  ptrowskiGot Helix?Premium
join:2005-03-14
Putnam, CT
kudos:4 | Brilliant! I love the "because we can" line. If only other ISP's would adopt that as well. | |
|
 | | | Re: Brilliant! it's because they are not a blood sucking titan of American Industry, but just a city that wants good internet connections for their residents and businesses. | |
|
| | | | Re: Brilliant! Wait a sec....$350 per month..that's not blood-sucking? I beg to differ! | |
|
| | | jca2050Premium
join:2002-02-04
Hacienda Heights, CA | Re: Brilliant! $350 is blood sucking for 1gb/1gb? Try getting this kind of speed from a local Telco for your business and be prepared to pay thousands of dollars a month. | |
|
| | | axus
join:2001-06-18
Washington, DC Reviews:
 ·Verizon Online DSL
| Like he said, they are experimenting with the price; if they don't lose money at $350 they can do price decreases until the total profit starts going down. I have no concept of what I'd do with 1Gbps, besides hosting content for other people ;p
I foresee some small web hosts opening up shop in Chattanooga. | |
|
| | | said by ptrowski:I love the "because we can" line. If only other ISP's would adopt that as well. I think TW has handily adopted that line as well, except they were referring to their price hikes... | |
|
|  HiVoltPremium
join:2000-12-28
Toronto, ON
kudos:12
·TekSavvy DSL
 ·TekSavvy Cable
| said by ptrowski:I love the "because we can" line. If only other ISP's would adopt that as well. Haha... Here in Canada, our duopoly incumbent telco and cableco use the same tagline...
We cap.
We throttle.
We charge the highest rates for less service in the developed world.
Why? Because we can.
--
BUCK FELL ,,!,,('-'),,!,, | |
|
| | | Maybe its because its not a cable company trying to gauge as much as they can for the lest common denominator. | |
|
|  dvd536as Mr. Pink as they comePremium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:4 | said by ptrowski:I love the "because we can" line. If only other ISP's would adopt that as well. others can. they just don't wanna.
--
The shortest distance between 2 points adds 1.5 stars to T. want $25? solve »coord.info/GC20A37 for me | |
|
| | How much bandwith per node / per backend headend? How much bandwidth per node / per back end headend?
Is 100 each way and 1 Gbps each way? of some thing like 100/5? | |
|
| | | Re: How much bandwith per node / per backend headend? the speeds are symmetrical. | |
|
| | dvd536as Mr. Pink as they comePremium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:4 | Re: How much bandwith per node / per backend headend? and the caps are how much/mo?
--
The shortest distance between 2 points adds 1.5 stars to T. want $25? solve »coord.info/GC20A37 for me | |
|
| | | | | Re: How much bandwith per node / per backend headend? You mean monthly download caps like Comcasts 250gb? If so, there is no listed monthly cap. I'm sure if you went full throttle all month they might give you a call but I haven't heard of it happening. | |
|
| BlueC
join:2009-11-26
Minneapolis, MN Reviews:
·Integra Telecom
 ·voip.ms
 ·T-Mobile US
| said by Joe12345678:How much bandwidth per node / per back end headend? I'd actually be curious to know this as well. Always wondered how much bandwidth they supplied to their network.
I'd imagine they can oversell the 1gbps connections fairly easily considering it'll be tough to fully saturate those connections (for most people). | |
|
| | | | Re: How much bandwith per node / per backend headend? "I'd imagine they can oversell the 1gbps connections fairly easily considering it'll be tough to fully saturate those connections (for most people)."
That's why they are offering it. This is not much more than marketing hype over everyone else. It's pretty tough at this time for a residential consumer to saturate 50-100Mb for an extended period of time. So if they offer 1Gbps it's not that big of a deal because they know that you can't sustain that rate. Anyone who can do that is more than likely breaking their terms of service which gives them an out on offering that speed to the end user. | |
|
| | |
| | chimera
join:2009-06-09
Washington, DC | The real trick to this is if they can get tech companies to move out there and start hosting data warehouses using their network they might be able to negotiate lower rates and peering agreements to help provide even lower bandwidth costs, which when you think about it is the entire purpose of the internet to begin with. I'm really curious to see how this plays out. | |
|
| | | BlueC
join:2009-11-26
Minneapolis, MN Reviews:
·Integra Telecom
·voip.ms
·T-Mobile US
| Re: How much bandwith per node / per backend headend? I don't think these connections come with strong SLAs and guarantees like a dedicated connection. Companies that host data are typically forced to pay the high costs to have a dedicated connection (or multiple, running BGP) because they require as much up-time as possible. | |
|
| | | | iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 | Re: How much bandwith per node / per backend headend? EPB would probably be willing to set up SLA'd access onto their network if you were willing to pay for it... | |
|
| | | | | No, because they don't offer the same style of pricing to businesses. If you are a company that is in the internet business expect to pay a considerably higher rate than a company that is not. I know that they are charging $5000+ for 100Mbps to companies that are in that business.
