Why are upload speeds so slow?

[nwrigley]

As is often mentioned, broadband in America tends to have upload speeds much slower than dowload speeds. I was just wondering why this was. Is this a choice by the isp, or is there a limiting factor?

 

[Fardringle]

Primarily it's a choice by the ISP to prevent home (private) users from running dedicated servers that use up a lot of expensive bandwidth on their relatively inexpensive home service. If you want to run a server, pay for a server connection...

 

[nwrigley]

Originally posted by: Fardringle
If you want to run a server, pay for a server connection...

I don't want to run a server, I want faster upload speeds.

 

[JackMDS]

I do not want to drive a Pinto, I want to drive a Ferrari.

Therefore, I bought a Ferrari.

Ergo, buy a contract with higher upload.

:sun:

 

[us3rnotfound]

Originally posted by: JackMDS
Id do not want to drive a Pinto, I want to drive a Ferrari.

Therefore, I bought a Ferrari.

Ergo, buy a contract with higher upload.

:sun:

pics of your car?

 

[nwrigley]

I can't find affordable contracts with higher upload speeds in my area. My question is: why does this have to be the case?

If you want to use the car analogy, I'm not looking for the fastest car. I just want a car that can drive me home from work as fast as it will drive me to work.

 

[her209]

A large majority of broadband users are clueless when it comes to running dedicated servers.

 

[spidey07]

Consumer internet doesn't need faster upload speeds. The providers do it to prevent servers.

 

[Kibbo86]

99% of home internet users don't need fast upload speeds, and thus the ISPs don't waste money by giving it to them. If you are an exception, you'll have pony up some cash.

What exactly do you need this upload speed for, if you don't mind my asking.

 

[nwrigley]

Uploading content to websites and sharing files over bittorent are my two needs. I deal a lot with video, so I?m frequently uploading large files. I'd be willing to pay extra for the extra bandwidth, but no one offers connections with significantly faster upload times. I could get upgraded DSL that would double my down speed, but would barely increase the up speed. Since my current down speed is adequate, it isn't worth it to me.

This is essentially my question: why don't ISPs offer more packages with different options? No one can offer me a good reason other than to keep you from running a server. Surely they can offer 1.0 mb or even 2.0 mb upload speeds, which is still too slow to be adequate for a server. I?m willing to pay extra for it, so why isn?t anyone offering it to me?

Before any one jumps on me again, by extra, I mean that I would pay the same amount to double my up speed as it costs to double my down speed. Everyone else seems to believe that it?s perfectly acceptable to expect someone to pay a business connection price for residential use.

 

[Mark R]

This is essentially my question: why don't ISPs offer more packages with different options?

They do. But they don't offer the high-end packages to 'home' users. The vast majority of home users don't need a fast upload - those that do legitimately upload such large volumes of media are usually doing it as part of business.

Buy a business package with symmetric bandwidth, and you'll get fast uploads.

I'm afraid you'll just have to accept that providing upstream bandwidth is expensive, and has little market for residential use. If you need it for business use, then you'll need to pay a business price.

 

[Varun]

My ISP offers 5Mbit down / 1Mbit up. That's been plenty for me, even with my home servers.

2 Static IPs included as well, about $30 a month US. You just have to find the right ISP.

 

[nwrigley]

I'm afraid you'll just have to accept that providing upstream bandwidth is expensive

This is what I was wondering. Is upstream more expensive than downstream to provide? If that were true, then I would understand why ISPs don't offer more options.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: nwrigley

I'm afraid you'll just have to accept that providing upstream bandwidth is expensive

This is what I was wondering. Is upstream more expensive than downstream to provide? If that were true, then I would understand why ISPs don't offer more options.

It isn't more expensive to them to purchase.

But it is more expensive to support and maintain the rather constant stream of traffic that servers generally present, rather than the burstiness of the general user.

 

[nwrigley]

But it is more expensive to support and maintain the rather constant stream of traffic that servers generally present, rather than the burstiness of the general user.

Once again, I'm NOT talking about running a server. Doesn't anyone else think that there is a need for more than 512kbps for some non-server internet users? Does no one else upload files to through the internet?

