US ranks 28th in Internet connection speed: report

Aug 25, 2009
A man surfs the web at an internet cafe. The United States ranks 28th in the world in average Internet connection speed and is not making significant progress in building a faster network, according to a report released on Tuesday.

The United States ranks 28th in the world in average Internet connection speed and is not making significant progress in building a faster network, according to a report released on Tuesday.

The report by the Communications Workers of America (CWA) said the average speed in is 20.4 megabits per second (mbps) -- four times faster than the US average of 5.1 mbps.

trails South Korea with an average of 15.8 mbps followed by Sweden at 12.8 mbps and the Netherlands at 11.0 mbps, the report said.

It said tests conducted by speedmatters.org found the average US download speed had improved by only nine-tenths of a per second between 2008 and 2009 -- from 4.2 mbps to 5.1 mbps.

"The US has not made significant improvement in the speeds at which residents connect to the Internet," the report said. "Our nation continues to fall far behind other countries."

"People in Japan can upload a high-definition video in 12 minutes, compared to a grueling 2.5 hours at the US average upload speed," the report said.

It said 18 percent of those who took a US speed test recorded that were slower than 768 kilobits per second, which does not even qualify as basic broadband, according to the .

Sixty-four percent connected at up to 10 mbps, 19 percent connected at speeds greater than 10 mbps and two percent exceeded 25 mbps.

The United States was ranked 20th in broadband penetration in a survey of 58 countries released earlier this year by Boston-based Strategy Analytics.

South Korea, Singapore, the Netherlands, Denmark and Taiwan were the top five countries listed in terms of access to high-speed Internet.

US President Barack Obama has pledged to put broadband in every home and the FCC has embarked on an ambitious project to bring high-speed Internet access to every corner of the United States.

According to the CWA report, the fastest download speeds in the are in the northeastern parts of the country while the slowest are in states such as Alaska, Idaho, Montana and Wyoming.

(c) 2009 AFP

Explore further: Millions without mobile phone service in Argentina

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Report: U.S. broadband speed outdated

Jun 26, 2007

So-called high-speed Internet broadband connection speeds are "pathetic" compared with other industrialized nations, a communications union report claimed.

South Korea tops in broadband penetration: study

Jun 19, 2009

South Korea, where 95 percent of homes have broadband, Singapore and Taiwan are among the top five countries in terms of access to the high-speed Internet, according to a survey released Thursday.

Recommended for you

Sony hacking fallout puts all companies on alert

9 hours ago

Companies across the globe are on high alert to tighten up network security to avoid being the next company brought to its knees by hackers like those that executed the dramatic cyberattack against Sony Pictures ...

Ear-check via phone can ease path to diagnosis

11 hours ago

Ear infections are common in babies and young children. That it is a frequent reason for young children's visit to doctors comes as no consolation for the parents of babies tugging at their ears and crying ...

Timeline of the Sony Pictures Entertainment hack

11 hours ago

It's been four weeks since hackers calling themselves Guardians of Peace began their cyberterrorism campaign against Sony Pictures Entertainment. In that time thousands of executive emails and other documents ...

Two more former Sony workers sue over data breach

11 hours ago

Two more former employees of Sony Pictures Entertainment are suing the company over the massive data breach in which their personal and financial information was stolen and posted online.

User comments : 72

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Foolish1
not rated yet Aug 25, 2009
200 kbps qualifies as broadband to the FCC.
John_balls
4 / 5 (1) Aug 26, 2009
Verizon fios is the latest and greatest. They have downn load speeds as fast as 50mbs and upload speeds at 20mbs but they are only one company.
zevkirsh
1 / 5 (1) Aug 26, 2009
funny, my internet is fine right now.
docknowledge
2.1 / 5 (7) Aug 26, 2009
Alarmist crud.

So frigging what? The US isn't "falling behind", it's avoided costly upgrades that most users don't need. There were screams when the US decided not to build the Concorde supersonic transport. And...guess what? It proved to be a multi-billion dollar waste of money.

Of the many, many things I do on the Internet, none of them are particularly limited by download speed. I could use a new, faster computer, with a better video card...but faster Internet? Not willing to pay for it.
Bob_Kob
4.2 / 5 (5) Aug 26, 2009
What you all are forgetting is that while your internet (and mine) may be adequate for the kinds of things we use on the net now will not be adequate for future advances. An ultra fast internet connect will allow for things currently unimaginable ~ virtual computing where all you need is an internet connection, your computer is shared from the server. High quality video conferencing (think webcams but much better) etc..

Not upgrading the infrastructure to accommodate the next generation of internet service and future improvements would cost more in the long run.
Nederluv
3.7 / 5 (6) Aug 26, 2009
Alarmist crud.



So frigging what? The US isn't "falling behind", it's avoided costly upgrades that most users don't need. There were screams when the US decided not to build the Concorde supersonic transport. And...guess what? It proved to be a multi-billion dollar waste of money.



Of the many, many things I do on the Internet, none of them are particularly limited by download speed. I could use a new, faster computer, with a better video card...but faster Internet? Not willing to pay for it.


You don't know what you're missing. The computer, telephone and television are merging. So you need a better connection to be able to stream HDtv, call and download at the same time. In The Netherlands you can get 120 Mbps for 90 dollars a month. For that money you can make national phone calls for free, you get 100 crystal clear HD channels, you can hire movies legally by streaming them on your tv and you get extremely fast internet. Welcome in the developed world :D
But don't worrying about falling behind. We'll send you guys some development aid by the time your overprotected, soon to be socialist police state can no longer compete with the rest of the world!! xD
jfleisher
2.8 / 5 (5) Aug 26, 2009
S Korea is about 1% of the size of the US, which makes it just a tad bit simpler to wire...
jfleisher
3 / 5 (4) Aug 26, 2009
actually, all of the countries mentioned in the article are tiny compared to the US (Singapore 274 sq miles!), so it might be more meaningful to factor in the sizes of the countries involved...
vika_Tae
2.8 / 5 (6) Aug 26, 2009
The US became arrogant, and started to believe they were the world technology leaders - they were at one point. So they got overconfident and sat on their laurels. Many still believe they are part of the most technologically advanced nation on the planet. Its not true any more, but they still believe it.

They don't desire faster internet? That's their problem. Let them get on with it as they are. The rest of us can reap the rewards over the next 5, 10, 20 years, and they can sit as they are, constantly diving deeper into recession because they are unable to compete economically with the more heavily wired countries.
Nederluv
3.8 / 5 (4) Aug 26, 2009
S Korea is about 1% of the size of the US, which makes it just a tad bit simpler to wire...


Japan is made out of islands, which makes it a tad bit harder to wire.

Size has nothing to do with it, population density has. However Russia is 2.5 times as large as the USA is. While it has less than half the inhabitants, but their connection speed is 1.4 Mbps faster! They kick American ass when it comes to technology nowadays xD
droid001
3 / 5 (3) Aug 26, 2009
I have 100 megabits per sec for 37$/month. It's enough speed even for me. Optic fiber rules.
forgotmybritches
4 / 5 (4) Aug 26, 2009
What you all are forgetting is that while your internet (and mine) may be adequate for the kinds of things we use on the net now will not be adequate for future advances. An ultra fast internet connect will allow for things currently unimaginable ~ virtual computing where all you need is an internet connection, your computer is shared from the server. High quality video conferencing (think webcams but much better) etc..



