The real Gigabit Challenge is getting ISPs to think like tech firms
gigaom.com
gigaom.com
Unlike US ISPs, which face almost no competition, and will remain in business as long as they provide some sort of service, charge just below exorbitant rates for it, and keep the service level just above the minimum needed to avoid consumer mutiny. It's not like people have a choice, and therefore they stay.
Asking major US ISPs to change their mindset is completely futile, they have no reason to do so, because their current strategy extracts the maximum amount of money from the market, and the minimum service upgrades they do keep them updated and not completely obsolete. The only thing that can make them change is competition. Most of you are americans, you apply this principle ruthlessly in most areas of society, but why do you have a blind spot for telcos and cable companies?
Meanwhile, my city hooked up my apartment building to the municipal fiber network last year. I volunteered to do the project for our housing co-op, so I called up a bunch of local ISPs, some small, some big, and got offers for our building. Some of them were good, some were bad, some were cheap, some were expensive, some were flexible, some were rigid, and ultimately I picked one and recommended to our board. And a week from now I'll enjoy 100/100mbit for $30/month along with everyone else in my building, and the cost is fixed for five years. After that period, we're free to re-negotiate the contract and pick another ISP if we're unhappy, but you can bet your ass that the one we picked are gonna do all they can to keep us happy, so they keep us a customer.
Competition tends to force companies to do that.
With mobile device sales taking an ever increasing share of the market, Intel cannot afford to miss out on this front.
This is definitely driving Intel's recent push towards efficiency.
WDM capacity world wide is rising as per the white line.
Cost per mbs-1 is falling as per the orange line.
These are facts. Labelled properly the graph is correct.
It is simply stupid to think that WDM capacity is falling, and the author needs to be - well, I will not be silly and intemperate!
The whole premise of the article is expanding capacity and falling costs and he describes the graph as exemplifying this and then when I look at it I feel foolish.
Glad to see I'm not the only one who noticed that.
The debate has never been about aggregate capacity (not since the 1900's), but rather about last-mile access, and will continue to be until last-mile access is liberated; which may never happen.