 
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
Coalinga, 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
Coalinga, 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
Coalinga, 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
·Comcast Formerly ..
| 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. | |
|
JSRoman
Premium
join:2005-03-10
Callahan, FL
| Won't happen any time soon. The main reason is that the majority of folks do not need this speed right now.There is no killer app that requires 100Mbps. Noticed I said the majority not your typical BBR poster. Most people would be happy if upload speeds would just increase to 1Mbps.
--
President Hillary Clinton! Are you scared yet?
| |
|
| 
ronpin
Imagine Reality
join:2002-12-06
Nirvana
·AT&T Southwest
| Re: Won't happen any time soon. said by JSRoman :.There is no killer app that requires 100Mbps. ...or is there no app because 100mbs is not available?
Telepresence needs at least 60mbs. 3-D TV may need more -- but why scope it out if its not feasible now?
--
"Now is the time for all good men to come to the aid of their country" - and stop the NeoCons | |
|
| Ahrenl
join:2004-10-26
North Andover, MA | Nor will there ever be if its never foreseeable available. | |
|
|
soothsayer15
join:2002-03-01
Irving, TX | They're kidding right? Verizon Fios can turn up the speed on BPON to 622 Mbps. When they upgrade to GPON, 1.4 Gbps. I can see Cavlevision actually doing this, but I doubt Comcast, Brighthouse, Time Warner, Cox, or Charter (Laughing Hard) moving up anytime soon. | |
|
| 
nycdave
Premium,MVM
join:1999-11-16
Melville, NY
 ·Verizon FIOS
| Re: They're kidding right? said by soothsayer15 :Verizon Fios can turn up the speed on BPON to 622 Mbps. When they upgrade to GPON, 1.4 Gbps. I can see Cavlevision actually doing this, but I doubt Comcast, Brighthouse, Time Warner, Cox, or Charter (Laughing Hard) moving up anytime soon. GPON is 2.4 Gbps down, 1.2 Gbps up... | |
|
| | patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
| Re: They're kidding right? said by nycdave :said by soothsayer15 :Verizon Fios can turn up the speed on BPON to 622 Mbps. When they upgrade to GPON, 1.4 Gbps. I can see Cavlevision actually doing this, but I doubt Comcast, Brighthouse, Time Warner, Cox, or Charter (Laughing Hard) moving up anytime soon. GPON is 2.4 Gbps down, 1.2 Gbps up... 2400mbit/32=75mbit
The speeds for PON tech are shared, just like HFC cable, except you will have fixed much lower contention ratios that dont have 100 people sharing a 40mbit DOCSIS channel. | |
|
| 
Cheese
Premium
join:2003-10-26
Naples, FL
clubs:
1 edit | said by soothsayer15 :Verizon Fios can turn up the speed on BPON to 622 Mbps. When they upgrade to GPON, 1.4 Gbps. I can see Cavlevision actually doing this, but I doubt Comcast, Brighthouse, Time Warner, Cox, or Charter (Laughing Hard) moving up anytime soon. Per household? I believe that's at the back end. | |
|
| |
See 12 replies to this post |
|
Dagda1175
join:2001-06-17
Goleta, CA | overkill, for now solve the crappy upload speed issue first! | |
|
| 
imrf
Premium
join:2002-06-06
Utica, MI
·WOW Internet and C..
| Re: overkill, for now said by Dagda1175 :solve the crappy upload speed issue first! If you read the article you would see that the Narad solution does. It's 100Mbps symmetrical. | |
|
| | 
LatinTek
join:2004-06-03
Flushing, NY
1 edit |  Re: overkill, for now
Sorry.. wrong spot. | |
|
| | |
Cheese
Premium
join:2003-10-26
Naples, FL
clubs:
| Re: overkill, for now said by LatinTek :Time Warner in NYC/Queens doesn't look like they care any to give us any increase in upload. 7Mbps down/2Mbps up would rock so hard. I think a lot of people would be very happy with that right now and that should be the standard service. Sorry.. wrong spot. Unless they have competition in the area, they aren't going to care. I have been down that road on the phone with them down here in Fl many times. | |
|
| | | | 
anonnoa
@myvzw.com | Re: overkill, for now Overkill for now ... first figure out how to get it out to the sticks where there is only dialup now. | |
|
| attsbcisgay
join:2003-03-18
Beverly Hills, CA
| said by Dagda1175 :solve the crappy upload speed issue first! I agree, more download and slightly faster upload is next to useless. If this is progress then it's all smokes screen. We ain't see anything close to T1 on Cable or DSL yet except FIOS which isn't going to be widely deployed anytime soon. | |
|
grandpinaple
join:2006-01-03
New York, NY | Ping Can the narad tech match Fios ping times? | |
|
|
See 7 replies to this post |
|
tmc8080
join:2004-04-24
Floral Park, NY
| cablevision blinked! Its 6/19/06 and cablevision did NOT rollout 50/XX megabit speed (or 100/100) for residential customers!!!
