South Korea Aims For 1Gbps - New $24.6 billion infrastructure investment plan
Links: home · search · speed test · login · more ·
Links: New Topic
Forums »
Jerm @ 2nd Feb 01:14PM:
WOOT1!1!11
1GBPS - on my "island" that is!
reply
woody7 @ 2nd Feb 01:14PM:
hmmmm....
Time to move ;)
--
BlooMe
reply
ninjatutle @ 2nd Feb 01:18PM:
Coo
Wonder if my MSI 10" netbook with a 5400rpm hard drive will handle the speed or blow up?
reply
Eat Me @ 2nd Feb 01:22PM:
What time frame?
Talk of 1GBps is nice, but what time frame?
reply
TSI Gabe @ 2nd Feb 01:32PM:
Re: What time frame?
Why the hell would you get 1gbps @ home when most computers out there can barely sustain it? Although I'm not saying it wouldn't be nice to have :p
reply
DarkLogix @ 2nd Feb 01:34PM:
Re: Coo
Just fo a local lan test to see how fast you can download from a computer on your internal network and that should give you an idea of if you can handle it
reply
Matt @ 2nd Feb 01:34PM:
Re: What time frame?
said by TSI Gabe :
Why the hell would you get 1gbps @ home when most computers out there can barely sustain it?
You're stuck in a "one computer" mindset. 1Gbps opens all sorts of possibilities for time shifting video and multiple people watching IP video streams, not to mention everything else we do these days.
reply
Angrychair @ 2nd Feb 01:42PM:
Re: What time frame?
Why would anyone need more than an 8088 when most people can't type more than 60wpm anyway?
reply
BigVe @ 2nd Feb 01:46PM:
Re: What time frame?
With 1gbps in my area it would mean resell(my eyes turns to $ signs)
reply
funchords @ 2nd Feb 01:48PM:
Re: What time frame?
said by TSI Gabe :
Why the hell would you get 1gbps @ home when most computers out there can barely sustain it? Although I'm not saying it wouldn't be nice to have :p
It's a fair question.
Because: the way that you support innovation is to get ahead of it.
Why does Intel and AMD put out processors BEFORE there are applications that need that much power?
The USA and Canada spent the 80s and 90s in leadership technology. Asia passed us in 2000 and this move by South Korea will help ensure that the USA and Canada will be chasing their taillights for decades to come.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon -- KJ7RL
... Should we pay those who are "too big to fail" more money to ensure they stay that way? ...
reply
Lazlow @ 2nd Feb 01:50PM:
Re: What time frame?
TSI
1gbps is only around 90MB/s (actual) or 125MB/s (theoretical). The newer (regular drives) now have a sustained throughput of 100MB/s with some of the high end drives hitting 250MB/s. Those are both in a non raid configurations. A lot of current motherboards come with built in raid capability so you can almost double those numbers when raid0 is used. Since most of the computers sold in the last few years have GigE Ethernet ports the can make good use of this kind of speed. I have set up a lot of households up with cat6 cable and GigE switches so that they would have this kind of speed in house, for all kinds of large file transfers.
Now on top of that, add what was hinted at above about multiple users in one home. A lot of homes now have a computer for every member. Mom, Dad, Brother, and Sister all online a one time can bring your "average" 16Mbps connection to its knees pretty quick.
All the above is just for today. Think about the bandwidth requirements that a household will have when the 1Gbps system is completed (3-5 years with luck?).
reply
The Folsom @ 2nd Feb 01:55PM:
Re: What time frame?
Well put. :)
reply
Karl Bode @ 2nd Feb 01:57PM:
Re: What time frame?
By 2012.
reply
Ignite @ 2nd Feb 01:58PM:
Re: What time frame?
said by Eat Me :
Talk of 1GBps is nice, but what time frame?
The article linked is your friend!
quote:
The plan calls for a total spending of 34.1 trillion won ($24.6 billion) over the next five years. The central government will put up 1.3 trillion won, with the remainder coming from private telecom operators. The project is expected to create 120,000 jobs.
reply
iansltx @ 2nd Feb 02:01PM:
Re: What time frame?
2012.
reply
Ignite @ 2nd Feb 02:02PM:
How The Heck Did They Get The Operators On Board?
South Korea has a population of about 50 million.
This is nearly $5,000 for every man, woman and child in South Korea, and $4,750 of that is coming from the carriers. How did they manage to swing this, and how can we get this model flowing elsewhere?
reply
iansltx @ 2nd Feb 02:02PM:
Re: WOOT1!1!11
Gbps, not GBps. IOW Gigabit ethernet crossover'd to fiber to the home. Needless to say, sick.
