Topic 'FCC's Definition of Broadband Is Too Slow, US Watchdog Says' in forum '' - dslreports.com

Re: FCC's Definition of Broadband Is Too Slow, US Watchdog Says

Fri, 06 Aug 2021 11:09:38 EDT

tc1uscg posted :

said by videomatic3:

but I'm not a normal case, and you aren't either

I'll agree to that ;-)

Re: FCC's Definition of Broadband Is Too Slow, US Watchdog Says

Fri, 06 Aug 2021 10:50:25 EDT

videomatic3 posted :

said by tc1uscg:

said by videomatic3:

How do you draw that line? Leaving the computer on for many hours or days when you're not using it to get something done?

Who doesn't leave their PC on 24/7 ;)? Personally, I leave my PC on 24/7. To be frank, I have two PC's (towers) online that are on 24/7. The only time they are down is if I'm taking it out to the garage to blow the dust out of'em.

I'm pretty sure people on this website are a minority. My parents, aunts uncles etc, if something takes too long they just don't do it anymore. Whether it's posting pictures or videos on social media or whatever. Nobody besides me leaves their computer on over night. I have 3 computers running 24/7 but I'm not a normal case, and you aren't either

Re: FCC's Definition of Broadband Is Too Slow, US Watchdog Says

Fri, 06 Aug 2021 10:47:02 EDT

tc1uscg posted :

said by videomatic3:

How do you draw that line? Leaving the computer on for many hours or days when you're not using it to get something done?

Re: FCC's Definition of Broadband Is Too Slow, US Watchdog Says

Fri, 06 Aug 2021 09:06:47 EDT

videomatic3 posted :

said by betam4x:

As long as it is fast enough to get things done, it doesn't matter.

How do you draw that line? Leaving the computer on for many hours or days when you're not using it to get something done?

Personally id like to be able to stream 4k to the internet. And 35mbit doesn't do that in real-time. And 2 streams? Forget about it.
So I don't even bother trying.

Watching a YouTube 4k stream is easy, plenty of download. Everyone's case is different, one size doesn't fit all.

Re: FCC's Definition of Broadband Is Too Slow, US Watchdog Says

Fri, 06 Aug 2021 08:57:53 EDT

betam4x posted :

said by videomatic3:

said by betam4x:

I'm not agreeing with him, but none of the use cases you presented need symmetrical speeds. Uploading large videos and other files benefit from faster speeds, regardless of symmetry.

Using that argument, why don't we all still use 56k modems? It achieves the same thing.

Now you are just trolling. I never said speeds weren't important. However, for users that require high upload speeds, symmetry does not matter. I could easily get away with 100 down/1 gig up, for example. Sure, it's great to have symmetry, but an internet connection not being symmetrical does not mean it is bad. As long as it is fast enough to get things done, it doesn't matter.

Re: FCC's Definition of Broadband Is Too Slow, US Watchdog Says

Fri, 06 Aug 2021 00:34:00 EDT

videomatic3 posted :

said by betam4x:

I'm not agreeing with him, but none of the use cases you presented need symmetrical speeds. Uploading large videos and other files benefit from faster speeds, regardless of symmetry.

Using that argument, why don't we all still use 56k modems? It achieves the same thing.

Re: FCC's Definition of Broadband Is Too Slow, US Watchdog Says

Fri, 06 Aug 2021 00:02:10 EDT

betam4x posted : I'm not agreeing with him, but none of the use cases you presented need symmetrical speeds. Uploading large videos and other files benefit from faster speeds, regardless of symmetry.

Re: FCC's Definition of Broadband Is Too Slow, US Watchdog Says

Thu, 15 Jul 2021 14:22:09 EDT

boredsysadm posted : For you or the previous joker of course I'd prefer 100/100 (or 200/200) over 100/25, BUT this is isn't how Docsis 3.0 works.
Docsis is designed to be asymmetrical speeds from the get-go. This is simply how things work in the real world. DOCSIS 4.0 is supposed to address this but Cable ISPs couldn't agree on one format for a while (see below)
»www.lightreading.com/cab ··· d/768950
»stopthecap.com/2019/10/0 ··· o-exist/

Re: FCC's Definition of Broadband Is Too Slow, US Watchdog Says

Thu, 15 Jul 2021 13:43:23 EDT

tc1uscg posted : If you needed the upstream speed, it's always best to pick the higher number. I don't need to allow some blood-sucking hacker to get my shit any faster so I'd be more for the slower upstream speed. Now, if I was doing media work on a cloud, 200/200 would be best, providing it's not "blasted" by the likes of Comcast. No manipulation of the speed is my point.