Not upgrading the infrastructure to accommodate the next generation of internet service and future improvements would cost more in the long run.



I'm with Bob - we should be better wired in preparation for a new wave of computing technologies...

I'm also in agreement regarding country size - it certainly isn't the only consideration in making a comparison, but it's certainly a factor. Still, America has demonstrated the ability to implement large-scale infrastructure changes across the country; it seems to be a matter of motivation.

Russia is so ass-backwards in so many ways, I can't even comment about their technology. It's just overshadowed by so many problems; i'll take slower internet and live in America.
david_42
3 / 5 (2) Aug 26, 2009
130Kbps is high-speed broadband for Hughes Network Systems. Only $60/month and six days to download a movie without exceeding the 'fair usage' policy.
Hyperion1110
2.8 / 5 (5) Aug 26, 2009
While Russia may be twice the land area of the US, it is not as spread out. Don't forget that Alaska is at the other end of the continent, and Hawaii is in the middle of the Pacific Ocean. Moreover, 75% of Russia population is in the four European Federal Districts, which are only about 30% of the total land area. So, in terms of wiring its population, Russia is not nearly as complex as the US.



While it's true that Japan is a series of islands, the distance between those islands is not significant...certainly nothing compared to the distance between California and Hawaii.



Distance between population centers and population density have everything to do with this. It is much easier to lay high speed cable when the entire country is the size of a large US city. But try connecting, say, Miami, Florida to Anchorage, Alaska...it's only 6000 miles (10000 km). Or perhaps wiring San Juan, Puerto Rico to Honolulu, Hawaii. They're only on opposite sides of the world. I'm sure the Netherlands could build the infrastructure for that 120 Mbps internet on those scales without a problem (sarcasm)!



It's absurd to read into this that the US is somehow losing its technological edge. People should keep in mind the following:



1. The US is the most geographically spread out country in the world;



2. The US invented the internet, and controls it; the talk of losing technological supremacy is insane;



3. This whole study is not an apples to apples comparison. The US is not South Korea, the Netherlands, Sweden, or any other small country. We're the third most populous and the third largest in land area; there are major population centers on opposite sides of the continent. That kind of complexity is incomparable to any country in the world. Period.



As a final note, I am always amused by the smugness of some Europeans. Let's see...massive economic inequality between west and east, little ethnic diversity due to genocide, stagnant economic growth, declining population in the west...need I go on? In comparison, North America has a much more robust economy, a steadily growing population, significant ethnic and cultural diversity, unmatched higher education systems, technological and military superiority, abundant natural resources, and political stability. Thanks for playing!
Hyperion1110
2.3 / 5 (3) Aug 26, 2009
wow... the US sucks at anything technological. I wonder if they will ever make a new shuttle or anything new?


That's funny. Your question is when will the US make new things when your country cannot now make those things that the US built 40 years ago.

It really makes you look silly to comment only how the US "sucks at anything technological." Especially when the computer your using technology either designed or built exclusively in the US.
Velanarris
5 / 5 (2) Aug 26, 2009
Guys,

The article is primarily concerned with upload speed, which is limited in the US to prevent copyright violation through file sharing in a nodeless environment.

US download speeds are about the same as other countries because the majority of their content servers are located on American backbone.

To those who are saying we need to wire for the future, current US coaxial systems can contain and transmit at sustained 100Gb and burst at 400Gb for download, there is no need for fast upload unless you're file sharing.
jester0000
1 / 5 (1) Aug 26, 2009
S Korea is about 1% of the size of the US, which makes it just a tad bit simpler to wire...


Wow.... someone has some real jealousy-induced hatred for the U.S. Seeing as how our country is so large, I think that would explain why its so much harder to wire. And just because Japan is made of Islands doesn't make it harder to wire... considering they wire the land, not the water, idiot.

And besides, all the larger countries just need a little time to catch up, which the U.S. certainly is. I live in the northeast and i get a consistent 20 Mbps connection. Right now, I don't need more, but by the time the internet has gotten to the point where we DO need more, FiOS and other Fiber-to-the-home services will be in place. So, as someone who is very technologically inclined, I have no fear for the future of broadband in the U.S.

South Korea, Japan, and all those teeeeeny tiny countries can afford to re-wire their entire country every 10 years or so.... pretty tough in a country as huge as ours.

Stop being jealous and just be happy living where you live without having to hate on others.


Japan is made out of islands, which makes it a tad bit harder to wire.



Size has nothing to do with it, population density has. However Russia is 2.5 times as large as the USA is. While it has less than half the inhabitants, but their connection speed is 1.4 Mbps faster! They kick American ass when it comes to technology nowadays xD

finitesolutions
3 / 5 (2) Aug 26, 2009
USA if it is difficult for you to create a superfast Internet service: do not do it. You have the freedom to lay back. If you have nothing that big to transfer just maintain the current hardware you have.
finitesolutions
3 / 5 (2) Aug 26, 2009
USA: you have 10% unemployment. Plus you have 2,310,984 million unemployed in the prisons. Upgrading your network connections can spark good employment and eliminate the unemployment. The goal is full employment for dignified americans. Producing and installing optical cable is not that difficult.
vika_Tae
not rated yet Aug 26, 2009
Actually, to those who are saying the US is larger, and thus more difficult to lay wires, what about wireless internet systems? They've been tried in many US major cities - municipal broadband. Most US cities have now scrapped their plans, because they get sued into next week by the telephone companies.

With the Americans, its not the difficulty of providing the service, its the difficulty of doing anything innovative without disturbing existing profit models, and thus being sued into next week, by nervous corporations.

As to the person who says that you don't need high upload speeds unless you are file sharing, that, is just bollocks. You require high upload and high download speeds if you are contributing to the content on the net, not just consuming it. From my angle, a definite high upload angle is telehaptics - which currently Britain and Spain are excelling at, because both have the upload/download speeds available to do it
Nederluv
3.4 / 5 (5) Aug 26, 2009
While Russia may be twice the land area of the US, it is not as spread out. Don't forget that Alaska is at the other end of the continent, and Hawaii is in the middle of the Pacific Ocean. Moreover, 75% of Russia population is in the four European Federal Districts, which are only about 30% of the total land area. So, in terms of wiring its population, Russia is not nearly as complex as the US.

While it's true that Japan is a series of islands, the distance between those islands is not significant...certainly nothing compared to the distance between California and Hawaii.

Distance between population centers and population density have everything to do with this. It is much easier to lay high speed cable when the entire country is the size of a large US city. But try connecting, say, Miami, Florida to Anchorage, Alaska...it's only 6000 miles (10000 km). Or perhaps wiring San Juan, Puerto Rico to Honolulu, Hawaii. They're only on opposite sides of the world. I'm sure the Netherlands could build the infrastructure for that 120 Mbps internet on those scales without a problem (sarcasm)!

