A simple idea — look how Apple now only releases OS updates via download. With speeds like this (~GB) we may be able to forgo updates altogether. Boot the entire OS from the cloud/remote server.
Perhaps then software will become versionless, and we just run the latest and greatest that has been pushed to the public.
I have 50Mb/s over 10Mb/s which I pay handsomely to Comcast for. No cap is nice. No packet inspection is nice. No QOS on ports is nice. I've had it a year. We very easily do 500-1000GB a month, and are just pulling down SD video at about 300-500MB per file.
I have backups with Arq once an hour to S3 that take longer than I want. I keep a full time VPN on the media server that downloads torrents, there's a few phones, tablets, etc. it's pretty easy to saturate the upstream. And I would live to lite up the VPN network wide.
Funny that the VPN service is unlimited and faster than my connection and I only pay $29.00 a month plus get much more than just VPN. It could be lower if I just wanted VPN.
The VPN provider can afford it, are making a profitable business out of it, and push it to 100% of their users. Yet Comcast and AT&T would like us to believe 1-5% of their users could even make an impact on their network if they tried?! If they can, that's sad that a small business can better manage their infrastructure than an actual upstream wholesale provider and/or cable supplier. Comcast shuffles uncompressed HD from their feeds at 6.6Gb/s [1] all day long. NetFlix drops the data at their front door so it's free. They have plenty of overhead for us Internet users.
Just for fun I throttled my laptop down to 2Mb/s synchronous, remembering back to the day when I paid $600.00 a month for a T1 at 1.54 Mb/s and people were amazed. I felt at the throttled 2Mb/s the connection was non useable.
We are falling behind. The only way this is going to get fixed is if Americans start to see that we are sitting at ~13th place in some "contest", and that China, Iran, Africa, Bulgaria, and third world countries we have a general sentiment of dislike for — are winning the "contest".
At that point Americans will care. How dare the Russians beat us into space. How dare the Koreans can build a better Internet than us!
I don't think people will care until those places can do awesome things we can't do. If they can buy a $500 TV that does everything their computers do (stream UHDTV films, games, etc.) then maybe they'll care. But, until then, so what?
And really, even then, so what? People's hearts just don't seem to be in that contest anymore. I think they're more likely to care about beating their friends in fashion than another nation. And if their friends don't have it, then they don't care much either. Hopefully this is here something like Google Fiber makes a difference. But then, without software to make it stand out...
I think it'll take true spectacle to get people really interested. As much as you or I would like this kind of thing, I just don't know what would sell it to the average person without requiring the purchase of additional tech as well.
> With speeds like this (~GB) we may be able to forgo updates altogether. Boot the entire OS from the cloud/remote server.
Speed isn't the biggest issue. Reliability is. Until my broadband is as reliable as my power supply, that's not an option I'd tolerate.
> Perhaps then software will become versionless, and we just run the latest and greatest that has been pushed to the public.
That's a terrifying prospect, given that pretty much every major software upgrade I've experienced have broken one or the other feature I like or need. I'll take my software upgrades when I'm prepared, thank you...
My internet service has been more reliable than my electric power for several years now... the power goes out once a year or two, but I still have internet access on batteries.
But I'm like you and prefer to have control over my own software and data. I might use it for tablets or ereaders though.
Perhaps then software will become versionless, and we just run the latest and greatest that has been pushed to the public.
I have 50Mb/s over 10Mb/s which I pay handsomely to Comcast for. No cap is nice. No packet inspection is nice. No QOS on ports is nice. I've had it a year. We very easily do 500-1000GB a month, and are just pulling down SD video at about 300-500MB per file.
I have backups with Arq once an hour to S3 that take longer than I want. I keep a full time VPN on the media server that downloads torrents, there's a few phones, tablets, etc. it's pretty easy to saturate the upstream. And I would live to lite up the VPN network wide.
Funny that the VPN service is unlimited and faster than my connection and I only pay $29.00 a month plus get much more than just VPN. It could be lower if I just wanted VPN.
The VPN provider can afford it, are making a profitable business out of it, and push it to 100% of their users. Yet Comcast and AT&T would like us to believe 1-5% of their users could even make an impact on their network if they tried?! If they can, that's sad that a small business can better manage their infrastructure than an actual upstream wholesale provider and/or cable supplier. Comcast shuffles uncompressed HD from their feeds at 6.6Gb/s [1] all day long. NetFlix drops the data at their front door so it's free. They have plenty of overhead for us Internet users.
http://www.ciena.com/connect/blog/How-much-bandwidth-does-Br...
Just for fun I throttled my laptop down to 2Mb/s synchronous, remembering back to the day when I paid $600.00 a month for a T1 at 1.54 Mb/s and people were amazed. I felt at the throttled 2Mb/s the connection was non useable.
We are falling behind. The only way this is going to get fixed is if Americans start to see that we are sitting at ~13th place in some "contest", and that China, Iran, Africa, Bulgaria, and third world countries we have a general sentiment of dislike for — are winning the "contest".
At that point Americans will care. How dare the Russians beat us into space. How dare the Koreans can build a better Internet than us!