Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The task force seeking to bring high speed broadband Internet service to Wake
Forest is inviting Wake Forest neighborhood and homeowners association (HOA)
representatives to a special information session on Monday, May 12. The meeting
will be held from 6-7 p.m. at the Wake Forest Renaissance Centre, 405 S. Brooks
St.
The information session is designed to educate HOA members about the current
installation of an ultra high speed fiber network throughout Wake Forest.
Discussions at the meeting will cover a range of topics, including the benefits
and potential cost of fiber Internet service, a tentative timeline and what to
expect during installation. A question and answer period will follow.
"Successful people aren't smarter, they just have better Internet" - Grizzmeister
Less bandwidth = small diameter hose (garden hose).
You can move a large amount of water (data) through a firehose and a smaller amount of water (data) through a garden hose if the speed (velocity) of the water (speed of light) is the same.
Now, the reason you have speed differences is due to either throttling or network congestion.
Throttling can be accomplished several ways: the internet service provider can "step on your hose" and make your "garden hose" smaller. Another way to do this is to give you a lower priority on the network (use a valve to direct the water to high-paying customers first, then each of your neighbors one-at-a-time and then you).
Network congestion simply causes a lot of people to share the garden hose's flow at the same time, i.e. you each still get water, just less of it. You can see this in some oversubscribed neighborhoods in the evenings or on holidays. (then there's data collisions, injected error packets and other devious stuff).
With fiber to the home (ftth), Google and others (even Time Warner if they wanted to!) have the ability to hook the data equivalent of a firehose to everyone's house.
I used to have satellite internet. That concept is like a bucket full of water. The more you paid, the larger your bucket. As you started using your internet, the "bucket" would start to drain. At that same time, they started refilling your bucket, but at a rate much slower than you were draining it out. The more you paid, the faster rate at which they would refill your bucket.
If you used so much as to drain your bucket completely, they would throttle you (see above). It got so slow, that it was better to walk away for an hour or more (again, depending on how much you paid!) and let your data "bucket" refill.
Sort of like flushing a toilet: water flushes fast, but refills relatively slowly.
You don't do this for a living, do you?
Who is responsible for filling your head with this?
Less bandwidth = small diameter hose (garden hose).
You can move a large amount of water (data) through a firehose and a smaller amount of water (data) through a garden hose if the speed (velocity) of the water (speed of light) is the same.
Now, the reason you have speed differences is due to either throttling or network congestion.
Throttling can be accomplished several ways: the internet service provider can "step on your hose" and make your "garden hose" smaller. Another way to do this is to give you a lower priority on the network (use a valve to direct the water to high-paying customers first, then each of your neighbors one-at-a-time and then you).
Network congestion simply causes a lot of people to share the garden hose's flow at the same time, i.e. you each still get water, just less of it. You can see this in some oversubscribed neighborhoods in the evenings or on holidays. (then there's data collisions, injected error packets and other devious stuff).
With fiber to the home (ftth), Google and others (even Time Warner if they wanted to!) have the ability to hook the data equivalent of a firehose to everyone's house.
I used to have satellite internet. That concept is like a bucket full of water. The more you paid, the larger your bucket. As you started using your internet, the "bucket" would start to drain. At that same time, they started refilling your bucket, but at a rate much slower than you were draining it out. The more you paid, the faster rate at which they would refill your bucket.
If you used so much as to drain your bucket completely, they would throttle you (see above). It got so slow, that it was better to walk away for an hour or more (again, depending on how much you paid!) and let your data "bucket" refill.
Sort of like flushing a toilet: water flushes fast, but refills relatively slowly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wrxdonkey
You don't do this for a living, do you?
Who is responsible for filling your head with this?
I'm wondering the same thing. In reading this thread, it seems that some people will strongly assert their understanding of data networking based on some irrelevant anecdotal experiences.
It's actually kind of troubling, because people should really understand the benefits of a faster broadband connection. With a gigabit connection, everything that people are currently accessing on the Internet will work the same or better, but they will also have the capacity for bandwidth-intensive applications of the near future like real-time HD video conferencing with a physician.
It's quite unproductive for people to be spreading baseless ideas about some distinction between broadband speed and bandwidth, and generally questioning whether faster speeds will make a difference. There are actually some important public debates that should take place related to gigabit broadband implementation and net neutrality, but I'm starting to doubt if that debate is even possible. The starting point seems to be very far away . . .
On Monday, AT&T announced that it has added Apex and Morrisville to its list of Triangle cities and towns targeted for its high-speed Internet service. Originally, the company announced plans for five local municipalities – Carrboro, Chapel Hill, Raleigh, Cary and Durham.
It's quite unproductive for people to be spreading baseless ideas about some distinction between broadband speed and bandwidth, and generally questioning whether faster speeds will make a difference. There are actually some important public debates that should take place related to gigabit broadband implementation and net neutrality, but I'm starting to doubt if that debate is even possible. The starting point seems to be very far away . . .
+1.
This whole situation is a massive win-win. It's obnoxious that it took Google threatening to offer 1Gbps to get MaBell & friends off of their butts to offer something better.
This is a great situation, because as homes are brought up to speed with video monitoring, and internet connected appliances, we don't have to be concerned with a lack of bandwidth. I look forward to the day when I'm at work and I can see 1080p video of my property/pets while I'm away. Storage, CPUs, and RAM are inexpensive. It's about time internet bandwidth follows suit and catches up with my networked devices in my home.
I can see 1080p video of my property/pets while I'm away.
I can understand bandwidth needs for high resolution telemedicine, etc. but high resolution for house and pets while on vacation? Seriously? We will soon be back here with a thread for 100Gbps.
I can understand bandwidth needs for high resolution telemedicine, etc. but high resolution for house and pets while on vacation? Seriously? We will soon be back here with a thread for 100Gbps.
100 Gbps broadband is not all that far-fetched. Network hardware has been advancing quickly. I remember that 1G switches were expensive 5 years ago, and are now pretty cheap. 10G switches are kind of at the price point 1G was back then, and the prices are coming down fast. Google Fiber is already looking into offering 10G broadband. In another five years, I'll bet that people will be demanding 10G connections, and 100G will be in the not so distant future.
A big part of the frustration with US broadband providers is that they wouldn't invest in new broadband infrastructure equipment, even after the hardware came down in price a lot. Fortunately, that seems to be changing now.
A big part of the frustration with US broadband providers is that they wouldn't invest in new broadband infrastructure equipment, even after the hardware came down in price a lot. Fortunately, that seems to be changing now.
The pace at which they can deploy increased speeds will alter. I figure we will move toward wireless transmission.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