It's absurd to read into this that the US is somehow losing its technological edge. People should keep in mind the following:

1. The US is the most geographically spread out country in the world;

2. The US invented the internet, and controls it; the talk of losing technological supremacy is insane;

3. This whole study is not an apples to apples comparison. The US is not South Korea, the Netherlands, Sweden, or any other small country. We're the third most populous and the third largest in land area; there are major population centers on opposite sides of the continent. That kind of complexity is incomparable to any country in the world. Period.

As a final note, I am always amused by the smugness of some Europeans. Let's see...massive economic inequality between west and east, little ethnic diversity due to genocide, stagnant economic growth, declining population in the west...need I go on? In comparison, North America has a much more robust economy, a steadily growing population, significant ethnic and cultural diversity, unmatched higher education systems, technological and military superiority, abundant natural resources, and political stability. Thanks for playing!


The USA was a great country, but it's losing touch. You're in denial mate, just admit it.

The distance between Miami and Anchorage is only 6440 kilometers instead of 10000!

The distance between the outer parts of Alaska and Florida is 7250 kilometers.

The distance between Kamchatka and Dagestan is 7700 kilometers.

It's true that most Russians live in the Western part of Russia, but they also have two large population centers in the south. The same accounts for the USA. Most people live in the eastern part and there is another population center in California. So Russia and the USA are comparable when it comes to size and population centers. However Russia's population density is lower. Companies rather spend their money on areas where a lot of people live. So normally the USA would have to perform better, but they don't. Besides wiring Russia is much more complex because of the way harsher climate.

Hawaii only has 1.3 million inhabitants. They hardly make a difference.

1. Russia is way bigger. Don't even think about throwing in those tiny islands in the Pacific into this discussion, because they hardly have any human beings living on them. Besides France and England also have islands scattered across the entire globe.

2. The US invented the internet, but they don't control it. Nobody truly controls it. If some other large power, like China, India or Russia, would want to block your access to internet they could. However, let's hope such stupid, barbarian things will never happen.

3. That's right, you can't compare the USA with any other country in the world. However, when you know that Russia is performing better than the USA, then you know that the USA is doing something wrong. Since it's harder to achieve such speeds in Russia, due to its harsher climates.

Now we Europeans are the haughty ones! You must be joking!? Which country in the world thinks it's the best at everything? Which country in the world has a military base in nearly every other country? Which country thinks that its moral values are superior to those of other cultures and forces them upon others? That's not Europe, but the USA.

Europe is not one country dude! Saying that there is massive economic inequality between the countries in Western Europe and Eastern Europe is like saying that there is massive economic inequality between the USA and Mexico or North America and South America. It's complete bullocks!

Little ethnic diversity due to genocide? Amsterdam (which lies in The Netherlands) is the number 1 city when it comes to ethnic diversity. You haven't ever been in Europe, have you Hyper?

Where and when did the genocide take place? Did I miss something?

Declining population in the south brother. Italy's population is dwindling. However, I live in a completely different country. You're seeing Europe as a whole, while it isn't. The population of The Netherlands is steadily growing as well.

Stagnant economic growth my buttocks. Economic growth in countries in Western Europe was between 2 and 4% before the crisis. Economic growth in eastern countries was between 4 and 12%. Our recession wasn't as deep as yours was and our economy is catching up as well now. We never had camps of homeless people outside of cities.

We have noticed just how robust your economy is. The USA dragged half the world into that hellhole you guys made. The USA came out of it by printing money leading to a weak falling currency. Which made it possible for wealthy foreigners (mostly Chinese, Arabs and Russians) to buy pretty much all of your cheap, large companies!

Of course the USA have much ethnic diversity, 99.9% of the Americans come from foreign countries.

The American education system isn't unmatched. Poor people hardly stand a chance of ever studying at a university. The University of Tokio has the most alumni that have become CEOs of international corporations. India has more students per 1000 people than the USA has! India even has more honor students than the USA has students!

Abundant natural resources? What? How much of your oil comes from foreign countries? Where are the abundant uranium or bauxite resources? The USA only have many phosphates and quite a lot of gas compared to other countries. They aren't better off at all.

Oh and regarding your reply to lord_jag. You don't even know where he lives. So saying that his country can't build anything is stupid. The European nations, Japan, China and Russia all have brilliant space programs, which keep improving. They all want to put people on the moon and eventually Mars in the next 25 years. NASA was at his height during the 60s, but it has collapsed due to a lack of funds. The USA doesn't spend money on important things anymore, they rather spend it on a lot of big guns. NASA has to make ends meet nowadays. They were the best, but they are no longer.

Only the American military is truly superior compared to others. Which isn't a good thing. Armies drain funds like crazy. It would be much better for your economy and for the wellbeing of people living on this planet to stop making enemies worldwide with your arrogant lifestyles. Maybe then the USA could eventually do with a smaller army.

I guess you will stop your childish nana-nana-na 'we're better then you are' nonsense. Only by acknowledging your weaknesses you can improve yourself. It's time to face the facts and start working on making the USA the best once again, because the rest of the world has been catching up lately.
Arkaleus
2 / 5 (4) Aug 26, 2009
Thanks Nederluv, I'm sure when Europe decides to destroy itself again your decendents will be very glad that America has dismantled its military and rid itself of its "arrogant lifestyles." How long will it be before it happens again? 20 years? 50? Europe seems to be the one with the most bodies buried under its soil, not the United States.

But just think how cool it will be having your fast internet with a new European emperor as your tyrant. With your socialized economies and lack of a real Constitution, your generation will be the first to receive reproduction licensing, genetic eugenics, green-panic rationing and outrageous taxation. Europe, time and time again has shown itself to be the instigator of wars and intrigues, the birthplace of tyrants, and the most self-destructive region of all the earth.

By the way, for those of you in the EU who think it's fashionable to insult and criticise the United States for its culture, remember who kept the Nazis from grinding your grandparents into fertilizer and forcing your parents to speak German.

Arrogant indeed.
Arkaleus
2 / 5 (4) Aug 26, 2009
...and don't even get me started on the Soviet Union. If the United States became like Europe after 1945, you would still be digging potatoes and rationing toilet paper under the benevolant rule of Moscow.

Instead, thanks to our "arrogance" and trillions of dollars from our taxes, you have the privledge of sitting on your soft, cheap IKEA sofas while passing judgments on the United States between mouhtfuls of fondue and Mentos.

Why don't you grow a pair and demonstrate your superior culture by drafting a real Constitution and forcing the EU to abide by the principles of limited government and legitimate representation? But, as we know, this will never happen and we'll find ourselves fighting some other would-be emperor of the world all over again.
finitesolutions
3 / 5 (2) Aug 26, 2009
I stopped buying american products as they are inferior in quality. American effort to sell me crap is annoying.
vika_Tae
3 / 5 (4) Aug 26, 2009
Um, the EU isn't a large country. Its a commonwealth of nations, independent nations. I'm not the best person to try and teach you that a nation is not the same thing as a state, mostly as I don't really think like an uneducated, intolerant individual, so cannot really communicate with you that well.

