| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 64508 | 2005-12-17 11:55:00 | Is Ihug the answer that NZ Needs to get better broadband?? | stu161204 (123) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 413481 | 2005-12-17 11:55:00 | I have just been reading: Ihug lays down challenge to govt (tvnz.co.nz) Ihug issues broadband challenge (tvnz.co.nz) & I am just wondering is Ihug challenge the answer that NZ Needs to get better broadband?? Or is this just more hot air?? |
stu161204 (123) | ||
| 413482 | 2005-12-17 12:13:00 | I have just been reading: Ihug lays down challenge to govt (tvnz.co.nz) Ihug issues broadband challenge (tvnz.co.nz) & I am just wondering is Ihug challenge the answer that NZ Needs to get better broadband?? Or is this just more hot air?? Don't know if $20m is going to get much, but here in Australia, Telstra has been forced long ago to allow ULL on its lines. This allows competition to offer speeds of up to 24Mbps. iiNet (www.iinet.net.au), the parent of ihug, is putting me on a 24Mbps line early next year. Lots of other internet providers are doing the same, with most now offering 12Mbps on fairly standard plans. Caution about ULL (unbundled local loop): I, and thousands of other suckers, got caught up in a stoush between Telstra and another telco. The issue was churning, and who should pay for the churn. I got stung for $A260 just to go to another telco, and then pay again for the sign-up etc. ULL (especially with DSLAM) will make it hard to switch between telcos because a tech has to go to the exchange and physically modify the lines apparently. |
vinref (6194) | ||
| 413483 | 2005-12-17 12:41:00 | They have to be realistic though. 24M pipes are really a waste of time. Not much on that there intarweb can actually satisfy a pipe that large anyway. Even 2M can be a hard enough gap to fill - just because you have 2M to the exchange, doesn't mean the internet at large can always pump 2M back at you. 24M to the home is a bit of a joke really, as at the end of the day, it's still get out of the country and theres only so much Southern Cross cable to go around. |
ninja (1671) | ||
| 413484 | 2005-12-17 18:10:00 | 24M to the home is a bit of a joke really, as at the end of the day, it's still get out of the country and theres only so much Southern Cross cable to go around. So why do the major players waste so much bandwidth by not peering in NZ? |
PaulD (232) | ||
| 413485 | 2005-12-17 20:49:00 | So why do the major players waste so much bandwidth by not peering in NZ?It would seem the next obvious step, getting everyone connected at max speed would encourage local servers more, particually if the southern cross is unable to bring data in at a reasonable rate due to the overload Ninja expects to see. | personthingy (1670) | ||
| 413486 | 2005-12-17 21:01:00 | They have to be realistic though. 24M pipes are really a waste of time. Not much on that there intarweb can actually satisfy a pipe that large anyway. Even 2M can be a hard enough gap to fill - just because you have 2M to the exchange, doesn't mean the internet at large can always pump 2M back at you. 24M to the home is a bit of a joke really, as at the end of the day, it's still get out of the country and theres only so much Southern Cross cable to go around.I don't find it at all hard to max out my 2M connection. A download on top of an update is enough to do that, and that's without filesharing and the like. I really liked Audio Galaxy before that was restructured for legal reasons because it would look for the source with the lowest ping time, and therefore would be more likely to be downloading from local sources. Nice, someone was thinking when they designed that feature. |
personthingy (1670) | ||
| 413487 | 2005-12-17 23:09:00 | problem with IHUG at the moment is that they are oversold on bandwidth, i was on telecom 2MB ADSL, i switched to IHUG 2MB ADSL and its slower. on telecome i had 1.9MB to the telecome speed check, 1.8 to an international checking site. with IHUG i still get 1.9MB to a speed check on IHUG but only 1.2MB to the international site. i often find that if i have a down load running at 20KBS then all my other pages slow to a crawl. with telecom i could hacve a download running at70KBS and still sruff at a good speed. |
robsonde (120) | ||
| 413488 | 2005-12-18 00:32:00 | I don't find it at all hard to max out my 2M connection. A download on top of an update is enough to do that, and that's without filesharing and the like.Neither do I. :p Though it would be nice to have faster speeds, 2MBit is fine for most users. What we need is higher data caps and higher upload speeds. :) | maccrazy (6741) | ||
| 413489 | 2005-12-18 00:47:00 | higher upload speeds. :) I agree with you there :) |
stu161204 (123) | ||
| 413490 | 2005-12-18 01:45:00 | File sharers would hate better upload speeds because it would chew through their cap too fast, but it would be great for gamers & small web developers or anyone who works from home. | Greven (91) | ||
| 1 2 | |||||