Verizon could do this with FiOS...if they were willing to oversell like the cable companies do lol.
reply
cajun4x4 @ 2nd Feb 02:09PM:
Heavy populated areas that's how
How many of you have been to South Korea? I much prefer to stay in the US and suffer from lower speeds than live in that country. I could surely bet that none of the farm areas in that country will see those type of services any time soon. I hate it when articles like that compare our country to countries the size of Texas.
reply
KodiacZiller @ 2nd Feb 02:12PM:
Re: Heavy populated areas that's how
1 Gbps. to. the. home = just.sick.
Yet, here we are in the USA hoping that we might get DOCSIS 3.0 at 50 Mbps before 2011.
reply
Angrychair @ 2nd Feb 02:12PM:
Re: How The Heck Did They Get The Operators On Board?
It's incredible what can get done when you remove greed as the motivation and insert altruism in its place.
reply
Ignite @ 2nd Feb 02:13PM:
Re: How The Heck Did They Get The Operators On Board?
said by Angrychair :
It's incredible what can get done when you remove greed as the motivation and insert altruism in its place.
I doubt it's altruism, they obviously think they can make money out of it at some point.
reply
Lazlow @ 2nd Feb 02:16PM:
Re: Heavy populated areas that's how
Cajun
While population density may explain why areas like New Mexico or South Dakota do not have widespread coverage of broadband, what about areas like St. Louis? St Louis is definitely a metropolitan area, yet 16Mbps is about the highest speed most areas see. Remember it is not the backbone going across the country that is slow, it is that last mile going to the home.
reply
espaeth @ 2nd Feb 02:20PM:
Re: How The Heck Did They Get The Operators On Board?
The nice thing about government projects is you can have 50 or even 100 year ROIs.
reply
espaeth @ 2nd Feb 02:23PM:
Re: Heavy populated areas that's how
said by Lazlow :
While population density may explain why areas like New Mexico or South Dakota do not have widespread coverage of broadband, what about areas like St. Louis? St Louis is definitely a metropolitan area, yet 16Mbps is about the highest speed most areas see.
I've been to St Louis many times -- the majority of the city is not multi-tenant buildings.
reply
diskace @ 2nd Feb 02:23PM:
core
1 Gbits @ home would be awesome but what is the true speed when you pass through the core ?
--
Electronic Box Inc.
reply
DarkLogix @ 2nd Feb 02:29PM:
Re: How The Heck Did They Get The Operators On Board?
and sometimes even a LOI (Loss Of Investment)
Its the government if the laws of the contry permit they could say do it or pay a penalty
reply
Lazlow @ 2nd Feb 02:30PM:
Re: Heavy populated areas that's how
While it was in the late 80's, I have been to Korea and a lot of it is not multi-tenant buildings either.
reply
Ignite @ 2nd Feb 02:37PM:
Re: How The Heck Did They Get The Operators On Board?
said by espaeth :
The nice thing about government projects is you can have 50 or even 100 year ROIs.
Thing is less than 5% of the money is coming from government.
reply
morbo @ 2nd Feb 02:45PM:
Re: Heavy populated areas that's how
said by cajun4x4 :
How many of you have been to South Korea? I much prefer to stay in the US and suffer from lower speeds than live in that country. I could surely bet that none of the farm areas in that country will see those type of services any time soon. I hate it when articles like that compare our country to countries the size of Texas.
your complaint would make sense IF we had similar speeds in the high density areas here in the U.S. the problem is, WE DON'T so there goes that argument. next?
reply
N O Y B @ 2nd Feb 02:46PM:
Apples & Oranges Comparison
6 - 9 bil is only stimulus package, not the total spending that would occur.
Once again we see Karl's blatant biased views being exhibited in his reporting.
reply
bender @ 2nd Feb 02:48PM:
Re: What time frame?
i'd run a webhosting business to be honest.
--
»www.crossloop.com/nealdaringer
reply
dwang5 @ 2nd Feb 02:49PM:
thinking long term
The koreans are thinking long term, unlike what we are doing in the US.
Did anybody think 5 years ago, 1TB would be something people would have at home?
Didn't Bill Gates say 640K would be enough for anybody?
Obviously, 1gbps looks crazy by today's standards, but 5 years from now, it doesn't look so crazy.
reply
mrchris @ 2nd Feb 02:49PM:
Sigh
Yet we continue to fall behind on overall broadband ranking because of things like greed, atrocious TOS and other things.
reply
e_dub @ 2nd Feb 02:49PM:
Re: Heavy populated areas that's how
said by cajun4x4 :
How many of you have been to South Korea? I much prefer to stay in the US and suffer from lower speeds than live in that country. I could surely bet that none of the farm areas in that country will see those type of services any time soon. I hate it when articles like that compare our country to countries the size of Texas.
I've been there 3 times and it more broadband penetration than think. Majority of those remote farm areas have 10MB wireless. Some of these farms have cell/wireless towers on them which the providers pay leasing fees to the owners. Also free wireless broadband to the remote farm areas that provide goods to the government.
South Korea is about the size of Kentucky at 38,622 sq mi. Texas is 268,820 sq mi. and the ILEC's (AT&T & Verizon) are fighting over who can deliver 1/50 of what Korea is going to do.
