OK, meaningless in a general context - are<div>we getting closer?</div><div><br></div><div>Re "that's just nuts," why not let</div><div>each person speak for themself?</div><div>Or are we in to casting aspersions now?</div>
<div>I'd say there's a certain arrogance in</div><div>assuming one is the last word on an</div><div>issue - my take is that this forum is</div><div>for discussions, not for those with too</div><div>much testosterone to declare themselves</div>
<div>the ultimate authority on an issue.</div><div>Issues get bounced around, and most</div><div>often eventually the level of detail the</div><div>person asking a question requires is</div><div>forthcoming. A back and forth process.</div>
<div>Someone named Greg got so agitated</div><div>a while back that he claimed we are</div><div>all idiots for not accepting his point of</div><div>view on many things, and stomped off</div><div>in a huff. Is that the kind of group some </div>
<div>people want? </div><div><br></div><div>Anyway, a useful notion of bandwidth </div><div>for me is how quickly a file arrives, </div><div>irrespective of the details. I don't care</div><div>whether it's in 100 Mbps bursts, followed</div>
<div>by 0 Mbps periods, or a uniform bit rate.</div><div>Comcast can offer more predictable</div><div>rates, and does in some regions with it's</div><div>business services. i.e., one gets </div><div>preferential treatment. But for now we</div>
<div>MI folks can't get the services AFAIK.</div><div><br></div><div>Re T3 line, I see things like $3K to $4K</div><div>a month. Like T1 lines, they were vastly</div><div>more than that not so long ago. Demand</div>
<div>is likely going away, as fewer can justify</div><div>the cost. A 50 Mbps service from Comcast</div><div>costs $100 per month in the Houston area.</div><div><br></div><div>Just a few more things to fret about I guess.</div>
<div><br></div><div> -- Bob</div><div><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 9:18 AM, Michael Mol <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:mikemol@gmail.com">mikemol@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
Then call it "meaningless in a general context"<br>
<br>
Yes, the test has meaning for particular contexts. When looking<br>
specifically at one's internet connection, it only means "I know my<br>
internet connection *can* go at *least* this fast, for this kind of<br>
transferred." It doesn't speak to a broader-term connection maximum,<br>
or a broader-term connection minimum.<br>
<br>
There are several parts of the problem:<br>
1) People use tests like speedtest as a reflection of their internet<br>
connection, to the ignorance of other potential network effects. If I<br>
had run that speed test over 802.11b, for example, my throughput would<br>
have been far worse. If I had run that speed test on a day when<br>
comcast's edge routers were having difficulties (say there were a<br>
failing NIC somewhere, or backhoe fade mid-transfer), my throughput<br>
would have been far worse.<br>
2) People expect an internet connection like cable, ADSL or VDSL to<br>
have precise, measurable behavior. It doesn't, it won't and it can't.<br>
In cable's case, you're sharing your connection medium (a coax line)<br>
with up to a couple hundred other users, and their behavior on that<br>
line will affect your own performance. In ADSL and VDSL's cases, there<br>
are physical limitations driven by distance and wiring quality which<br>
mean that I wasn't going to get 6Mb/s (though I always got a *solid*<br>
5Mb/s day-to-day)<br>
<br>
I'd say, "remove the rate caps, charge by the gigabyte", but that'd be<br>
a disaster, like setting up a bar tab for someone who doesn't know<br>
when to stop; at the end of the day, they'll be looking at a $200 bill<br>
and not remember what they spent it on.<br>
<br>
If people want predictable, guaranteed behavior, there are services<br>
for that; DS0, DS1, DS3, OC3, etc. They simply cost much more money,<br>
and people aren't willing to pay for it. They're barely willing to pay<br>
for residential knock-offs, and then they'll complain royally when<br>
they're not getting the service for something that costs far more.<br>
<br>
Put another way, I'm paying $80/mo for just cable internet. By my<br>
speed tests, I'm getting anywhere from 42% to 82% of the throughput of<br>
a T3. At something like 10% of the cost*. And people like Bob think I<br>
should be raising hell because I'm not getting 44% instead of 42%, or<br>
not getting 82% all the time. That's just nuts.<br>
<br>
* Ok, I don't know what a T3 costs. Last time I looked hard at those<br>
numbers, a *T1* cost a couple grand a month, and I know it's a lot<br>
cheaper, now. Still, a T3 carries 28 times the bandwidth of a T1.<br>
<div class="im"><br>
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 8:14 AM, Bill Creswell<br>
<<a href="mailto:bcreswel@morrison-ind.com">bcreswel@morrison-ind.com</a>> wrote:<br>
</div><div><div></div><div class="h5">>> But "meaningless" still strikes me as too<br>
>> strong a way to describe attempts to see<br>
>> one's connection speed.<br>
>><br>
><br>
> I might also add that I believe Comcast's powerburst, is really just a cap<br>
> that gets put on after a few MBs, perhaps even designed to look good in<br>
> these tests?<br>
><br>
> <a href="http://customer.comcast.com/Pages/FAQViewer.aspx?seoid=How-long-does-the-PowerBoost-burst-last&AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=1" target="_blank">http://customer.comcast.com/Pages/FAQViewer.aspx?seoid=How-long-does-the-PowerBoost-burst-last&AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=1</a><br>
><br>
><br>
> --<br>
> This message has been scanned for viruses and<br>
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is<br>
> believed to be clean.<br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> grlug mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:grlug@grlug.org">grlug@grlug.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://shinobu.grlug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/grlug" target="_blank">http://shinobu.grlug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/grlug</a><br>
><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</div></div><font color="#888888">--<br>
:wq<br>
</font><div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>
--<br>
This message has been scanned for viruses and<br>
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is<br>
believed to be clean.<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
grlug mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:grlug@grlug.org">grlug@grlug.org</a><br>
<a href="http://shinobu.grlug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/grlug" target="_blank">http://shinobu.grlug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/grlug</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>
<br />--
<br />This message has been scanned for viruses and
<br />dangerous content by
<a href="http://www.mailscanner.info/"><b>MailScanner</b></a>, and is
<br />believed to be clean.