|
Thanks Ants posted:Forcing companies to open up their ducts / poles / network to competitors who have absolutely no capital costs is a great way of ensuring nobody invests in infrastructure. Not like they put all that much effort into it as it is.
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2014 01:41
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 00:02 |
|
|
computer parts posted:At the very least it's telling you that most people don't actually care about faster internet. Most people only user the internet for things like Facebook and email, so there is quite a significant disparity in usage between the types of people who use the internet. Just because there is a lot of people who would not use the higher speeds does not mean they should not put the minimum amount of effort into the infrastructure to offer high quality, high end speeds. They are already overselling what their infrastructure can handle, how can you say they put anything but the bare minimum into their infrastructure as it stands?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2014 02:54
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Where is your proof that they are overselling their infrastructure? Hard data, not anecdotes please. I was thinking of something else with the overselling, relating to their peering arrangements. My bad on that. The majority is heading towards online streaming for video and music, which requires faster speeds... though companies are doing their best to compress the streams to fit in our small amount of throughput. 10Mbit is not really sufficient for upcoming technology like 4k. Of course, you also have companies like Google charging only $70 a month for gigabit... while some major ISP's are charging more than that for less than 50Mbps. If they charged accordingly for their speeds, I think less people would care that much.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2014 05:14
|
|