However, a nation has its own independent government, and sets its own independent taxes, own independent laws, that can directly contradict the ideals of the commonwealth. Many even have independent monarchies, and radically different styles of government.

Italy for example is radically anti-internet, and keeps passing laws to curtail its use, or limit its reach. France is pro-internet, for the most part, and has some of the best internet infrastructure in the EU. Britain is slowly turning into a totalitarian police ruled country, whilst Eire is basically welcoming everyone in with a hands off approach.

There is no uniformity on approach to any issue, and the political parties as well as government styles, are completely different for each government. Thus, you cannot take all of Europe as a whole, like you can with the US, because the US is only one country. I hope I'm getting through to you, because you really do seem to not understand this point.

As to those who claim that trillions of dollars of your taxes are being spent on world war two, we thank you for that. Give generously. After all, every $100 you spend today, goes to feeding, clothing and arming a US soldier sixty years ago, thanks to a bizarre grasp on temporal physics which apparently makes sense to so many Americans. Give all you can, for this glorious cause.
Nederluv
3 / 5 (3) Aug 26, 2009
...and don't even get me started on the Soviet Union. If the United States became like Europe after 1945, you would still be digging potatoes and rationing toilet paper under the benevolant rule of Moscow.

Instead, thanks to our "arrogance" and trillions of dollars from our taxes, you have the privledge of sitting on your soft, cheap IKEA sofas while passing judgments on the United States between mouhtfuls of fondue and Mentos.

Why don't you grow a pair and demonstrate your superior culture by drafting a real Constitution and forcing the EU to abide by the principles of limited government and legitimate representation? But, as we know, this will never happen and we'll find ourselves fighting some other would-be emperor of the world all over again.

I'm not insulting the USA, I'm just critical of its flaws. The USA is losing ground fast, but some of these fools above me are too blind and patriotic to admit it. When there is negative news regarding the USA many Americans always come up with some lame excuse like 'yeah well but we are bigger so it's harder to wire us all up', which just isn't true.

I'm not going to reply to your dystopian European future, because I doubt that an emperor will ever arise again. We've been democratic for quite some time now.

We already have outrageous taxation. I agree with you on that one. At least I'm critical when it comes to the flaws of my nation. We have another huge flaw: we're way too soft. The Netherlands has just freed a mass murderer (6 deaths) after having been in jail for only 10 years. You only get 14 years for murdering a national politician. You often get away with burglary and smaller crimes.

So I may not criticize the USA because they once helped The Netherlands? Canada, England and the Soviet Union helped freeing Europe as well. Do I have to applaud communists as well or should I only refrain from criticism when talking about the USA?

The Netherlands has never been under Soviet rule (thank goodness!). So I doubt that I would have been rationing toilet paper if the Soviet Union was still intact.

The American Constitution isn't saving the USA from large governments nor bureaucratic regulation. Just check your national spending. First the defense budget exploded and now the health care budget is about to explode as well. It's not just America's national spending that is growing every second. Your government is growing as well!

The USA is overprotected, both the economy (by quotas and tariffs) as well as its own citizens and companies. The US is no longer that brilliant nation it once was. It takes me ages before I get my luggage when I hop out of a plane, because of all of the security nonsense. American (and also Canadian) citizens that have a bank account in The Netherlands have to fill in a list with over 10 questions before they can transfer money from their Dutch account to another account which they own! What happened to freedom? The USA has completely forgotten about the wise words of your Founding Fathers:
- Those who sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither and will lose both.
- A government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have.
- The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases.

Ditch those stupid Democrats and Republicans and elect a Libertarian president!
Velanarris
4.3 / 5 (3) Aug 26, 2009
You ladies all about done measuring ethnicity penises?

Here's the truth for all sides involved in this discussion. There is no technological advantage anymore, everyone is on the same playing field in a global economy. There is only temporary fluxuation.

And if you want to talk about the best military on the planet, Israel wins that one.

Best technology, South Korea/India

Best Health, Japan

Europeans get ready to welcome America into the "Former Roman Empire" club. We'll make sure we keep China and Indias' seats warm until they get here too.

As for American internet, this is really nothing new, then again, we have absolutely NO need for larger network pipes, making it a prohibitive cost for no gain.

Hell, the Europeans loved the fact you had a higher resolution TV signal, yet you never used it. BBC jsut started using HD cameras because of AMERICAN viewers.

vika_Tae
5 / 5 (2) Aug 26, 2009
Um, Velanarris, you're not quite right on a few of those points. If I might clarify.

There is a definite need for larger network capacity in all countries. The more data they can handle, the more options are open. As it is in the UK, as network bandwidth has increased, use has not just kept pace, it has actually increased ahead of capacity to deliver. Once the majority of people wake up to the possibilities offered by the net, they tend to embrace it.

Of course one of the key differences between the UK and the US, is that in the UK, you pay a fixed monthly sum for uncapped internet. My own packet downloads are somewhere in the region of 60-80gb per month, and uploads are probably around 20 gb. (Please note I said packets, not files. The vast majority is not files, it is streaming data.)

To my knowledge in the US, the majority of plans are a monthly fee for a usage cap, that once you go over you are either fined for, or disconnected. With that mentality in place, people are going to be leery of using it too much.

As to the BBC, well:

1. The BBC stands for British Broadcasting Corporation. As this implies, it is a British broadcaster, not a European broadcaster. Mainland Europe can pick up BBC Worldwide, same as the US does, but not the rest of the programming. That is strictly for the nation of Britain.

2. It is true the BBC have only just started using HD. However, its not because of American demand. You have to consider the context. In 2001, the UK's network backbone was capable of an appaling 18gb/sec total, over any link. At the time the BBC actually had its own coaxial cable based network linking its studios, as the public internet simply could not cope with what it demanded. Likewise, digital transmission is something very new technologically, so it simply was not feasible to give HD content to the viewers until quite recently. We have actually had the technology since 1988 I believe it was.

There is more than enough demand for it, but even now, it is not transmitted for the majority of programs, because there is not enough bandwidth to cope. Even with analogue transmission turned off.

Eventually we will get there, and there is a constant fight to improve broadband speeds and equal access to broadband provision across the country.

Minimum of 2mb/s has been mandated by the government. That's nowhere near enough of course, but its a good starting point. We will see increasing demand for services continue to escalate ahead of the ability to put the communication's infrastructure in place, of course, but many of these new demands, create new, disruptive business models. Strengthening a country's economy and providing an increased variety of jobs, seems to me to be a small price to pay for the expense of 'bigger pipes' and better transmission methods.
Hyperion1110
1 / 5 (1) Aug 26, 2009
LOL...I worked on this big reply to all kinds of posts for a while until I realized I could sum it up quite succinctly: ours is bigger! :)
Arkaleus
2.3 / 5 (3) Aug 27, 2009
Velanarris and others,

China and India are not at parity with the United States and will probably never be in our lifetimes for the following very important reasons:

There are 60 languages used in India and while there are over 1 billion people, the large majority of them live in squalor and extreme poverty. 42% of India's population falls below the international poverty line of $1.25 a day. http://en.wikiped...in_India There is a rising middle class and technological growth, but there's a difference between innovation and high tech labor. India's gigantic population growth and constant warfare with Pakistan will make India's future uncertain. The risk of nuclear war in India is currently greater than any other region. If that were to happen, it would be a century before India could rebuild its infrastructure and compete in the world again. There are deep cultural and religious divisions between Muslims, Sikhs, and the Hindu majority. India is not a world leader in anything, except mediocre engineers and perhaps curry powders.