IF they are going up against a competitive quote they will sell the service at a loss to get the business if they have to. If there is not a competitive quote they will get as much as they think the customer will pay. It's not uncommon to find businesses in Chattanooga that are paying close $2,000 + for 10 Mb of Data and some Voice. | |
|
| | | | chimera
join:2009-06-09
Washington, DC | Re: How much bandwith per node / per backend headend? Is the 10Mb split between voice and data or is the voice in addition to the data on dedicated bandwidth? If it's split that's about what I'm used to seeing for metro ethernet. | |
|
| | | | | | | Re: How much bandwith per node / per backend headend? Just the Data | |
|
| | | | | | chimera
join:2009-06-09
Washington, DC | Re: How much bandwith per node / per backend headend? That's not a bad deal, not great but not bad. Does that include them renting out and managing any edge equipment? I'm assuming they can't provide any redundancy so another ISP would be needed for a failover. | |
|
| | |  bentand IngaPremium
join:2004-10-04
Loveland, CO
·Comcast
| said by chimera:The real trick to this is if they can get tech companies to move out there and start hosting data warehouses using their network they might be able to negotiate lower rates and peering agreements to help provide even lower bandwidth costs, which when you think about it is the entire purpose of the internet to begin with. I'm really curious to see how this plays out. Right? A big F'in pipe like that for the price of a T1? How many 10's of thousands of dollars a month does a Gig-E connection cost now?
I wonder what the TOS and SLA are like?
--
Greedy Old Pigs v. The Donkey Show | |
|
| | | | iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 | Re: How much bandwith per node / per backend headend? Realistically, you can get a gigabit to many places for on the order of $8500 or so, depending on the quality of bandwidth that you want and the legwork you're willing to do... | |
|
| | | | iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 | Also, I'd wager that EPB would cost less than other providers for business-grade services... | |
|
| | | | | BlueC
join:2009-11-26
Minneapolis, MN | Re: How much bandwith per node / per backend headend? On transport, yes, but I really think for dedicated transit you'd get a better deal through someone that resells one of the Tier 1s. Plus you'd get your choice of routing instead of relying on EPB. | |
|
| | | | | | iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 | Re: How much bandwith per node / per backend headend? EPB is dual-homed AT&T + SprintLink. I'd take that network over most out there. All it needs is Level3 to be just perfect  | |
|
| | | | | | | Depends on who you are. If you are an ISP you can expect to pay 4-5 times their retail rate monthly and $200k + for a build out even if their fiber is on poles that are feed your building with their power. | |
|
| | | | | | iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 | Re: How much bandwith per node / per backend headend? Interesting...though 4-5x retail is still on the order of $10-$12 per Mbit. | |
|
| | iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 | Well, they have bandwidth from Sprint and AT&T. Not sure how much, but I'd guess somewhere between 1Gbit and 10Gbit per carrier, with the capacity to add more. | |
|
| | | BlueC
join:2009-11-26
Minneapolis, MN | Re: How much bandwith per node / per backend headend? Those guys aren't cheap when it comes to bandwidth. I wonder if they managed to get it at a lower rate than most.
They're probably running something like 1gbit commit on a 10gbit port per carrier. | |
|
Reviews:
 ·EPB Fiber Optics
·EPB Fiber Optics
·Comcast
| EPB FTTH i have this service. it have the 30 meg low tier, and it runs 58 bucks a month. i just ran a speed test on speakeasy and here are the results.
