fios
 

Is the internet worth it, I am looking at 50mbps, will I get close to those speeds or is it the same as the rest and I get 2/3rds of the speed I pay for?

Currently with brighthouse and get turbo 30mbps but really only getting around 18 mbps which isn't to bad but I get buffering at night with the roku and 3 computers going.

Your opinions please:thumbup:

Re: fios
 

I hear that much of the speed limitation is farther upstream, so no matter how fast your local connection, your actual download speed may only be a fraction of that.

Re: fios
 

Yes, absolutely you should get FIOS if able. It is - by a long way - the best consumer Internet connection widely available in the US. Verizon uses fibre to the premises so your quoted connection speed will be exactly that. Secondly, unlike the scumbags at Comcast, your Internet connection has no hard or soft download limits nor any DPI to shape specific traffic (search for Comcast & Reset packet to find out how Comcast attempts to mess with your traffic.

FIOS is also nationally contended, rather than locally (ala Comcast) so if you live in an apartment block Comcast's bandwidth is contended between your block, whereas FIOS is nationally contended.

So, is that clear then? FIOS is by far and away the best product.

Re: fios
 

Agreed, but from what I hear it doesn't mean that everything downloads at the fastest rate, there are other upstream bandwidth restrictions that may reduce the actual download rate observed by the conserved.

Re: fios
 

You're referring to TCP ACK's not being sent due to a saturated upstream? If so, that's not remotely an issue here given a) FIOS is a symmetrical product & b) even if it was asymmetrical, the upload speed would only need to be around a meg (if that) to ensure the upload link wasn't saturated with ACKs.

Re: fios
 

No, I don't think that's what I'm referring to, but that's mostly because I have not the slightest idea what you mean; it would make as much sense as if you'd replied in Greek. :unsure:

Re: fios
 

What type of router are you using? If it is an 802.11g router, you won't get wireless speeds above 18 mbps (probably due to the acknowledgements required) even though it is rated at a maximum of 54 mbps. To get higher wireless speeds, you'll need an 802.11n router and devices that also support the n protocol (most devices within the last 5 years support the n protocol on the 2.4 GHz band and some on both the 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz bands). You can also purchase the new AC type routers that are about 3x faster than the N type router (1750 mbps vs 600 mbps) but currently few devices support the AC protocol so that is probably a waste of money.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-...ined-its-cool/

To see the real speed of your line, hardwire directly to your modem and use the following link. You can also probably hardwire directly to the router instead of the modem since that should support 100 mbps but I'd wire it directly to the modem to make sure. Your best results will probably occur late at night (1 am or later). For me, I get about 29 mbps download and 6 mbps upload late at night but that is reduced to 27 mbps download and 5.5 mbps during the daytime. That reduction could be caused by server overloads, more internet traffic, slower cable speed, or more wireless collusions (even though I'm using the 5 GHz band which should eliminate most collusions) during the day.

http://www.speedtest.net/

Also it appears that DOCSIS 2.0 modems can't get much above 25 mbps and you will probably need a DOCSIS 3.0 modem to get to 30 mbps.

Currently I consistently get 27-29 mbps download and 5.5-6 mbps upload with Comcast's internet service (advertised at 25 mbps download and 4 mbps upload) using a DOCSIS 3.0 modem and a dual band n type router. I primarily use the 5 GHz band (on my two computers, TV, and Blu-Ray player but not my wireless printer and mobile devices which don't support the 5 GHz band) since I live in a condo complex and if I use the 2.4 GHz band, I get extremely variable wireless speeds (3 mbps-25mbps) due to collusions with other routers. The 5 GHz band can't transmit as far so there is very few collusions with other routers. If you live in a house, I wouldn't recommend using the 5 GHz band (unless the devices are close to the router) since it has a difficult time going through more than one wall. Even going through one wall with the router about 10 feet on the other side of the wall, I usually only see 4 bars on the 5 GHz band but always 5 bars on the 2.4 GHz band.

Since Brighthouse is advertising 30 mbps, I suspect the line speed is at least 30 mbps and more likely a little higher than that.

Re: fios
 

Here's a speedtest with FIOS at midday. I'm on their 75/35 service.
http://i39.tinypic.com/fo2aep.png

I get that result consistently, every day, no matter what the time. FIOS is 100x better than Comcast imo.

