Slashdot Mirror
Broadband's Unintended Consequences
Makarand writes "BBC News is
reporting on the result of a long term study
conducted to find how ordinary people and small businesses in and around London and Leeds used broadband. They
found
that broadband was actually slowing down user interaction with
the Net as they are no longer afraid of spending
too much time online anymore. People did not really care about the speed at which they could download from the Net. Broadband's
selling points- like speed and the capacity to be always-on, were something
that the average person did not care about."
Maybe they forgot to plug the modem in... My mom did when she first got broadband and said it was ungodly slow...
Banaaaana!
Unintended consequences have broadband!
In other news.. People who are constantly fed say they aren't hungry.
Liberty.
I like it.
I have a $5.95/month 56k unlimited dialup plan, and other than WAITING for huge pictures in my email ("here's ANOTHER 1000KB JPG of my dog d00d!"), and the inability to download ISOs, it's fine.
Yes, I do "scramble" a little more while I'm online, and I've discovered compression for my SSH sessions, but the Net is still quite usable. I get on, I surf for what I want, I get off. I spend less time plugged in, and more time interacting with real people.
I'm debating going back to broadband when my finances improve, but I'm unsure if I will.
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
People did not really care about the speed at which they could download from the Net.
Take their broadband away and put them back on a 56k dialup connection again for a few days. I'll bet they'll care. It's not that people don't take about download speeds, its just that broadband users take it for granted after awhile.
Personally, I don't think I really consider this to be measurable anymore. If I'm at a computer, 9 times out of 10, I'm online even if I'm just recompiling a kernel or typing up a paper. Maybe I'm not actively browsing or chatting or anything, but I consider myself online.
-N
I've nothing to say here...
...all the promised music and video-on-demand that was supposed to be the killer app for broadband access never materialized thanks to plenty of legal manuevering by the RIAA and MPAA.
But people like the lower latency and the fact their web pages pop up quicker, so it doesn't matter that there's no real need for the average person to have a giant pipe.
NO CARRIER
Considering that telephone calls in the UK are toll calls, this is a no brainer. Back when Compuserve was The Thing and you paid by the hour you got in, did your business and got the hell out fast. With always on access who cares if it takes three minutes or thirty? You don't HAVE to run like hell anymore as the monitary cost is no longer a fctor in how long you stay on line.
Boobies never hurt anyone. - Sherry Glaser.
Ive always maintained that users dont need the bandwidth of Broadband, like they dont need the latest greatest processor etc. Only benefit to 512K + is downloading large files, which isn't something i, along with the majority of users, spend a lot of time doing.
I'd be happy with 128K, always on, but with the ability to have 'bursts' of say 2MB when i do want to download somthing large.
I dunno about most of the world populous, but I had dialup (all the way back to the GEnie/CompuServe/Prodigy era), then cable for about 6 months as soon as it was available, then I moved to an area with no broadband available. Trust me, it was horrible. No one could call me because I took 3 hours downloading OS updates, I couldn't do much of what I used to like to do - idle on IRC, listen to streamed audio (legal matters aside), download new Linux distros, et cetera. After 2 years of this madness cable finally became available and life has been good again. It's just not good enough for a geek to have dial-up anymore - even with a dedicated phone line.
This story says that people get and use broadband service because they don't use a phone line or get charged per-minute charges.
I'm sure that's fine and dandy in the UK, but here I don't think anyone pays per-minute charges for dial-up and the cost of a second phone line + AOL or MSN about equals the cost of broadband. Hell, broadband is even a little cheaper than that combination where I live.
They say that the big selling point of broadband is that it's always on, but say absolutely nothing to elaborate. Gee, thanks.
They say that most people aren't downloading, so increased download speeds aren't important. Sure, few people download as a majority of their online time, but it's certainly an important factor when people do download.
They end with "broadband doesn't do what it says on the tin." How the hell they got to that conclusion isn't even evident.