Any company other than an ILEC or cable co will have a tough time trying to deliver speeds like these to a city, forget an area the size of a state. They'll find themselves wasting money in court because of these same ILEC/cable-co's.
reply
tiger72 @ 2nd Feb 02:50PM:
Re: Heavy populated areas that's how
precisely. This explains rural areas, but densely populated urban areas, ie Chicago, the entire core from Richmond, VA to Boston, MA, etc. could easily be much faster.
reply
Matt @ 2nd Feb 02:52PM:
Re: What time frame?
said by bender :
i'd run a webhosting business to be honest.
It's not the bandwidth that costs money. It's the power, power backup, cooling, and physical security that costs money.
reply
bender @ 2nd Feb 02:55PM:
Re: What time frame?
i'm not going to host google mind you.
to be honest, i'd probably lean more towards hosting game servers.
reply
Eat Me @ 2nd Feb 03:01PM:
Re: What time frame?
If you wanted to run a hosting business, you can already get a fiber connection to do that, and a lot more than 1GBps actually.
In fact most of the hosting companies I deal with have multiple redundant connections peered to several different backbones.
If you think you're going to run web hosting off your home internet connection, unless it's just pics of the kids for grandma, you're f'ing nuts.
reply
Eat Me @ 2nd Feb 03:02PM:
Re: WOOT1!1!11
Verizon is already overselling, just not the last mile (yet).
reply
BillRoland @ 2nd Feb 03:14PM:
Re: Apples & Oranges Comparison
said by N O Y B :
6 - 9 bil is only stimulus package, not the total spending that would occur.
Once again we see Karl's blatant biased views being exhibited in his reporting.
Its not even reporting, its a daily ignorance filled ranting tirade.
--
"Don't steal. The government hates competition."
reply
DarkLogix @ 2nd Feb 03:15PM:
Re: thinking long term
Ya 5 years ago I was happy with a little old 4Mbit thinking it does what I need but now I can't stand to be on something that slow if I'm at home
in 5 more years I expect to have at least D3 w/ 8CH or better
reply
espaeth @ 2nd Feb 03:21PM:
Re: Sigh
said by mrchris :
Yet we continue to fall behind on overall broadband ranking because of things like greed, atrocious TOS and other things.
We continue to fall behind because of lacking demand. If everyone subscribed to the top broadband speed tier available to them, the service providers would get more aggressive about expansion.
Maybe someday UNICEF will take of the cause of providing gigabit broadband to all of the nation's children, but until then network spending is going to be driven by profitability.
reply
Eat Me @ 2nd Feb 03:27PM:
Re: What time frame?
said by iansltx :
2012.
The article contradicts itself. 2012 isn't 5 years away.
reply
espaeth @ 2nd Feb 03:31PM:
Re: How The Heck Did They Get The Operators On Board?
said by Ignite :said by espaeth :
The nice thing about government projects is you can have 50 or even 100 year ROIs.
Thing is less than 5% of the money is coming from government.
Fair point. The subscriber densities still work out in the two major carriers' favor. SK Group owns 50% of the country's Internet access infrastructure, with KT Corp accounting for the other 38%. Those densities could actually make the business case for fiber deployment, especially if they can also deliver video services over the same connection to boost revenue. I'm not sure if the smaller players making up the last 12% will go along with this plan or not -- depends on how they can recover their costs.
Verizon, by comparison, is spending $23 billion to roll FiOS and they're only seeing a 25% adoption rate. Still, it was their only real play to keep pace with the triple play offered by the cable MSOs.
reply
espaeth @ 2nd Feb 03:32PM:
Re: thinking long term
said by dwang5 :
Obviously, 1gbps looks crazy by today's standards, but 5 years from now, it doesn't look so crazy.
Why not deploy it in 4 years then, when the equipment costs will easily be half of what they are now?
reply
DarkLogix @ 2nd Feb 03:37PM:
Re: thinking long term
Because it'll take 5 years to deploy and in 10 years they're gona want 10G
reply
DarkLogix @ 2nd Feb 03:38PM:
Re: Sigh
Now quick everyone buy the fastest Broadband (Um er Wideband, ah whatever) you can
reply
Karl Bode @ 2nd Feb 03:55PM:
Re: What time frame?
Yeah I noticed that...
reply
shoan @ 2nd Feb 04:04PM:
Starcraft 2
Come on now they are doing this because Starcraft 2 will be totally finished by then all three races. It's like a national sport over there. They will need the network for all that Zerg rushing :P
reply
majortom1029 @ 2nd Feb 04:11PM:
Re: core
Also are there any home routers that can handle 100/100 speeds let alone gigabit?
reply
DarkLogix @ 2nd Feb 04:14PM:
Re: Starcraft 2
Oh ya they need that speed just for SC2
we're doomed their skills will get 1337 in no time flat
reply
PapaMidnight @ 2nd Feb 04:21PM:
Re: Heavy populated areas that's how
said by morbo :said by cajun4x4 :
How many of you have been to South Korea? I much prefer to stay in the US and suffer from lower speeds than live in that country. I could surely bet that none of the farm areas in that country will see those type of services any time soon. I hate it when articles like that compare our country to countries the size of Texas.
your complaint would make sense IF we had similar speeds in the high density areas here in the U.S. the problem is, WE DON'T so there goes that argument. next?
