mo plan looks nice, but I highly doubt that you have access to anywhere near 100Mbit at any given time. The claims of 'fully burstable' are a joke. (I know.) | |
|
| | | | | deepblackmag
join:2004-12-27
00000
| Re: FIRST POST Thats why im getting 1/3 the bandwidth.
Im paying the 110 for a TB a month and i CAN push and pull at 100mbps from my server. I have tested this with university students downloading or uploading large test files. Different carriers are obvious subject to their own problems, however if you find a good one the ability is there. | |
|
| | 
99664227
Heavily MODerated
Premium
join:2002-11-21
USA
| said by deepblackmag  :The bandwidth has been available for a long time, for dirt cheap. Why dont people start asking the right question? How is it i can buy symmetrical 100mbps with a 2000GB/month cap for under 100$/month from a 13 yr old @ a datacenter, but a big company wont sell that sort of thing to my home? You can't get that kind of bandwidth at a residence. 
--
Market go up. Market go down. | |
|
| | | deepblackmag
join:2004-12-27
00000
| Re: FIRST POST you CAN and thats the point. the wires in the ground are perfectly capable of it, its the ANCIENT equipment in use that isnt capable of doing it. They arent willing to spend the money and upgrade the hardware. This isnt about running fiber, fiber isnt necessary to the house to get the speeds that we need as a nation. | |
|
| | 
toadlife
Premium
join:2004-05-03
Lemoore, CA
 ·AT&T Yahoo
| said by deepblackmag :The bandwidth has been available for a long time, for dirt cheap. Why dont people start asking the right question? How is it i can buy symmetrical 100mbps with a 2000GB/month cap for under 100$/month from a 13 yr old @ a datacenter, but a big company wont sell that sort of thing to my home? It about the "last mile" and how much that "last mile" costs. Data centers pay a pretty penny to have fiber run directly into their building and they make up for it by reselling that bandwidth in volume. That "10 meg pipe" you pay 13.99 a month for is not all yours - it is shared with several other people who are also paying 13.99 a month.
Right now, it is impossible to give 100mbit speeds to the homes because the copper/coaxial cables that run into them simply can't handle that much data. Coaxial is a bit better than telco copper, but not that much better. Both are dead end mediums and must be replaced with fiber before any massive rollout of 100bit+ service is even possible.
If you want 100mbit speeds to your house, call up the telco and get a quote on how much it will cost to run fiber to your home.
--
Have problems running your Windows box as a limited user?
Try this...»winsudo.toadlife.net | |
|
| | | pabster
join:2001-12-09
Waterloo, IA
·Mediacom
| Re: FIRST POST Well, Verizon has found Coax good for 270Mbps and is now using it inside the home rather than fiber, to cut costs.
Name me a telco that has technology that can deliver anywhere NEAR that figure (even theoretically).
You are right that fiber all the way is the wave of the future. But for the forseeable future, Cable has a marked advantage vis-a-vi the bandwidth it COULD offer the end user over existing infrastructures. | |
|
| | | |
toadlife
Premium
join:2004-05-03
Lemoore, CA
·AT&T Yahoo
| Re: FIRST POST said by pabster :Well, Verizon has found Coax good for 270Mbps and is now using it inside the home rather than fiber, to cut costs. Name me a telco that has technology that can deliver anywhere NEAR that figure (even theoretically). RJ45. The telcos can run fiber to the outside of the home and RJ45 into the house. Sure, there is a cost of running that RJ45 into the house, but it's not a show stopper.
--
Have problems running your Windows box as a limited user?
Try this...»winsudo.toadlife.net | |
|
| | | deepblackmag
join:2004-12-27
00000
| WRONG WRONG WRONG The last mile thats in the ground RIGHT NOW can handle it. The twisted pairs and coax is just fine, the only problem is the equipment at their substations and in peoples houses. Upgrade that and they are good to go. You dont need fiber for 100mbps. The copper thats there work just fine. | |
|
| | | |
toadlife
Premium
join:2004-05-03
Lemoore, CA
·AT&T Yahoo
| Re: FIRST POST said by deepblackmag :WRONG WRONG WRONG The last mile thats in the ground RIGHT NOW can handle it. The twisted pairs and coax is just fine, the only problem is the equipment at their substations and in peoples houses. Upgrade that and they are good to go. You dont need fiber for 100mbps. The copper thats there work just fine. Sure if you tack enough equipment onto copper to keep the signal/noise ratio down, you may be able to push 100mbits of data through it, but it won't be very reliable and it will probably be more expensive to keep up than just running fiber.