I understand that for web surfing, there isn't any need. For users who DO need it and are willing to PAY extra (but not an absorbent amount), I still haven't heard any good reasons why more ISPs don't offer the option for faster upload speeds.

 

[LOFBenson]

Originally posted by: nwrigley

But it is more expensive to support and maintain the rather constant stream of traffic that servers generally present, rather than the burstiness of the general user.

Once again, I'm NOT talking about running a server. Doesn't anyone else think that there is a need for more than 512kbps for some non-server internet users? Does no one else upload files to through the internet?

I understand that for web surfing, there isn't any need. For users who DO need it and are willing to PAY extra (but not an absorbent amount), I still haven't heard any good reasons why more ISPs don't offer the option for faster upload speeds.

If you needed it enough you would pay for what they have available. If they created a service to fit your needs people currently paying extra would downgrade. You are a minority of a minority in their market.

 

[Nocturnal]

I haven't even read this thread but first things first, your ISP would like to not have you serving warez to everyone and anyone and then besides that I guess it's a matter of bandwidth being expensive although one could argue that point.

 

[Blades]

Downstream traffic can be cached, mirrored, etc.. Meaning. the load can be distributed.. Personal uploads really cannot.... Its sort of an iffy statement but if upload speed were to be increased it would generate more traffic.. more traffic ends up meaning more cost and more problems.. More problems.. less happy consumers.. Ma and pa duke don't really care about setting up a ftp server... But.. they certainly would care if your FTP server were "breaking or slowing down their interweb".

 

[Kibbo86]

Here's some basic economics for you:

1. Home users who use a lot of upstream bandwidth are rare, so ISPs don't bother offering packages with that feature; it wouldn't sell enough aditional accounts to even print up the marketing material (or possibly even cover the costs of training all their phone monkeys).

2. Business users don't buy internet access for fun; it's a neccessity for them.

3. Business users often have greater incomes than home users, and they can write off their expenses.

2+3= A greater willingness to pay for business-class internet access

4. There are extra cost involved in selling internet access to business users: When they use upstream, most of them are running servers; many ISPs (including the one I work for) give speedier technical service to business class users when there are problems on the line

The problem you are facing is the same as they guy who really, really, wants to order chocolate chips on his pizza. There's no real reason why it's not offered by any pizza places, except that they didn't think that they'd sell any pizzas with chocolate chips.

Write a letter to all the ISPs in your area. It could be that there are others who feel the same way you do, and if so, they might have written letters too. Eventually the ISPs will catch on to the fact that there are sophisticated internet users out there, and that it will be profitable to chase after them.

 

[Eos]

Every analogy here blows except for wanting to drive home as fast as you drive to work.

The ISP companies (all of my previous, anyway) offer different packages with different speeds. Two ISP companies ago (Comcast) they only had 3mb/256k. Then they increased speeds to 4mb/368k for no extra charge. Then they offered business lines to residential customers. I left them at 6mb/768k. Rock and roll, buddy!

I sell Qwest DSL, and they offer 5mb/1.5mb, 1.5mb/900k, and 256k/256k to my customers. Now I see three different upload speeds there. Why not just offer one? If they truly didn't want any choice for us, there would be only one speed.

My current ISP only offers one; 768k up and down (mine is the same line, but uncapped at 7mb/7mb) and they offer the 768k to anyone who can qualify. Why only one choice?

The OP has a valid point and it seems like a lot of you are ragging on him for no good reason.

Customer wants this - no one offers it as far as he knows.

I have seen no good reason why.

 

[nweaver]

Has the OP looked int business class DSL/Cable, or true b/w, such as a T1? btw the statment 1.5 isn't fast enough.....I doubt you have ever had dedicated bandwidth. A t1 is very fast, in many cases, it's as fast as the DSL lines that state higher speeds, and you have a DEDICATED PIPE, which means 1.5 up/1.5 down. Pony up the cash and get a T1 if it's that important to you.

 

[blemoine]

why don't ISPs offer more packages with different options?

i don't think your asking the right question. you should be asking "why won't/can't I pay for a connection with a higher upload speed." because that is all that is stopping you. They advertise what they think they can sell to the general public. if you call the phone company and say you need to have a certain amount of bandwidth they will give it to you but will charge accordingly.