I concur. If I had more selection than Comcast, Comcast, and more Comcast as an ISP in my area with more reasonable prices per megabit, maybe your argument would be valid. Considering that in the market of Baltimore, Maryland, I cannot even get Verizon, your argument is invalid.
reply
PapaMidnight @ 2nd Feb 04:22PM:
Re: Heavy populated areas that's how
said by e_dub :said by cajun4x4 :
How many of you have been to South Korea? I much prefer to stay in the US and suffer from lower speeds than live in that country. I could surely bet that none of the farm areas in that country will see those type of services any time soon. I hate it when articles like that compare our country to countries the size of Texas.
I've been there 3 times and it more broadband penetration than think. Majority of those remote farm areas have 10MB wireless. Some of these farms have cell/wireless towers on them which the providers pay leasing fees to the owners. Also free wireless broadband to the remote farm areas that provide goods to the government.
South Korea is about the size of Kentucky at 38,622 sq mi. Texas is 268,820 sq mi. and the ILEC's (AT&T & Verizon) are fighting over who can deliver 1/50 of what Korea is going to do.
Any company other than an ILEC or cable co will have a tough time trying to deliver speeds like these to a city, forget an area the size of a state. They'll find themselves wasting money in court because of these same ILEC/cable-co's.
Those same Incumbents who will likewise then be on Capitol Hill begging for money to continue to keep down the competition and their monopoly / duopoly status.
reply
heat84 @ 2nd Feb 04:26PM:
How will this speed be utilized?
Are there any websites on a 1GBp pipe yet? I guess in 3 years there will be.
reply
Lazlow @ 2nd Feb 04:31PM:
Re: core
Most of the major router manufactures have GigE routers. Japan has had 100/100 for quite a while. They have routers too.
reply
majortom1029 @ 2nd Feb 04:35PM:
Re: core
I am talking about getting actual gigabit speeds through them not the ports themselves.
Most if not all routers dont have the processing power to give out 1 gig speeds.
reply
Lazlow @ 2nd Feb 04:40PM:
Re: How will this speed be utilized?
You can download from more than one server at a time. There are tons of websites on 10Gbps pipes now. They usually have them limited down to evenly distribute the bandwidth across those connected. Some have it split up dynamically (bnadwidth/#of users) but since so few users have high speed (say 20Mbps +) most just have a hard limit set (say 5 Mbps/user no matter how many users).
I would imagine that once high speed connections are more the norm, servers(or server farms) will move up to even higher speeds.
reply
Lazlow @ 2nd Feb 04:46PM:
Re: core
Lots of homes run GigE within the house. Personally I usually just suggest adding a GigE switch (cheaper than switching to a GigE router). Those systems easily handle multiple 90MB/s transfers without issue (a->b and c->d). Running at GigE speeds does not require much processing power at all. What does require lots of processing power is running hundreds of connections at once (p2p type apps).
reply
anon @ 2nd Feb 05:18PM:
Re: WOOT1!1!11
Obviously Verizon is overselling bandwidth.
Or do you somehow believe that they have enough bandwidth to the Internet for all of their business line, DSL, and FIOS customers combined for each of them to have their full speed at all times?
All ISPs/NSPs/Hosting providers have always oversold. If there are any that didn't, they are out of business.
reply
clandestin @ 2nd Feb 05:24PM:
Re: What time frame?
2012 is the date for VoIP...
reply
iansltx @ 2nd Feb 05:29PM:
Re: WOOT1!1!11
Honestly, I don't care about overselling as long as I get the bandwidth I want when I want it. When capacity is high (gigabits per second) then it's very easy to oversell without anyone getting annoyed at the result.
reply
milnoc @ 2nd Feb 05:44PM:
Re: What time frame?
Careful now Gabe! Your age is showing! :)
Lazlow's absolutely right. I may live alone, but I have computers for every room in the place! Imagine for a moment a "Tech Savvy" family! (pun intended)
reply
anon @ 2nd Feb 05:45PM:
Re: How will this speed be utilized?
I don't know of any major sites that aren't on a CDN that is connected by at least a 10Gbit/sec uplink or that are in a data center that has any less than one 10Gbit/sec uplink.
reply
Tails @ 2nd Feb 05:51PM:
Re: What time frame?