China is often touted as the next superpower, but let's look at the facts. China is a totalitarian state barely 70 years old. It consists of over a dozen culturally diverse regions with separate languages and an extensive history of warfare with each other. There is no comparison between the regions of china and the States of America, or even the member states of the EU. China is held together by military force and social control. All propaganda aside, it is going to remain so.

The only way for China to attain a superpower status would be for its people to liberate themselves from the totalitarianism, but as soon as this would occur China will fracture along deep cultural lines and revert to a collection of competing states. While I agree that China will eventually become a great power, it will not dominate the world by any means. China is at the apex of its industrial revolution at a time when resources are at a premium. The simple economic truth is that they will not be able to generate the levels of wealth the West did when key resources were cheap and available.

Don't get me wrong guys, I have deep respect for Europe, India, and China, and most of you I enjoy speaking with on this forum. But your disdain for America is poorly justified and confirms the stereotypes many Americans have of Europeans in general.

As for you, netherluv, I suggest you examine the history of your continent more carefully. My nation is a single culture, with a single language, and my people lack the extreme ethnic violence that stains Europe and Asia. We are interbred, most white people in America are a mixture of some or all European races, but we are strong because we are one. China, India, and Europe will never be one, they will never be unified, and they will always be a clumsy collection of artificial unions filled with animosity and resentment. It is inevitable Europe will find itself facing another war for supremacy - It's simply human nature. The nature of your civilizations, their proximity to one another, and thousands of years of cultural precedent indicate it will occur sooner rather than later. You are naive to think those in power behind the EU are going to somehow avoid the temptation of building a empire greater than any before to exist in Europe. It's in your blood, so to say. And when it occurs, it will be the United States as the only free nation on Earth.

All petty nationalism aside, the first people to get to the next habitable world win it all. The first nation to claim a habitable world will rise to levels of power that will dwarf any earthly empire and will come to dominate the first interstellar human civilization. If our governments were smart about this, they would understand it and begin immediately.
Velanarris
5 / 5 (2) Aug 27, 2009
Ark, you and I typically agree, however, your views of Europe are inaccurate.

The relationship between European countries is more akin to the relationship between states in the US. The debates within the confines of the EU are much like the debates within our very own senate. I've lived in Europe and the US for almost equal parts of my life and the only way I can characterize the disparity between social and governmental views are seperate but equal.

I concede your point on India but I'd wait before stating they're going headlong into nuclear war.

As for China, there's an old saying. "Invaders are like the Yangtzee, strong, all consuming, and greatly potent, but China is the sea. The body which adapts and swallows all who rise to meet it."

Now that China has engaged in cultural trade with the rest of the world I'd see them as post colonial America would be viewed by Europe after the Civil war.
Velanarris
not rated yet Aug 28, 2009
vika_Tae,



I would concede to your point except you're not looking at the flow of network design.



End users rarely need large upload capability, but need large download capability.



From a hardware perspective, each CPU core on your PC can cache and reassemble frames at a rate of 800Mbps. Now in the corporate world this is greatly increased by using larger frame sizes so less processor is used to join information, or through TOE (TCP Offload Engines).



Now couple this with hard drive speeds, the speed of the PCI bus. ETC.



An engineer skilled in the art realizes that any network connection going to a home PC that is in excess of 10Gbps is useless after 10Gbps. Keep in mind this is split over send and receive, be default at a rate of 60% rx/40% tx. So giving a home user a network connection with a larger upload is utterly useless in most cases. Couple this with the fact that docsys modems are effectively locked at a low MTU (1500) and are incapable of Jumbo frame support and your point is moot.



You really need to understand the technology beyond NIC and Cable/DSL. This is fundamental network theory. And until Cisco or another competitor can figure out greater compression or better infrastructure routing at level 1 on the hardware ISO there's no point to increasing speed.

That is until PCI-X is commonplace on the home PC and utilizes the more expensive network card formats that enterprise design employs.

vika_Tae
not rated yet Aug 28, 2009
The problem is, more and more, we are not seeing 'end users'. This is where that paradigm breaks down. We are seeing more and more those people become contributors, uploading more and more onto the network.

I'm not a network engineer, this is true, but to me at least it is common sense that as the general demand to put more in, more of the time increases, it would make sense to increase the capacity of the plumbing to take more at once.
Velanarris
not rated yet Aug 28, 2009
I'm not a network engineer, this is true, but to me at least it is common sense that as the general demand to put more in, more of the time increases, it would make sense to increase the capacity of the plumbing to take more at once.
But you're not talking about something that's even close to congruent with plumbing.



There's no need to change the speeds while compression increases. If you can compress the data further with no information loss, as we do in the US with large block data encryption, there is no need for that large an upload pipe.



Look at it like a highway. There are several different types of onramps. Making the onramp bigger won't necessarily let more people get onto the highway at once.



Fast upload speeds are only necessary to send data. How much data do you think your average user sends over the period of a month? You'd be surprised how little it is. Even the most high intensity games don't send large amounts of data onto the internet. The main driver of upload speeds are raw data send and recieve, like peer to peer block level network sends.

And point of fact, anyone sitting at a computer regardless of their activity is an end user.
vika_Tae
not rated yet Aug 28, 2009
Ah bit the problem is, compression is not increasing, not in line with demand, at least not in the UK. US may be a different matter. Perhaps demand for the internet is lower there. We're also approaching the maximum limit of copper wire, again in the UK. Forcing more data through the same system as is used for voice calls, isn't going to work much longer, and the best speed possible is 24 mb/sec four miles from a phone bank exchange.

We;re starting to have to look into making the local loop fibre, just to keep up with demand.

Games don't use a lot data transfer wise, this is true. videoconferencing is a bit different, and with the big push in telehealth these days, that's where a great deal of it goes.
Velanarris
not rated yet Aug 28, 2009
Ah bit the problem is, compression is not increasing, not in line with demand, at least not in the UK. US may be a different matter.
It is a different matter. A completely different matter. You wouldn't think so due to the fact the internet is "global".

We're also approaching the maximum limit of copper wire, again in the UK.


You can't be. You're no where near the limit of copper. We're pushing 180GB (capital B, Bytes) over simple twisted pair copper in the lab over distances of 50 miles without a repeater in sight. The reason most people want to get away from copper is because glass is a helluva lot cheaper.

I work in Healthcare IT right now, and telehealth doesn't require greater than a 100Mbps connection for full real time functionality.

