On 10G, you can go 80 km, not 500. More cost is more cost.
Ah, 10Gbps Ethernet. I remember when that was new. That was 2006.
Using commercial optics, yes. I do believe I mentioned that waiting for commercial standards is not the best course and not what is in use in practice. Currently people are moving 100Tbps over a set of seven single-mode optical cables at a range of 100 miles, giving 14,000,000 Mps per fiber over good distance. Of course this is not what is used in practice, but it is an example of the trend of progress. 100 Tbps is more than sufficient to give every home in the greater KC metropolitan area a pure, undiluted full symmetric 1 Gbps, over only 7 single mode fibers.
The actual trunks are thousands of fibers. They're as thick as your arm. I went out and watched them laid back in the early '90's, when they were going to make bazillions by carrying long distance 56kbps voice traffic at a dollar a minute. Back when "metered long distance" was still a thing; when we had 45 pages of phone bill explaining why we had to pay so much as $1/m to call across town with destination, start time and duration for every call. You probably don't remember that.
I was getting annoyed, but this is becoming amusing. Please keep digging this hole.
Dude, I know you're making fun, but if you want that then just move to Kansas City, Provo UT or Austin TX. You can get all that for $300 installation fee and a guaranteed $0/mo for seven years (net $8.30/mo.) You only get 5 Mbps, but that should do what you want to do. Private FTP servers, webservers, gameservers, no data caps, no prioritizing or filtering for less than a third of your demanded price.
And this is why the subject for my first comment on this topic was "Help us Google Fiber! You're our only hope." You people think this is a ridiculously unreasonable demand, and in Google Fiber country it's 3x over the cost of the minimum offer of "5Mbps free if you will pay the cost to run the cable from the pole to your house."
Peak bandwidth is the rate at which data is delivered. Putting a monthly cap on data transfer reduces the average monthly bandwidth but not the peak. Remember the old adage: never understimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of backup tapes. There are 2,419,200 seconds in February. Divide a 50 gigabyte cap by 2,419,200 seconds and you get an average monthly bandwidth of roughly 160kbps. About 3x dialup. Barely even broadband. Before you make fun of this math, I used to pass this much data in the 1980's, buying and aggregating new lines to meet growing real bandwidth needs as an ISP.
90% of users never get anywhere near even this cap. So what they're trying to do is to keep the actual utilization of broadband down even below saturation of dialup would do. There are two possible reasons for this:
They choose not to invest in the backhaul to support the actual evolution of usage over the last 15 years, even though that backhaul is fiber and it costs them only a few hundred thousand dollars a city to upgrade their endpoints and switching to adapt to the improvements in technology that move data 100,000x faster over their backhaul.
They are invested in content providers who sell and deliver their streaming video time-fixed content over coax, and the content itself, advertising networks and agencies, and the established relationships involved. A transition to an all IP-based TV would be a disaster to their other assets.
I'm willing to bet the answer is the latter, not the former.
The cost of the SFP+ module is nothing against the cost of burying 500km of fiber. Those fibers used to carry 1Mbps when they were laid in the trenches, and were almost all dark. Now they can carry 200,000 Mbps, and they're still almost all dark. At the current pace of progress there is no reason to believe most of it will ever need to be lit up.
Google is putting in the fiber in KC and so far there are no complaints about oversubscription. Google designs and manufactures their own switches, fabrics and ports - as anyone pulling that volume should do, so they aren't paying retail prices, markup and all that jazz. It's not even proper Ethernet. Perhaps Google is using a better fanout than you are thinking, also, with 200Gbps links to the neighborhood. They claim to be turning a profit with $70/mo unmetered, unfiltered, uncapped symmetric gigabit fiber to the door. Why don't you ask Google how they're pulling that off when these cable companies claim they'll go broke if their subscribers saturate the measly 15-30Mbps they're given.
Also, Google is manufacturing the fiber terminal switch and wifi router, the set-top box, the tablet. They didn't just buy Motorola for the phones.
Bandwidth is "too cheap to meter". The practice of metering and capping it it for every user adds costs to every user that exceeds the cost of the bandwidth itself. Therefore by insisting on metering you are saying that you are willing to pay more and get less, so that others who use more than you can pay even more. This is a very unhealthy position to take.
Seriously the ISPs who get behind metering and capping are just trying to stop the cord cutter movement. They know they are dinosaurs and the end is near. They are the same ones who refuse to take free Netflix CDN boxes to reduce the Netflix backhaul by 90%, and improve the service quality to their customers as well, instead trying to charge Netflix bandwidth fees. There is nothing whatsoever precious about Internet bandwidth. Every few years some new tech lets them put 100x as many bits down the same single mode fiber-optic pipe, and it's burying or stringing that pipe where the lion's share of the cost is.
Since Google isn't in the TV game really, they have nothing to lose by letting you pass all the data you want.
