simlesa
Premium
join:2006-04-14
Astoria, NY
| reply to en102
Re: Wow, this sounds great!
said by en102  :I'm sure they could 'filter' down connections to give everyone 150kbps (3Mbps/200) if it came down to it. Don't you mean 15 kbps?
(3Mbps=3000kbps, 3000/200=15kbps) |
|
viper3431
join:2003-04-21
STL, MO
| reply to RadioDoc
Just because you, me, and most of the posters here use P2P a lot to share data and run video streams doesn't mean that everyone does. I will state again that for MOST users, this kind of bandwidth would be ample. I can name ten households I personally know that don't do either of these two things. All these people are intersted in is surfing the internet without the wait of dial-up, which this would be great for. |
|
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
 ·RoadRunner Cable
 ·DSL EXTREME
| reply to RadioDoc
I had 75 users + corporate email and web hosting on 6Mbps/608 for a while, and it was more than enough. I'm sure they could 'filter' down connections to give everyone 150kbps (3Mbps/200) if it came down to it. This isn't much different than Cable dishing out 8Mbps connections to multiple neighborhoods.
This is broadband in the forest, not in an urban market. |
|
RadioDoc
58ef2c0
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
·AT&T Midwest
| reply to viper3431
I'll guess that your company isn't keen on people running P2P or pulling video streams while at work, so of course that degree of overselling would not be a particular burden.
You can't assume that in a consumer market.
--
Toolmaster of La Grange. |
|
