US Internet Offers 10Gbps Fiber In Minneapolis

An anonymous reader writes Christmas came early in Minneapolis! U.S. Internet has announced that they are now offering 10 Gbps service to all of their existing fiber customers. Their prior top tier service was 1 Gbps. The article also goes on to state that they're actively working on rolling out 40 Gbps and 100 Gbps fiber service as well."

Comments

Re: 10Gbps? I'll take 100 Mbps, shit I'll even tak

[phizi0n]

There is no indication of unit confusion prior to your post.

Re:Yay! More bait and switch

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, considering how much porn you can download with a 10 Gbps connection, once you switch, you'll be 'batin.

So, yes, while it is "bait and switch," it's more accurate to call "switch and bait."

How fast is just too fast?

[swb]

Assuming you're not running major data service out of your house, what's the point of diminishing return for connectivity?

I'm making the assumptions that the link speed you're sold is actually the speed you get and that there are no resource constraints, artificial or real, that would stop you from utilizing the maximum bandwidth.

Do most web sites have per-connection caps on how fast any one connection can download files or data? Could you mount a file store on AWS or any other cloud storage provider and use it like a local NAS disk?

Re:How fast is just too fast?

[phizi0n]

Most top websites are just running large arrays of cheap hardware behind load balancers and the majority of websites are on shared/virtual hosting. The problem with ultra-fast residential connections is that most servers can't saturate it.

Assuming that you connect to servers that can saturate it, SATA3 is only 6Gbps so it would actually have more throughput than a typical SSD but your latency would be much higher.

Re:How fast is just too fast?

[Areyoukiddingme]

Assuming you're not running major data service out of your house, what's the point of diminishing return for connectivity?

That would depend on the price, wouldn't it? If the marginal cost of 10 Gbps vs 1 Gbps is negligible, by all means, provide 10 Gbps. 10 Gbps ethernet over copper (for use within the residence to be able to take advantage of this speed) is still at the margins in terms of price, but that's mostly for the same reasons that 1 Gbps was so expensive for so long. If only "enterprise" uses it, it stays expensive, because business, as always, charges all the traffic will bear, and business customers like to pay more because they think that means they're getting something valuable.

Once residences started using 1 Gbps, the price dropped and dropped and dropped and now you can get a very good quality 24 port 1 Gbps ethernet switch for less than $100. 10 Gbps will follow the same trajectory, but the demand has to be there. This is the first move towards creating that demand.

Other people have pointed out that the server side won't talk to you at 10 Gbps anyway. You're throttled by the server at far lower than that. I've pointed it out myself for the past few years. But we know that the backbone bandwidth is in the ground, unlit, to support far higher outbound throughput from data centers. There's just no demand, and it saves on server hardware. Again, this is a move towards creating demand.

Somebody has to be first, and it has to be on the demand side. This is one of the first, at least in the US.

Can't wait to replace CenturyLink

[eaddict]

My daughter goes to UofMN and has a very painful 1Mb service in her apartment for $30/month! CL says they are looking to improve the offerings in her building but she is not holding her breath. We haven't been told we can NOT get other service BUT there is currently no other service in her area. No monopoly you say? Wish this service would work its way around the University.

Re:Who is this for?

[Matheus]

It's called a philosophy change. We've been living under the current regime of minimal service just barely eeked up every few years always far behind what was capable and being told to take it or leave it (with no real option to leave to).

This is a company giving us far more than we need or want for a fairly reasonable cost. Yes most of their customers won't use that (or buy that... $400 a month is a bit pricy for your average home's internet needs) but compared to the Comcast/CenturyLink habits of overselling oversubscribed lines with not enough bandwidth for too much money and I'll take it!

My only complaint is they are staying south of Downtown. I live in NE Minneapolis and, at the moment, can't even get the CenturyLink service I used to have in South (I had 40/20 and now am relegated to 12M/860K... the DL is ok but that upload is *painful*)

  Someday...

Data cap?

[Anonymous Coward]

Progress for the ISP. Now their customes can hit their data cap in the first 10 minutes of the month!

That's just the signalling rate.

[hey!]

Are they guaranteeing throughput? Then it's meaningless for most folks. It's like putting tires rated for 200 MPH on your care and assuming it will now go 200 MPH.

Now what's AT&T's story?

[xzeroed]

So much for AT&T claiming that new net neutrality rules would financially hinder them from building out their fiber network!! If this tiny little company can role out 10 Gbps service, offer 1 Gbps service for $65/month, and be actively engaged on getting 40 Gbps and 100 Gbps rolled out in Minneapolis without having to charge companies like Netflix additional fees, then why can't a behemoth like AT&T do the same??