Take a look at Microsoft's Office Communicator Suite. The Bandwidth needs are nil while the videoconferencing, shared worksapce, and telehealth capabilities are GIANT.


The reality is you don't need a big pipe. You need a smart provisioning mechanism. Look at Citrix, you get entire applications via transmission of screen prints and mouse clicks.
Velanarris
not rated yet Aug 28, 2009
I just noticed you said this:
We;re starting to have to look into making the local loop fibre, just to keep up with demand.


You mean it isn't already? The US is coast to coast grade 4 fiber or better. The really good stuff is the new grade 7. FiOS requires grade 5 and performs at peak on grade 6.

How are you guys not already glass from end to end?
docknowledge
1 / 5 (1) Aug 28, 2009
Velanarris and others, ... ...

China is often touted as the next superpower, but let's look at the facts. China is a totalitarian state barely 70 years old. It consists of over a dozen culturally diverse regions with separate languages and an extensive history of warfare with each other. There is no comparison between the regions of china and the States of America, or even the member states of the EU. China is held together by military force and social control. All propaganda aside, it is going to remain so.


I wouldn't agree. China is a superpower that is following a long-standing and very deliberate plan to be a superpower. They have stolen, bought, or been given trillions of dollars of technology over the last 50 years. The "miracle" is that nobody tried to stop them, everybody thought they could use them.

I worked for a Chinese networking company. The Chinese were confident 20 year ago -- now they are swaggering and boastful. They have nothing to fear. For the Chinese, their family and traditional values have the highest importance. Those traditions go back 100s of years.

Is this a bad thing? Probably not. What was the alternative? For the US, Russia or India to get into WWIII with them? (For those of you who aren't counting, that's the last one.)
vika_Tae
not rated yet Aug 29, 2009
We're not glass from end to end, because of the sheer scale and cost of the operation. Much of the copper in place is over 100 years old, and it is going to take billions of pounds to put the infrastructure for fibre into place.

Plus of course, over 20% of the country is rural, and the digital divide is bad enough as it is. Government refuses to let it get any worse. So, solutions have to be found for those 20 miles from a PBX, as well.

I believe Virgin Media are currently doing a test of fibre to the home, up north. I don't have statistics on hand as to how well they are doing with roll-out however.
vika_Tae
not rated yet Aug 29, 2009
docknowledge, world war three will not be the last one. I forget who said it, but:

"I do not know what weapons world war three will be fought with, but world war four will be fought with sticks and stones."

So long as there are two humans left alive after ww3, there will be another one.
Velanarris
not rated yet Aug 29, 2009
We're not glass from end to end, because of the sheer scale and cost of the operation. Much of the copper in place is over 100 years old, and it is going to take billions of pounds to put the infrastructure for fibre into place.



Plus of course, over 20% of the country is rural, and the digital divide is bad enough as it is. Government refuses to let it get any worse. So, solutions have to be found for those 20 miles from a PBX, as well.



I believe Virgin Media are currently doing a test of fibre to the home, up north. I don't have statistics on hand as to how well they are doing with roll-out however.



Then how can you guys say you have faster Internet when it must go down a helluva lot.
vika_Tae
not rated yet Aug 29, 2009
It doesn't, actually. It stays up most of the time. Don't forget, the number of PBXes is enormous, and in villages and towns at least, few if any are more than 3 miles from one. Multiplexing is used to separate voice and data signals on the same line, but for most people, the net connection stays up 23.95 hours per day, 7 days a week.

We're still relying on ADSL a lot, because of the copper, but as demand continually increases, that horrible technology is slowly being replaced with SDSL.
Velanarris
not rated yet Aug 29, 2009
It doesn't, actually. It stays up most of the time. Don't forget, the number of PBXes is enormous, and in villages and towns at least, few if any are more than 3 miles from one. Multiplexing is used to separate voice and data signals on the same line, but for most people, the net connection stays up 23.95 hours per day, 7 days a week.



We're still relying on ADSL a lot, because of the copper, but as demand continually increases, that horrible technology is slowly being replaced with SDSL.

Ok so the difference between the US and the UK should be fairly clear now.

You guys are delivering backbone speeds to end users while in the US we have a far faster backbone that we divide out to users.

That makes sense when you take population size into account.
Fazer
not rated yet Aug 30, 2009
It seems to me this is all a moot point, since it seems likely that most users are moving to wireless solutions. 4G will be a true wireless IP network, (ideally) offering speeds of from 100Mbs to 1Gbps. Verizon, for example, is steadily installing the infrastructure, interconnected mostly with fiber, and expects to offer 4G LTE wirelss service throughout the US in 2013.

Desktop PC sales are way down, and although laptops are popular, I think even those will fall by the wayside as newer mobile solutions are developed with interfaces that can be used "on the run."
vika_Tae
not rated yet Aug 30, 2009
wireless only works until it hits the backbone. Then it has to travel at the max speed / capacity of the national links.

If the backbone's not being upgraded, all the hotspots in the world won't help.
John_balls
not rated yet Aug 30, 2009
Ah bit the problem is, compression is not increasing, not in line with demand, at least not in the UK. US may be a different matter.
It is a different matter. A completely different matter. You wouldn't think so due to the fact the internet is "global".







We're also approaching the maximum limit of copper wire, again in the UK.








You can't be. You're no where near the limit of copper. We're pushing 180GB (capital B, Bytes) over simple twisted pair copper in the lab over distances of 50 miles without a repeater in sight. The reason most people want to get away from copper is because glass is a helluva lot cheaper.







I work in Healthcare IT right now, and telehealth doesn't require greater than a 100Mbps connection for full real time functionality.







Take a look at Microsoft's Office Communicator Suite. The Bandwidth needs are nil while the videoconferencing, shared worksapce, and telehealth capabilities are GIANT.











The reality is you don't need a big pipe. You need a smart provisioning mechanism. Look at Citrix, you get entire applications via transmission of screen prints and mouse clicks.







Your just wrong about copper. Though their might be "lab" tests which are not real life. Their are not commerical applications in place to get those speeds off of the existing telco twisted wires. You might be confusing the twisting wiring that is used in Cat5 (which can use all 8 wires) and what the telcos have in the united states which is in the legacy outside plant. Big difference.

Yea, sounds like your confused about the type of wiring. Well , in any event verizon is the midst of spending billions of dollars rolling out fiber the home while completly eliminating the legacy pots lines which today have some limitations.
Velanarris
not rated yet Aug 31, 2009
Your just wrong about copper. Though their might be "lab" tests which are not real life. Their are not commerical applications in place to get those speeds off of the existing telco twisted wires. You might be confusing the twisting wiring that is used in Cat5 (which can use all 8 wires) and what the telcos have in the united states which is in the legacy outside plant. Big difference.

Yea, sounds like your confused about the type of wiring. Well , in any event verizon is the midst of spending billions of dollars rolling out fiber the home while completly eliminating the legacy pots lines which today have some limitations.

Stick to the global warming articles where people might listen to you.