Last Result:
Download Speed: 34471 kbps (4308.9 KB/sec transfer rate)
Upload Speed: 27451 kbps (3431.4 KB/sec transfer rate)
smokin hot!!
take that and stick it were the sun don't shine comcrap.
the speed is amazing. i can download an 800 meg movie in under an hour. it blows anything off the planet. i feel for anyone who can not get fiber internet. it is just plain insane fast.
if you live in chattanooga and you read this, dump your current ISP and give EPB a call. it is well worth your time. | |
|
|
See 25 replies to this post |
|
| | speed super fast crazy high speed is nice but then you have the issues of available speed from the content you want and the speed of the gear in the home itself
--
my site | |
|
| | | Re: speed Nashville pretty well sucks in getting descent Broadband . . . | |
|
| | | | Re: speed lol well hopefully with this it'll suck a little less.
--
my site | |
|
| | | iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 | Re: speed Nashville != Chattanooga. | |
|
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Verizon Online DSL
·Comcast
| You can get it for less than $350 Just add a basic phone line to the mix and the price drops by nearly $40. Not sure how much of that is going to be added back in taxes, but it's something to think about.
Also, EPB isn't quite the cheapest gigabit fiber out there...Paxio charges $245 for their gigabit. However EPB has a MUCH larger service area than Paxio.
Last but not least, 100M EPB is now $140, down from $175 yesterday. So everybody wins. Except Comcast and AT&T...they can no longer compete. At. All. | |
|
| BlueC
join:2009-11-26
Minneapolis, MN | Re: You can get it for less than $350 I wish we had someone like Paxio out here. They do dark fiber at under $1k/mo, which is pretty much awesome. All you need then is someone to provide the transit, which at that point won't cost you all too much. | |
|
|  GuspazGuspazPremium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:16 | It looks like the bundle discount for adding telephone service on the 1000 package is $55.95; you need to consider that the telephone service itself costs $22.99.
--
Developer: Tomato/MLPPP, Linux/MLPPP, etc »fixppp.org | |
|
 heels_fan1.20.09 The start of SocialismPremium
join:2003-02-07
Columbia, TN
kudos:1 | Different pricing With it being a Public utility, they have to offer the the same residential pricing to all residents and the same commercial pricing to to all commercial accts. They can not (lawfully) offer different pricing to each and every business.
--
everyone is born ignorant. some are born stupid, others achieve stupidity and the rest have stupidity thrust upon them. | |
|
|
See 8 replies to this post |
|
 keithpsPremium
join:2002-06-26
Soddy Daisy, TN
·EPB Fiber Optics
| Crazy I'm still waiting on it to become available where I live, its getting close because I see them stringing fiber all over the place. Crazy thing is that there are people in their service footprint that only have dial-up. Can you imagine going from having dial-up to having 1Gbps symmetrical fiber as an option?
--
RIP Dad (10-28-1955 to 4-10-2010) | |
|
|
See 6 replies to this post |
|
 woodwardXMission BroadbandVIP
join:2000-12-28
Salt Lake City, UT | Future Chattanooga is building fiber infrastructure for the future, and by being one of the first to do it they're getting a leg up on industry.
In other words, they get it. Kudos. | |
|
Reviews:
·Cybersurf Intern..
| Speed vs cost Ok the ISPs can make the argument that bandwidth = cost because of capacity and electrical cost.
They sure cant make the argument that speed = cost. If I have gigabit and never use it. I cost them just as much as I would if I had 5mbit.
ISPs should venture to give the very best stable speed to all customers. | |
|
|
1 edit | Re: Speed vs cost said by munky99999:Ok the ISPs can make the argument that bandwidth = cost because of capacity and electrical cost. They sure cant make the argument that speed = cost. If I have gigabit and never use it. I cost them just as much as I would if I had 5mbit. ISPs should venture to give the very best stable speed to all customers. I agree and disagree with that stance.
If the ISP were providing 1Mbps connections, their $/GB bandwidth costs would be the same as if they were to provide 1Gbps connections (i.e. related to data transmitted / received, not the rate at which it was transmitted or received).
If the same ISP wanted to start offering 100Mbps connections, wouldn't they likely need higher performance infrastructure, and connections to bigger pipes? Do the backbones charge different access rates for higher speeds? Or do they just charge the ISPs flat rates based on data consumed?
If the backbone providers charge flat rates based on data consumption, then the ISP would still have to recover the cost of the new equipment to handle peak bandwidth usage.
Would they jack up the price a lot and get the equipment cost recovered quickly, or would they institute a small increase and spread the cost out over a longer period of time?