Re: FCC's Definition of Broadband Is Too Slow, US Watchdog Says

Thu, 15 Jul 2021 13:35:46 EDT

nondo posted :

said by boredsysadm:

Which one you would choose: 100/25 or 35/35?
I know which I would pick and it ain't the latter. Do keep in mind I do work remotely and I fully understand the need to have decent upload speed, maybe because I've been doing IT for the last 20 years professionally.

Why did you make the symmetrical worse? 100/25 vs 100/100 or 50/50 isn't a difficult choice.

Re: FCC's Definition of Broadband Is Too Slow, US Watchdog Says

Thu, 15 Jul 2021 10:58:22 EDT

videomatic3 posted :

said by boredsysadm:

Probably 100/25, but if it's like between 1000/35 and 200/200 I'd definitely go for 200/200
Or let's say the symmetrical tier was 100/100 I'd look into having both services, and downgrade the 1000/35 to something cheaper

Re: FCC's Definition of Broadband Is Too Slow, US Watchdog Says

Thu, 15 Jul 2021 10:30:21 EDT

boredsysadm posted : Which one you would choose: 100/25 or 35/35?
I know which I would pick and it ain't the latter. Do keep in mind I do work remotely and I fully understand the need to have decent upload speed, maybe because I've been doing IT for the last 20 years professionally.

Re: FCC's Definition of Broadband Is Too Slow, US Watchdog Says

Thu, 15 Jul 2021 10:28:14 EDT

boredsysadm posted : It matters a lot since government tends to give ISPs moneys to bring the internet into unserved or underserved areas. If ISP can't provide the "broadband" it doesn't get the moneys.

Re: FCC's Definition of Broadband Is Too Slow, US Watchdog Says

Mon, 12 Jul 2021 09:32:52 EDT

Tony0945 posted :

said by r81984:

It makes zero sense. Why voluntarily arbitrarily limit your internet connection???
All internet should be symmetrical, there is no technical limitation to not have symmetrical.

»[Cable Speed test: 94.03/2.58 32 ms] No problems except latency (not all the time) and outages. I really was doing fine at 25 down and didn't notice any change going to 100 down. My daughter gets 3 down (AT&T DSL) . THAT's a problem!

You are probably right about no technical limit but perhaps there is a capacity/economic limit, else why would ISP's not be symmetrical? Just to be mean? No, there must be a financial advantage to them.

EDIT:
Sometimes I get a long pause sending e-mail with a big attachment. Probably could be corrected with 25 up. So maybe there is a case for 25/25 as a standard.

Re: FCC's Definition of Broadband Is Too Slow, US Watchdog Says

Mon, 12 Jul 2021 08:55:41 EDT

tc1uscg posted :

said by videomatic3:

said by tc1uscg:

said by videomatic3:

so crappy internet connections leads to better video compression, how is this any good for the movie making companies?

When people start hyping on "compression" and a new standard, I just roll my eyes and silently laugh. Clearly, they have never had Comcast.

How does it not work with comcast?
Limited bandwidth leads to more channel compression.

Didn't say it didn't work. It just degrades the quality of the video from what I've seen. It's not "zero loss".

Re: FCC's Definition of Broadband Is Too Slow, US Watchdog Says

Mon, 12 Jul 2021 08:12:32 EDT

r81984 posted :

said by Tony0945:

said by r81984:

All options should be symmetrical. Asymmetrical makes no sense.

It makes sense for people not gaming, not torrenting, not working from home. What percentage is that? I don't know but I'm confident it's over 50% even 80% possibly 90%.
Households with lots of people need large download bandwidth. Unless they are all gaming or doing business, they are asymmetrical.

It makes zero sense. Why voluntarily arbitrarily limit your internet connection???
All internet should be symmetrical, there is no technical limitation to not have symmetrical.

