UBS back on track

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by EMB, Aug 26, 2004.

  1. EMB

    EMB Guest

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?storyID=3587109

    Well, sort of anyway. How the hell Telecom can even think that a high
    speed (1 or 2 Gbit) asymmetrical service with only 128Kb upstream is
    acceptable to the market is beyond me. I guess it all comes back to
    wanting to keep the "full rate" ripoff plans generating money.


    --
    EMB
    change two to number to reply
     
    EMB, Aug 26, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. EMB wrote:
    > http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?storyID=3587109
    > Well, sort of anyway. How the hell Telecom can even think that a high
    > speed (1 or 2 Mbit*) asymmetrical service with only 128Kb upstream is
    > acceptable to the market is beyond me.


    I'd be more than happy with it.
    I don't upload **** all, so 128k should be more than enough to send ack
    packets for my downloads.


    *Corrected Gbit to Mbit.

    --
    Dave Hall
    http://www.dave.net.nz
     
    Dave - Dave.net.nz, Aug 26, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. EMB

    EMB Guest

    Dave - Dave.net.nz wrote:

    > EMB wrote:
    >
    >> http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?storyID=3587109
    >> Well, sort of anyway. How the hell Telecom can even think that a high
    >> speed (1 or 2 Mbit*) asymmetrical service with only 128Kb upstream is
    >> acceptable to the market is beyond me.

    >
    >
    > I'd be more than happy with it.
    > I don't upload **** all, so 128k should be more than enough to send ack
    > packets for my downloads.


    Makes running a webserver a bit hard though.

    > *Corrected Gbit to Mbit.


    Thanks Dave - brain is a bit slow after doing a night shift.

    --
    EMB
    change two to number to reply
     
    EMB, Aug 26, 2004
    #3
  4. EMB

    Tim Guest

    March? May? They don't say which year! So are they waiting for the
    technology to become obsolete just as they did for ISDN before sensible
    pricing came along...

    Woosh looks better everyday.

    - Tim




    "EMB" <> wrote in message
    news:cgj5rk$ap2$...
    > http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?storyID=3587109
    >
    > Well, sort of anyway. How the hell Telecom can even think that a high
    > speed (1 or 2 Gbit) asymmetrical service with only 128Kb upstream is
    > acceptable to the market is beyond me. I guess it all comes back to
    > wanting to keep the "full rate" ripoff plans generating money.
    >
    >
    > --
    > EMB
    > change two to number to reply
     
    Tim, Aug 26, 2004
    #4
  5. EMB

    Chris Guest

    EMB <> wrote in news:cgj5rk$ap2$:

    > http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?storyID=3587109
    >
    > Well, sort of anyway. How the hell Telecom can even think that a high
    > speed (1 or 2 Gbit) asymmetrical service with only 128Kb upstream is
    > acceptable to the market is beyond me. I guess it all comes back to
    > wanting to keep the "full rate" ripoff plans generating money.
    >
    >


    Thats kind of like what my friend in the USA has from what I can tell -
    upload tested at 167kbps 1.25 mbps down.

    I can only guess it's to make it harder for people to operate servers or do
    VoIP etc etc
     
    Chris, Aug 26, 2004
    #5
  6. EMB

    TomV Guest

    On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 23:51:52 GMT, Chris <> wrote:

    >>

    >
    >Thats kind of like what my friend in the USA has from what I can tell -
    >upload tested at 167kbps 1.25 mbps down.
    >
    >I can only guess it's to make it harder for people to operate servers or do
    >VoIP etc etc


    It also limits peering on some of the more recent implimentations like
    overnet. with a 128 upload, you'd be limited to download bandwidth of
    around 512.

    ....tom
     
    TomV, Aug 26, 2004
    #6
  7. EMB wrote:
    >>> http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?storyID=3587109
    >>> Well, sort of anyway. How the hell Telecom can even think that a
    >>> high speed (1 or 2 Mbit*) asymmetrical service with only 128Kb
    >>> upstream is acceptable to the market is beyond me.


    >> I'd be more than happy with it.
    >> I don't upload **** all, so 128k should be more than enough to send
    >> ack packets for my downloads.


    > Makes running a webserver a bit hard though.


    I believe that that would be their point. :)

    --
    Dave Hall
    http://www.dave.net.nz
     
    Dave - Dave.net.nz, Aug 26, 2004
    #7
  8. EMB

    JedMeister Guest

    5 years ago many were saying 56kbps dial up is enough too - so why did we
    ever bother going to higher speed connections?

    I think 'enough' would be around 500Megabytes per second download, allowing
    a Dual layer DVD movie to be downloaded in around 20 seconds. Way beyond the
    attention span of many people but I could cope.

    Perhaps 100Megabyte per second upload would be OK for me to send large
    files.


    "Dave - Dave.net.nz" <dave@no_spam_here_dave.net.nz> wrote in message
    news:...
    > EMB wrote:
    > > http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?storyID=3587109
    > > Well, sort of anyway. How the hell Telecom can even think that a high
    > > speed (1 or 2 Mbit*) asymmetrical service with only 128Kb upstream is
    > > acceptable to the market is beyond me.

