4 ms·
This is a company that has consistently insisted that the demand just isn't there for even 50 Mbps speeds Sadly, I have to agree with Time Warner. While gearh
by byoung2 14y ago
This is a company that has consistently insisted that the demand just isn't there for even 50 Mbps speeds
Sadly, I have to agree with Time Warner. While gearheads like myself (a sometime work-from-home software engineer) have a constant craving for the fastest internet speed, the general population cares more about keeping costs low. So for a typical family with a laptop or two, and maybe an XBox and a tablet, 6Mbps might suffice. In our house, we have 4 Android tablets, 3 Android phones, 1 iPad, 2 laptops, 2 desktops, 1 media player, 1 Skype video phone, and a security camera DVR that streams over IP all using the same internet connection.
I live in an area where Time Warner offers 50Mbps internet, so I took advantage of it. I previously had 24/3Mpbs AT&T U-Verse, which was the fastest internet available in my old neighborhood. But even among techies, I think we're atypical...a simple poll of 6 of my coworkers revealed that most had 6Mbps or slower connections, and these are all software engineers. One was considering getting 18Mpbs U-Verse, but he hasn't yet.
So it looks like the demand just isn't there yet.
- mindcrime 14y agoSadly, I have to agree with Time Warner. Same here, at least for home use. I mean, I like the idea of ludicrous speed downloads, but in terms of my day-to-day life, an extra 50 or 100 or 1000 MB of bandwidth isn't going to make much difference to me. I rarely, if ever, find myself constrained by my home broadband connection (which is, indeed, TWC). I got a postcard in the mail from them just last night, announcing that they've increased my bandwidth by 50% with no rate increase, and instructing me to reboot my cable modem to see the new speed. I didn't even bother to do the reboot, since it just isn't terribly useful to me. I'll bother to do it when I happen to be in the room where the modem is.
- jordan0day 14y agoYou're quite possibly right -- the extra bandwidth might go unnoticed and unused. I'd be willing to bet the "killer app(s)" just haven't made themselves apparent yet. This refrain reminds of feature-phone users in 2005, before the iPhone, Android, or the mobile web in it's current form. Many people saw the appeal of smartphones, but professed they just didn't think they'd use them all that much.
- mindcrime 14y agoI'd be willing to bet the "killer app(s)" just haven't made themselves apparent yet. I'd agree with that. I'm not saying there won't ever be a need for the extra bandwidth, just agreeing that there probably isn't widespread demand for it right now. Many people saw the appeal of smartphones, but professed they just didn't think they'd use them all that much. Heh, now there's a mindset I can't understand. I was champing at the bit for what we'd now call a smartphone, in like, 2000. I desperately wanted a phone sized device with a real browser and ubiquitous wireless broadband. It sucks that it took so long for it to happen. Actually, to that point, there is where I'd appreciate more bandwidth... my 4G (or so-called 4G) wireless data connection. :-(
- revelation 14y agoThere is a limit above which downstream becomes somewhat useless, and 50Mbps or even 25Mbps is probably that point. But at least offer decent upstream to match it. The simple fact is that you often get barely enough upstream to transfer the TCP ACKs needed to utilize your downstream. It's the television model translated to the Internet, where consumers are just that: people consuming data and content. Not creating them.
- ktsmith 14y ago25Mbit can get chewed through if you have multiple HD streams going at the same time. It depends on your usage habits and number of people in your house from my experience. If I had to guess 50Mbit is probably the point even heavy usage households won't go over right now.
- byoung2 14y agoYou're right about upload speeds...I got the 50 mainly to get 5 up.