Unlimited broadband plans: what is the future?

[mgcarley]

You guys may not know that America start with few kbps net speed. On dos screen computers they use it for many years after that GUI (windows) comes in existence. At that time they already have develop internet. And at that time they already have huge telephone network. On that existing network they have implemented internet which is well known as ISDN network. And till now they uses 64kbps internet. Till now the demand of internet in India is not very big, only few percentage of population uses it.


Yes, back in the early 80's and 90's kbps was a typical measurement of internet in the west (US, Europe and Far-East). Granted, web pages and applications were not nearly as advanced as they are now. Even something as "mundane" as youtube would have blown a lot of people away in 2000. Heck, it still does to the "newbie" even now.

Similarly with storage space - games didn't take up 4GB, Operating Systems didn't take up 15GB, applications weren't 300MB to 1GB each. And 4GB of RAM would have been difficult to fathom.

But Windows was by far not the first GUI to have networking support. In fact it was almost, if not, THE last major OS to have support for TCP/IP. DOS never did at the time (although it can now). I don't recall which was first, but GEOS on Commodore64 (made in about 1984, 9 years before "Windows for Workgroups" came along) did support and have functionality for internet-like applications. And let us not forget that the first web browser (as we know them) was built for UNIX. But MacOS and OS/2 got there before Windows.

Like the USA, India too has a huge telephone network. Even lakhs of fibre-optic cables spanning the country. Granted, some areas are not as developed as they could be, but the same scenario is typical even today in the very rural areas of the USA and Canada.

ISDN did NOT achieve very much usage in the US - it was just as slow as dialup and much more expensive. It's not until newer technologies *based* on ISDN (such as ADSL) came along that one could say that the concept of digital signals over POTS really took off. Weirdly, in the late-90's/early 00's, there were a lot of people using ISDN instead of dialup in Japan. Perhaps that explains why they are where they are today.

After that some time later dot com Companies have launched online shopping website (many of them still existing like Amazon). These companies have started revolutionary change in internet. So how shopping can demand more bandwidth?


Images, more complicated layouts et cetera. While the bandwidth demand on these sites can't have increased too much (per user), some may have offered technologies that we don't see very often anymore, such as QTVR and so forth. The increase for bandwidth really comes about with streaming Audio, streaming Video, VOIP and basically any real-time applications.

Companies are selling videos online and many such things which demands bandwidth. And dot com revolution not only limited to online shopping its also about video conferencing, video streaming and most importantly DOWNLOAD. Now in that scenario nearly 60% of population of America demands hi speed internet.


I don't know about 60%... I think the penetration rate is still quite low compared to other OECD nations, but they're working on it, and at least trying to make it available, which can't be a completely awful idea.

And blab la bla….. but after that they got a huge telecomm infrastructure some time later dot com revolution is over but it leaves that huge infra structure.


Again, India too has a huge telecoms infrastructure and many lakhs of KM of fibre cables. The Dot-Com revolution was not the cause - either in the US or India - for the laying of cables - even if a lot of cables were laid at that time, I would hazard to guess that the same amount or more are being laid now.

Naw talk about India.
I ask some questions to you :

Can you buy even 100 rupee item from dot com company?
May be you can but generally very very less number of peoples can do it. And now even Americans can’t do that, because of shopping malls and dot com revolution is over.


Probably not. It may depend on the site, but generally speaking, the costs of micro-transactions make it not viable in many cases.

Most people don't know about online shopping in India - yes there are plenty of sites where you can buy tech gear, but I don't know any that I can buy certain other items. Admittedly, I'm not too well educated about where to find such things online, in India either. And where is India's version of Alibaba?

While the Dot-Com revolution might be over, e-commerce/online shopping is increasing year-over-year by billions of dollars in revenue - and not just in the US.

 

[mgcarley]

...bollocks bollocks bollocks...

Instead of arguing with you, I'll just tell you actually know sweet f all about the internet in India, let alone the rest of the world, and you appear to know little about how it even works, or what the telcos have with regards to resources at their disposal right at this moment.

You're also woefully uninformed and sadly unaware about the huge variety of content available on the web. Yahoo and Amazon are not the only sites on the web.