They have another 10 days to deploy the speed increase otherwise they have failed to keep up with their rhetoric in the race to keep customers happy.
Verizon increased speed from 15/2 to 20/5... and will rollout dhcp in another couple of weeks making another 150-200kbits up/down. In all new cablemodem technology including docsis 2.0 you can only go 38 megabits down and about 10mbit up with MAJOR upgrades in the node infrastructure. Anything using channel bonding and/or symmetric speeds uses docsis 3.0/proprietary modulations.
Mum's the word on anything new from cablevision to compete. | |
|
|
Cheese
Premium
join:2003-10-26
Naples, FL
clubs:
| Re: cablevision blinked! said by tmc8080 :Its 6/19/06 and cablevision did NOT rollout 50/XX megabit speed (or 100/100) for residential customers!!! They have another 10 days to deploy the speed increase otherwise they have failed to keep up with their rhetoric in the race to keep customers happy. Verizon increased speed from 15/2 to 20/5... and will rollout dhcp in another couple of weeks making another 150-200kbits up/down. In all new cablemodem technology including docsis 2.0 you can only go 38 megabits down and about 10mbit up with MAJOR upgrades in the node infrastructure. Anything using channel bonding and/or symmetric speeds uses docsis 3.0/proprietary modulations. Mum's the word on anything new from cablevision to compete. Keep holding your breath for those speeds | |
|
| | pcnetworx1
join:2005-09-21
Bethel Park, PA | Re: cablevision blinked! Ya, keep holding. I love to see fanboys look like smurfs when they hold it too long...  | |
|
| 
SDKiwi
VIP
join:2002-05-27
El Cajon, CA
| "In all new cablemodem technology including docsis 2.0 you can only go 38 megabits down and about 10mbit up with MAJOR upgrades in the node infrastructure. Anything using channel bonding and/or symmetric speeds uses docsis 3.0/proprietary modulations."
DOCSIS 2.0 can go faster than this on upstreams today, at least 15 Mbps in mixed mode with 1.x modems. 30 Mbps if you can allocate 2 upstreams per node.
Pre-std channel bonding solutions will be available long before DOCSIS 3.0 providing much faster downstream speeds. | |
|
i1me2ao
Premium
join:2001-03-03
TEXAS |  for what
| |
|
| 
J D McDorce
Premium
join:2001-12-29
Westland, MI
| Re: for what said by i1me2ao :if providers are griping about bandwidth useage what good is 100 mps?? Comparative advertising versus competitive internet delivery methods.
I can almost envision 100 Mbps burst capability if the channel bonding scheme comes to fruition, assuming, of course, that someone is actually pushing data at that rate and no one else on your plant segment is online at that given instant.  | |
|
| | compton
join:2002-02-08
Brooklyn, NY | Wrong Copper/coaxial cables can handle up to 500 MBPS. The problem is with getting that speed is the need to upgrade the signal processors, switches and amplifiers. | |
|
| | | cwh
join:2006-05-14
San Antonio, TX
| Re: Wrong said by compton :Copper/coaxial cables can handle up to 500 MBPS. The problem is with getting that speed is the need to upgrade the signal processors, switches and amplifiers. Yes, but then share it with 500 households and see what happens. | |
|
| | |
J D McDorce
Premium
join:2001-12-29
Westland, MI
| said by compton :The problem is with getting that speed is the need to upgrade the signal processors, switches and amplifiers. You forgot to mention a significant change in mindset regarding the manner in which cable companies provide services over said copper/coaxial cables. Raw capacity of the cable becomes an interesting factoid, however, how much of that can be harnessed for IP traffic when part of the spectrum is dedicated to broadcasting 80+ channels of analog television signal plus additional digital streams being broadcast containing multiplexed digital and HD video?
| |
|
Trevorm7
join:2005-01-17
Clearwater, FL
1 edit | Get rid of analog tv They need to get rid of all the analog tv channels and use switched digital or ip tv, all the freed channels can be used for ip traffic.