I really want to know how those things work!
edit: But yeah, if they already have the infrastructure in place, it doesn't seem to make sense to charge people more for a faster tier that you can already offer. It would be nice if they had a single tier, but that would probably cost them too many customers that want a slower tier because it's always been cheaper. | |
|
| | Reviews:
·Cybersurf Intern..
| Re: Speed vs cost quote:
If the same ISP wanted to start offering 100Mbps connections, wouldn't they likely need higher performance infrastructure, and connections to bigger pipes? Do the backbones charge different access rates for higher speeds? Or do they just charge the ISPs flat rates based on data consumed?
I said best stable connection. Not best possible theoretical connection.
If my connection can only do 2mbit. I get 2mbit. If I have a linecard capable of 24mbit adsl2. Then that's what I get.
As for backbone. They already are capable of handling the speed. It's purely a matter of datacapacity. Which really doesnt necessarily == increasing with an increase in speed.
Moreover, they charge based on data usage; at an insane $/gb level already. Giving people better speed != more usage. If they do use more usage this == more $.
--
--
if (value == 0)
return value;
else
return 0; | |
|
| | | Gami00
join:2010-03-11
Mississauga, ON | Re: Speed vs cost that's fine thinking in the old world DSL tech.
with distance/line quality/overhead.
that doesn't fly in Fiber world, were you get the connection that you're paying for. | |
|
| | | | Reviews:
·Cybersurf Intern..
| Re: Speed vs cost said by Gami00:that doesn't fly in Fiber world, were you get the connection that you're paying for. Google disagrees with you and agrees with me. On the mark of spending tons of $ on that bet. As their intentions to give best stable speed on ftth will be gigabit. | |
|
| |
|
WhatNowPremium
join:2009-05-06
Charlotte, NC | Total cost The system cost $200 million. Wiki says there was almost 171,000 population in 2008. That comes to about $1200 (if I did the math right) for each person in the city. If we all committed to putting up that amount more places could have that type of service.
The 3 play (phone, 30M internet, and 194 channel + HD +DVR) no premium like HBO is $143.45 / month.
Other cheaper options.
To get equal to my TWC package of just 6M, phone, and TV same @ $152 (removed taxes) is $125 for EPB.
»epbfi.com/internet/ | |
|
| keithpsPremium
join:2002-06-26
Soddy Daisy, TN Reviews:
·EPB Fiber Optics
| Re: Total cost said by WhatNow:The system cost $200 million. Wiki says there was almost 171,000 population in 2008. That comes to about $1200 (if I did the math right) for each person in the city. If we all committed to putting up that amount more places could have that type of service. The 3 play (phone, 30M internet, and 194 channel + HD +DVR) no premium like HBO is $143.45 / month. Other cheaper options. To get equal to my TWC package of just 6M, phone, and TV same @ $152 (removed taxes) is $125 for EPB. » epbfi.com/internet/ Their service area is probably closer to 300,000 people though, because they serve a good chunk of Hamilton County, TN. They are passing 169,000 homes and businesses, and you know there is more than 1 person in each home.
--
RIP Dad (10-28-1955 to 4-10-2010) | |
|
| | | No, it cost well more than $200 million. You are not including the $115 stimulus grand or the undisclosed subsidies from the Electric Side of the Company which have been substantial. | |
|
heels_fan1.20.09 The start of SocialismPremium
join:2003-02-07
Columbia, TN
kudos:1 | Who Who do they use as their back bone providers?
Level 3? QWEST?....??? | |
|
| iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 | Re: Who AT&T and Sprint, actually. AT&T WorldNet, not BellSouth or SBCIS. | |
|
Reviews:
·EPB Fiber Optics
| Wow Here I was looking for a new router to handle possible 100mbps speeds in the future and they go and drop this bomb. The faster their top tier is the faster their slowest tier is likely to be. 
I look forward to seeing what Comcast and AT&T will try to do to slow down EPB's progress. | |
|
| |
| | GuspazGuspazPremium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:16 | Re: Wow You're almost CPU limited (on the WRT) at that point, though, and keep in mind that the speed test only does one direction at a time. It's highly unlikely that the WRT54G could support the full 60Mbps aggregate throughput that saturating both directions on the pipe would produce.
The WRT also can't handle that sort of throughput over wireless; ignoring that 802.11g only offers ~20Mbps of aggregate throughput in practice (your line does 60, and wifi is half-duplex and shared), wireless encryption can put a real crimp in throughput by maxing out the CPU.
