AT&T And Verizon Say 10Mbps Is Too Fast For 'Broadband'

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
How many of you could actually get by with a 10Mbps plan? Personally, I'm at 150Mbps and I can't wait until Cox rolls out its gigabit service later this year in my area.

"Given the pace at which the industry is investing in advanced capabilities, there is no present need to redefine 'advanced' capabilities," AT&T wrote in a filing made public Friday after the FCC’s comment deadline (see FCC proceeding 14-126). "Consumer behavior strongly reinforces the conclusion that a 10Mbps service exceeds what many Americans need today to enable basic, high-quality transmissions," AT&T wrote later in its filing. Verizon made similar arguments.
Click to expand...
 
I wonder if "consumer behavior" encompasses things like not buying faster internet because it costs half a car payment?
 
"We've almost eradicated unlimited *wireless* data - let's commence Operation Skullfuck Their Broadband Speeds."
 
I have around 100mbp down but the upload still sucks around 5mbps. Upload speed needs to increase before anything else. Upload is important for sharing and loading content onto the web. Most companies are still stuck in the 90s and early 2000s with 64kbps-8mbps upload speeds. Stone age
 
Steve said:
How many of you could actually get by with a 10Mbps plan? Personally, I'm at 150Mbps and I can't wait until Cox rolls out its gigabit service later this year in my area.
Click to expand...

I think a 10/1 connection with a moderate cap say 80GB's is good for old folks and computer illiterate parents.

Anyone that actually knows how to use a computer tho and in the 15-50 age group it won't be enough.

If were talking a relatively young family two parents and two kids and netflix hells no.
 
1.5Mbps and I'm just fine, thanks.

I had some fox kits playing in the by my dock last night.

I wouldn't trade that for any internet speed. Ever.
 
I wonder if Comcast is pushing for 4Mbps because then they can call that cheapy 5Mbps plan they give as "broadband", it's fairly obvious why AT&T is pushing... since 10Mbps would effectively remove the "broadband" label from all it's DSL that isn't UVerse.

That said, they're absolutely full of shit, I have 6Mbps, youtube "auto-resolution" goes to 720p max, sometimes I can watch 1080p if I give it 10 seconds of buffer, but if I'm downloading anything, or my wife is also looking at video clips, then forget about it.

It's funny that these huge mega corps are lobbying so hard though, it's just a fucking name, they can still offer their 3Mbps DSL service, the fact they're scared so much that they can't advertise it as "broadband" is laughable
 
{raising hand]
Not accidentally, 10Mbps is fast enough for everything except large file transfers and HD video.

Just to clarify your comment, Verizon et al are saying 7Mbps is "enough" for HD video, and should be the breakpoint which defines broadband service.
 
We should just apply Moore's Law to the minimum broadband definition. Keep things moving upward...
 
~6Mbps is about where traditional DSL maxes out in many places.

I'm not saying I think ~6Mbps is fast, but it certainly is a lot faster than 56k for people who don't have other options.

I'd just hate to see things change to where people currently stuck with only ~6Mbps DSL end up with even LESS options due to it not being considered broadband anymore resulting in government subsidies ending and their DSL providers deciding it's not worth it anymore to even provide service.
 
You guys are forgetting that this is [H] and by no means a good representation of the larger population.

Want to know how people out there use Internet? Go to Zillow and browse the pictures of a bunch of homes. Depending on the area you will see tube TVs in more than half of the homes for sale. Tube TVs!!! Those consumers don't care about 720p or 1080p.

You also have to consider that you get diminishing returns streaming high bitrate full HD. A 14 Mbps HD stream looks to many consumers just like a 7 Mbps HD stream. Considering compression, VBR, and magic, you don't need the actual theoretical bandwidth requirement to actually stream in HD.

The issue is too that many households have multiple "data intensive" users. Two adults and two teenagers will chew through 60-80 Mbps ez.

sfsuphysics said:
That said, they're absolutely full of shit, I have 6Mbps, youtube "auto-resolution" goes to 720p max, sometimes I can watch 1080p if I give it 10 seconds of buffer, but if I'm downloading anything, or my wife is also looking at video clips, then forget about it.
Click to expand...

This could also be a peering issue between your ISP and the Internet/Youtube, or a caching/proxy issue on your ISPs side.

Once way to figure out what's what is to download a youtube 1080p video and then divide the file size by the runtime to figure out at what download rate you would get the maximum data for that particular video.
 
My provider has a budget option of 12/1 for $25 (+fees, taxes, etc). I would jump on it in a heartbeat if it had more upstream. 12/3 for $25, yes please.
 
TwiceOver said:
My provider has a budget option of 12/1 for $25 (+fees, taxes, etc). I would jump on it in a heartbeat if it had more upstream. 12/3 for $25, yes please.
Click to expand...

Meant to mention that I pay $49 for 60/8. Would be willing to take the hit on my down as long as it wasn't so much of a hit to my up.
 
I think broadband should be decided algorithmically.

The most popular tv format in america is 1920x1080.
The average household size in america is 2.55.

Broadband should be the bandwidth to accomplish 2.55 streams at 1080p

When the household size triples, and the screen goes to 4k and stereoscopic, that would require a 24x increase for the definition for broadband for example. (Ignoring compression progression)
 
AT&T and Verizon should not be in the telecom industry for the sheer fact they are both some of the greediest worthless piece of shit anti-consumer companies in the United States.
 
