This Company in Hong Kong offers 1000MB Fibre speed

Interesting article on BBC World service about this company http://www.hkbn.net/2010/eng/en_service1_1a.html

Now they are the people who know about the Internet and it's future.


Can't find any pricing anywhere but I am sure it is not expensive.

Steve

Edited by stevepressman (Fri 13-May-11 12:11:35)

Is the Subject how they sing it?

8 Gbps - I very much doubt it.

Says $169 HKD for 100mbps

So that's like what £13-14 a month?

They are not the first Japan had gigabit connections in 2008 and South Korea are planning a national network according to this http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/click_online/9...

Woops missed that one Thanks Bob is corrected now

Steve

Great deal. I've just ordered and will be paying £7.50 (HK$35.4) per month. Connection charge is £135 million, seems a bit steep, but hey great speeds!

eta: just in case there are people with £135 million to spare: I'm lying.

Edited by deleted (Fri 13-May-11 12:53:52)

Is there any evidence that people connected to 100Mb/s or 1Gb/s services where they are available get anything like these speeds in practice (rather than just nice numbers coming out of speed test sites) - or does the bottleneck simply get shifted somewhere else?

I can saturate a 40Mb/s FTTC link from some sources on the internet but in practice most seem to hit about 3 and a bit MB/s and not much more.

I'm not even clear what you need 1Gbps for as a single user - it's all very well being able to download a typical DVD in less than a minute but it's still going to take you a couple of hours to watch it - and streaming is probably better for that unless you simply want to brag about how many DVDs you have in your media library.

Even if we suppose that someone might set up a service streaming full bandwidth blu-ray (36Mb/s) you can still get two such streams in a 100Mbps connection with a bit to spare. Frankly though I don't see anyone sourcing that sort of bandwidth for several years yet - most "HD" streams are less than 8Mb/s (eg iPlayer currently tops out at 3500kb/s 720p)

In reply to a post by stevepressman:

Now they are the people who know about the Internet and it's future.

They are the people who have the advantage of only having to wire up a small area with a high population density.

Piece of cake by comparison with wiring up even a small country like the UK.

It's interesting, yes, unfortunately even big cities in the UK aren't as favourable as Hong Kong for this deployment.

Plus as soon as London got wired with such services people would be up in arms to Ofcom and MPs about the digital divide. Forget that some places are just easier to wire than others, we must all be equal, how dare those densely populated city areas with their pollution, traffic and relative lack of space have faster services than farms and idyllic rural villages in the middle of nowhere that cost hundreds of thousands or more just to reach.

If you could give all the rural areas 4 Meg, I'm sure most of the inhabitants would be delighted. The divide isn't about rural people wanting 100 Meg or 40 Meg. It's about them having a service which allows them to access the modern, bloated web.

In reply to a post by camieabz:

If you could give all the rural areas 4 Meg, I'm sure most of the inhabitants would be delighted. The divide isn't about rural people wanting 100 Meg or 40 Meg. It's about them having a service which allows them to access the modern, bloated web.

It isn't the most that shout the loudest.

Actually, it is exactly that. The web will always bloat to match the capability of the service to the city-dwellers. The rural areas will always be behind the cutting edge (or even the blunt edge).

I'm afraid to say that, by virute of numbers, the rural dwellers will, forever more, be behind on the service-level offered. It has been true since the first canals delivered coal from the country into the heart of Manchester, and will go on being true into the future.

You might say, now, that all they want is 2Mb or 4mb, ... but you just remember that those are speeds that were impossible to city-dwellers a decade ago - and there were no services that made use of it either. How far we've come in the decade.

The services will always expand to match the space available to the masses (with the credit cards), and the rural areas will always get left behind, but always demand more. Sorry - I don't make the laws of economics here - it's just the way it is. Eventually, perhaps, there'll be a price premium to live in the country, and rural-dwellers will be able to afford the extra costs.

New campaign slogan - "Broadband for the Farmband".

Edited by RobertoS (Sun 15-May-11 08:58:41)

I often see articles like this suggesting amazing speeds somewhere else, often in the far east. Some thoughts:

1. The connections are often to the building rather than individual dwelling
2. Even if to the dwelling, the architecture may include shared cables, so there still may be some dilution of the bandwidth
3. The headline usually focuses on the sync speed, rarely/never makes it clear what throughput is achieved, which requires investment in backhaul

IIRC average throughput in these same cities/countries is nowhere close to the sorts of headline speeds such as the one in this story which suggest to me that the connection is usually to the buidling, that backhaul investment is a long way behind and makes the speed in the last mile almost irrelevant.

Hardware manuafacturers often promote these stories, usually forget to talk about the throughput, without this the investment would be, IMHO, largely wasted.