    >
    > I'd be more than happy with it.
    > I don't upload **** all, so 128k should be more than enough to send ack
    > packets for my downloads.
    >
    >
    > *Corrected Gbit to Mbit.
    >
    > --
    > Dave Hall
    > http://www.dave.net.nz
     
    JedMeister, Aug 26, 2004
    #8
  9. EMB

    theseus Guest

    "EMB" <> wrote in message
    news:cgj5rk$ap2$...
    > http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?storyID=3587109
    >
    > Well, sort of anyway. How the hell Telecom can even think that a high
    > speed (1 or 2 Gbit) asymmetrical service with only 128Kb upstream is
    > acceptable to the market is beyond me. I guess it all comes back to
    > wanting to keep the "full rate" ripoff plans generating money.
    >


    Thats the way all Asymetrical DSL is isn't it ?
    Its built to be a domestic service
     
    theseus, Aug 26, 2004
    #9
  10. EMB

    JedMeister Guest

    You will find DSL is used for business too.

    "theseus" <> wrote in message
    news:OnaXc.359$...
    >
    > "EMB" <> wrote in message
    > news:cgj5rk$ap2$...
    > > http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?storyID=3587109
    > >
    > > Well, sort of anyway. How the hell Telecom can even think that a high
    > > speed (1 or 2 Gbit) asymmetrical service with only 128Kb upstream is
    > > acceptable to the market is beyond me. I guess it all comes back to
    > > wanting to keep the "full rate" ripoff plans generating money.
    > >

    >
    > Thats the way all Asymetrical DSL is isn't it ?
    > Its built to be a domestic service
    >
    >
     
    JedMeister, Aug 26, 2004
    #10
  11. EMB

    theseus Guest

    "JedMeister" <> wrote in message
    news:TGaXc.17906$...
    > You will find DSL is used for business too.


    But not for commercial internet services
    Its designed to be ASSYMETRICAL
     
    theseus, Aug 26, 2004
    #11
  12. EMB

    JedMeister Guest

    true

    "theseus" <> wrote in message
    news:fYaXc.362$...
    >
    > "JedMeister" <> wrote in message
    > news:TGaXc.17906$...
    > > You will find DSL is used for business too.

    >
    > But not for commercial internet services
    > Its designed to be ASSYMETRICAL
    >
    >
     
    JedMeister, Aug 26, 2004
    #12
  13. EMB

    EMB Guest

    theseus wrote:

    > "JedMeister" <> wrote in message
    > news:TGaXc.17906$...
    >
    >>You will find DSL is used for business too.

    >
    >
    > But not for commercial internet services
    > Its designed to be ASSYMETRICAL


    Overseas it's normally got about 25% upload rate. And ADSl and SDSL are
    still the same technology.


    --
    EMB
    change two to number to reply
     
    EMB, Aug 26, 2004
    #13
  14. EMB

    AD. Guest

    On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 12:26:08 +1200, Dave - Dave.net.nz wrote:

    > EMB wrote:
    >>>> http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?storyID=3587109 Well, sort
    >>>> of anyway. How the hell Telecom can even think that a high speed (1
    >>>> or 2 Mbit*) asymmetrical service with only 128Kb upstream is
    >>>> acceptable to the market is beyond me.

    >
    >>> I'd be more than happy with it.
    >>> I don't upload **** all, so 128k should be more than enough to send ack
    >>> packets for my downloads.

    >
    >> Makes running a webserver a bit hard though.

    >
    > I believe that that would be their point. :)


    I wonder why they are so against it. Wouldn't it allow them to charge for
    more traffic that is using up the relatively unused capacity going back
    the other way?

    Or am I missing something about how their network it structured? (probably).

    Cheers
    Anton
     
    AD., Aug 26, 2004
    #14
  15. EMB

    theseus Guest

    "EMB" <> wrote in message
    news:cgjjh8$qto$...
    > theseus wrote:
    >
    >> "JedMeister" <> wrote in message
    >> news:TGaXc.17906$...
    >>
    >>>You will find DSL is used for business too.

    >>
    >>
    >> But not for commercial internet services
    >> Its designed to be ASSYMETRICAL

    >
    > Overseas it's normally got about 25% upload rate. And ADSl and SDSL are
    > still the same technology.


    256k upstream is about as good as it gets for most places, some countries
    offer 512/512 SDSL
    But there are physical limits to what services can be guaranteed
    Line length and quality are the parameters that suck in NZ
     
    theseus, Aug 26, 2004
    #15
  16. AD. wrote:
    >>>Makes running a webserver a bit hard though.

    >>I believe that that would be their point. :)


    > I wonder why they are so against it. Wouldn't it allow them to charge for
    > more traffic that is using up the relatively unused capacity going back
    > the other way?


    > Or am I missing something about how their network it structured? (probably).


    Having reletivly small uploads means that for decent web-serving, you'll
    have to co-lo or something, costing you more money.

    Also, once that nice quick circuit is into the building that you're
    co-lo'ing at, chances are that it's upstream provider will be Telecom.