It's called QoS, and it works very well if you know how to use it ;)
--
Do or do not, there is no try! - Yoda
reply
Eat Me @ 2nd Feb 05:53PM:
Re: core
More processing power is required for throughput and memory is required for state tables, and if you use NAT you need both for keeping states and rewriting packets.
I have pfsense running on server class hardware (Dell 2950 x 2) and we get 800MBps tops.
reply
Lazlow @ 2nd Feb 06:15PM:
Re: What time frame?
Josh
How does QoS change bandwidth? It does not. It just says who gets first in line. In the example I gave lets say that each individual is watching a different stream, how will QoS help?
reply
Matt @ 2nd Feb 06:20PM:
Re: What time frame?
said by Tails :
It's called QoS, and it works very well if you know how to use it ;)
QoS doesn't affect inbound bandwidth unless the ISP enables it. I'd also argue that it doesn't work very well for outbound bandwidth control at all.
reply
Lazlow @ 2nd Feb 06:23PM:
Re: core
Eat Me
800MBps or 800Mbps? Internet is generally sold in Mbps. GigE which is 1000Mbps is (as stated above) only 125MB/s or 125MBps(theoretical) and is usually only 90MB/s(effectively). If you can do 800Mbps(100MB/s) you are doing quite well.
reply
espaeth @ 2nd Feb 07:15PM:
Re: What time frame?
said by bender :
i'd run a webhosting business to be honest.
As long as you can get it done on a single IPv4 address, go nuts.
reply
espaeth @ 2nd Feb 07:22PM:
Re: Heavy populated areas that's how
said by PapaMidnight :
Those same Incumbents who will likewise then be on Capitol Hill begging for money to continue to keep down the competition and their monopoly / duopoly status.
It's the duopoly that makes this work in South Korea, because the companies know they will get a return on their investment due to essentially forced subscription. Two companies (SK Group and KT Corp) make up 88% of the Internet access for the country.
reply
Eat Me @ 2nd Feb 07:39PM:
Re: Heavy populated areas that's how
Honestly we have bigger problems like the economy to be worried about 1GBps broadband.
reply
Eat Me @ 2nd Feb 07:40PM:
Re: WOOT1!1!11
I'm on Cable and I don't have any peak congestion problems at all.
Probably helps that my node doesn't really have that many people.
reply
Eat Me @ 2nd Feb 08:02PM:
Re: core
800 megabits per second.
I was typing on my phone and it auto spell corrected.
Remember this is not a home internet connection, so we are not doing quite well, we have 2Gbps to the cage so we have firewall upgrades down the pipeline.
reply
Lazlow @ 2nd Feb 08:54PM:
Re: core
If you mean 800Mbps out of a 2Gbps line, then no something is very wrong. If you mean 800Mbps on a 1Gbps line then you are not going to get much better. Depending on who you talk to there is a 15-20% overhead for tcp. Just look at Ethernet 100, very few people get much above 9.5 MB/s (76Mbps) over it despite how long it has been around.
reply
bender @ 2nd Feb 09:03PM:
Re: What time frame?
i run 3 counterstrike:source and 2 left for dead servers on my u-verse service and have no problems
reply
iansltx @ 2nd Feb 09:23PM:
Re: WOOT1!1!11
Probably helps. I don't have many, if any, peak congestion issues here either, however there are plenty of places who do, especially as you go up in the number of uses your node is shared with, particularly on DOCSIS 3.
reply
anon @ 2nd Feb 11:44PM:
We don't need to spend a couple of Billions on broadband
The US doesn't need to spend the billions on broadband, we don't have the budget for it. However, we DO have the budget to find trillions of dollars to start a couple of wars and give several hundred billions to Halliburton for "services" contracts, though. Only in America!!
reply
RayW @ 2nd Feb 11:53PM:
Re: Heavy populated areas that's how
said by Lazlow :
While it was in the late 80's, I have been to Korea and a lot of it is not multi-tenant buildings either.
Here in America we dream of the house on 10 acres with a wooded lot and a stream. In Korea they dream of an apartment in a mega complex. You have to BUY the apartment before most places apparently start building it. I was over there in 2007 and several of the folks I worked with had already put down on the apartment in a complex that was not due to be built for a few years, which was when they would be retiring, so it worked out.
S. Korea today is not the same as the S. Korea of 1980. When we drove from Incheon into Seoul, we passed by miles of those mega-apartments. Then when we went south to where we did our work, we drove by big clusters of them with new ones being built alongside, like a cancer cell growing and multiplying in the valleys.
When we stayed in Chung-Ju, which is a big industrial city, our hotel was supposedly the best in town and supported a lot of foreign business people, but we had to use the manager's dial-up computer to do our email back home.
In Seosan we had high speed internet at the hotel we were in, 3 megs worth. The Tech Rep we worked with had dial up at home and 256K (as I recall) at work, kind of slow.
One thing S. Korea has over us is not having infrastructure that started out as local government systems and bought up piecemeal and tied together over many years, they are basically building from scratch and those mega-complexes make it easy. Plus they have a lot of internet cafes, and we do not.