--
Developer: Tomato/MLPPP, Linux/MLPPP, etc »fixppp.org | |
|
 MIRV
join:2000-12-01
Louisville, KY | Green with envy My 10/1 cable feels so puny. | |
|
| | Lame Boy do I feel ripped off. Can't get over 1.5Mbps down and 384k up and paying $45 a month. I hope all the greedy telcos and cable corps DIAF!!! | |
|
Reviews:
·EPB Fiber Optics
·EPB Fiber Optics
·Comcast
| $$$$ the sad thing is that the cable providers could run speeds way higher than they offer. they just dont do it because they have no need to offer any more than what they have.
on a side note, a friend of mine has the comcrap triple play with 2 DVR boxes and all channels. her bill is almost 250 a month. she called comcast and told them to schedule a disconnect date and they asked why to which she replied what she was getting and for how much. they locked her in to a 1 year deal at 129 a month. | |
|
rothman
join:2001-04-01
Signal Mountain, TN | EPB FIber I've had my EPB fiber for a few weeks now..upgraded from ATT dsl the day I got my door hanger advertisment. Very happy with the dual stream! | |
|
| rothman
join:2001-04-01
Signal Mountain, TN | Re: EPB FIber Oh, btw..i downloaded a 740 MB file the other night in 3 minutes..if I remember correctly i was getting a 1.2Mbps transfer rate. | |
|
| | iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 | Re: EPB FIber According to my calculations, you were actually getting ~33 Mbps (~4.1 MB/s). Which is awesome. | |
|
| | Wow. They are going to get a bunch of new jobs out of this. We have Go Daddy, University of Phoenix & a bunch of tech support companies out here. I hope we don't start losing them. | |
|
| | | Re: Wow. They are going to get a bunch of new jobs out of this. Luckily, there's a lot more factors involved than residential internet speeds regarding where a business would necessarily want to be located. | |
|
| | | | Re: Wow. They are going to get a bunch of new jobs out of this. said by pepe7:Luckily, there's a lot more factors involved than residential internet speeds regarding where a business would necessarily want to be located. I'll stand by my prediction that Chattanooga has just put itself on the radar of a lot of tech companies. | |
|
| | | | | Re: Wow. They are going to get a bunch of new jobs out of this. Go read the Wall Street Journal and/or Economist Magazine. Also pay attention to MSNBC. Then you won't be as certain that the tech companies would necessarily relocate to Chattanooga. Having good broadband is actually only a small piece of the entire puzzle.
For another not unrelated example go look at why the aerospace industry is centered in Southern California and not somewhere much cheaper. | |
|
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Verizon Online DSL
·Comcast
| You'll need a router for that Any decent home router these days can pass 100 Mbps of wireline traffic. Gigabit is another story. You will probably need to build your own pfSense or Mikrotik box to pul down a gigabit of traffic. So you're looking at ~$500 for a router ccapable of handling a $350 per month internet connection...
...and honestly, that's not that bad. | |
|
|  RolteC0h
join:2001-05-20
Fresh Meadows, NY
kudos:1 | Re: You'll need a router for that Yeah, for a computer based router, try going with Cisco, or Alcatel Lucent, and you will see yourself spending around $10,000 for a router that supports those speeds with good results/features.
Then again, this all depends on the user and what they need.
I got myself the Cisco ASA 5505, for around $400. I got this when I got myself my FiOS at 20/20 speeds.
I now get 43/35 speeds and video on demand increases that to around 60/35 at max. Now can most routers do that in full duplex, probably not. Most routers will either stop way below it, or give you high pings times.
So far a router like that can handle up to 100Mbps, maybe 150 as the website states, but look at the other products out there.
One could purchase a good netgear WNDR3700, but this wont provide more ten around 400Mbps, maybe 700 total both ways, and this is a simple $160 router.
For those that can get and afford the 1Gbps lines, I envy you, but do let us know what the computer provides in terms of a router, or what you end up buying! | |
|
| | iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Verizon Online DSL
·Comcast
| Re: You'll need a router for that FWIW my Linksys WRT310N (~$100) has no problem pushing 60 Mbps down and 20 Mbps up over wireline. If I wanted hundreds of Mbps (but not a gigabit) of routing throughput I could get an Engenius gigabit 11n router for about $60 that would do the job admirably.
That isn't exactly a gigabit though... | |
|
| | router well 700 is close enough without having to spend a crapload of money. can the modern PCs handle that much speed though? | |
|
|
|