I am a huge fan our our public school teachers. I don't envy their challenges. If more parents shared the load I think it would help. By taking responsibility for ensuring my own students get a chance to meet a reasonable standard without relying on their teacher to hold their hand, hopefully some other student gets an enhanced opportunity as well.
If you thought your kids were getting a proper education in public school you might want to think again. My rule is that I teach my kids math, science and art - and then I send them to public school not to learn stuff, but to learn what is taught there so they can understand where their peers are coming from. My youngest: "people are stupid." Yes dear, but you have to deal with them anyway.
Microsoft is ready to pour $100B into mobile if they can find in that a path to success by doing so. But there is no such path. The truth is that we moved the party and don't want them here. How rich they are is not relevant. They are rude, obnoxious and not fun. We moved the party to get away from them.
OK, if you've been reading/. more than a few weeks you know I'm not a Microsoft fan. I'm not their defender generally. But Ivy Bridge wasn't available when the Surface Pro was being designed or launched. This one specific thing is not their fault.
They get no pass from me on the horrid UI, the update debacle on their own device, the marketing that will stand for all time as how not to do it, not doing a wide beta and all that. But I cannot blame them for not including components that were not available. We expect ridiculously swift time to market, but it is unfair to demand time travel.
In America we spend 25% of our income to buy health insurance. This gives us the key to the golden door of treatment, but are expected to pay 90% of the actual expense of treatment out of pocket due to deductibles/uncovered amounts/location of treatment/etc. If we actually develop a real ailment that would require insurance coverage to pay, our insurance companies fight tooth and nail to take back our golden key.
If you were ever interested in running for city council or mayor, this may be your year.
Two weeks after OP balked at Google Fiber they approved it, only to have Google withdraw the offer. OP will now be the island of "no gigabit" in a sea of Internet.
These are different things measured. This result, while amazingly exciting and a triumph is nowhere close to net energy returned. It is a long road to fusion energy production, but ultimately I think it is worthwhile.
The mean annual surface air temperature of the Antarctic interior is -57C. Surface melt refreezes rather promptly. But ice is great insulation, and geothermal energy comes up from the Earth to melt the bottom of the ice sheet. This meltwater flows in streams and rivers across the world's largest continent until it becomes the world's largest rivers, inevitably finding the sea. This should be obvious.
Slashdot Mirror
On 10G, you can go 80 km, not 500. More cost is more cost.
Ah, 10Gbps Ethernet. I remember when that was new. That was 2006.
Using commercial optics, yes. I do believe I mentioned that waiting for commercial standards is not the best course and not what is in use in practice. Currently people are moving 100Tbps over a set of seven single-mode optical cables at a range of 100 miles, giving 14,000,000 Mps per fiber over good distance. Of course this is not what is used in practice, but it is an example of the trend of progress. 100 Tbps is more than sufficient to give every home in the greater KC metropolitan area a pure, undiluted full symmetric 1 Gbps, over only 7 single mode fibers.
The actual trunks are thousands of fibers. They're as thick as your arm. I went out and watched them laid back in the early '90's, when they were going to make bazillions by carrying long distance 56kbps voice traffic at a dollar a minute. Back when "metered long distance" was still a thing; when we had 45 pages of phone bill explaining why we had to pay so much as $1/m to call across town with destination, start time and duration for every call. You probably don't remember that.
I was getting annoyed, but this is becoming amusing. Please keep digging this hole.
Dude, I know you're making fun, but if you want that then just move to Kansas City, Provo UT or Austin TX. You can get all that for $300 installation fee and a guaranteed $0/mo for seven years (net $8.30/mo.) You only get 5 Mbps, but that should do what you want to do. Private FTP servers, webservers, gameservers, no data caps, no prioritizing or filtering for less than a third of your demanded price.
And this is why the subject for my first comment on this topic was "Help us Google Fiber! You're our only hope." You people think this is a ridiculously unreasonable demand, and in Google Fiber country it's 3x over the cost of the minimum offer of "5Mbps free if you will pay the cost to run the cable from the pole to your house."
Peak bandwidth is the rate at which data is delivered. Putting a monthly cap on data transfer reduces the average monthly bandwidth but not the peak. Remember the old adage: never understimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of backup tapes. There are 2,419,200 seconds in February. Divide a 50 gigabyte cap by 2,419,200 seconds and you get an average monthly bandwidth of roughly 160kbps. About 3x dialup. Barely even broadband. Before you make fun of this math, I used to pass this much data in the 1980's, buying and aggregating new lines to meet growing real bandwidth needs as an ISP.
90% of users never get anywhere near even this cap. So what they're trying to do is to keep the actual utilization of broadband down even below saturation of dialup would do. There are two possible reasons for this:
I'm willing to bet the answer is the latter, not the former.
I was ready to sympathize with you, right up until you said this:
They sent this letter the week that the Google Fiber guys put their Fiber Jack in my apartment.
Now you can only get my envy, not my sympathy. Got room in your closet for a VPN host? Be a pal.