Still, I do like visiting there, I like the food. Just do not want to live there in the housing that is the current rage.
--
I am not lost, I find myself every time.
reply
anon @ 2nd Feb 11:55PM:
1Gbps ain't worth squat
Keep in mind that small countries like Korea have populations crammed together so it's easy to develop super high speed internet infrastructure. Consider another country with high per capita internet connections - Iceland, did they not go bankrupt? Speaking of which, Korean banks had to set up a borrowing facility from the US FEDERAL RESERVE, like their own central bank couldn't handle the crisis. Moral of the story is do you want to live in a country that brags about its super high service and overly tacky melodramas but doesn't have their act together when it comes to finances, banking (remember 1997 anyone?), education, cultural insularity...
reply
fiberguy @ 3rd Feb 02:54AM:
Re: We don't need to spend a couple of Billions on broadband
said by Jack00 :
The US doesn't need to spend the billions on broadband, we don't have the budget for it. However, we DO have the budget to find trillions of dollars to start a couple of wars and give several hundred billions to Halliburton for "services" contracts, though. Only in America!!
Get off the rant bud.. we didn't start this war..
We didn't even really start Iraq, if you look at the history of Iraq.. it was bound to happen sooner or later. I know it's hard to look in history, but are you one of those people that think 9/11 started in 2001? ... do your history books not go back 30 or 40 years? ;)
I'll admit there was some major corruption in Iraq and that war didn't need to happen EXACTLY when it did.. but dude, we didn't start Afghanistan.
reply
anon @ 3rd Feb 04:56AM:
Re: We don't need to spend a couple of Billions on broadband
OK then, war is war, I really don't care, but why is is SO hard to find money for our, the US, infrastructure, healthcare, jobs, BROADBAND!!!, etc... while most democracies can find such money easily without raising taxes. We can easily find money for pork spending, and the military and corrupt people who overcharges, and steals our tax dollar.
reply
Tails @ 3rd Feb 08:43AM:
Re: What time frame?
I was refering to this comment here:
"Now on top of that, add what was hinted at above about multiple users in one home. A lot of homes now have a computer for every member. Mom, Dad, Brother, and Sister all online a one time can bring your "average" 16Mbps connection to its knees pretty quick."
I don't know about you, but I used to have 4 people connected to a 3 meg down/ 384 kilobit up connection, and I was able to play online games like cz and cod4 with 70-80 ping while the rest of the family downloaded files or surfed the web.
EDIT: I have QoS enabled on my router, and throttle my own bandwidth so one app doesnt choke it out of sight.
--
Do or do not, there is no try! - Yoda
reply
tiger72 @ 3rd Feb 09:01AM:
Re: Heavy populated areas that's how
said by Eat Me :
Honestly we have bigger problems like the economy to be worried about 1GBps broadband.
You don't think the internet increases productivity? Or that infrastructure upgrades could create jobs?
Spending money on internet infrastructure would be more economically prudent than what the $trillion bailout package is actually being spent on.
--
"What makes us omniscient? Have we a record of omniscience? ...If we can't persuade nations with comparable values of the merit of our cause, we'd better reexamine our reasoning."
-United States Secretary of Defense (1961-1968) Robert S. McNamara
reply
Eat Me @ 3rd Feb 09:34AM:
Re: WOOT1!1!11
I'm on D3 and my speeds are pretty consistent. Almost always get 27-29mbps down and 1700-1900 up at speedtest.net.
reply
Eat Me @ 3rd Feb 09:38AM:
Re: What time frame?
I'm sure most residential ISPs will also put in their TOS the usual "no servers, no reselling" clause.
Even FiOS blocks port 80 unless you have static IP, and you can't resell a residential connection.
So you may be able to get away for a short while reselling but then they'll find out eventually, shut you down and/or sue you.
reply
XBL2009 @ 3rd Feb 10:01AM:
Re: 1Gbps ain't worth squat
said by Cargopantdude :
Keep in mind that small countries like Korea have populations crammed together so it's easy to develop super high speed internet infrastructure. Consider another country with high per capita internet connections - Iceland, did they not go bankrupt? Speaking of which, Korean banks had to set up a borrowing facility from the US FEDERAL RESERVE, like their own central bank couldn't handle the crisis. Moral of the story is do you want to live in a country that brags about its super high service and overly tacky melodramas but doesn't have their act together when it comes to finances, banking (remember 1997 anyone?), education, cultural insularity...
Always some excuse or reason why Americans can't build a Worldclass network.