Re: FCC's Definition of Broadband Is Too Slow, US Watchdog Says

Mon, 12 Jul 2021 07:49:08 EDT

videomatic3 posted :

said by tc1uscg:

said by videomatic3:

so crappy internet connections leads to better video compression, how is this any good for the movie making companies?

When people start hyping on "compression" and a new standard, I just roll my eyes and silently laugh. Clearly, they have never had Comcast.

How does it not work with comcast?
Limited bandwidth leads to more channel compression.

Re: FCC's Definition of Broadband Is Too Slow, US Watchdog Says

Mon, 12 Jul 2021 07:23:21 EDT

tc1uscg posted :

said by videomatic3:

so crappy internet connections leads to better video compression, how is this any good for the movie making companies?

When people start hyping on "compression" and a new standard, I just roll my eyes and silently laugh. Clearly, they have never had Comcast.

Re: FCC's Definition of Broadband Is Too Slow, US Watchdog Says

Sun, 11 Jul 2021 20:34:43 EDT

nondo posted : H.266 increases PQ for 1080p, 4K, and unlocks consumer 8K
+
H.266 unlocks millions of households to HD video. A complete garbage 768k DSL connection will be able to watch 720p H.266 video with no buffering.

Pirates can steal blurays in less than 7 minutes so nothing is going to stop them:
(50 gigabytes) / (1 Gbps) = 6.66666667 minutes

Re: FCC's Definition of Broadband Is Too Slow, US Watchdog Says

Sun, 11 Jul 2021 19:31:30 EDT

videomatic3 posted : so crappy internet connections leads to better video compression, how is this any good for the movie making companies? with smaller files itll be easier to download and store on the computer illegally.
they should be pressing for higher speeds so theres no need to find better ways to compress video data, and therefore decreasing piracy, because huge hard drives are expensive.
how about that for some logic

Re: FCC's Definition of Broadband Is Too Slow, US Watchdog Says

Sun, 11 Jul 2021 12:02:54 EDT

nondo posted :

said by Tony0945:

said by r81984:

All options should be symmetrical. Asymmetrical makes no sense.

It's almost 2022 and 25/25, 50/50, and 100/100 isn't needed? :uhh:

If you want to go down the road of what people need, they don't need large download bandwidth unless they are gaming or doing business. A family of four can watch 1080p netflix perfectly fine with a 25/3 connection. No, you don't need 4K Netflix. With H.266 that family can get by with 10/3 connections. The FCC should lower the definition of broadband down to 10/3 or even 10/1 to reflect this future need. I'm willing to bet you don't like your own logic of what is needed anymore.

Re: FCC's Definition of Broadband Is Too Slow, US Watchdog Says

Sun, 11 Jul 2021 09:36:01 EDT

Tony0945 posted :

said by r81984:

All options should be symmetrical. Asymmetrical makes no sense.

Re: FCC's Definition of Broadband Is Too Slow, US Watchdog Says

Sat, 10 Jul 2021 00:09:06 EDT

betam4x posted : It changes funding from the federal government. In order to qualify to receive funding you must meet the definition of broadband. By raising speeds, you stop AT&T, Verizon, etc. from milking the pot with DSL in most markets.

Re: FCC's Definition of Broadband Is Too Slow, US Watchdog Says

Fri, 09 Jul 2021 19:00:19 EDT

r81984 posted : All internet is people/customer funded, does not matter if "private" or by the "government". We the people are paying for it no matter what. Companies never pay for anything.

It should be symmetrical no matter what. They should not need government funding when they get plenty of money from their customers.

Re: FCC's Definition of Broadband Is Too Slow, US Watchdog Says

Fri, 09 Jul 2021 18:42:26 EDT

deaddyfreddy posted :

said by boredsysadm:

Let's make 100/25 minimum acceptable broadband speed

Why does it matter and who cares what the actual speed definition of the term 'broadband' is?

When it changed to be 25 x 3, Verizon just stopped calling their DSL 'broadband' and marketed it as 'high speed internet'. They didn't make an attempt to increase speeds on DSL to more than 15 Mbps, they didn't do a mass deployment of Fios.

Changing the definition is nothing but a feel good move that produces little results.

