50Mbit Service Upstream Discussion - Page 4

Ignitionnet · 12-01-2009, 16:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by broadbandking

I think we are all wishing on false hopes for upstream to increase, all companies have always had low upstream even BE cant guarentee the 2.5Mb upload

That's only down to line conditions, which are of course not an issue on cable

Ignitionnet · 14-01-2009, 20:24

I think we may have an explanation for some issues, I really hope this is a fault. This from a 50Mbit modem:

Upstream
Channel Type 1.0 Channel ID 3
Frequency (Hz) 25808000
Ranging Status Success
Modulation QPSK
Symbol Rate (KSym/sec) 2560
Mini-Slot Size 2

4.4Mbit of usable bandwidth on an upstream that could, in theory, be catering for several 20 and 50Mbit customers. Is the network really in such bad shape that it can't handle a more strenuous upstream modulation, or at least a DOCSIS 2.0 ATDMA wider upstream?

I'm hoping this is an oversight, it's pretty concerning if the product is being released in places without the appropriate (or going by this any on the return path in this area) network work being done. Problem is this would explain why there's the wait for upstream bonding and even then it's only going to 2.5Mbit.

I will run with oversight for now I think. If that is the best that area of network can manage it's no business running the other tiers let alone 50Mbit.

AppleSauce · 14-01-2009, 21:10

You hit the nail right in the head, VM obviously have the superior network, but they aren't using it correctly.. we need DOCSIS 2/3 asap, then we can hopefully get the extra upstream, not just 50mb that needs it, it's 20mb too.

AbyssUnderground · 14-01-2009, 21:27

All of the tiers need it, not just 20Mbps and 50Mbps.

The tier speeds should be (In Kbps):

2000/512
10000/2000
20000/4000
50000/6000

Bare minimum...

More and more people are uploading things nowadays, not just downloading.

- Pictures are larger because of increasing mega-pixel capacity on cameras.
- Games are larger because of better physics engines and game data so multi-player game data becomes larger too.
- Videos in HD from high mega-pixel camcorders uploading to youtube.
- High quality graphics uploaded to your own websites.
- Sharing via p2p (legal of course) rather than using pre-defined servers which may have lack of bandwidth.

Without the larger upload capacity, the future of what the internet is becoming (highly interactive and media driven) will eventually come to an almost dead stop when people are finding it takes to long to realistically perform any task on the web, besides browsing ebay and checking their e-mail...

Ignitionnet · 14-01-2009, 21:28

Tech support inform that the above is a 'control channel' and that there are 3 other upstreams available for DOCSIS 3 customers which are bonded under this one.

I'm not sure about that and think he's talking about the downstream bonding group, which consists of a primary and 2 other downstreams, all carrying data, bonded, but we'll see.

RubberyDuck · 14-01-2009, 21:31

If they offered 20Mbit/4Mbit no one would want the 50Mbit, unless it was Ã‚Â£5 more a month.

The price should be as follows as well:

2Mbit - Ã‚Â£10
10Mbit - Ã‚Â£17
20Mbit - Ã‚Â£25
50Mbit - Ã‚Â£35

Ignitionnet · 14-01-2009, 21:40

To be honest 20/2 or 20/2.5 would be ok, but c'est la vie!

Pushkar · 15-01-2009, 10:37

Yep, Agree Completely,

More upload speed is required, not just because people are file-sharing :P but also because of websites such as Facebook, I have a 10mp camera and files are approx 3.5mb each and it takes ages to upload 1 photo, how long will it take to upload a whole holiday?

Also, YouTube - it would also take ages to upload your own video that you made, these are just the two most used websites - im sure other people will find other uses for uploading.

AbyssUnderground · 15-01-2009, 10:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by TaiLZ

Also, YouTube - it would also take ages to upload your own video that you made, these are just the two most used websites - im sure other people will find other uses for uploading.

I do web and graphic designs, so I can quite easily find use for more upload. I also use Facebook and Youtube a lot myself so it comes in useful there too.

moroboshi · 15-01-2009, 10:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by RubberyDuck

You right about BE, I'm with them now, tried the 2.5Mbit upload for 3 days, couldn't get anymore than 1.5Mbit, download then dropped to 5Mbit.

The thing is though, BE only charge Ã‚Â£4 for upto double the speed. VM can almost ensure doubling the upload speed and I'm sure many a person hear would pay that for double upload. Ã‚Â£55 a month for 50/3.5 doesn't sound as bad as Ã‚Â£51 for 50/1.75.

I'd pay it for sure, though I am going to get the 50Mbit as soon as it is available here in Essex anyway. Anyone know when ;-)

While I agree more upload is needed if you're dumping 10 megapixel photos on Facebook you might want to invest in a resizing app, like Photoshop. 10mp is total overkill for everything except high end pro work.

Stabhappy · 15-01-2009, 10:46

Some people simply like having a record of their photos in high definition, can you blame them? If he wanted easily uploadable files I'm sure there's a size reduction mode on his camera.

General Maximus · 15-01-2009, 11:33

I take all my photos at 8 megapixel no matter what they are for, it is great having the size and detail.

broadbandking · 15-01-2009, 12:47

I have no uses for upload as I only play online and use torrents which I can keep my ratio as I just leave the files going but I can see why people would need it, if it was increased then that would be fine and useful for my torrents, I have to admit the uploads are bad but with the upstream channel bonding coming the end of the year we should see a increase.

Ignitionnet · 15-01-2009, 13:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by broadbandking

I have to admit the uploads are bad but with the upstream channel bonding coming the end of the year we should see a increase.

From my POV yes there might be an increase but they are still offering well short of what can be delivered without bonding due to not having an interest in the necessary investment to delivery higher upstream services.

Frankly 2.5Mbit isn't good enough, especially with bonding, and it may not even benefit your torrents if it comes with rumoured torrent throttling.

If someone like Be can deliver 2.5Mbit over rubbish copper cables to a percentage of their customer base then imho 1.75Mbit is not acceptable on 'fibre optic' broadband that's leading the broadband revolution and 2.5 isn't really much better either.

Be great to see upstream speed become more of an 'issue' and a competition tool. Up to 20Mbit/1.3Mbit costs less than a tenner a month from O2, and 20/2.5 less than 20GBP.

AbyssUnderground · 15-01-2009, 16:25

They should keep in line with the likes of Be*, 24Mbps/2.5Mbps...

That equates to about 50Mbps/5Mbps, if you just roughly double the speeds. I think thats more then fair if you ask me. They can either do that for everyone, or make a special tier for those who DO want it and know why they need it. Either way, they do need to put it up SOON.