It would be nice if we could set a 100mbps standard so everyone in the US is connected at the same speed and the network would be a lot more efficient instead of the messy network we have now.
reply
Eat Me @ 3rd Feb 11:05AM:
Re: Heavy populated areas that's how
No, the internet at workplaces actually decreases productivity.
reply
iansltx @ 3rd Feb 11:25AM:
Re: WOOT1!1!11
OTOH you could get those speeds with DOCSIS 2. And you're not on a crowded node. And that's less than 1/3 of the capacity of DOCSIS 3. Plus you've got caps. So I'd say PenTeleData is playing it safe. Which is fine...I suppose...
reply
tiger72 @ 3rd Feb 12:00PM:
Re: Heavy populated areas that's how
said by Eat Me :
No, the internet at workplaces actually decreases productivity.
I guess that depends on how it's used then. I'd say productivity has been increased by entrepreneurs taking advantage of the internet.
--
"What makes us omniscient? Have we a record of omniscience? ...If we can't persuade nations with comparable values of the merit of our cause, we'd better reexamine our reasoning."
-United States Secretary of Defense (1961-1968) Robert S. McNamara
reply
anon @ 3rd Feb 02:27PM:
we dont need this kind of speed in the us
Our country is much larger than Korea, so people whining need to get over it. I say we slow speeds down so people can go outside and do something productive while they wait for their files to download. Then maybe we will have less lazy scrubs mooching off the workers in this country! .... be patient we will get there when we need to.
reply
fiberguy @ 3rd Feb 04:14PM:
Re: We don't need to spend a couple of Billions on broadband
said by Jack00 :
OK then, war is war, I really don't care, but why is is SO hard to find money for our, the US, infrastructure, healthcare, jobs, BROADBAND!!!, etc... while most democracies can find such money easily without raising taxes. We can easily find money for pork spending, and the military and corrupt people who overcharges, and steals our tax dollar.
Broadband, bud, is not something that should be handled by the federal government. Was telephone? Power? Water? ANY utility? Seriously.. Government need not spend one shiny dime on broadband. However, their job IS to ensure that the providers that DO build broadband, do it as we the people want it done.. with in regulation, and programs. They operate at the privilege of the people, however, they themselves have rights too.
Health care.. we're already spending $440 billion a year on medicare alone in 2007. Again, it's not government's job to spend on health care. HOWEVER, there are things the government can do to ENCOURAGE savings on health care spending. (And I say THAT lightly) More over sight would be one. Second, the people themselves need to own up and take part in this too. There is a reason why so many people NEED health care, yet they don't want to own up to it. For one, a little less broadband maybe? Stop eating such crappy food? STOP SMOKING! - there's nothing good about it. Cut back on the drinks, eat healthy, exercise more, and so on. But, American's enjoy their vices and refuse to give them up. Obesity is one of the largest expenses in health care today and could be EASILY treated at the personal level.
Jobs. Show me one point in time where government spending ever spurred the economy.. and I'll show you how this very method killed the economy back in the 20's to 1943 after the war. Government spending will not create jobs in this country other than bigger government. Bigger government means more taxes which harms people. Show me one point where higher taxes did the people good.. and I'll show you why we left England years ago in search of a new country.
Infrastructure! Now you're on to something! Yes.. there needs to be more spending there on this I agree with you.
Out government isn't "finding money".. they are printing monopoly money; good for nothing, further devaluing the dollar. Moving off the gold standard was the worse thing this country ever did.
You let this country operate the way it's suppose to, put back protections and oversight in place that was stripped by Bush 1, Clinton, and especially Bush 2, and maybe this country will start to flow again.
reply
Lazlow @ 3rd Feb 04:37PM:
Re: Heavy populated areas that's how
Eat Me
If internet in the workplaces was not to the businesses advantage, they would not be paying to provide it. Obviously the companies are getting value out of providing an internet connection to their employees.
reply
bender @ 3rd Feb 05:29PM:
Re: What time frame?
said by Eat Me :
I'm sure most residential ISPs will also put in their TOS the usual "no servers, no reselling" clause.
Even FiOS blocks port 80 unless you have static IP, and you can't resell a residential connection.
So you may be able to get away for a short while reselling but then they'll find out eventually, shut you down and/or sue you.
then don't charge rent for the server. charge rent for storage of data. call it consulting? it just seems like a waste of a perfectly good pipe if people are not able to use it to its full potential.
this is one of those subjects that really should be taken care of once and for all with some net neutrality. internet service should be transparent. as in i should never have to call them to unblock a frigin port. its the most rediculous thing i've ever heard of.
you'd have to be pretty silly to have a large server farm on a residential connection. i'd go the extra distance and get a business account if it would give me some guaranteed level of service (unlike most residential companies). although i don't see how a "business" account actually costs any more than a regular residential account. except for the different wording in the service agreeement.
reply
KrK @ 4th Feb 04:34AM:
Re: What time frame?
said by Eat Me :
Talk of 1GBps is nice, but what time frame?
Uh, they said.
By 2012 it will be complete.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
reply
KrK @ 4th Feb 04:34AM:
Re: Starcraft 2
said by DarkLogix :
Oh ya they need that speed just for SC2
we're doomed their skills will get 1337 in no time flat
It's too late. We're already doomed, they are already 1337 at SC2!