The biggest problem with these metrics is that they assume only one user will ever be using the internet. If 4mbps is sufficient for someone to stream HD video, then that is ALL that household will be doing at that moment in time. Kids need to research a paper while you watch Die Hard? Good luck with that. Even the slightest attempt at sharing bandwidth in the 4mbps tier will result in crippling performance for everyone involved. 50mbps+ is needed for multi-resident households. I can watch Netflix while the wife is watching PlayOn, and if I had kids they could play xbox while the latest game downloads in the background.

Luckily it looks like plenty of laymen politicians even realize that 4mbps is laughable. Probably because they represent the families I speak of, and have learned that having a single service internet bottleneck really annoys them and does not make sense in the 21st century.
 
They are right, but only because every service we use on the internet doesn't expand their capabilities due to our ISPs being so stinky. If we get a much faster average you can bet that we would be getting a much better experience on the net due to expanded data capabilities.
 
I wish that I get 10 megabit at my house. Stuck with AT&T 6 megabit with upload speeds that are slower than dialup.
 
its like the auto industry complaining about raising the avg mpg. they dont want to spend the money on research and development, and making a product that meets the standards.
 
At my $100M site we get around 44 kbps. Director of Engineering told us, "yeah that's my fault. Sorry about that. HAHAHA." Server is offsite too.... Why the director of engineering had anything to do with this is beyond me.

10 MBps sounds great right now!!!!!
 
The CEOs of both AT&T and Verizon should be fired for making asinine comment like this.

The US got to be where we're through innovation and motivation to better our lives. When did we have disgraceful CEOs telling us to settle. This is literally as anti-American as it gets.

I'm just beyond angry. I don't care about the broadband speed. I care about CEOs that are important figures of our society telling us to hold back. Absolutely pathetic.
 
i have a 10mb service right now and for me i am quite happy. but that is the lowest speed available with my provider!

version is fuct
 
It would be AT&T and Verizon spewing this garbage. Those two can go fuck themselves. I hope the FCC pushes ahead with plans to get broadband to 10 or more.
 
Steve said:
How many of you could actually get by with a 10Mbps plan? Personally, I'm at 150Mbps and I can't wait until Cox rolls out its gigabit service later this year in my area.
Click to expand...

Cox is going to roll out gigabit service?!
Dam, I hope it comes to my area soon. I need to check it out.

Get by with 10? HA! I have 5 people in the family who all use it at the same time. No way in hell!
 
I've got Time Warner Cable and I pay for 15/1, but I'm lucky to get 5/1.
Broadband should be 100/10, and anything less should cap at $15 a month.
Give these guys a kick in the ass and make them give us what we've already paid to get.
 
I would take that upgrade in a heartbeat. Though for what I want.. 20-30 should be good enough.
 
Kueller said:
We should just apply Moore's Law to the minimum broadband definition. Keep things moving upward...
Click to expand...

I think american isps are applying part of moore's law. Every year what you get is smaller.
 
For LAN, 10Mbps was fast enough. Once 100Mbps came out, that was stupid fast in comparison. Then, 1Gb came out, and I'm still in awe of the speeds. When 10-40Gb comes out for home, I'll be blown away.

But, is 10Mbps fast enough anymore? Not really. For basic internet, 10Mb is about just right. Web, email, basic streaming. Other than streaming, that's what we used to say dialup was good for. When we had 1.5Mbps, dialup was good enough for basic web and email. Now, 1.5Mb is laughed at. 10Mb is about minimum. I'm at 25 now, and I would love to go faster if the price were the same.

10Mbps was fine. Not anymore.
 
Steve said:
How many of you could actually get by with a 10Mbps plan? Personally, I'm at 150Mbps and I can't wait until Cox rolls out its gigabit service later this year in my area.
Click to expand...

It depends on your use. I think Netflix's HD is 3Mb/s, so you could argue it's broadband, but I think it really starts at 20-30. Increasing bandwidth really doesn't matter much if you're capped. You just get to the cap faster.

I don't know if Cox has caps or not. With that said, I don't need 100 Mbps either. But depending on the price, I might get it. Anything that pushes prices down is good. So if 1Gb pushes 30Mb prices down, then good. We all win.
 
nilepez said:
It depends on your use. I think Netflix's HD is 3Mb/s, so you could argue it's broadband, but I think it really starts at 20-30. Increasing bandwidth really doesn't matter much if you're capped. You just get to the cap faster.

I don't know if Cox has caps or not. With that said, I don't need 100 Mbps either. But depending on the price, I might get it. Anything that pushes prices down is good. So if 1Gb pushes 30Mb prices down, then good. We all win.
Click to expand...

I have no caps, but am only on their 100Mb plan, so I could upgrade to the 150. Its not expensive which is nice. I did get placed on a list to get notified when gigabit is in my area and available. Do I need it? Who cares!!!
 
In my research I found that 99% of Americans feel ATT, Verizon, COX, Time Warner and Comcast charge WAY too much for internet services.
 
Twisted Kidney said:
1.5Mbps and I'm just fine, thanks.

I had some fox kits playing in the by my dock last night.

I wouldn't trade that for any internet speed. Ever.
Click to expand...

You shouldn't have to choose.
The only reason you can't have BOTH is because your ISP doesn't want to put any money into upgrades (unless its an upgrade in their salaries)
 
Sp33dFr33k said:
In my research I found that 99% of Americans feel ATT, Verizon, COX, Time Warner and Comcast charge WAY too much for internet services.
Click to expand...

The remaining 1% own significant amounts of stock in one or more of those companies.
 
I'd rather they focus on lowering premiums then increasing speed. I feel that the $60/mo I pay for 20/2 is just too much. The cost of internet should be held what it is now, but thanks to no-compete agreements they can charge whatever they want.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top