I might be impatient, but I can tell you for sure I get a lot less done simply because of the internet speed. In starting my service, it is somewhat out of selfish means, but if you don't like it or think you don't need it, don't buy it. I can't put it any more simply, but most (if not all) of the other people around here will disagree with you that they/we don't require more speed.

I personally know of people who have lost web development contracts because the net conditions in this country are too abysmal - so tell those who have lost lakhs of rupees due to that very factor that 256k is more than enough.

I could care less if you don't like faster access - stick with your 256kbits - I'll be over here building my faster service and people who want it can use it for whatever purpose they want to use it (that is THEIR business). My experience is that NOT having to wait for pages is better than waiting for them.

So, don't come bitching to me when you can't access all the same stuff that the rest of the world can (or you have to wait hours for it and are paying roughly the same price for your 256kbits as my customers will for their 2Mbits) - I'll be too busy doing a bunch of things at once with my net connection.

And the 21st century is an arbitrary term referring to the fact that India needs to be brought out of the Internet stone-age. Judging by the spelling and grammar in your posts, your education could have benefitted from a faster net connection, but now I'm feeding the trolls.

----------

If anyone wants me to post a full fledged argument to this guy, let me know. I just can't believe it.

 

[Sushubh]

Airtel was the one that came out with the Impatient One advertisement. I guess, they made the point pretty clear.

 

[mgcarley]

Fine, I'll feed the trolls.

:irock: Its not surfing which demands more then 256 kbps, not now & newer. You can access any web within 10 seconds. You can access any web even with full of picture on it within 1 min. yes you demand more bandwidth if you are viewing U-tube video. But U-tube videos are still buffered in 1:2 ratios. I don’t agree that you was that much busy you can’t give 10 sec to download site. If you are that much busy how did you get time to surf here?
Don’t talk about foreign countries, we are Indians not American, European or Japanese.

YOU might be fine at 256k, but 1 minute for a webpage is too long for me. I visit sites with pictures and video, and waiting for them is painful, especially when I have multiple tabs loading different pages. Ergo, I need a faster connection.

Its orkut in India which increase demand of internet in India. Orkut is worst forum site I ever seen in terms of the way people use it. Peoples on orkut use it like a chat room. But still I agrees that its purpose is good.

Really? Orkut? The driving force? So what about the time before 2006?

And don’t talk about those countries which are of population below 10 million or even of few millions or even less then 1 million, are of few thousands of kilometer area. They can easily provide even wireless 10mbps internet, but its India where we don’t have enough IP addresses , Spectrum(applicable to wireless), telecomm infrastructure and market(for Internet).

India can also be provided with 10Mbits connections - wireless or not. USA, Canada, Russia, China - hell, even Pakistan - they're not exactly small in land mass, even if they do only have a fraction of the overall population. Even then, it's not about "who has most" - the population density is such that, especially in urban areas, installing infrastructure is worthwhile doing.

The capacity is there, and some parts of the infrastructure do support it. But wholesale access is expensive by comparison with most of the rest of the world. Do you really want India to be considered a "developing country" for the rest of your life? Come on, you have one of the largest economies already - the money is there (although in the hands of the few), so anyone with motivation could come and improve the infrastructure.

With wireless spectrum, we actually have a large range of frequencies to choose from.

With IP addresses, ISPs purchase what they need - they are not alotted to a particular country. Indian ISPs use IP blocks which neighbour the US, other parts of Asia and even New Zealand.

As for the market, you can't tell me that, as one of the largest centres of IT man-power in the worldwide market, there is no market for internet. That's just incorrect, whichever way you look at it.

I don’t think that capacity of few optical fibre cable of few terabits/sec can give you 8 mbps. In America fiber optic cable is reaches to home and technology called FTH, but we uses optical fiber to trunk the cities or even states. With these fibre optical trunk ( presently have )the ISP’s can’t provide you more then 200 to 300 kbps (average) to all that’s why they are not offering you high speed. 8mbps airtel plane is just a bluff you can use all its free GB’s within 4 hours.

There is submarine cables, then there is optical fibre. We are installing fibre to the building. The US is actually far from being a leader in this field - most of Europe is far, far ahead.