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
reply
Lazlow @ 4th Feb 04:46AM:
Re: What time frame?
Josh
QOS just puts who goes first and how much. Again how does that help with bandwidth? Try running 4 HD streams on your 3 meg connection, it will be unwatchable.
reply
XBL2009 @ 4th Feb 09:13AM:
Re: we dont need this kind of speed in the us
said by jvillej :
Our country is much larger than Korea, so people whining need to get over it. I say we slow speeds down so people can go outside and do something productive while they wait for their files to download. Then maybe we will have less lazy scrubs mooching off the workers in this country! .... be patient we will get there when we need to.
People like you don't need faster speeds but many Americans could use 100mbps or more for business. It would allow new better online software to finally be launched. Teleconferencing would be dramatically better and who knows what else faster speeds will bring.
People with attitudes like yours must be ignored or America will become a third world country.
reply
Tails @ 4th Feb 10:46AM:
Re: What time frame?
As for that, I have no answer my friend. :)
I guess that is where you are screwed :(
--
Do or do not, there is no try! - Yoda
reply
Lazlow @ 4th Feb 02:10PM:
Re: What time frame?
Josh
If you go back to your first post on this thread, that is why QOS does not make any difference and why 1Gbps (or a huge move in that direction) is usable.
reply
anon @ 4th Feb 04:54PM:
Re: core
He is talking about LANWAN TRANSFERS
reply
Tails @ 4th Feb 07:23PM:
Re: What time frame?
I don't see why any household would need that kind of bandwidth. I could see 20/20 or 30/15 or even 30/30, but if you use more than the average home, then it might be best if you move up to the business account.
I'm with you on this, but at the same time the world isn't perfect. ISPs want to be the gatekeepers, plain and simple, and if you want unfettered access to the internet, either you protest until you're blue in the face, build your own network (hardly possible), or pay more (which is probably what you will end up doing, sadly). :(
--
Do or do not, there is no try! - Yoda
reply
funchords @ 4th Feb 07:55PM:
Re: What time frame?
said by Tails :
I don't see why any household would need that kind of bandwidth.
Why would anyone need a processor faster than 4.77 MHz?
Why would anyone need more than 594 KB of memory?
Then we got faster processors, and more memory -- and the applications that used them.
said by Tails :
I could see 20/20 or 30/15 or even 30/30, but if you use more than the average home, then it might be best if you move up to the business account
I'm with you on this, but at the same time the world isn't perfect. ISPs want to be the gatekeepers, plain and simple, and if you want unfettered access to the internet, either you protest until you're blue in the face, build your own network (hardly possible), or pay more (which is probably what you will end up doing, sadly). :(
True -- or support all three.
There is NOTHING wrong with higher fees -- as long as a market is a healthy market, the prices will stay in line. But with these monopolies, we're simply at the mercy of a few despots or we do without.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon -- KJ7RL
... Should we pay those who are "too big to fail" more money to ensure they stay that way? ...
reply
Lazlow @ 6th Feb 04:24AM:
Re: We don't need to spend a couple of Billions on broadband
Actually fibreguy yes the Federal Government was involved in telephone, water, and electricity. The easiest to point to is the REA (rural electric association), the telephone was brought out to those same areas by small local companies with government backed loans (later ate up by ATT), water lines were not brought into many areas until the late 1970s (again government backed). How much more expensive would your food be if the government had not made those investments? There is a reason that(relative to most other countries) we spend so little on food.
As far as the health care; compare the AVERAGE persons health care in the US to almost any other industrialized nation. Yes, for the rich there is some of the best health care in the world available in the US, but for the average guy it is not nearly as good as in other countries.
reply
thomas007 @ 7th Feb 02:31AM:
Metering Is The Way To Go
I agree we do not need 1GBS in the United States.
After all it is becoming the norm to (sell and restrict service),in the United States.
It is much more cost effictive to employ restrictive traffic mgmt and bandwidth caps with money making overage charges.
Why would any nation want to upgrade there internet backbone at such a high cost.
If you think I agree with this statement - you should go back to dial up.
upgrade,upgrade,upgrade and stop restricting the service I pay for.
reply
kymystic2 @ 24th Mar 09:23AM:
Re: We don't need to spend a couple of Billions on broadband
The US is ranked 37th in the world for healthcare. We're ranked right after Slobovia. How does the US rank 37 when we spend more on health care than any other country in the world? Because we aren't getting what were paying for. The US can't provide the most basic necessity "health care" to its own citizens (by either free enterprise or by the government), at a resonable cost. You are right about staying healthy, because if you get sick in America, your screwed. Sad, but true.
PS, If the US can't even provide healthcare, obviously there isn't any chance it's going to provide 1Gbps of internet service.
reply
Thank you for using lo-fi dslreports.com - report bugs
© 99-2009 silver matrix LLC