Telco twisted lines have been a thing of the past for a long time. Category 5 is old, max speed on it was 10Gbe. Category 7 is pushing over 100 Gbe in standard usage. No one uses 4 line twist except maybe residential that hasn't been upgraded.

As for verizon, they're replacing their grade 4 fiber with grade 6 fiber. They've been in progress on this for a year now. The nation has been full fiber from pole to pole since 92.
TrinityComplex
not rated yet Aug 31, 2009
Well at least the conversation has gotten back to the technical aspect of the story. The 'your country's stupid' rhetoric was getting rather tired. I'm all for having pride in your country, but insulting others and their country, no matter where your from, is ugly and disgusting. Try to remember that if you are going to participate in international discussion you are being held as a representative of your nation. The American that says 'Europeans suck because of these reasons' paints a bad picture of Americans, and the same goes for other people from other countries, even if you know academically that not everyone from that country is like that, it will still color your view of the generalized population.

Yay for those that have faster internet connections than the US, you should be proud, but instead of saying 'Haha, American tech sucks' how about discussing the matter of why without slinging insults. And for Americans, stop just making excuses and discuss how it can be resolved.

There is only going to be more and more information transmitted over the internet, so thinking of ways to keep increasing the speed is never a waste.

I'd say the biggest problem with internet connectivity is construction, especially when the workers cut a line in the ground while digging and think of it as a way to make some extra cash by recycling. Sadly, this is a true story. Even more sadly, it's happened more than once in my city.
John_balls
not rated yet Aug 31, 2009
Your just wrong about copper. Though their might be "lab" tests which are not real life. Their are not commerical applications in place to get those speeds off of the existing telco twisted wires. You might be confusing the twisting wiring that is used in Cat5 (which can use all 8 wires) and what the telcos have in the united states which is in the legacy outside plant. Big difference.







Yea, sounds like your confused about the type of wiring. Well , in any event verizon is the midst of spending billions of dollars rolling out fiber the home while completly eliminating the legacy pots lines which today have some limitations.




Stick to the global warming articles where people might listen to you.







Telco twisted lines have been a thing of the past for a long time. Category 5 is old, max speed on it was 10Gbe. Category 7 is pushing over 100 Gbe in standard usage. No one uses 4 line twist except maybe residential that hasn't been upgraded.







As for verizon, they're replacing their grade 4 fiber with grade 6 fiber. They've been in progress on this for a year now. The nation has been full fiber from pole to pole since 92.




Holy cow, lololololol.. I spent 14 years working for a telco and you don't have the slightest clue to what you're talking about. Please go to your house and open up you telephone box.



Your wrong about the fiber. They don't have it pole to pole since 92. They just started running fiber to the premise 6 years ago. And yes, the majority of people have pots lines to this day.Where the hell did you dig this stuff up??

Guess what DSL works off genius?? pots lines, I would know.


92' lololololololol.
John_balls
not rated yet Aug 31, 2009
I just noticed you said this:



We;re starting to have to look into making the local loop fibre, just to keep up with demand.








You mean it isn't already? The US is coast to coast grade 4 fiber or better. The really good stuff is the new grade 7. FiOS requires grade 5 and performs at peak on grade 6.







How are you guys not already glass from end to end?


This is a lie or just utter ignorance on your part.



Their is only one company deploying fiber to the last mile which is verizon (FTTP) and their foot print at best is covering 22 million homes. Cable is going start deploying doscis 3.0 while still using coxial from the pole to the home.

Att&t is deploying a system called uverse which is using fiber to the node and the last mile they still will be using twisted pair.



I got to hand it to you velannaris, you actually try to sound like you know what you are talking about. You keep refering to the grade of fiber which I find interesting because not once do you mention multimode or single mode fiber cables.

The fiber optic wiring you are so confuse about is the backbone wiring which has been all fiber for quite some time.

Listen, if you don't understand a subject you don't have to post on it like you're an expert. My first reply toward you wasn't meant to make front of you but just to educate you on what you said.Though, it may have come across that way.
Velanarris
not rated yet Sep 01, 2009
John_balls,



No one cares about the last mile when talking about networks. Glass from end to end means from switch to switch, not from switch to machine.

Verizon has been fiber from pole to pole since 92. Copper is too expensive and cannot maintain a clean protocol signal on OC line. Last loop from node to home is copper as that's where the signal is metered down to support phone and ADSL.

Seeing as you're talking about fiber modalities you should already know that all fiber is single mode since you can't transmit multiple signals through a fiber medium simultaneously. Multimode is only in regards to the duplexers that allow multiple paths over a single strand. Keep in mind this is sequential, not simultaneous.

Thanks for trying to get involved though, seeing as you don't understand what terms like "end to end" refer to, you may want to just stay mute on the subject. Stringing cable for a telco means you have your low volt and pole license, that's about all it certifies you for.
vika_Tae
not rated yet Sep 01, 2009
Actually, the last mile is where the real bottlenecks are for the users. You may not care, but we do. That is known as the 'local loop' and is where most of our efforts to improve infrastructure are focussed.

Also, you can transmit multiplexing signals through fibre, you simply take advantage of different frequencies of the light spectrum. I'm trying to remember which US uni8versity managed to transmit a couple of petabytes sustained, using that method. Its not yet deployed commercially as far as I am aware.
vika_Tae
not rated yet Sep 01, 2009
Oh and John, much as cable sounds like a good thing, it isn't really. Don't forget, cable based internet is Ethernet based. You get a max total bandwidth for the whole coaxial line, that is then parceled out as more people join that spur.

Its a good solution for a small area, but long-term, I still believe any DSL connection is going to be better for the users in any sort of built-up area.
Velanarris
not rated yet Sep 01, 2009
Oh and John, much as cable sounds like a good thing, it isn't really. Don't forget, cable based internet is Ethernet based. You get a max total bandwidth for the whole coaxial line, that is then parceled out as more people join that spur.



Its a good solution for a small area, but long-term, I still believe any DSL connection is going to be better for the users in any sort of built-up area.

It depends on what your CO can handle switch wise. Verizon took a hit when they were offering DSL on shared DCLEC infrastructure. All in all I agree with you. Individual subscriber lines will probably be the way to go.
John_balls
not rated yet Sep 01, 2009
Oh and John, much as cable sounds like a good thing, it isn't really. Don't forget, cable based internet is Ethernet based. You get a max total bandwidth for the whole coaxial line, that is then parceled out as more people join that spur.







Its a good solution for a small area, but long-term, I still believe any DSL connection is going to be better for the users in any sort of built-up area.


It depends on what your CO can handle switch wise. Verizon took a hit when they were offering DSL on shared DCLEC infrastructure. All in all I agree with you. Individual subscriber lines will probably be the way to go.

This is wrong, dsl is not the way to go it has limitations with distances.
John_balls
not rated yet Sep 01, 2009
Oh and John, much as cable sounds like a good thing, it isn't really. Don't forget, cable based internet is Ethernet based. You get a max total bandwidth for the whole coaxial line, that is then parceled out as more people join that spur.



Its a good solution for a small area, but long-term, I still believe any DSL connection is going to be better for the users in any sort of built-up area.

