Isn't it incredible how slowly internet bandwidth is increasing?

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: nismotigerwvu
I hope sometime soon wimax or wimax-like technologies will be able to put the squeeze on cable/dsl providers to actually stop just sitting on the cash they are raking in right now. One has to be simple minded to believe that there is no way to expand on a service that has been static for half a decade. Once the average Joe gets a sales pitch that he can get wireless internet, essentially anywhere (I'm well aware that this is not how wimax works, key word, sales pitch) for a price competitive with their current provider at comparable speeds, they will jump all over it (and note, current cellular options are not comparable in speed or price to cable/dsl so Joe is staying far far away for the most part). The only option for cable/dsl providers will be to ramp up the sppeds and starts a Slowskies campaign, and man do I ever love turtles . One last point, Spidey, you seem to know quite a bit about what you are talking about, but if you just continue to thrash the other posters' character they won't pay any attention. If you cared even 1/100th of what it seems (posting enough to make it seem like a lot) you'd understand that a lighter touch might actually help someone learn a thing or two from you. Or you could just be a troll, but I'm not one to make assumptions.

Sorry for coming off so harsh. But it seems this kind of misinformation just keeps continuing and continuing. There are so many factors involved it's impossible to sum up the situation on an internet forum. I don't really question one's character, I just question their exposure, experience and knowledge.

If you want to try to keep up with the incredible movement and everything that is going on go to lightreading.com. It's a trade rag, but it has tons of good information.

 

[13Gigatons]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: xeemzor

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: xeemzor

Originally posted by: spidey07
You're smoking crack.

Bandwidth follows moore's law. It doubles roughly every two years. 100 Gigabit ethernet is on the horizon.

So when will I be able to get a 100/10 megabit connection to my house?

When you feel like paying for it.

:roll: You know exactly what I meant. When will the average consumer be able to get internet speeds comparable to say, Japan where 100mbit is the norm? FIOS is a great step, but it's not being implemented fast enough.

Not this crap again.

When you live in a extremely dense area on a very small island subsidized by government on relatively new infrastructure it's isn't difficult to offer these services for cheap.

Stop the entitlement mentality.

I'm sick of this excuse, most cities are dense and yet fiber still does not exist in any of them because they want to keep milking the cash cow they have.

America has the money, it would only cost $150 billion to Fiber the last mile for 100 million homes. The benefits and revenue would be massive though. After 100+ years copper is DEAD, let's allow it to die a dignified death.

 

[13Gigatons]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Nitemare
It's called broadband monopolies...

FACT:

The majority of people with broadband have a choice. There is no monopoly. Stop spreading tinfoil hat crap.

You mean two lousy choices, cable or DSL.

 

[The Boston Dangler]

Originally posted by: 13Gigatons
Rich Telcom industry screwing Americans even after they were giving $200,000,000,000 to build the information super highway. What a surprise.

Until AT&T, Verizon and Comcast are broken apart and every American has a choice between 5 or 6 ISP's to get REAL broadband then the monopolies will own you.

could you explain how any of the companies you named violate anti-trust laws? how would breakups produce multiple overlapping companies? these people are extremely cheap, so now that the money is in their pockets, how do you get it out?

UK users please chime in:
i'm told there are a dozen or more competitive ISPs widely available in the UK. could you explain how it's done, or provide a decent link?

 

[adairusmc]

Originally posted by: 13Gigatons

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Nitemare
It's called broadband monopolies...

FACT:

The majority of people with broadband have a choice. There is no monopoly. Stop spreading tinfoil hat crap.

You mean two lousy choices, cable or DSL.

Bullshit.

I live in a town of 6,000 people in eastern Oregon, and other than the company I work for, there are 4 other ISP's offering service. There are plenty of choices to be had.

You are not entitled to having a cheap, super fast connection anywhere. If you want one, then pay for it and quit bitching. Go get yourself a DS3 or an OC3 and be done with it. It will cost you from $3,000 to $40,000 a month for those connections, but that is your problem. If you want that kind of speed then you should pay for it.

 

[Nitemare]

Originally posted by: adairusmc

Originally posted by: 13Gigatons

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Nitemare
It's called broadband monopolies...

FACT:

The majority of people with broadband have a choice. There is no monopoly. Stop spreading tinfoil hat crap.

You mean two lousy choices, cable or DSL.