If it weren't so costly to purchase wholesale bandwidth, then it would be more economically viable to provide more than 256k to each user. Sadly, this is not yet the case. It is NOT about the infrastructure in most cities - most of the big players have, as I've said, Lakhs of Kilometers of fibre nationwide - inter- and intra-city. Tata just finished a 1,500 KM local loop fibre installation project in Mumbai in April or so. Do you still want to tell me that there is no infrastructure for providing faster service?

You can't. However, the cost (even to Tata, a part-owner of at least 3 submarine cables stretching the planet) of the wholesale bandwidth is prohibative (they can't just give it to themselves for free, they still have to pay the consortium).

“100 baat kee ek baat” we don’t have genuine demand of more then 256kbps unless you download movies, games and softwares. Which I previously says for “PIRACY” you need more.:hysterical: :rofl:May be you are doing some kind of Ph.D for which you need online support from NASA (may be ISRO) and you need real time services of few GB/s line rate, but majority of people steel don’t demand that bandwidth (in Mb/s).

It's sad to think that the only reason you can come up with for justifying faster speeds is piracy. That's very unimaginitive of you.

What about the 200Mbytes per month of Windows Updates? 15Mbytes of Virus definitions? I hate waiting for these, and if I do happen to be downloading something, I have to stop it, otherwise often they time out, and I get those stupid Windows saying "your virus definitions are out of date".

LOL, DTH Internet through satelite “You” was definitely doing some kind of Research through “NASA”. These Stuff must be very costlier and must not be provided to home user. By DTH I mean “Dis TV”, “Big TV” etc etc. “Cablewalas” have huge bandwidth in their network they have enough potential to provide internet to you of some mbps of bandwidth and they getting cut in their market because of DTH (TV), if they have brain they has to become small scale ISP’s to save their business.

Uhh... who do you think the Cablewalas buy their bandwidth from? They don't just make it out of thin air. They have the same problem as every other ISP - expensive wholesale bandwidth.

And your average cablewalas network bandwidth is pathetic by comparison to the larger players. In my view, cablewalas should be eliminated from the field - more often than not, they prevent competition, rather than promote it, and they're known to - according to sources even on this forum - sabotage other peoples networks.

So I don't know where you're getting your information, but it is wrong.

Airtel & BSNL are major ISP’s because they have enough infrastructure (because of their landline network) to provide 1mbs Internet and their network is upgradable to 4 mbps (upload + download). That means they are capable of 4 mbps(few less using ADSL) download rate but they are not providing because they are not able to Trunk with the total bandwidth needed by each city or state.

Airtel and BSNL both have trunks between each city capable of many gigabits. If I'm to believe the network maps, even hundreds of gigabits. Currently at the main peering point in India, about 6 Gbits is being used at peak hours.

And lastly I always’s recommend Govt and ISP’s to provide 64 kbps speed internet for free with telephone lines.

\"Abey Technology mat jhad\"
\"Bahvnao ko smajho\"

For your kind information its dot com revolution which increases American and European demand of high speed internet. During that period 60% of shopping in America is done via internet and after that they got huge Internet capable Infrastructure. Because of that very high no. of peoples using internet at home.

America was building internet infrastructure well before the dot-com boom - well before the first browser, and well before most people had even heard of "the internet". Since the 1984 breakup of AT&T and the unbundling of the local loops after that America has been building infrastructure - most of it built by private companies.

Do you just make this tripe up, or are you just sadly misinformed?

And no, not even CLOSE to 60% of shopping could have been done online at that time. The percentage of people with internet access was too small.

And buddy cables are already Installed. But Telecomm Companies has not enough Trunking capacity. Do you have see any location in India where you don’t find landline phone. And if cable not layed now then airtel or BSNL both can’t get any problem to lay them. And don’t say govt don’t allow it. Its opposite you saying govt never intrupt in cable installation by Airtel or BSNL. But they (Airtel) are fuking up the streets because of there cable installation.

Wait, so in previous paragraphs, there isn't enough infrastructure, but now all the cables are installed? Eh? The government DOES allow companies to build infrastructure - but the fact that most of what is there is barely used is the problem.