I guess the criteria for getting a story on Slashdot is just that it has a fancy headline and is about tech? Even if some idiot n00b wrote it? Even if it's totally wrong? Hell, it doesn't even mention Linux or Open Source. Eesh.
I personally feel that if I had to go to my desktop (muchless turn it on, muchles dial up!) I wouldn't do half the stuff I want to do. I think it really comes down to the interfaces we currently have (big boxes in a side room). It's the physical integration that will increase broadband usage. Once that happens, broadband becomes a necessity.
This is my digital signature. 10011011001
I see they're running Windows.
The Mothership
Hmmmm, so the researchers thought that the fact that broadband had faster download speeds would mean that people would spend less time online? I'm not surprised that the reverse is true and people spend more time online when using broadband than when they had dialup.
With broadband using the 'net isn't as frustrating with all the waiting around so I don't stop out of irritation. I don't have to get off the 'net to keep the phone line free. I also don't have to deal with the annoying modem screech and inevitable busy signals before connecting to the 'net.
Why wouldn't I spend more time online?
In Europe, as well as Japan, phone calls, even for local numbers, are charged by the minute, in constrast to the practice in the US where you get unlimited local calling. Therefore, traditionally, without broadband, dialup Internet users here have been very concientious about the time they spend online. Many studies have shown that this has caused the growth of ecommerce and (more of interest to me) online gaming to be slower in those parts of the world. With broadband, and unlimited usage, it was a quantum leap for many Internet users here in Japan and I'm sure such was the case in England as well, to be able to have UNLIMITED usage. I would say that, compared to the US where broadband was just an evolution in speed, it was, from a marketing standpoint much more of a compelling sell in these countries, because of the UNLIMITED aspect of it, causing people to use/overuse it even more than in the US.
-- Samir Gupta, Ph. D. Head, New Technology Research Group, Nintendo Co. Ltd., Kyoto, Japan.
I think the article is right on the money, for now. I also think the people visiting slashdot may not be the same demographic group compared to the one mentioned in the article. I guess we can be considered 'early adapters'. Where Joe Average still feels his main reason for having DSL is not having to worry about the minutes he has to pay for (and I remember that sentiment, it's been a few years though), we have already gone beyond that point and discovered that broadband gives us more possibilities. The fact that we may be a bit more computer literate won't hurt. 'Us geeks' have the toys and the knowlegde to fill the broadband, but just wait a year, or possibly even less and the learning curves will be even less steep, the software will be more user friendly and the 5Mbit digital camera will be cheaper than today. I say that broadbands selling point makes sense. It made sense for the early adapter who helped develop the market, and in the near future it will make sense to the average user who could care less right now.
I remember 5 years ago all the hype and promise of video on demand, video conferencing and the ilk.
It never happened, not just because of the RIAA but because ISP's were choked by the baby bells and couldn't sell broadband cheaply and competitively. Then there was the browser war that created about 10 different sets of standards ensuring no company could create a multimedia app without pissing everyone off for not supporting their OS/Format.
These issues still exist but hopefully MPEG4 will cure some of it. I don't know what to do on the ISP side, they are just totally screwed as long as they have to deal with the baby bells. Worldcom couldn't make it, why should any smaller ISP?
I personally don't care if it's always on. I just want it on when I want it, if that means flipping an on switch then so be it. I want it as fast as possible at the lowest price possible. I also do not want restrictions on it (i.e. no servers). As long as ISP's play that game I don't see broadband working out.
I have yet to see video conferencing work out even. I know one company that uses it and they had to get a secured dedicated T1 specifically for it. Video conferencing has so much potential it's crazy, but no one is taking advantage of it. Just watch the extras DVD in the Episode II DVD and see what Lucas's sound team did with the dedicated ISDN lines to Australia. They were doing the voice overs for the Camino characters in realtime across the world.
Anyway, some how or another all this stuff will need to shake out. The corporate arrogance will need to end it's attempts to tell customers what they want and actually listen to what they want and sell a product that meets the demand. I just don't see it happeneing any time soon.
