Slashdot Mirror


High-Bandwidth Users Are Just Early Adopters

silverpig writes "Cisco has released a whitepaper on mobile data usage which has some interesting data in it. The top 1% of users consume 20% of the bandwidth, but that share is down from 30% previously. 'Regular' users are catching up as they watch more video. High-bandwidth users of today will be relatively average users by 2015, so network operators should look to those users for insight in designing their future networks."

14 of 162 comments (clear)

  1. But.. But... by francium+goes+boom · · Score: 5, Informative

    That means I actually have to spend money on my network!

    1. Re:But.. But... by toastar · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That means I actually have to spend money on my network!

      The fact that this is a white paper by a company selling network equipment didn't set off anybody's conflict of interest meter?

    2. Re:But.. But... by DanTheStone · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Just because there's a conflict of interest doesn't mean the data is a lie. This should be as obvious as the correlation/causation idiom.

    3. Re:But.. But... by bsDaemon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There's a difference between "conflict of interest" and "we know what we're talking about," although the two do sometimes overlap.

    4. Re:But.. But... by gknoy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      On the other hand, look at the infrastructure difference between the US and other countries. Sure, we have rural areas, but in urban areas we aren't getting the level of service that happens in Japan or Korea or even (I think?) some European countries. This is after having "loaned" telecom companies massive amounts of money to build infrastructure, and they (mostly) did not.

      When you consider that everyone and their mom is now using Youtube, and wanting to do video phone calls, Skype, streaming Netflix, etc, it's hard to argue with Cisco's conclusions (at least, as the summary stated them ;)). In five or ten years, demand for streaming video will likely be even higher, and that's just the most obvious one.

    5. Re:But.. But... by Eudial · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I live in Sweden. Medium sized city, pop. 70,000, population density 2,261/km2 (about 80% of the population density of Urban New York City). The apartment complex I live in was built in the '60s.

      As a private person, I pay roughly $30 (USD) a month for municipal broadband. And what do I get?
      * 10 IP addresses.
      * 100 Mbps connection, and that is up and down. Network jack in the wall that's hooked up to a switch somewhere in the building that's got a fiber connection.
      * No data transfer cap, no surcharges based on traffic, no closed ports or clauses in the terms of service that say I can't host servers or bullshit like that.

      This is not the perk of living in some a luxury apartment, but something that's fairly common.

      --
      GAAH! MY PRINTER IS ON FIRE!!! PUT IT OUT! PUT IT OUT!
    6. Re:But.. But... by icebike · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Which is more expensive. The Japanese simply used the copper wires that already ran into everyone's home (i.e. the phonelines), so it was cheap and easy for them. It won't be that easy for the americans.

      Erm, isn't that exactly what DSL is?

      With some of the newer micro head-ends, DSL can be run out of that green box at the end of the street, instead of 4 miles down the road at the nearest sub-office. You only need fiber to the neighborhood patch panel.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
  2. Wait a second.... by Immostlyharmless · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I thought those heavy users were all supposed to be pirates?....now they say they are early adopters, does this mean we're all going to turn into pirates? Best get out my peg leg and shine it up....

  3. The ISPs know this all too well by swordgeek · · Score: 3, Informative

    In Canada, we are facing a fight over Usage-Based-Billing, and whether the federal government can effectively force it on ISPs. The idea isn't actually terrible per se, but the way they're trying to implement it certainly is.
    One thing that has come up time and time again is that it's to protect the consumer from the excess of the 1% of extreme consumers. They're often implicitly labelled as pirates by the ISPs, but in fact are the vanguard.
    An excellent article in the Globe and Mail had this to say on the matter:

    The knowledge that penalties await heavy Internet usage does something quite terrible: discourage desirable behaviour. Most of Bell’s arguments for treating consumers as wrongdoers rely on the villainization of “bandwidth hogs” who use up everyone else’s bandwidth and generally bring misery to the land. But there are better words for big users of the Internet: “pioneers” and “innovators.” A nation that spends its time worrying about bandwidth caps is not a nation that leads.

    --

    "People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
  4. Ahead of the curve by RobertB-DC · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The cell phone companies are way ahead of the curve on this one. They've been working on ways to screw us over for years now... and the more you know about making the sausage (from sites like HoFo), the more you know how bad you're getting it. Especially in the US.

    Just a few days ago, I got a text message from T-Mobile saying, "Texas Recovery Fee now included on monthly bill." Oh for crying out loud. Does the grocery store charge me a "Municipal Services Recovery Fee" to get back the cost of their food service license? Even the tire store doesn't charge the "tire disposal fee" if I tell them to load 'em up in the back seat. I'd drop 'em in a minute if it weren't for two things: 1) Everyone else is just as bad or worse, and 2) T-Mo makes it easy and *cheaper* to stay *out* of a contract, which actually makes me *more* likely to stay.

    --
    Stressed? Me? Of course not. Stress is what a rubber band feels before it breaks, silly.
    1. Re:Ahead of the curve by characterZer0 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Some states (NY for example) make the tire stores charge the tire disposal fee even if you keep the old tires.

      I make sure I get my money's worth by taking the used tires and leaving them at the side of the freeway.

      --
      Go green: turn off your refrigerator.
  5. IPv4 by Piata · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You're talking about the same companies that knew IPv4 addresses were rapidly depleting for years and are just now taking steps to implement IPv6. Their main concern is minimizing expenses while maximizing profit. The less your average user uses, the more users they can squeeze onto the same pipe. I'm pretty sure most ISPs would love it if everyone bought an $80 data plan and only used it to check their email. There's no room for long term planning when you have shareholders that expect constant short term growth.

    1. Re:IPv4 by C_amiga_fan · · Score: 5, Insightful

      >>>Their main concern is minimizing expenses while maximizing profit.

      It is a logical choice.
      - The longer you wait, the cheaper upgrading becomes. Upgrade to a 3000 megahertz single core P4 five years ago and spend $1500. Make the same upgrade today and spend $150. The same decreasing cost applies to upgrades in Servers and DSL or cable or fiber lines.

      --
      FREE magazine : http://clarkesworldmagazine.com/prior/
  6. FUD is much cheaper by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Just call them "bandwidth hogs," oversell your capacity, and blame your connectivity problems on the people using most of the flow they paid for.

    --
    I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!