Airtel actually has a small coverage area of broadband AND trunk cables compared to BSNL, Tata and Reliance Communications. Why are you picking on Airtel? They happen to provide the best value for money at the moment. Whether the service is any good remains to be seen, but I've heard fairly positive things about it. They must be doing something right.

Internet is first established for ameriacan army. Its not available to civilians. At that time gui does not exist. I know Gui is not first used in window but for general use GUI is firstly used by majority of peoples in windows.

Really? The US Army? And here I was thinking it was MIT, Bell Labs, University of California and Stanford Research. The US Military got in on it with ARPANET, but this was already after the technology was developed.

Dot com revolution not only concern with online shopping but it’s the start up for internet after that high speed broadband comes in existence because of competition between ISP’s.

And for every bodies kind information both Americans and Europeans are still using ISDN and 256 kbps but for surfing only.

Really? When were you last in Europe? 1993? Name one European country which has 256kbits as a "standard", and one provider who even sells ISDN in the US.

Some people in areas of the USA are still forced to use Dialup, but ISDN and Dialup - not the same.

ISDN are of two version first narrow band & second wideband.
Narrow band is implemented on telephone line and wideband implemented of cable TV network (generally). Both are still in use.

Yes, and Cable TV networks should be capable of around 40Mbits, unless they have implemented DOCSIS3, which allows for about 270Mbits.

Stop bringing ISDN up. ISDN is narrowband, but irrelevent. It was always expensive, used mostly by businesses and the only real advantage was that you didn't pay by the minute. But I've not used an ISDN connection since 2001. Dialup still exists, but its popularity is in sharp decline. I think I used Dialup last in... 2007.

And don’t campare your optical fibre network with others we are using optical fibre to trunk whole state or city traffic. Not for general purpose.

I'd suggest you check your facts. I've already mentioned that Tata has a 1,500KM fibre loop in Mumbai that I know of. They are trying to bring fibre closer to the premises because it will allow them - eventually - to provide faster service. It's all part of the continuing network upgrades that providers do without you all even knowing.

Both our Cable operator & telecomm companies using step Index optical fibre(which is cheaper and of less band width) or of low capacity graded index fiber but rarely. For your kind information I have make my Major project in optical fiber communication, but its of few mbps capacity so don’t make any misconception in your mind with optical fiber cable. It may be very cheaper of 1 rupee per meter cost to 100’s of dollars per meter.

1KM of armoured 24-strand optical fibre for outdoor use costs about US$15,000 retail. It is capable of at least 10Gbits, is full of fire retardant gel and resistant to rodents. The $100/m stuff is more what you'd find going sub-marine.

I would like to see some cable that is Rs1 per metre. I think you are dreaming.

Dot com revolution is over I knew it but online shopping is nearly nil as compared to that time.

Hm. So care to explain why year on year the growth rate is in double digits?

Black Friday is well known because of the fact that nearly all dot com companies become bankrupted some good companies only survived like E-bay, Amazon, Yahoo and etc. But when its started it creates huge demand of internet in America and Europe.

No, they started well before the demand was even there - they were all started in the 90's. They got really big because they went public on the stock market. They were fortunate to survive the bursting of the bubble, simply due to the amount of cash reserves they had or even rescue by other companies. Or they were established enough that their burn-rate didn't kill them.

:irock::irock::irock:And don’t be touchy and saying we are in 21’st century. :irock::irock::irock:Its just means that earth is revolved more then 2000 times from the date when calendar is developed and nothing else.

It's arbitrary. Would you rather I used the Jewish Calendar? Muslim Calendar? Mayan Calendar? Japanese Dynasty Calendar? Chinese Dynasty Calendar? UNIX time?

----------

xkcd - A Webcomic - Duty Calls

 

[svagyan]

With IP addresses, ISPs purchase what they need - they are not alotted to a particular country

Really? I thought atleast the major blocks were assigned to the various regional NICs, such as APNIC, and then within those blocks, it was buyer's choice.

 

[raj1402]

There are 4 major players for International bandwidth in India. VSNL/Tata, Bharti Airtel, Reliance and BSNL. Tata is the biggest player and BSNL is the smallest player. Reliance is the rising star.