Re: fios
 

Comcast also has 50/10 and 105/20 plans. For me, the basic 25/4 plan is all I need, is reliable, and is month to month.

I agree that FIOS is slightly superior to the others but not that significant as long as the area cable system is 720 MHz or above. I believe FIOS is only a 540 MHz system but it doesn't have to contend with legacy analog channels (currently about 1/5th of the bandwidth needed in my area for the still supported 20 analog channels).

Re: fios
 

My point is it's not so much about the speeds (though they're very impressive on FIOS) but rather the underlying technology used to provide the service. Comcast still uses coaxial along with docsis3.0. The connection is asymmetrical, which means the potential for saturation of the upload stream is high. This in turn means that your download speeds are reduced (often quite drastically).

So for example, if you live in a neighborhood where people on Comcast like to torrent, you'll find that your local UBR is going to experience significant upload saturations which then affects ALL downloads attached to that UBR.

Bottom line: Comcast's using an outdated, inefficient product offering. Just like Virgin Media in the UK.

FIOS, otoh, suffers from none of these issues by virtue of not relying on local UBRs and being a symmetric connection.

Re: fios
 

It's shit, but it's massively less shit than the alternatives, unless you have Google.

On the shit factor, it compares just as much as Comcast/TW when things go wrong and we've found it to go wrong as much as the alternatives.

The up/down is pretty consistent though.

Re: fios
 

I agree if you like to torrent, then FIOS is superior. If you don't torrent, I don't think there is a major significant difference between the two.

Re: fios
 

Sorry, my point is being lost. It's not to do if whether YOU like torrenting, it's to do with the impact your NEIGHBORS can have on your Comcast connection by virtue of their love of uploading activities.

FIOS, as a nationally contended product, suffers from none of the UBR saturation issues that plaque cable providers.

Re: fios
 

I don't understand why I don't seem to see much degradation but my download speed never seems to drop below 27 mbps whenever I have checked. I tried to think of reasons but I can't seem to come up with a valid reason for not seeing the degradation. You would think I should occasionally see a major degradation when someone sharing my stream is watching a HD video, playing online action games, or downloading. DOCIS 3.0 could possibly help solve the problem in the future by using multiple channels to get the bit rate very high and then throttling the connection to keep the throughput down but with some many DOCSIS 2.0 modems still in use, it wouldn't currently help much.

Also FIOS is not totally free from the problem either since it has to backhaul all the packets to and from the internet.

Edit: With most cable system between 720 MHz and 1 .2 GHz, there should be plenty of spare bandwidth available to create a very high speed stream once they get rid of all the analog channels on the 720 MHz system. Each analog channel (6 MHz each) would create a maximum of about 38 mbps download or about 27 mbps upload throughput. I suspect cable companies are currently putting DOCSIS 2.0 modems on it's own download channel (only one allowed) and putting DOCSIS 3.0 modems on multiple download channels and then throttling them if they have restricted speeds. I suspect the cable companies currently may be using the same upload channel for both versions and throttling upload speeds. If that is the case, then that might explain why I don't see much degradation since most customers have the 25/4 plan and the download stream would have to have at least 3 channels (114 mbps) to be able to support the 100/20 plan. Also I suspect that less than 20% of the customers currently have DOCSIS 3.0 modems. If they are also using more than three download channels for DOCSIS 3.0 modems, then my chances of seeing degradation even becomes less.

Re: fios
 

Easy. Your local UBR doesn't suffer from high contention ratios. Comcast also attempt to perform DPI on your traffic to manage it, thankfully the FCC stopped this abhorrent behaviour, but it shows you the kind of ISP/company they are.

Re: fios
 

I just checked my cable modem lights and they indicate that both upstream and downstream are bonded. So upstream has a minimum stream speed of at least 54 mbps and downstream has a minimum stream speed of 76 mbps. Unfortunately the front lights don't tell me if more than 2 channels are bonded in either direction and no one on the internet seems to know how many channels are currently being bonded by Comcast for DOCSIS 3.0.

Re: fios
 

I don't understand why FIOS won't have similar saturation issues as cable. I understand that cable may put 200 homes on the same frequency (could be 8 QAM256 channels for downloading using 48 MHz of the cable bandwidth) possibly causing saturation and FIOS handles the traffic independently but when FIOS backhauls 200 homes, then I would think they would have to combine those all those separate packets into one stream possibly creating saturation. It seems that one is combining packets on the front end and the other is combining packets on the backend or am I missing how FIOS works.