Bullshit.

I live in a town of 6,000 people in eastern Oregon, and other than the company I work for, there are 4 other ISP's offering service. There are plenty of choices to be had.

You are not entitled to having a cheap, super fast connection anywhere. If you want one, then pay for it and quit bitching. Go get yourself a DS3 or an OC3 and be done with it. It will cost you from $3,000 to $40,000 a month for those connections, but that is your problem. If you want that kind of speed then you should pay for it.

so you have a capped cable service with crappy bandwidth during peakhours, a DSL with virtually no upload capacity and what else?

 

[adairusmc]

Originally posted by: Nitemare

Originally posted by: adairusmc

Originally posted by: 13Gigatons

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Nitemare
It's called broadband monopolies...

FACT:

The majority of people with broadband have a choice. There is no monopoly. Stop spreading tinfoil hat crap.

You mean two lousy choices, cable or DSL.

Bullshit.

I live in a town of 6,000 people in eastern Oregon, and other than the company I work for, there are 4 other ISP's offering service. There are plenty of choices to be had.

You are not entitled to having a cheap, super fast connection anywhere. If you want one, then pay for it and quit bitching. Go get yourself a DS3 or an OC3 and be done with it. It will cost you from $3,000 to $40,000 a month for those connections, but that is your problem. If you want that kind of speed then you should pay for it.

so you have a capped cable service with crappy bandwidth during peakhours, a DSL with virtually no upload capacity and what else?

We have no cable service.

We have two DSL providers (including my company), and 4 wireless providers.

As far as DSL with crappy upload - if you want upload, then pay for a T1 or multiple T1's. If you don't like what the ISP's offer, then get a big boy connection.

Cant afford a real connection for your upload problem? Too Fucking bad for you then. Deal with it.

 

[Jeff7]

I just dropped down from RoadRunner standard to Roadrunner Lite, to save a little money. RR was $30/month, which was apparently another one of those damn introductory offers. It was set to go up to around $50/month in March. Now it's $15/month, but it's also throttled back to 768kbps. "Buffering" on Youtube has a whole new meaning now. I guess it provides immunity from Rickrolling - a few seconds of video starts to play, and then it sticks at buffering. I don't even have the bandwidth to get Rickrolled in realtime.

 

[thomsbrain]

Originally posted by: spidey07
You're smoking crack.

Bandwidth follows moore's law. It doubles roughly every two years. 100 Gigabit ethernet is on the horizon.

Ooooookaaaaay.

Here's Silicon Valley:

1998 cable internet sustained bandwidth (@Home): 10 Mbps, no upload throttle. ~$40/month standalone.
2008 cable internet sustained bandwidth (Comcast): 8 Mbps, 512 Kbps upload. ~$40/month when bundled.

Take one step forward, take two giant steps back.

Moore's law is powerless against TEH COMCASTORZ!

I used to get sustained 1MB/s+ downloads to a spanking-new Pentium II 400 (ooh! MMX!). Of course, there wasn't much to download... Windows updates... this new thing called "MP3."

These days I'd cream myself if I had that 1998 connection again.

 

[Nitemare]

Originally posted by: thomsbrain

Originally posted by: spidey07
You're smoking crack.

Bandwidth follows moore's law. It doubles roughly every two years. 100 Gigabit ethernet is on the horizon.

Ooooookaaaaay.

Here's Silicon Valley:

1998 cable internet sustained bandwidth (@Home): 10 Mbps, no upload throttle. ~$40/month standalone.
2008 cable internet sustained bandwidth (Comcast): 8 Mbps, 512 Kbps upload. ~$40/month when bundled.

Take one step forward, take two giant steps back.

Moore's law is powerless against TEH COMCASTORZ!

I used to get sustained 1MB/s+ downloads to a spanking-new Pentium II 400 (ooh! MMX!). Of course, there wasn't much to download... Windows updates... this new thing called "MP3."

These days I'd cream myself if I had that 1998 connection again.

Cable companies are the monopolies that I was referring to...

 

[JujuFish]

Originally posted by: adairusmc
We have no cable service.

We have two DSL providers (including my company), and 4 wireless providers.

As far as DSL with crappy upload - if you want upload, then pay for a T1 or multiple T1's. If you don't like what the ISP's offer, then get a big boy connection.