    --
    Dave Hall
    http://www.dave.net.nz
     
    Dave - Dave.net.nz, Aug 26, 2004
    #16
  17. EMB

    Peter Ingham Guest

    On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 23:51:52 GMT, Chris <> wrote:

    >EMB <> wrote in news:cgj5rk$ap2$:
    >
    >> http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?storyID=3587109
    >>
    >> Well, sort of anyway. How the hell Telecom can even think that a high
    >> speed (1 or 2 Gbit) asymmetrical service with only 128Kb upstream is
    >> acceptable to the market is beyond me. I guess it all comes back to
    >> wanting to keep the "full rate" ripoff plans generating money.
    >>
    >>

    >
    >Thats kind of like what my friend in the USA has from what I can tell -
    >upload tested at 167kbps 1.25 mbps down.
    >
    >I can only guess it's to make it harder for people to operate servers or do
    >VoIP etc etc


    I'm fairly sure the conspiracy theory is wrong on this one.

    There are technical restrictions implicit in the design of ADSL (as
    there are for every product).

    AFAIR the absolute, best case, limits for ADSL (anywhere in the known
    universe) are approx 8000K bps down and 800K bps up. These drop with
    line quality and distance from the exchange.

    For example, my actual ADSL data rates are often in the region of 380k
    down 3800k up. Therefore no one could guarantee 512k up to me even if
    they wanted to.

    Telecom seem have made the decision that unless they can achieve rates
    of 2Mbps down and 128Kbps up they will not offer you their ADSL
    products, presumably expecting that they can achieve these rates for
    the vast majority of their customers. This then implies that they
    will not offer products in the marketplace where either of these
    speeds is exceeded. They may choose to change at some point to say
    "if you are lucky, some of our higher speed products are available for
    purchase, but we cannot guarantee the service", but I can't see this
    as being commercially acceptable.

    The only options for me to achieve significantly higher upload speeds
    are: use different hardware (Fibre/Cable/RF), different techniques
    (SDSL?, ADSL2?), and/or relocate either the exchange or my home.
    Simply wanting more speed won't work.

    --
    Please remove '_SpamTrap' when replying. You know why :-(

    Peter Ingham
    Lower Hutt
    New Zealand


    -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
    http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
    -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
     
    Peter Ingham, Aug 29, 2004
    #17
  18. EMB

    Chris Guest

    Peter Ingham wrote:
    > On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 23:51:52 GMT, Chris <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>EMB <> wrote in news:cgj5rk$ap2$:
    >>
    >>
    >>>http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?storyID=3587109
    >>>
    >>>Well, sort of anyway. How the hell Telecom can even think that a high
    >>>speed (1 or 2 Gbit) asymmetrical service with only 128Kb upstream is
    >>>acceptable to the market is beyond me. I guess it all comes back to
    >>>wanting to keep the "full rate" ripoff plans generating money.
    >>>
    >>>

    >>
    >>Thats kind of like what my friend in the USA has from what I can tell -
    >>upload tested at 167kbps 1.25 mbps down.
    >>
    >>I can only guess it's to make it harder for people to operate servers or do
    >>VoIP etc etc

    >
    >
    > I'm fairly sure the conspiracy theory is wrong on this one.
    >
    > There are technical restrictions implicit in the design of ADSL (as
    > there are for every product).
    >
    > AFAIR the absolute, best case, limits for ADSL (anywhere in the known
    > universe) are approx 8000K bps down and 800K bps up. These drop with
    > line quality and distance from the exchange.
    >
    > For example, my actual ADSL data rates are often in the region of 380k
    > down 3800k up. Therefore no one could guarantee 512k up to me even if
    > they wanted to.
    >
    > Telecom seem have made the decision that unless they can achieve rates
    > of 2Mbps down and 128Kbps up they will not offer you their ADSL


    They do offer 256 kbps both ways. My current connection shows 832Kbps
    up and 3456 Kbps down, I'm about 4 -5 Km from the exchange. I'm not
    pushing any conspiracy theories. I think it is more a case of Telecom
    trying to manage the network between exchanges so that the data (by
    which I mean "internet") doesn't overload the network - there must
    surely be limit as to how much can be pushed through up or down with out
    investing in large amounts of capital, remembering that most (maybe
    almost all) the network would be "pre internet"



    --
    OK, whats below this text is not added by me, it's added by
    www.newsfeed.com becase thats where my ISP gets their news feed from,
    well, actually, it's most likely a case of www.orcon.net.nz (my ISP)
    farming out the NNTP service to News Feed.


    -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
    http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
    -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
     
    Chris, Aug 29, 2004
    #18
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Knowing About

    Skype services back on track - Jordan

    Knowing About, Oct 13, 2006, in forum: VOIP
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    613
    Knowing About
    Oct 13, 2006
  2. AT
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    400
    Dave - Dave.net.nz
    Dec 15, 2004
  3. ~misfit~
    Replies:
    20
    Views:
    648
    Big Tony
    Aug 30, 2005
  4. D@Z

    insert track reference in mp3 track

    D@Z, May 2, 2008, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    861
    Shel-hed
    May 2, 2008
  5. Barkley Hughes
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    448
    Keyboard
    Nov 12, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page