Re: FCC's Definition of Broadband Is Too Slow, US Watchdog Says

Fri, 09 Jul 2021 18:28:11 EDT

deaddyfreddy posted :

said by Brian_M:

Looking at Santa Monica, there are indeed 12 different options listed. 14 if you count the 2 business solutions that aren't on the residential side too. Ok, 2 of those aren't in the 90% availability area...

»www.highspeedinternet.co ··· a-monica

Websites like that and Broadband Now are garbage and should not be trusted. Whatever databases they pull their information from give misleading and inaccurate results.

They say I have Verizon at 15 Mbps and Frontier at 100 Mbps with 99% availability in my area. Not true at all, couldn't be more wrong. Verizon is the ILEC, not Frontier. For those that can actually get DSL and it's very limited, the CO is 15+ miles away, everyone that can get DSL in my area is serviced from a remote terminal, the top speed is 5 Mbps.

For every area it lists AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile as options under Mobile, regardless of it that area has adequate reception or not. HughesNet and Viasat are listed no matter what zip code you enter. That would seem like a safe bet, but it isn't. For Viasat, the beam that covers my region is at max capacity and has been mostly closed off for new subscribers for years. The WISP that's listed, is some company I have never heard of whose website hasn't been updated since 2016.

This one is fun. The zip code for one town over lists a WISP called Brown Dog. Again never heard of them. Their website hasn't been update since 2011 and they look like they service the St. Louis area, if they are even still in business. That's not exactly Upstate NY

Re: FCC's Definition of Broadband Is Too Slow, US Watchdog Says

Fri, 09 Jul 2021 16:32:51 EDT

elray posted : Only Spectrum is available throughout the city. But cable bad, right?

Frontier is mostly DSL, and it isn't necessarily available, depending on how diligent and persistent you are. Fiber availability is scant.

Starry covers but a sliver, providing the property owner consents. Wander is similar.

Earthlink is just a retail-price reseller of the above. They aren't bringing *anything* to market.

Verizon and T-Mobile Home are available in a few places, but not ubiquitously, and you're dealing with congested data and/or RF some might not want outside your window.

So no, sorry, no 12 options. I'm pretty happy with the single option; I'd like Frontier to get its act together, but I can live without.

What frosts me is CityNet, which prevents wired competition while the muni-worshippers genuflect and heap praise on it. They don't live here.

Re: FCC's Definition of Broadband Is Too Slow, US Watchdog Says

Fri, 09 Jul 2021 14:49:36 EDT

Rekrul posted :

said by Brian_M:

You understand that this won't change what's available to 90% of the country (land mass, not population), right? No matter what the definition is, *I* will only have 15/.75 DSL available (till I don't because it's unmaintained).

And by changing the definition, you essentially guarantee that those places who already don't meet the Current definition, will Never meet the definition. It just opens the Gov-Bucks to be allotted to those who already have top tier service, because those are the easiest to upgrade. The rest will be forgotten/ignored.

The problem is that by having low definitions, it allows ISPs to say "See? This area has 'broadband'!"

It's like saying that an area is adequately served by grocery stores if there are a couple gas station convenience stores there.

Re: FCC's Definition of Broadband Is Too Slow, US Watchdog Says

Fri, 09 Jul 2021 14:44:05 EDT

nondo posted :

said by Brian_M:

You understand that this won't change what's available to 90% of the country (land mass, not population), right? No matter what the definition is, *I* will only have 15/.75 DSL available (till I don't because it's unmaintained). ...

If you only care what YOU get, and you're in an urban area with your 12 choices, then carry on but do us a favor and state that. If you're honestly concerned about the whole population having access to something you think is important, you might want to consider how such a change will be abused by the companies who already have an earned reputation of not delivering what they say/promise.

90% of the country by landmass intentionally votes for representation that goes against their best interests.

Two way street. If your local, state, and fed reps vote against improving your internet, should you have to state that?

Re: FCC's Definition of Broadband Is Too Slow, US Watchdog Says

Fri, 09 Jul 2021 14:09:58 EDT

DocDrew posted : The only real connections in that list for Santa Monica are Spectrum and Frontier. 2 are satellite (ViaSat, HughesNet) and 3 are WISPs (Starry, Synergy, Wander) with limited service. The Earthlink listing is a hold over from when they ran on Charter or TWC before they merged. It's not available anymore to new customers, unless it's still a DSL reseller across Frontier, but I don't think so.