Yes, their are limitations to cable but you need to research doscis 3.0 ,which, by the looks of it they have circumvented some of them. They are promising 100mb download speeds.
Velanarris
not rated yet Sep 01, 2009
This is wrong, dsl is not the way to go it has limitations with distances.

Not when you implement repeaters, and every WAN, including DOCSIS based systems use repeaters.
John_balls
not rated yet Sep 01, 2009
Vel,



Stop talking already, you're all over the place. The bottleneck is in the last mile to the home which has historically been the weakest part of the chain. It is not relevant what they have anywhere else if the last mile can only carry limited speeds. And if you were talking about switch to switch having fiber is one thing but when you are spouting pole to pole references it is entirley assinine.

First off when referencing to the telco you have to use the proper venacular. You are also confusing the internet with the responsibilities of the telco. Their is a handoff at the central office to the internet which is why you sound midly retarded when you talk about end to end fiber when this whole time we are talking about download speeds that you are getting from your telco or cable provider which has to do with the last mile.
John_balls
not rated yet Sep 01, 2009
If you must know what I do for a living, I'm a senior network engineer.
John_balls
not rated yet Sep 01, 2009
This is wrong, dsl is not the way to go it has limitations with distances.




Not when you implement repeaters, and every WAN, including DOCSIS based systems use repeaters.


If repeater were the end all be all then verizon would not be stringing fiber connections. Coxial and telco twisterd pair are different mediums.

Let me also add cable users are sharing the same medium which makes it easier to implement repeaters while their is a twisted pair wire that is connected that runs from your house directly to the central office.
vika_Tae
not rated yet Sep 01, 2009
This is wrong, dsl is not the way to go it has limitations with distances.


How is that a concern? You need to use DSL six miles (by wiring, not necessarily as the crow flies distance). If the house is more than 6 miles from the PBX, a wired solution is impractical - unless you lay fibre, again.
John_balls
not rated yet Sep 01, 2009
This is wrong, dsl is not the way to go it has limitations with distances.



How is that a concern? You need to use DSL six miles (by wiring, not necessarily as the crow flies distance). If the house is more than 6 miles from the PBX, a wired solution is impractical - unless you lay fibre, again.



PBX?? They are connected to dslams. I'm not even sure what you are saying?
vika_Tae
not rated yet Sep 01, 2009
Personally I don't like coaxial solutions John, not because of the technology itself, but the way it is handled. Most frequently, cable internet is rolled out as a minimal cost solution. One spur serving several tower blocks.

If everyone in those blocks tries to be online at once (not just talking PC, referring to AR, telehealth, teleconferencing, telemonitoring, et al) then they are each going to get speeds not much different from dial-up.

My bone of contention with cable services is that they should be rolled out with a theoretical max in mind that is at least 20% above any probable peak usage. In practice, its rolled out at less than half or less of the practical peak usage. As more connect to it, everyone suffers.
John_balls
not rated yet Sep 01, 2009
Personally I don't like coaxial solutions John, not because of the technology itself, but the way it is handled. Most frequently, cable internet is rolled out as a minimal cost solution. One spur serving several tower blocks.



If everyone in those blocks tries to be online at once (not just talking PC, referring to AR, telehealth, teleconferencing, telemonitoring, et al) then they are each going to get speeds not much different from dial-up.



My bone of contention with cable services is that they should be rolled out with a theoretical max in mind that is at least 20% above any probable peak usage. In practice, its rolled out at less than half or less of the practical peak usage. As more connect to it, everyone suffers.

Yes, I agree. I have fios at home and my speeds do not change. I'm wondering if doscis 3.0 has worked out some if these issues because if they have they are going to give the telcos a run for their money.
vika_Tae
not rated yet Sep 01, 2009
PBX = Private Branch Exchange. It was originally the name for a private telephone exchange, but has come to mean all of BT's (British Telecoms) exchanges as well. Basically the handover onto the local loop.

I'm not sure if they're called the same thing in the US or not. I'm not a network engineer, though I am in a related field, so I know the general principals if not the correct terminology for a given country.
John_balls
not rated yet Sep 01, 2009
PBX = Private Branch Exchange. It was originally the name for a private telephone exchange, but has come to mean all of BT's (British Telecoms) exchanges as well. Basically the handover onto the local loop.







I'm not sure if they're called the same thing in the US or not. I'm not a network engineer, though I am in a related field, so I know the general principals if not the correct terminology for a given country.


Yes, your phone calls use pbx switches but DSl line are terminated in whats called DSLAMs.
vika_Tae
not rated yet Sep 01, 2009
Ahh. Thank you. Please substitute DSLAM for PBX in the above post, in order to read it.
John_balls
not rated yet Sep 01, 2009
Ahh. Thank you. Please substitute DSLAM for PBX in the above post, in order to read it.

Any time.
Velanarris
not rated yet Sep 01, 2009
If you must know what I do for a living, I'm a senior network engineer.

Great, then we have something in common, I used to be a senior network engineer until I decided to move into architecture and platform development.

If repeater were the end all be all then verizon would not be stringing fiber connections. Coxial and telco twisterd pair are different mediums.
Yes John, we're aware that coaxial and telco are different.

Let me also add cable users are sharing the same medium which makes it easier to implement repeaters while their is a twisted pair wire that is connected that runs from your house directly to the central office.
That's inaccurate. You don't have a direct connection to your telephone CO anymore. You're part of a bonded set, the distance issues, even with repeaters, are typically caused by interference along channels and cross talk interference at the switch level. This is all before the loop terminates at the DSLAM.
John_balls
not rated yet Sep 01, 2009
Sorry, but I have worked in a central office and I was a splicer prior to becoming an engineer and yes the twisted pair gets terminated in a cable vault which is located in the basement of almost every central office. You will find hundreds of thousands of pairs in these vaults that then get consolidated.



I have also used repeaters for t1 lines where you literally had to go into the manhole about the distance where the t1 signal started to weaken and attach the "twisted pair pots line" to a repeater.
Velanarris
not rated yet Sep 01, 2009
Sorry, but I have worked in a central office and I was a splicer prior to becoming an engineer and yes the twisted pair gets terminated in a cable vault which is located in the basement of almost every central office. You will find hundreds of thousands of pairs in these vaults that then get consolidated.







I have also used repeaters for t1 lines where you literally had to go into the manhole about the distance where the t1 signal started to weaken and attach the "twisted pair pots line" to a repeater.

Not that I doubt what you're saying over what Verizon is telling us but I'm sure you can see why I take their word over yours.

Then again, that very well could be my fault for listening to Verizon.
vika_Tae
not rated yet Sep 01, 2009
Sorry, but I have worked in a central office and I was a splicer prior to becoming an engineer and yes the twisted pair gets terminated in a cable vault which is located in the basement of almost every central office. You will find hundreds of thousands of pairs in these vaults that then get consolidated.


Hopefully they're assembled in a slightly more organized fashion than the typical mid-sized organization rackmount.

If not, thanks John, you have just given me nightmares.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.