Copper is not reliable, it has major distance limitations, and can't hold one millionth of the bandwidth that fiber can. It's a dead end medium. The sooner is goes away, the better.
--
Have problems running your Windows box as a limited user?
Try this...»winsudo.toadlife.net | |
|
| | | | | deepblackmag
join:2004-12-27
00000 | Re: FIRST POST I agree its not as reliable, however it IS cheap and already there. And thats what matters here. | |
|
| | | | | | BosstonesOwn
join:2002-12-15
Everett, MA
clubs:
·Comcast
| Re: FIRST POST said by deepblackmag :I agree its not as reliable, however it IS cheap and already there. And thats what matters here. You really wanna know the cost analysis of it ? Verizon when the fiber is completely rolled out to a neighborhood can pull down the copper at its own discretion and scrap it for almost 2/3 the price of the fiber. Severely reducing the costs of running the fiber the rest of the way.
I find it amazing that they don't do this. When an area is lit with fiber give the people a free install of new service, pull all the copper and scrap it. And lower the peoples bills by $2 a month and consider it a free "upgrade". I mean really think of it as getting a faster return on your money.
--
"It's always funny until someone gets hurt......and then it's absolutely friggin' hysterical!" | |
|
| 
dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
| said by SteveLV702 :Cox Comunication here is talking about 100Mbps/25Mbps Now that would kick ass. That is probably CBS over fibre, not HFC.
--
You can never be too rich, too thin or have too much Bandwidth | |
|
ARGONAUT
got ping?
join:2006-01-24
New Albany, IN
1 edit | It will probably be more like 100mbps down / 386k up  | |
|
| deepblackmag
join:2004-12-27
00000
2 edits | Re: FIRST POST said by ARGONAUT :It will probably be more like 100mbps down / 386k up* * = With maximum 25 gigabytes per month traffic.
Prices subject to change at random with no notification.
Availability subject to cherry picked neighborhood with avg incoming over $300,000. | |
|
dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
| said by LiberalKing : IMAGINE THIS SCENARIO. 100Mbps/150Kbps Of course with 150kbps upload, that limits the downstream to about 5500kbps max due to limited ACKs
--
You can never be too rich, too thin or have too much Bandwidth | |
|
mrchris
We don't miss you Bush
Premium
join:2002-10-01
North Babylon, NY | 150kbit would not be enough for all the downstream, it would have to be several megabits up at least. | |
|
dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ | Enough with download speeds already. how about more UPLOAD! | |
|
Kompressor
Premium
join:2002-02-12
Huntington Beach, CA | Asymmetric is the front-wheel-drive of the computer world.
Anyone think residential service will EVER become symmetric? | |
|
| attsbcisgay
join:2003-03-18
Beverly Hills, CA
| Re: FIRST POST said by Kompressor :Asymmetric is the front-wheel-drive of the computer world. Anyone think residential service will EVER become symmetric? asymetric is used a lot these days due to marketing but yea it'll change as our needs grow... maybe someday... some have 10/10, 5/5, 25/25 etc in other countries and they can do more with their connection...
asymetric means that there's got to be a lot of bandwidth from others to be useful... why do asymetric sucks? just imagine if both of your computer can only receive files fast but if you want to send to each other, it's capped at low speed so it is frustrating. because low upload speed is intentional, is artificial, it isn't what it's suppose to be...we are being sold an empty bag that someone with symetric conneciton will only be able to fill it up fast the rest gotta take their sweet time, the whole point of asymetric. satellite is the worst kind of asymetric and most users hate it so it is proven that user are not pleased when they can't upload much or their download suffers because their isn't enough upload bandwidth to compensate for it. | |
|
|
|
|
