Google Fibre in Kansas Live

Caporegime
Joined
18 Mar 2008
Posts
32,741
Of course the comparisons to yesteryear, no one cares any more about dial up, that's the whole point in progress...

But as an apparent nation of technological advancement as our main goal, it is not good enough that there is even a "fair usage" turd in the system, I desire the time that i no longer hear of throttle any more.

It is irritating to pay for a service that gets torn down 1000% (yup, not even an exaggeration) because they cant be ass'd using their profits to actually make the nation a better place.
 
Last edited:
Man of Honour
Joined
11 Mar 2004
Posts
76,634
That's one of the issues, they don't have huge profits to reinvest.
Virgin for example made loss after they rolled it out to a significant proportion.

We don't pay enough and ISPs don't even offer a higher tier for us wanting to use large bandwidth and willing to pay for it.

Ofcom need to enforce stick advertising. Unlimited should mean unlimited with no fup, throttling, tethering restrictions or anything else.
 
Soldato
Joined
5 Jul 2005
Posts
17,995
Location
Brighton
Isn't he correct? I remember when I used to benchmark my standard 7200rpm hard disk the write speed would be ~70meg/s. The interface was never the bottleneck.

Modern HDDs have more dense platters, even a good 5400RPM 2TB drive can get 100-120Mb/s sustained writes (although doing lot sof small files will decrease that).
 
Permabanned
Joined
1 Sep 2010
Posts
11,217
What about Blu Ray quality media? You're looking at 20+ GB for a movie, then there's uploads which are woefully slow on most broadband.

100Mb/s would do fine, assuming it was each way.

Exactly! As well as streaming TV shows which is pretty much the established norm these days (iPlayer, ITV Player, Sky Player, Lovefilm etc all offer HD content which is a massive bandwidth whore). Then you have to remember that a lot of services offer TV on demand which is via your internet line (i.e. more bandwidth) as well as the rise to prominence of app stores such as Steam, Windows 8 App Store, OS X App Store which mean you can be downloading games and programs way above 10GB.

Whilst I get an awful lot of the population probably don't need high throughput lines, I'd wager there are an equal number who do and don't realise it for one reason or another.

That's one of the issues, they don't have huge profits to reinvest.
Virgin for example made loss after they rolled it out to a significant proportion.

We don't pay enough and ISPs don't even offer a higher tier for us wanting to use large bandwidth and willing to pay for it.

Ofcom need to enforce stick advertising. Unlimited should mean unlimited with no fup, throttling, tethering restrictions or anything else.

This is nonsense. If they're taking a hit on offering high bandwidth services then there is no reason not to charge extra for them. Those who genuinely use higher levels will pay for it, because it is cheaper to do so (ever been hit with an overusage bill? It's painful).

If Virgin Media are taking losses, it's because they're freaking incompetent or because they have the common sense not to take the Michael charging more whilst continuing to offer a service that is widely known to be total dog****. I'd put money on it being the former.

(Virgin customer for 4 years).
 
Soldato
Joined
19 Dec 2006
Posts
9,260
Location
Saudi Arabia né Donegal
You're not wrong about the Dutch, but it's worse in France on average according to these stats*:

http://www.thinkbroadband.com/news/5500-the-shifting-sands-of-global-broadband-speeds.html



UK average is 5.6Mbps. The year-on-year increase in peak broadband speeds is also quite high compared to other nations. It's not great here, admittedly, but as the article says, overall it's not 'doom and gloom' like some make it out to be.


*as always there's a million different ways of measuring something so maybe they're better on some other metric

Wow, Ireland is rated higher than that and I thought we were bad!
 
Soldato
Joined
14 Mar 2004
Posts
8,040
Location
Brit in the USA
Does anyone actually know why our telecommunications infrastructure is so inferior to other countries?

Because BT was the only player in town for so long. By the time the market was opened up to competition, the infrastructure was way behind. This is why competition is a very good thing.
 
Caporegime
Joined
18 Mar 2008
Posts
32,741
Because BT was the only player in town for so long. By the time the market was opened up to competition, the infrastructure was way behind. This is why competition is a very good thing.

Or a very bad thing if its an essential item like energy, water and perhaps transport to some extent, then its just anal.
 
Associate
Joined
1 Dec 2010
Posts
1,657
Location
North Wales
http://maps.ofcom.org.uk/broadband/ although thats from 2011 it shows how bad it is. BT need to pull there finger out and start upgrading everywhere rather than the places that is "viable" they are being given a lot of money from the EU and Government to do it.

What really annoys me is pushing the money into areas that already have 30 meg but neglect those that are struggling for 5. They just keep re-upgrading the areas that already have the good speeds!


Ofcom said:
We intend to update all our broadband speeds data later this year.
Guess we will see how much this rollout has helped the areas that were already struggling. My guess is that it wont be an improvement. All you will see is the faster areas getting faster and others left behind.
 
Last edited:
Associate
Joined
19 Feb 2005
Posts
1,233
Location
Docklands, London
https://hyperoptic.com/web/guest/home#3

Methinks they will go the way of be. Wouldn't touch them with a bargepole.

I had my tail-end installed with them last week (which consists of a ~10m CAT5e run to a cab down the hallway next to the dry riser) and the fibre to building should go live sometime this week. For £25 a month it's got to be better than the 3mbit (~512k through at peak) BT can provide.
 
Soldato
Joined
28 Nov 2004
Posts
16,024
Location
9th Inner Circle
A lot of that will be to do with load balancing. I'm sure the servers are capable of it, however if you use all their available traffic then no one else can connect.

That would be bandwidth throttling not load balancing.

Yes, upload speeds can be bad, but I'd say the vast majority couldn't care one iota about their upload speed.

You're right but I care about upload speed. People who work from home and small businesses also probably care about upload speeds.
 
Back
Top Bottom