Another nail in BluRay's coffin?
- Thread starter r.jones1116
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 60
- Views 8K
It will be interesting to see if the cable companies and telco's are willing to upgrade their infrastructures *again* to allow all its customers access. Since the costs of building and maintaining the necessary infrastructure would be passed on to customers, it will be interesting to see if the subscriber fees would be in-line with current high-speed rates, or they would charge a premium. Given that half the US population still seems content with dial-up, demand for this much bandwidth by the average person is still a long ways off, and demand will be the only thing that drives cost per consumer down.
That article was a good read, but it’ll be many years before that technology spreads past universities. However I do believe that 50 – 100mb speed is right around the corner, which is more then enough to download HD movies in minutes. I’ve heard and don’t buy the speed cost argument. Prices always level out then drop off. DSL is now routinely under $19.99 and we all know what it use to be. Even dialup was initially through the roof.
EXACTLY!!!
And IF (and that is a BIG IF) the studios will begin to REALLY clamp down to suppress end user's rights. Just because the GRID is out there, even if telcos and cable cos upgrade; doesn't meant all the content will be or how it will be, or at what hyper-price scheme.
I second that.
Its too much work for cable companies, too many upgrades to do in order for them to achieve that goal, and I am sure they will require a lot of bandwidth.
Imagine how much money people will have to pay monthly for their internet bill. Wasn't Comcast asking 120$ a month for 50mbps?
Download speed is not the factor here, the upload speed is....from the servers.
I could have 100mbps download speed, but if the upload server is slow, it will not make a difference if I have 1 mbps speed or 100 mbps.
This won't happen for another 5-10 years.
The download content is overrated, people pay/download the movies for 24 hours and then you have to buy again to view it.
People that think download content will succeed, they are years ahead of themselves, it will be a long long time.
Regarding the article, whoever wrote it should get slapped.
Its all about upload servers, not your download speed.
10000mbps connection downloading from a server that can only do 768kbps...big deal...it will still be hours.
You obviously missed this part of the article.....
The Internet could soon be made obsolete. The scientists who pioneered it have now built a lightning-fast replacement capable of downloading entire feature films within seconds.
At speeds about 10,000 times faster than a typical broadband connection, “the grid” will be able to send the entire Rolling Stones back catalogue from Britain to Japan in less than two seconds
How long have you been working at Cern?
I guess your parents are proud of your Phd. in physics?
It's not that we are content with dial-up, it's that companies won't make the investment to get broadband to us in the rural areas. My telephone co-op has no intention of it, neither does the electric co-op. A private wi-fi provider will get me the service, but I have to put a guyed 70 foot tower in my yard in order to get the signal from his nearest antenna. DSL or cable modem is completely out of the question. So, that only leaves satellite internet. And frankly, I'm not sure that will end up being any faster than dial-up according to some of the stuff I read here. It's really a shame. I have a PS3 for bluray and I have a Wii. Both have added content and stuff for broadband connection, but I can't get that stuff all because no one is interested in tapping a money making market for rural broadband.
I do know exactly what you are talking about. My sister lives in rural Washington and pays something like $60/mo. for 1.5 Mbs with Wildblue sat internet service. I did hear of another sat internet service launching in the next year or so. Hopefully the competition will start to drive prices down.
As far as DSL being below $19.99, that's for 1.5 Mbs usually and only if you also subscribe to the phone company's service. According to my cable bill, I'm paying $12/mo. for 7 Mbs, but that's only because I'm also paying $150 for their phone and TV services, most of which I don't even use. Of course, paying for only the services I do use separately costs about the same.
"Although the grid itself is unlikely to be directly available to domestic internet users, many telecoms providers and businesses are already introducing its pioneering technologies. "
If memory serves wasn't there a plan for Internet 2 a few years back. It was only for higher education and research labs.
If memory serves wasn't there a plan for Internet 2 a few years back. It was only for higher education and research labs.
Keep dreaming downloaders, once ISPs move to consumption based pricing we will see how many of you will be downloading huge movie files. Blu-Ray is the format for foreseeable future IMO
Well naturally since most DSL is delivered over a live phone line. My point still stands, ultimately no matter what the speed is prices will level out then comeback to the masses.
I’m assuming your paying as much as $150 because you added every channel they offer. I know my cable co(NJ) offers $99 triple play(phone, internet, cable)15mb speed. With the speed Boost package it goes up to 30mb $9.95 additional. Face it HD downloading is right around the corner and at a decent price.
Optimum - Optimum Online - Speed. Security. Support.
For $19.95, if you also have AT&T POTS service, you can get DSL at 768Kbps down/384Kbps up, not very practical for movie download service.
Clearly you are not seeing the point.
My download speed could be lighting fast, but if the upload speed is crap from the server, no matter how stupid lighting fast your download speed is, it will still require the same time to download it compared to a 1mbps connection. If the server can only do 768kbps, thats all you can do. Also, no ISP company is willing to make that large of an investment to upgrade all of their infrastructure for their servers, let alone the content uploaders servers.
Good luck with that, it will take millions of dollars to convince companies go that route. Also it doesn't mean people that work at CERN are super smart about networking/internet world.
Most intelligent people would assume that if a company is in the HD download business they would have a fast server. Icepup lets just try to imagine they would have fast servers. Let me know if you need help with that concept?
I thought you wanted to name it the BD cheer zone.
No one is ready to make that big of a commitment, they will put whatever is out in the market now. Imagine all the price inflations because of your so called *grid*.
What are you talking about, cable cos are already starting to invest in the new 100mb Docsis 3.0 cable modems. Verizon FIOS is placing fiber in the home at prices competitive with cable cos. If you stop cheering maybe you could see the light.
Don’t confuse the Grid with new developments that are soon to be within our grasp. The Grid was a interesting read but all that’s not needed to wipe out BD. Just maintain the natural evolutionary rate of development and the speed will be here in time to keep BD as a niche format. No extraordinary expenditures needed.
Again the price issue comes down, no one is willing to pay over 100$ monthly for just internet.
DOCSIS 3.0 is many years away, it will cost cable companies stupid amount of money to replace every single leased box.
There is no light for whatever plan you have, too expensive for any average customers.
Obviously different cable cos./markets will have different pricing structures. Without bundling you pay $42/mo for 7 Mbs. with Cox San Diego. (My actual speed only averages about 2.5 Mbs.) I recently received a survey from them in which they asked if I'd be willing to pay $65 for 25 Mbs.
Not sure why I'd even need it at this point.
Obviously different cable cos./markets will have different pricing structures. Without bundling you pay $42/mo for 7 Mbs. with Cox San Diego. (My actual speed only averages about 2.5 Mbs.) I recently received a survey from them in which they asked if I'd be willing to pay $65 for 25 Mbs.
Not sure why I'd even need it at this point.
Here is what I got from my cable company:
[FONT="]Please take note that Charter can only guarantee 70% of the speed.
No point in charging people for the other 30% if they only guarantee 70% of it.
[/FONT]
Similar threads
Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)
Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 1)
Latest posts
-
-
TCan We Break Away From Our Smarthphones Or Laptops In The Future
- Latest: TWiT Tech Podcast Network
-
-
T