From my understanding, fiber in the streets can get to about 1.2 GHz of bandwidth using about 6 amplifiers per mile. Whether it is cable or FIOS, neither can exceed that bandwidth for all services provided. For either cable using DOCIS 3.0 or FIOS, it would seem that both are restricted by the bandwidth on the fiber available for internet traffic.

I'll admit that with DOCSIS 2.0, the bandwidth could not be expanded beyond one channel (6 MHz) which was a very limiting factor and suspect that is probably the reason that most cables limited download speed to about 15 mbps several years ago but DOCSIS 3.0 with the correct hardware can expand the bandwidth and bitrate of the stream to any size that can be provided by the cable company. Although most current DOCSIS 3.0 modems are limited to 4 or 8 channels maximum so therefore are limited but there in no limitation on the number of channels that can be supported by a DOCSIS 3.0 modem and therefore the main limitation in the future should be the amount of bandwidth available for internet traffic as more channels are supported by the newer modems.

It seem hard to believe that FIOS could maintain 50 mbps download simultaneously for 200 homes since that would require over 1 GHz fiber bandwidth just for internet traffic even if FIOS can get a 50% increase in bitrate for the same bandwidth as QAM256. The only way I could see that as being possible without significant degradation would be is if FIOS has a significantly higher throughput fiber or has two sets of fiber, one for the internet and another for TV. I realize that in the real world that would never likely happen but I don't see a significant difference of having cable supporting the same bitrate on the front end as FIOS would on the backhaul for the same number of homes.

Re: fios
 

Some questions.

1. Do you know what a UBR is?
i. Are you aware of the difficulties experienced with providing locally contented UBRs?

2. Do you know the difference between a symmetric product and an asymmetric one?

3. Are you aware that FIOS offers a symmetrical product?

4. Are you aware of the reason why coaxial cable products can only offer limited upstreams compared to FTTP products?

You (still) don't seem to be able to understand that Comcast is a locally contended product and FIOS a nationally contended one.

Re: fios
 

Above is the biggest point you're missing. This is the third time i'm saying this now; Comcast (and other cable providers) operate a UBR (universal broadband router) that is connected to local cable 'cab' boxes. If usage in a street, or an apartment block, or similar is high then the local UBR becomes saturated. Cable providers are unable to contend their traffic in a more efficient manner (ie, nationally) hence introducing traffic management to try and ensure their network doesn't get clogged.

FIOS suffers from none of these issues.

1. They're fibre ALL THE WAY to the premises, not just to the local cab box then coax the rest.
2. The product is nationally contended, bypassing any local bottlenecks that build up ala cable providers.

Re: fios
 

With 4 devices going simultaneously, the 'roadblock' isn't your own home wireless network, is it?

Regards, JEff

Re: fios
 

It is unusual for that to be the case with mainstream sites or services. Almost without exception, they all use CDNs to deliver their content. Bottlenecks are typically with your internet service provider.

Colleagues have DSL connections that claim to be 35 Mbps, but they are contended (so 50 people might all have 'up to 35Mbps connections' but they all route out of a connection that does not support all 50 users connected at full speeds at the same time). Their speeds drop dramatically during peak hours.

I have a 10 Mbps connection at my ranch via a directional 5GHz long range wireless access point that hits a another repeater on a water tower some 18 miles away (I live in the boonies). The service is dedicated and uncontended. I have no problems running multiple streams of HD video, VPN connection to the office, etc. My connection is 10Mbps via my provider, at all times. During peak times, my 10Mbps connection is better than my colleagues ('up to') 35Mbps connection.

At my office (in the metroplex) I have a dedicated 1Gbps fiber connection. That rocks.

In a nutshell, if you are using a contended connection then the ISP and location are big factors. A quoted faster connection may or may not be faster than a quoted slower connection speed at peak hours.

The speed limit on the M4 is 70 mph. If few others are using it you can do 70 mph, at rush hour chances are you will be doing 50 mph. An uncontended connection is like being given the M4 bus lane to travel down.

Re: fios
 

Wow. Geekfest.

Re: fios
 

Well, the one thing that I do understand is that FIOS is not available where I live and probably won't be for some considerable time so all of this discussion is moot as far as I am convcerned ... :(