Re: FCC's Definition of Broadband Is Too Slow, US Watchdog Says

Fri, 09 Jul 2021 13:31:14 EDT

Brian_M posted : Looking at Santa Monica, there are indeed 12 different options listed. 14 if you count the 2 business solutions that aren't on the residential side too. Ok, 2 of those aren't in the 90% availability area...

»www.highspeedinternet.co ··· a-monica

Re: FCC's Definition of Broadband Is Too Slow, US Watchdog Says

Fri, 09 Jul 2021 13:16:57 EDT

videomatic3 posted :

said by r81984:

All options should be symmetrical. Asymmetrical makes no sense.

Anything government funded should be symmetrical, anything else doesn't make sense

Re: FCC's Definition of Broadband Is Too Slow, US Watchdog Says

Fri, 09 Jul 2021 12:04:26 EDT

elray posted :

said by Brian_M:

If you only care what YOU get, and you're in an urban area with your 12 choices, then carry on but do us a favor and state that.

The rest of your post is spot-on, but what are these 12 choices urban areas enjoy?

At best, we have CableCo and Telco, and maybe a rooftop outfit like Starry and occasionally Verizon or T-Mobile Home offers, but those are very spotty and sporadic, not necessarily functional.

Re: FCC's Definition of Broadband Is Too Slow, US Watchdog Says

Fri, 09 Jul 2021 11:51:32 EDT

r81984 posted : All options should be symmetrical. Asymmetrical makes no sense.

Re: FCC's Definition of Broadband Is Too Slow, US Watchdog Says

Fri, 09 Jul 2021 10:45:13 EDT

Tony0945 posted :

said by tc1uscg:

But you are right, us city peeps are spoiled being able to jump from one provider to another by having more then 1 provider in the area.

Spoiled? when I went to school (in the Middle ages", they taight us that that was the way capitalism was supposed to work -- with so many companies that no one can dominate the market place. Not like those nasty Socialist countries that you only have one supplier to to buy from.

Re: FCC's Definition of Broadband Is Too Slow, US Watchdog Says

Fri, 09 Jul 2021 10:19:24 EDT

tc1uscg posted :

said by Brian_M:

f you only care what YOU get, and you're in an urban area with your 12 choices, then carry on but do us a favor and state that.

When I was shopping for a new homestead, 1 out of maybe 50 listings would state "fiber" or "High Speed Internet" but no numbers. But as much as it might be a selling point (or one of), it should be in the listing IMO. However, we just had our offer accepted for a house near the gulf coast of MS. About 2.5 miles from the Ocean but still kind of rural. New sub, most homes built in 2016. AT&T Fiber and Sparklight gig service is there. Prices are 80/70 respectfully. But you are right, us city peeps are spoiled being able to jump from one provider to another by having more then 1 provider in the area.

Re: FCC's Definition of Broadband Is Too Slow, US Watchdog Says

Fri, 09 Jul 2021 09:53:52 EDT

Brian_M posted : You understand that this won't change what's available to 90% of the country (land mass, not population), right? No matter what the definition is, *I* will only have 15/.75 DSL available (till I don't because it's unmaintained).

And by changing the definition, you essentially guarantee that those places who already don't meet the Current definition, will Never meet the definition. It just opens the Gov-Bucks to be allotted to those who already have top tier service, because those are the easiest to upgrade. The rest will be forgotten/ignored.

If you only care what YOU get, and you're in an urban area with your 12 choices, then carry on but do us a favor and state that. If you're honestly concerned about the whole population having access to something you think is important, you might want to consider how such a change will be abused by the companies who already have an earned reputation of not delivering what they say/promise.

BTW, I agree that everyone should have access to at least 100/25, and everyone should have access to a ~$30/plan (10/.5?, 25/1?) if they can neither afford the high speed nor want to pay for something they won't use anyway. I just understand that changing a definition won't make that reality.

FCC's Definition of Broadband Is Too Slow, US Watchdog Says

Fri, 09 Jul 2021 09:02:07 EDT

boredsysadm posted : Let's make 100/25 minimum acceptable broadband speed