India connects to the world through 4 cities Chennai, Mumbai, Cochin and Tuticorin. Needless to say these are the port cities. The cities also host the landing stations – which connect the land cables with the submarine cables.

When it comes to bandwidth there is a near monopoly by Tata and Reliance. That is the reason why MTNL recently bought bandwidth from Tata and Reliance. You might wonder how could Reliance and Tata get away with something like this when we have BSNL. Well, the government thought that the submarine cables and the landing stations is a low profitability business.

Not sure how much truth is there to the low-profitability stuff but BSNL and MTNL are relying on Reliance and Tata for the Internet backbone. BSNL has decided it is about time it build its own landing station and is planning to set-up one in West Bengal.

 

[raj1402]

in india tata airtel relaince and bsnl got National internet backbone connectivitytata got majority and bsnl the least in that orderthese 4 cos got 8 NIB connected to other countries total available bandwidth is 587.5GBPs and as of now utilized or currently used is around 64GBPSso its clear that no way bandwidth limit is the problem may be maintenance cost due to large area!!!

 

[mgcarley]

Really? I thought atleast the major blocks were assigned to the various regional NICs, such as APNIC, and then within those blocks, it was buyer's choice.

You are right, but ARIN doesn't necessarily have more IPs than APNIC - just more *active* IP blocks.

in india tata airtel relaince and bsnl got National internet backbone connectivity

tata got majority and bsnl the least in that order


Actually, BSNL has by far the most Fiber Cable laid throughout India. Where-ever you got your stats from, they must be incredibly old.

these 4 cos got 8 NIB connected to other countries


BSNL by itself does not own or co-own any international cables currently.

total available bandwidth is 587.5GBPs and as of now utilized or currently used is around 64GBPS


These numbers must be at least 10 years old. In 2003, about 360Gbits of international capacity was lit. Now that number is significantly higher. One cable by itself (SEACOM) has 8.4 Tbits of capacity. SMW3, SMW4 and i2i have slightly less but are still over 1 Tbit each.

so its clear that no way bandwidth limit is the problem may be maintenance cost due to large area!!!

Yes and no. The main issue ISPs are facing in the cities (and I have heard this from Reliance, Bharti and Railtel) is the last mile - and it's both a competition and cost issue. Mumbai in particular costs a lot to dig up, averaging Rs 50 lakh per KM.

But yes, the main international lines are barely used - by large ISPs for unknown reasons (they *could* drop the price further, even if it has come down from 37.5Cr/year for an STM-1 to under 2Cr since 2002), and by smaller ISPs because of the aforementioned cost issue - for every STM-1 (about 1.92Cr), in theory we should provide not more than 7750 customers. That would cost about Rs 206/month to provide each customer (before oberheads), but 7750 customers could eat up the ~50 Tbyte monthly capacity if they downloaded a mere 6.5GB each in a month. Of course, ISPs offering unlimited can reduce the number of customers per STM by increasing the price per connection: Rs 800 would allow for (almost) a 128kbits unlimited connection.

Yes, the more we buy, the more discounts we do get, which is why a 128kbits connection doesn't cost Rs 800 with most ISPs, but the problem is still there - the cost needs to drop by quite a huge factor (I'd say another 87%) for anyone to really "open up the taps" and offer 1Mbits at the same as you get 128-256k now. And if an 87% drop in price sounds ridiculous, it's already dropped by over 90% since VSNL's monopoly was taken away in the early part of the century.

 

[techfun]

256 is the minimum speed considered in broadband by TRAI...well some people here are more then satisfied by MINIMUM..i used 512 in 2004 on connect dsl and found it ok but not very good..in 2008 i used 2 mbps on airtel,it was good but not very good...last month i used reliance broadband +,it was very good but not excellent......i am waiting for something better than very good...rates are very high and speed very low....AUR KATE PE NAMAK CHIDKANE COMPANIES LAYIN HAIN FAIR USAGE POLICY....

 

[iChaitanya]

Actually, BSNL has by far the most Fiber Cable laid throughout India.
The government has no budget problems, I guess.

BSNL by itself does not own or co-own any international cables currently.
So, I guess they must be buying wholesale bandwidth from either VSNL or Reliance.