Cant afford a real connection for your upload problem? Too Fucking bad for you then. Deal with it.

Yeah, progress is bad. :roll:

 

[manowar821]

For household bandwidth, it is slow. You can thank greed-filled capitalists for that. They make the rest of us capitalists look like pigs.

 

[manowar821]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Nitemare
It's called broadband monopolies...

FACT:

The majority of people with broadband have a choice. There is no monopoly. Stop spreading tinfoil hat crap.

You're so full of shit! :laugh:

 

[Martin]

Originally posted by: Scouzer

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: xeemzor

Originally posted by: spidey07
You're smoking crack.

Bandwidth follows moore's law. It doubles roughly every two years. 100 Gigabit ethernet is on the horizon.

So when will I be able to get a 100/10 megabit connection to my house?

When you feel like paying for it.

That's the impression I'm getting too.

We're just going to end up paying more and more for higher bandwidth options. They just will not do it for the standard $40/mo people are paying.

Shaw Cable charges $93/mo for 25/1 Cable Internet around here

Here's a hint: anytime somebody suggests you don't have good internet or mobile technology because of geography, they're full of shit, ignorant and simply wrong.

The reason why north america lags is because of shitty government regulations which coddle companies instead of spurring competition and large, inept, uncompetitive companies.

Consider free.fr. 30 Euros ($45) a month gets you:
-free calls to 70 countries
-100 tv channels
-28mbps/1mbps internet service

Now the standard bullshit (of which there is plenty in this thread) goes like this: "well you see, France is a small country with lots of people, we couldn't possibly do that here in Canada". But you have to consider three things:
-free.fr is available all over france, not just super-dense metro areas.
-Urban populations in Canada are actually fairly dense. About 50% of our population live in the top 7 metro areas (link) where the population density is not much different from the suburbs and smaller towns free.fr provides services for.
-Incomes are higher than the average and wealth is concentrated in the cities.

So, anybody that tells you that services like free.fr's can't be provided to 15 million well-off consumers is really, really, REALLY full of shit.

 

[13Gigatons]

Originally posted by: adairusmc

Originally posted by: Nitemare

Originally posted by: adairusmc

Originally posted by: 13Gigatons

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Nitemare
It's called broadband monopolies...

FACT:

The majority of people with broadband have a choice. There is no monopoly. Stop spreading tinfoil hat crap.

You mean two lousy choices, cable or DSL.

Bullshit.

I live in a town of 6,000 people in eastern Oregon, and other than the company I work for, there are 4 other ISP's offering service. There are plenty of choices to be had.

You are not entitled to having a cheap, super fast connection anywhere. If you want one, then pay for it and quit bitching. Go get yourself a DS3 or an OC3 and be done with it. It will cost you from $3,000 to $40,000 a month for those connections, but that is your problem. If you want that kind of speed then you should pay for it.

so you have a capped cable service with crappy bandwidth during peakhours, a DSL with virtually no upload capacity and what else?

We have no cable service.

We have two DSL providers (including my company), and 4 wireless providers.

As far as DSL with crappy upload - if you want upload, then pay for a T1 or multiple T1's. If you don't like what the ISP's offer, then get a big boy connection.

Cant afford a real connection for your upload problem? Too Fucking bad for you then. Deal with it.

First let me say that your attitude is amazingly bad. You seem to think that consumers have no rights to high quality and low price goods and services and the providers can do whatever they want.

Second in 1994 "they" signed an agreement to provide 500 channels and 45mbps symmetrical service by 2004 in return they would receive 200 billion in tax breaks. It was called the information super highway, well they weasel out of the deal after getting the tax breaks and did not upgrade their service instead giving everyone slow DSL service.

So I as a consumer should not be require to spend $3000 a month on a DS3 line I should get the high speed line I already paid for or they should give the money back.

http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pu...t_20070810_002683.html

 

[Auryg]

Originally posted by: adairusmc

Originally posted by: 13Gigatons

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Nitemare
It's called broadband monopolies...

FACT:

The majority of people with broadband have a choice. There is no monopoly. Stop spreading tinfoil hat crap.

You mean two lousy choices, cable or DSL.

Bullshit.

I live in a town of 6,000 people in eastern Oregon, and other than the company I work for, there are 4 other ISP's offering service. There are plenty of choices to be had.