The cost of the SFP+ module is nothing against the cost of burying 500km of fiber. Those fibers used to carry 1Mbps when they were laid in the trenches, and were almost all dark. Now they can carry 200,000 Mbps, and they're still almost all dark. At the current pace of progress there is no reason to believe most of it will ever need to be lit up.
Google is putting in the fiber in KC and so far there are no complaints about oversubscription. Google designs and manufactures their own switches, fabrics and ports - as anyone pulling that volume should do, so they aren't paying retail prices, markup and all that jazz. It's not even proper Ethernet. Perhaps Google is using a better fanout than you are thinking, also, with 200Gbps links to the neighborhood. They claim to be turning a profit with $70/mo unmetered, unfiltered, uncapped symmetric gigabit fiber to the door. Why don't you ask Google how they're pulling that off when these cable companies claim they'll go broke if their subscribers saturate the measly 15-30Mbps they're given.
Also, Google is manufacturing the fiber terminal switch and wifi router, the set-top box, the tablet. They didn't just buy Motorola for the phones.
Bandwidth is "too cheap to meter". The practice of metering and capping it it for every user adds costs to every user that exceeds the cost of the bandwidth itself. Therefore by insisting on metering you are saying that you are willing to pay more and get less, so that others who use more than you can pay even more. This is a very unhealthy position to take.
granny pays very little
Google has this covered. Granny gets 5mbps for free.
Seriously the ISPs who get behind metering and capping are just trying to stop the cord cutter movement. They know they are dinosaurs and the end is near. They are the same ones who refuse to take free Netflix CDN boxes to reduce the Netflix backhaul by 90%, and improve the service quality to their customers as well, instead trying to charge Netflix bandwidth fees. There is nothing whatsoever precious about Internet bandwidth. Every few years some new tech lets them put 100x as many bits down the same single mode fiber-optic pipe, and it's burying or stringing that pipe where the lion's share of the cost is.
Since Google isn't in the TV game really, they have nothing to lose by letting you pass all the data you want.
SXTZ display: 1920 x 1200 pixels. iPad Air display: 2048-by-1536.
I am a huge fan our our public school teachers. I don't envy their challenges. If more parents shared the load I think it would help. By taking responsibility for ensuring my own students get a chance to meet a reasonable standard without relying on their teacher to hold their hand, hopefully some other student gets an enhanced opportunity as well.
This is not news. It's a PC. It's made by Microsoft. Why would it not run Windows apps?
If you thought your kids were getting a proper education in public school you might want to think again. My rule is that I teach my kids math, science and art - and then I send them to public school not to learn stuff, but to learn what is taught there so they can understand where their peers are coming from. My youngest: "people are stupid." Yes dear, but you have to deal with them anyway.
Microsoft is ready to pour $100B into mobile if they can find in that a path to success by doing so. But there is no such path. The truth is that we moved the party and don't want them here. How rich they are is not relevant. They are rude, obnoxious and not fun. We moved the party to get away from them.
OK, if you've been reading /. more than a few weeks you know I'm not a Microsoft fan. I'm not their defender generally. But Ivy Bridge wasn't available when the Surface Pro was being designed or launched. This one specific thing is not their fault.
They get no pass from me on the horrid UI, the update debacle on their own device, the marketing that will stand for all time as how not to do it, not doing a wide beta and all that. But I cannot blame them for not including components that were not available. We expect ridiculously swift time to market, but it is unfair to demand time travel.
In America we spend 25% of our income to buy health insurance. This gives us the key to the golden door of treatment, but are expected to pay 90% of the actual expense of treatment out of pocket due to deductibles/uncovered amounts/location of treatment/etc. If we actually develop a real ailment that would require insurance coverage to pay, our insurance companies fight tooth and nail to take back our golden key.
Reports just in of a Torino 1 level asteroid to possibly hit in 2032. Just your garden variety 400m wide space pebble.
If you were ever interested in running for city council or mayor, this may be your year.
Two weeks after OP balked at Google Fiber they approved it, only to have Google withdraw the offer. OP will now be the island of "no gigabit" in a sea of Internet.
What was in the tablet offered at $1238.72/yr?
These are different things measured. This result, while amazingly exciting and a triumph is nowhere close to net energy returned. It is a long road to fusion energy production, but ultimately I think it is worthwhile.
The mean annual surface air temperature of the Antarctic interior is -57C. Surface melt refreezes rather promptly. But ice is great insulation, and geothermal energy comes up from the Earth to melt the bottom of the ice sheet. This meltwater flows in streams and rivers across the world's largest continent until it becomes the world's largest rivers, inevitably finding the sea. This should be obvious.
Your mistake here is thinking I am trying to alter the behavior of the company. We all know there is nothing we can do about that.
I'm just test driving it here. It seems to be working, so the next push is to make it a meme.
I think I see the light at the end of the tunnel.
Can you propose a more effective method than ridicule for changing undesired behavior? That would be helpful.
They would never lie to us.