Slashdot Mirror
New Data Transmission Record — 14 Tbps
deejne writes to alert us to a new bandwidth record: Nippon Telegraph and Telephone has announced data transmission at a rate of 14 terabits per second over a single optical fiber. The paper claims the previous record was "about 10 Tbps." In the new experiment, NTT sent data over 160 kilometers (nearly 100 miles) of optical fiber, in 140 channels of 111 Gbps each.
And still nothing worth watching.
vista.windowsupdate.com?
I thought it meant 14 ThePirateBays per second...
liqbase
That's still nothing compared to a semi loaded with DVDs traveling at 70mph.
http://alternatives.rzero.com/
and yet I'm still downloading at a measly 300 kbs.
I'd like to know what the cost of the required equipment is. We know that hardware has a premium for the newest and fastest and it would be interesting to see what the premium is in this case. Maybe it would be cheaper to run 14 1 Tbps links instead of a single 14 Tbps link. Sure, if I already have the fiber in place, then using it for higher speed would be the way to go. However, if I am in a position where I am about to lay fiber anyway, I don't really care about those costs since I will be paying them anyway.
Reading code is like reading the dictionary - you have to read half of it before you can go back and understand it.
While impressive, the feat was accomplished over a single optical fiber using proprietary amplifiers not in production. It certainly is innovative, but it is not an indication of speeds you will see in consumer level services. I see these high-bandwidth paradigms being very useful in the medical industry in the near future - especially for things like transferring high quality MRI images from hospital to hospital with very little delay, or in transferring patient ICU data to a centralized monitoring center - which is currently being done, but super-high bandwidth models open up avenues of information that are not currently available - anything from real-time HI-DEF video from the room, to real-time control of in-room instrumentation.
Good thing I didn't buy that eSATA card I was looking at today. 3Gb/second? What a piece of crap!
This is the internet, not the interstate.
God spoke to me.
Quote:
Well, I remember back on my 14.4 modem... those text pages loaded like the wind. I was on top of the world... Then those damned pictures started cropping up on websites. Pictures on the internet? Ha! Then came the 56.6k modem which showed those pictures who were boss. No problems. Oh wait, online gaming? File sharing ? Cable and DSL save the day. More than adequate
Reply:
I beg to differ. I have [cough] friends that download movi^H^H^H^H^H content from the internet, and some dvd rips^H^H^H^H^H^H^H database files can be larger than 4GB! Even at a good (cheap) DSL line of 1KBPS it still takes quite alot longer to download content than it would take to go to blockbuster^H^H^H^H^H^H^H the office and pick up physical media with the data on it.
Blessed are the pessimists, for they have made backups. -- 0 1 My two bits
Each advancement in technology allows the main internet backbone companies to purchase one very expensive fast pipe and share it between all the customers (ISPs) of a country or state.
These things need to be thousands of times faster than your home connection because each one will carry thousands of times more data.
Its no good one single person having all that bandwidth if there is nobody else to talk to at that speed.
liqbase
How many DVD movies per second was this?
Also, they failed to provide a conversion from terabyte to Libraries of Congress.
1) Yes, distance is cruically important in these measurements. There's no points in having gazillions of petabyte data transfer if it can only done from one corner of the lab to the other. Which is why all credible speed-of-information-transfer articles include a number with units of [ (bits / second) * distance].
2) The record is still held by the transmissions from Voyager II's encounter with Neptune.
We're all born with nothing.
If you die in debt, you're ahead.
One of the russian computer trading companies easily topped that. The box with 20 400GB HDDs fell from the shelf 2m high. Total data transmission rate was
20*4*10^11*8/sqrt(2*2/9.8)~=10^14 bps or 100 Tbps
As you see if you have enough money to burn you may easily scale that number.
my sstream of consciousness
1KBPS? How cheap _IS_ your DSL line?
How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
So while the new line isnt quite nothing compared to a truck, a truck can move more data 100 miles faster than the new link.
Storm
African or European hard drives?
Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known. -- Carl Sagan
Current routers, like the Cisco CRS-1, use OC-768c/STM-256, which is about 40 Gbit/sec. Right now, there are a couple of camps in the IEEE, ones that want 40 Gbit Ethernet, others that want the factor of 10 increase that Ethernet has normally been associated with. Since there is no 100 Gbit SONET (that I'm aware of at least), these public demonstrations, this one by NTT and another by Lucent, prove that 100 Gbit Ethernet is possible, even for long haul. Some providers like at&t, Yahoo and Google, really need 100 Gbit Ethernet because they produce that much data, or provide 10 Gbit service to customers, and they need to aggregate it somehow.
20 GOTO 10
I once threw a box of 120 Gig tapes into a dumpster. I think there were about 200 tapes in the box.
I admit the distance wasn't far, but the burst rate was 24 TBytes/sec.
Someday our kids will look back at us and wonder how the hell we surfed porn so slow.
Ignore this signature. By order.