But their crappy coaxial networks will not be able to keep up with fiber for very long so they will either have to upgrade to fiber or disappear. | |
|
| SeekHelp
join:2006-05-27
New York, NY
| Re: Get rid of analog tv you are clueless. Most advance cable companies are hybrid coax network. The biggest question was. how much would it cost to extend that last mile of fiber to the home in their case.. That article stats an avg of $50 per home, you really think they couldnt start to compete with fios and bring FTTH? What would verizon shareholders do if cable companies announced aggressive FTTH roll outs? Who would be panicking then? Of course the obvious winner in any of those solutions would be the consumer which is the overall goal. | |
|
| pabster
join:2001-12-09
Waterloo, IA
·Mediacom
| You, sir, with all due respect, are clueless.
Most cable systems are already FTTN (Fiber To The Node) and all that would need to be done is to extend it that 'last mile' to each customers' front door. This is in stark contrast to projects like FiOS where fiber has to be laid from end to end to replace existing copper.
And don't worry, eventually analog cable channels WILL disappear. I think TW's trials of 'managed cable' (as I call it - where the channels sit at the router and are only piped down when (if) someone requests them) are the future. | |
|
| | cwh
join:2006-05-14
San Antonio, TX
| Re: Get rid of analog tv said by pabster :You, sir, with all due respect, are clueless. Most cable systems are already FTTN (Fiber To The Node) and all that would need to be done is to extend it that 'last mile' to each customers' front door. This is in stark contrast to projects like FiOS where fiber has to be laid from end to end to replace existing copper. And don't worry, eventually analog cable channels WILL disappear. I think TW's trials of 'managed cable' (as I call it - where the channels sit at the router and are only piped down when (if) someone requests them) are the future. IPTV would be quite easy for them implement and I suggest they get started sooner rather than later. | |
|
LoneGreyWolf
Premium
join:2002-09-09
Bath, NY
clubs: | I would just be happy with 768/64... All this talk of 1000Mbps, when I would be happy with 768kbps or even 512kbps service. Right now all I have is 26.4kbps dial-up. | |
|
| Techman21
join:2005-04-14
Richmond, VA
| Re: I would just be happy with 768/64... Then move. People who have no access to broadband and who live in the sticks need to stop complaining and start to realize it is not going to come to you anytime soon no matter what the cable/telcos tell you.
For the most part it is not economically viable for them to service an area that is less than around a thousand(?). That number is a total guess it might be higher. I certainly know they wouldn't do it for a small community of 100 or even 200. If they did and it was cable they'd probably charge you ridiculous rates which if it were a smart consumer they wouldn't pay for it. The faster that consumers stop taking it in the rear from big businesses and start showing them with our dollars what we want they will continue to abuse their position/power. (this heads off into another topic better left for another thread)
Hell I had a person call at work yesterday who complained that Satellite wasn't much faster than their dialup. Then again they were using a home network and I was unsure how it was wired/wireless(?)
I've had sprint and they're moving a nice clip imo. Seems like every year they come out with a new speed selection and new prices. Now its Embarq in my area and its even cheaper I think.
As for 100Mbit connections, I don't think we'll see those nice connection speeds as we have before with the same TOS. The telcos/cable companies have learned what they should put in the TOS so the connection is near worthless...I've started to hop skip over all these issues and think when I've got a much better paying job I'll start to look at a T1. And to keep costs down look into getting other people to help foot the bill. This is how those young people are able to sell cheaper bandwidth. Although they may be skirting laws or TOS (I don't know). | |
|
| |
LoneGreyWolf
Premium
join:2002-09-09
Bath, NY
clubs:
| Re: I would just be happy with 768/64... Always with the just move replies. Moving isn't a viable option, especially when you have a large family to support. I have 5 children, plus my wife and I. Yes, seven people! So I have seven people to think about, jobs for my wife and I, my children's schooling, my son is a classified student (basically means he gets special services). He has sensory integration issues. He gets speech therapy, and occupational therapy. My youngest son, was born 8 weeks pre-mature and has many developmental issues and will need special service as well. The problem with this is, not all schools have it, or if they do, they may not be something that is wanted.
If you step back and think about "just move", you may it isn't always that easy to do. For a family, just up and moving should never be taken lightly! | |
|
majortom1981
join:2004-08-26
Lindenhurst, NY
| Copper isnt the problem The coax lines for the cable companies are not the problem.
Why hasnt anybody actually turned around and took a look at cablevision.
They are a small cablecompany that is competing with gigantic companies like time warner and verizon.
Everybody complains that they are capped. have you looked and saw how this small cable company is giving some of the fastest speeds in the country even though its a lot smaller company ?
Also the narad tech would be perfect for a company like cablevision it can help the companies slowly change over to a fttp system.
also look into the docsis 2.0b spec i think it is. There are some hardware companies who have come out with hardware capable of docsis 2.0 operation that can also use channel bonding.
The problem is not the network and more of the money. | |
|
|
|
|
100Mbps Cable
·