111–120 of 246 posts
Hi from the developed world.. just checked, the slowest available broadband here is 200Mpbs/20Mpbs. Default is 200/200, I and most people I know went with 1000/1000Mpbs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 25/3 Mbps is a very reasonable speed for most people. the issue is that its provided on a best effort basis that is never maintained for long, if at all. netflix says thats enough to stream UHD[0] Please expand upon your point. Why exactly is 25/3 reasonable for most people? I'm not necessarily disagreeing; indeed, this would be a god-level speed compared to what's currently standard for most of Latin America. Howe…
> your point about Netflix is irrelevant because not every use case can be buffered nothing special about netflix, just a service that most people use. even their highest quality offering is streamable if we actually got advertised speeds. just trying to say that 25 isnt a meaningful cap for most people. > require better up speed than 3Mbps with bad ping and high jitter rejectfinite makes this point downthread and i…
It is if you don't want to update the minimum every 5 years. 100 isn't even high enough, IMO. It should be at least 500 down and at least 100 up to be safe for another decade, maybe 2.
If the pandemic has shown most of the world anything, it's that people need internet with high speeds. With the increasing gap between rich and poor, there are more people in flat shares too (per flat and total flat shares). Houses are bought later, if at all.
Hi from the developed world.. just checked, the slowest available broadband here is 200Mpbs/20Mpbs. Default is 200/200, I and most people I know went with 1000/1000Mpbs.
I hope you realize that the US is not uniform as a single entity, because I live here, and I can also say "hi from the developed world", given I have at least 2 providers here willing to give me symmetrical 1000Mbps up/down for $50-70 with no data caps (and I have been using one of them for the past 2 years and couldn't be happier). But this is far from being the case everywhere in the US.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does the cost of running a network depend on network utilization? Does a network that is more heavily used require more maintenance?
Yes. If the network is more heavily used, it will require more capacity where it connects to other parts of the network or other networks. More ports and more wires means more failures of ports and wires and more diagnosis of ports and wires and more replacement of ports and wires. Or, if capacity is not increased to meet demand, you need more people at the callcenter to ignore customer complaints.
Is this the same ratio in the US? My friends in mainland Europe seem to have much more symmetrical up/down streams
25/3 is a little sad for modern computing. It's ok for video streaming and conference calls. And I guess that's the minimal threshold. But with more and more services and offerings in the cloud, especially iCloud that just happily backs-up data out of the box and OneDrive 1TB corporate plan it's not going to win any awards. With the pandemic and the changes in work from home habits, if I was a small town mayor I'd be…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's asymmetric, providing far less upload capacity than download.
It can be, but the two biggest PON operators in the US (AT&T and Verizon) offer symmetric speeds.
25/3 is a little sad for modern computing. It's ok for video streaming and conference calls. And I guess that's the minimal threshold. But with more and more services and offerings in the cloud, especially iCloud that just happily backs-up data out of the box and OneDrive 1TB corporate plan it's not going to win any awards. With the pandemic and the changes in work from home habits, if I was a small town mayor I'd be…
Unfortunately, mayors haven't been seeing a lot of resources to work with this year. First priority will always be to stop the bleeding. And, of course, printing money isn't an option for them, so the opportunity will mostly be missed.
They can always borrow, and make up for it in higher property taxes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm I reading that right that a "940/450 Mbps" fiber plan is ~$10 a month??
It looks that way to me (40 LEI ~= $9.81 USD). Personally I'm more impressed that they advertise a 200/100 Mbps minimum speed. I'm not sure I've ever seen a minimum speed listed by a US residential ISP. If you're very lucky they'll tell you the average speed to expect and not a theoretical maximum. They also didn't say anything about data caps, though there could be something in the contracts. I don't read Romanian m…
I doubt they have any.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm I reading that right that a "940/450 Mbps" fiber plan is ~$10 a month??
It looks that way to me (40 LEI ~= $9.81 USD). Personally I'm more impressed that they advertise a 200/100 Mbps minimum speed. I'm not sure I've ever seen a minimum speed listed by a US residential ISP. If you're very lucky they'll tell you the average speed to expect and not a theoretical maximum. They also didn't say anything about data caps, though there could be something in the contracts. I don't read Romanian m…
Main reasons for such a good network and low prices: low income and piracy, which fueled a giant "duct-taped" Lan infrastructure some 20 years ago, with ISP's at every corner, which were then bought because the infrastructure was already there.
See the link in my other comment here for a better explanation.