When DSL service first became available in my area 3 years ago, I signed up immediately. I owned a small computer store at the time, and I figured that the time saved downloading drivers (as we had to do frequently) would more than pay for the DSL service.
I was right - it radically changed our outlook on drivers, which were, up to that point, carefully hoarded on floppies or CDs.
But what surprised me was that suddenly, streaming video and audio where completely options! Imagine, tens of millions of computers' content available for cheap to free, and available instantly!
Mp3.com is what then made me get DSL service at home. Music from anywhere and everywhere - like having the world's largest collection of indep. band CDs...
Oh, and remember Napster?
It was just a few months later that I signed up at home, and I will not ever turn back. (I sold said computer store. Now I telecommute as my line of work - I love it!)
I guess it's sorta like the Tivo - it's hardly exciting until you've lived with it for a while. Then, it becomes something you'll not want to live without!
I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
That was one of the dumbest things I've ever read. This is the junk they pass for "research" these days?
..." and the fact that they never bother to mention how they came to that conclusion.
Others have mentioned the "...actually slowing down interaction with the net
"People are not doing things that require speed, so that is something of a red herring as a selling point," - What, no one must be surfing then. I know not everyone is downloading warez, but lord knows that BB has been a boom to the pr0n industry.
simply because most users do not leave their computers on. - OK, actually a good point, I'll give them this one.
But until technophobia is overcome, broadband is unlikely to be viewed in this way, said Mr Crabtree. - they never mention how broadband and technophobia are related, at least in terms of broadband vs dialup. Hell, hooking up my dsl/cable modem was simpler than getting my dialup working right.
"Broadband doesn't do what it says on the tin," - What, it doesn't provide faster downloads and instant on service? That's what their advertising isn't it, and isn't that what they (generally) deliver?
I can't believe that news about Alan Kay doesn't make it (or did it and I missed it?) but yet crap like this shows up?!?
"Broadband doesn't do what it says on the tin"
--James Crabtree, i-Society
Well, there's your problem, James. You've attached your computer to a soup can. You want to be hooked up to some sort of a modem. RTFM.
This is my post. There are many others like it. If you don't like what you read here, go try one of the others.
Since I supervise the broadband services department of a major cable company in the USA I'll share my opinnion on the matter. Sure unlimited time, and (usually unmetered) broadband may make people a bit slower when browsing the web. However, the difference is that the websites can offer more content, and a richer experience than what would be a considered a resonable download time with a 56k modem. I also double as an ASP/SQL contractor and I have at times forgotten about the bandwidth limitations of our customers (internal and external) who may not be using a broadband pipe. I would think that as more people get broadband html in general will die, we will see more and more FLASH oriented sites (or whatever the latest and greatest technology is at the time.) Not HTML + Flash, but pure Flash and images will move from being jpgs and gifs to PNGs. Yea you can do all this now, but you would be leaving at least 50% in the cold.
*pats his computer on the top of it's case* Don't listen to them Aerie, they're just stupid mean humans. :)
This Space Intentionally Left Blank
I never feel rushed using my 56k dial-up. It's always on mostly, persist enabled. When it goes down its down for 60 secs and then its back up. I've downloaded several ISOs using dialup over the years. no big deal. I can see where time is an issue for those folks that live in countries with whack rate plans just for local calls but in the states its no biggee to be online all day even when I'm not there.
-
with broadband, I stay online longer because the experience is less painful. have you seen how huge the average page is at a site like tomshardware? or cnn? or anywhere else? toms front page is 120k, with 250 links and 250 images. (most of which are the same clear gif, but still.)
Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
--Dave
Broadband is to wife, as dialup is to girlfriend.
Think about it.
The most important thing any republican needs to know.
What a load of hogwash! Everything on the internet requires broadband. Try loading the BBC's home page with dialup. Try looking at the weather channel and seeing a weather map. How about doing some research with google and clicking on 5 different links before you find the information you were after.
I teach my kids that if the result they want doesn't flash up on the screen instantly than the computer or the network or something is too slow!
Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Let's examine the shill angle. Their mission statement says in part, "we aim to make our workplaces more effective, more successful and more fulfilling." Sound familiar, like "Everything you do will be easier and more fun."? Hmmmm, who sponsors these effeciency experts who can make my job more fulfilling? Their Executive Summary (which they claim requires Adobe, but works just fine with xpdf), does not say. It has more highly abstracted stuff that ends up calling for "smarter" regulation. They congratulate themselves in their Anual Report for "-have ensured that the Society 's name has appeared in print or been heard on television or radio almost every day..." and BINGO, "...The launch of our three-to-five-year iSociety project, with the support of Microsoft Limited..." I knew it! Strange Darwinian language about competition and the need for efficiency, while claiming to represent and care for the squezed, it just smelled like M$.
Still, it's hard to tell. The member list, contained in their 50 page anual report (50% white space, 10% photos, 25% adjective, 5% adverb, 5% hyperbole, 5% news), did not look suspicious. Members of the House of Lords, Bank of Scotland, and various Civil Servants might be forgiven for being taken in by the beast from Redmond. They seem to have some reasonable ideas about employee dignity etc, but all abstractions sound as good. Surely, the "members only web pages," are a strange way to share information. Freedom is required for dignity, folks. This paper and the iSociety makes you look like indusry shills. If I can't read your papers online, I won't be reading them and you look shallow.
Wink, Mr. Wates your secretary must be using M$ word to write "My thanks and appreciation go to every member of staff and my colleagues on the Boar and on the management team ...". Yes, that like the pig or Dutch in South Africa. A wild ride, I'm sure. Auto correct or Imperial Dream? I don't spell check for Slashdot and no one is paying me for this.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
In the UK, users of dialup services are charged on a per minute basis, even for local calls (such as those to an ISP). Clearly, it's flat rate pricing that was the big selling point. Consequently, the study's conclusions are of little relevance to the US market.
-
Broadband subscribers use the Internet for significantly more minutes per day than they did when they were dial-up users, and
-
High-speed is why they sign up, but always-on is the reason that they rearrange their furniture in order to get the computer out of the back room and into regular "family" space.
Once they get to the point where the PC is in the kitchen or family room, and it's always on, and the Internet connection is just there, the Internet becomes the prefered source of information for almost everything: news, weather, movie listings, encyclopedia articles, etc.Broadband is to wife, as dialup is to girlfriend.
I dunno, is your wife always-on? I know my wife gives me more busy signals now than back when I had girlfriend.
Hello all. Sorry some people on the thread seem to think the bbc story, and by association our research, is dumb. It isn't meant that way. A few points of defence. Firstly, we didn't ask the beeb to run the story, neither did they talk to us, neither did they actually ask me about those quotes. Second, the point in the BBC story which is most innacurate is the paragraph which reads "They found that people did not really care about the speed at which ADSL and cable allowed them to download websites and files. Instead broadband was actually slowing down surfer's interaction with the net." This isn't what we said. We said that speed, as a selling point which made people appreciate and want broadband a lot, was contingent on activities involving heavy data use, or things requiring fast response (like ping rates for gaming). If all you do is send e-mail and surf a little - which if you look at the data this is what most home internet users do, give or take - then a massively fast connections is nicer than dial-up (of course it is), but doesn't actually make for a revolution in internet use. Counterintuitively, a lot of broadband users told us that what they really liked avout it was not having to worry about time, rather than speed. We are talknig about mothers with kids or small business owners here, rather than the type of people who read slashdot. Hence, broadband is not always about speed, but can be about taking it easy. Hence those people who sell broadband as about speed might find that regular users - as opposed to slashdot people - don't buy it. Just in case anyone didn't notice, we also said that broadband wasn't about being always on too.... read the presentation here http://www.theisociety.net/archives/000219.html#00 0219
the research itself will come out in the spring. If anyone wants to come in for a coffee and give us some pointers, drop me a line jcrabtree {at} theworkfoundation dot com