posted
Actually, this isn't a rhetorical question. I'm moving, and naturally the first thing to arrange is a suitable broad band connection. The city to which I'm moving has a city wide LAN on which various ISPs compete for customers. I've kind of randomly decided on one provider whose policy match what I'm looking for, but now I have to choose what kind of speed I'm prepared to pay for. Hence the question, how much bandwidth do you really need.
The ISP I'm considering offers five alternatives: 1/1 Mbit/s, 10/10 Mbit/s, 30/30 Mbit/s, 100/10 Mbit/s and 100/100 Mbit/s (first number down speed, second up speed). The cheapest offer is at about § 18/month and the most expensive at § 66/month; the others lie in between. I could afford the most expensive one if I wanted to (although what I'd do with 100 Mbit/s up speed I have no idea), but I've no intention of paying for more than I'd need.
So my question is, would I notice any difference between say 10 and 30 Mbit/s for normal Internet activities (surfing, the occasional (legal... uhm, yes legal!) movie download)? Are there any new exciting services on the way that I'd want to use and which would require higher bandwidth (video conferences, streaming high-definition TV, etc)? Wouldn't bottle necks elsewhere on the net reduce my speed anyway on most occasions?
Input is appreciated.
Posts: 896 | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
I'd say 10mbps is quite fast. I've used 10mbps for *cough*legal*cough* movie downloads, and it was quite quick still. of course, the faster the better.
I'd also recommend using an online backup service since you do have pretty good speeds.
[shameless plug follows] try Titanize.com or just wait for McAfee Online backup service [we make both]
Posts: 142 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
There are lots of video stores nearby in an area of a city with multiple ISPs offering multiple bandwidths. You can easily rent more movies than you can watch for the $48 difference between the highest-priced and lowest-priced ISPservices.
If you still prefer to download at home, there is a quite NOTICEABLE difference between 1Mbit/s and 100Mbit/s inregard to the time that your computer takes to download a movie.
Nothing you've said indicates that you'll need any highspeed upload capability, so bundle your choice of download speed with the smallest upload speed that you can purchase. Don't know how it is now, but they used to charge considerably more for an increase in upload speed than for the same increase in download speed.
posted
If they actually deliver what they say, then I beleive 10 Mbit/s should suit you for most practical purposes; but you should be aware that these speeds tend to be measured during power cuts in the middle of the night.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Abhi, it's a rather small city in Sweden. I doubt you'd want to move there . And yes, I'm leaning toward thinking that 10 mbps is plenty, but I read an article the other day about how more bandwidth hogging services are constantly evolving, so perhaps I should err on the side of abundance. I could always upgrade later, though.
Posts: 896 | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sorry, Tristan, I forgot that you lived in a civilized part of the world rather than the US. Still should have noticed from the honest-with-the-customer price structure you gave.
Posts: 8501 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Tom, things like this is indeed one of the advantages with our semi-socialist/semi-capitalist system. The municipality pays for the infrastructure with the tax payers' money and private actors can then compete to provide the cheapest service. Of course, if you want to count the complete cost you'd need to factor in the proportion of taxes going to this project; but nevertheless, I think that in this case we come out ahead since we're avoiding unnecessary redundant investment costs, potential monopoly situations and are stream-lining the competitive market.
Hmm, after further research it appears as if the actual LAN is owned by a private company with the business idea of providing a neutral platform for other actors to offer their services. Who would have thunk. Although I can't find any information on who is actually owning the company. Possibly it's the municipality after all.
posted
Meanwhile in the WildWildWest, ISP robber barons have successfully bribed legislators to prevent free/lowcost WiFi-to-Internet from becoming the norm. So lots of people are still stuck with slow slow slow telephone connections, even more are stuck with barely tolerable ~0.3Mbit/s DSL, and (where available) 3Mbit/s costs about the same as your 100Mbit/s service.
Posts: 8501 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Aspectre, ISPs are growling over here too about the increasing coverage of free/lowcost WiFi. I don't think we have any laws against it yet, but possibly if it were to be provided on tax payers' money it would run afoul of EU competition laws. I think however that we are eventually moving towards total WiFi coverage where customers sign up with one provider and nevertheless are allowed to connect anywhere. If however this development is to be brought about without significant government interference, I suspect it will be a bumpy road until we get there.
Posts: 896 | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
That would make sense if most other BT users also had 100 Mbit connections. Or possibly if you liked to open several dozen torrents at the same time (I've actually done this...but that doesn't mean that anyone else should).
Can't you just go with the basic package now and upgrade later if you feel pinched?
Posts: 763 | Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
These days, if I don't get my movie downloaded overnight, I'm angry. My webrowser should be able to open multiple sites instantly and if I have to wait even 2 seconds, I lose patience and leave the computer.
We pay for 100 Mbps and it's still not fast enough.
Posts: 1314 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
. And yes, I'm leaning toward thinking that 10 mbps is plenty, but I read an article the other day about how more bandwidth hogging services are constantly evolving, so perhaps I should err on the side of abundance. I could always upgrade later, though.
