GlobalMind
Domino Dude, POWER Systems Guy
Premium
join:2001-10-29
Hollywood, FL
| Ability or willingness?
It seems to me that many areas of the world outside the US, internet services offer dramatically faster tiers than what we see here. If there was some major worldwide crunch then these services would be throttled back and you wouldn't see 100/100 service.
Is the "crunch" due to an inability to afford upgrades or simply because no one wants to pay for it? We're not talking about a natural resource which cannot be reclaimed here, this is all man made stuff.
Perhaps bandwidth isn't limited but it is kinda like the US Treasury - that's OK we'll just print more...and they do.
Also given the fact that so many rural areas are unserved and our various ISPs seem generally unwilling to expand to those areas, one might say they're already seeing this bandwidth shortage. Again, self inflicted.
I would disagree that there is any "looming bandwidth apocalypse." What we're all just going to wake up some day and *poof* no internet? Sure it could happen, but it is more likely due to gear failure than "oops sorry we're fresh out of bandwidth today."
--
TheGlobalMind.com | Speed costs money. How fast do you want to go? | Angus the IT Chap |
|
cmaenginsb
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-19
Palmdale, CA
| Most of the 100/100 service in places like Korea are easy to do. Basically doing that is like creating a big lan, it doesn't mean however that they will get those speeds connecting to a server in the US however, in most cases not even close. The concern about capacity is the "backbone crunch" which is complicated in the US by the decentralized nature of the backbone routing centers. Korea has maybe 1-2 equivilants of a MAE point where we have at least 15 I can think of.
--
CCNA, Comtrain Certified Tower Climber |
|
james
join:2001-02-26
antarctica
| reply to GlobalMind
These idiots need to start looking at the internet the same way cities look at vehicle traffic. You can only do so much to stop people from driving to work, such as starting car pool lanes, and increasing public transportation. But the only REAL solution is to make bigger roads. The great thing about the internet is that it doesnt contribute nearly as much to pollution as traffic and Fiber lines are tiny compared to a 6 lane freeway.
NO ONE drives in New York because there is too much traffic, Amirite? |
|
Yauch
join:2005-06-24 | This analogy only works if you're implying that cities should also buy your cars for you. |
|
jp10558
Premium
join:2005-06-24
Willseyville, NY
| You know, the problem I see is that I don't understand why more bandwidth now costs so much more than more bandwidth cost going from dial-up to DSL? Or in home networking, or heck - lan networking.
At home, 5 years ago I was paying ~$40 for a 5 port 10/100 switch. Now I can pay the same (or less) for a 5 port gigabit switch. Now, I understand the scale + cost is higher, but if I was spending $10k on a 48 port switch 5 years ago and I'm going to upgrade and pay (and amortize again over 5 years) $10k I can't imagine that I'm not going to get a similar bump from 100Mbit to 1Gbit...
So how does the bandwidth cost more? I mean, all along the way - of course if you're going to AT&T and they haven't and won't do similar upgrades, they will charge more...
As far as I can tell, it's just that upgrades that had been made right along when we were using modems up through cable/dsl now the companies don't want to do the next round of upgrades at the same cost (actually less real cost due to inflation).
--
Opera 9.23(Build 8808); Windows XP Pro SP2;Athlon 64 X2 4600+; 2.5GB PC3200 DDR; 1M/128k DSL; NOD32(Version 2.5.25); Outpost Pro 3;Proxomitron 4.5j Grypen 5/23/07(Opera mod),GPG ID:0x0A1C6EE3 |
|
Yauch
join:2005-06-24 | I've always believed the answer to that question (what ever it is) is the only real connectivity problem we have in the country. |
|
