Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

High-Bandwidth Users Are Just Early Adopters

Posted by samzenpus on from the leader-of-the-pack dept.

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."

8 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 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.

    2. 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.

    3. 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.

    4. 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!
  2. 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.
  3. 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/