You are not entitled to having a cheap, super fast connection anywhere. If you want one, then pay for it and quit bitching. Go get yourself a DS3 or an OC3 and be done with it. It will cost you from $3,000 to $40,000 a month for those connections, but that is your problem. If you want that kind of speed then you should pay for it.

Well, my hometown of about 4,000 people has two options total, but most people can only get one or the other. Despite being only a few hundred feet from the next house that has cable internet (and TV), my house can't. We have one choice. Local TDS DSL. 40 dollars a month for 3 meg down. I'm sure another cable company would love to come and get money from us..but they can't.

By the way, this isn't some hodunk town. It's one of the richest per capita in Minnesota.

Even here in Duluth, which is one of the biggest cities in MN, I only have two choices. Qwest DSL or Charter cable.

 

[The Boston Dangler]

AuryG, is your house built far from the roadway, so that you'd be charged for the construction of cable plant? if your house is 300 feet or less from the cable plant, there is no technical reason why cable internet wouldn't work.

in MA, all existing residences in a town are entitled to service. newly built homes are charged contruction fees, usually the bill goes to the property developer or the multi-millionaire that builds a palace a couple miles off the road.

 

[maxster]

No incentive to give you better speed so you can dl more torrents.

 

[13Gigatons]

Originally posted by: The Boston Dangler

Originally posted by: 13Gigatons
Rich Telcom industry screwing Americans even after they were giving $200,000,000,000 to build the information super highway. What a surprise.

Until AT&T, Verizon and Comcast are broken apart and every American has a choice between 5 or 6 ISP's to get REAL broadband then the monopolies will own you.

could you explain how any of the companies you named violate anti-trust laws? how would breakups produce multiple overlapping companies? these people are extremely cheap, so now that the money is in their pockets, how do you get it out?

UK users please chime in:
i'm told there are a dozen or more competitive ISPs widely available in the UK. could you explain how it's done, or provide a decent link?

People always bring up anti-trust law like it's in the bible with little understanding of how capitalism is suppose to work.

The ideal in this situation would be if I had six fiber lines coming to my house and six companies competed to provide service. Sadly having 6 fiber lines wired to every house would be very wasteful, it would be better for them to have one fiber line that is shared by 6 companies since it would be a lot cheaper to build and maintain. Every highway in America was paid for by Taxpayers but you are required to buy a car if you want to drive on it but in Telcom AT&T, Verizon and Comcast own the roads and aren't interested in the common good only in profits this is why there are so many speed bumps and potholes.

 

[soydios]

Originally posted by: spidey07
You're smoking crack.

Bandwidth follows moore's law. It doubles roughly every two years. 100 Gigabit ethernet is on the horizon.

you must be the one on crack. we're talking INTERnet, you're talking INTRAnet.

 

[The Boston Dangler]

what exactly would i use an industrial strength internet connection for? surely, whether paying per packet or not, i won't be up/dl'ing several hundred GB/day of anything. does youtube have an HD+DTS format i don't know about?

 

[GregGreen]

Is Moore's law still applicable if it increases way above the level it should for a while, then the level of progress slows down? For instance the Silicon Valley 10mbit down/uncapped upload instance to Comcast 8mbit down/512kbit up -- since bandwidth increased to a level much higher than it should have at the front end, is the 8mbit not close to where you should be according to Moore's law? I'm too lazy and too uneducated to do actual math but unless you guys want to turn over your extra rebate checks to fiber upgrades (It is theorized that it will cost about $150 Billion to upgrade every household in the US to a fiber link), I think you are about where you are supposed to be...

 

[The Boston Dangler]

@13GT- what you describe is exactly what was supposed to happen with dsl. baby bells own and maintain the physical property, and lease bandwidth and rackspace to competitors. beyond the physical limitations of dsl, i think it was a mistake to allow the property owners to offer service alongside (crushing, really) the leasees. cable is legally exempt from common-carrier laws.

a friend and bell employee told me that on his things-to-do list, covad and the others were beyond lowest priority.

things being what they are owners are not going to stop offering service. since that includes my employer, i say "Get your own damn wires!!"

 

[0roo0roo]

greed. insufficient regulation.
other countries have more bandwidth, we get shafted with companies that are trying squeeze more profits out by limiting traffic.

 

[TallBill]

You're telling me. I have 1.5 meg dsl