Results 1 to 25 of 33
-
06-11-2002, 09:15 AM #1Fool about Town
- Join Date
- Sep 2001
- Location
- Sirkali Rural Tamilnadu
- Posts
- 738
Will bandwidth prices be back to sanity?
Bandwidth and consequently dedicated server prices have been plummeting every day primarily because of Cogent
If this article is true, will it mean that bandwidth prices and overall web hosting prices will become reasonable?
http://www.americasnetwork.com/ameri...l.jsp?id=21161
Cheers
BalajiI am now happily selling Natural Herbal Hair Oil - happy to be so far removed from technology!
-
06-11-2002, 08:39 PM #2TheXception.com
- Join Date
- Apr 2002
- Location
- Canada
- Posts
- 382
I really don't think Cogent is going to go under. Not anytime soon anyways.
What I could see however... may be Cogent working on getting most of these lines setup, and these clients on board, and then raising their prices.
So you may be right, prices may go up yet, but I think it will be a long time before that happens, and chances are somebody else will try to offer the lowest cost fiber connectivity before too long.
Just my 2 bits.
-
06-11-2002, 09:20 PM #3Aspiring Evangelist
- Join Date
- Sep 2000
- Posts
- 367
i see more of the same
cheap bandwidth
newbies
burn outs
-
06-11-2002, 09:33 PM #4Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Nov 2001
- Posts
- 852
Re: Will bandwidth prices be back to sanity?
Originally posted by MotleyFool
overall web hosting prices will become reasonable?
-
06-12-2002, 01:46 AM #5Fool about Town
- Join Date
- Sep 2001
- Location
- Sirkali Rural Tamilnadu
- Posts
- 738
my goodness!
I was telling we need to see higher prices to make a decent living
Cheers
BalajiI am now happily selling Natural Herbal Hair Oil - happy to be so far removed from technology!
-
06-12-2002, 02:07 AM #6I Love The Chicago Bears
- Join Date
- May 2002
- Posts
- 141
I dont understand why your complaining! It's like you want to pay more! It's simple economics: The more capacity bandwidth providers have the cheaper they will sell bandwidth for! Providers spend the late 90's expanding their data pipes because they though there would be huge demand for them because of the internet explosion. Now thousands of miles of "dark fiber" lay there so they have to do something with it. I'm not sure why you didnt expect this, I think in 10 years we will be buying a terabyte for $1 not a gigabyte. It might sound crazy now but it's not. As routers get faster and faster and more fiber gets laid bandwidth will get cheaper and cheaper.
I sort of know where your coming from though as I myself am starting a hosting company I understand that competitors are selling hosting for dirt cheap, and you know what? I dont care! Because I know that in 6 months they will be gone and i'm still going to be here.
-
06-12-2002, 02:43 AM #7Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Nov 2001
- Location
- Vancouver
- Posts
- 2,422
Originally posted by TheException
I really don't think Cogent is going to go under. Not anytime soon anyways.
http://bigcharts.marketwatch.com/qui...d=0&o_symb=coi
Enron and all the other blow ups just go to show you that cooking the books is not a rare event. So I trust charts more than financials and certainly more that gut feel.
Could turn into
http://bigcharts.marketwatch.com/qui...d=157372&time=
Level 3 looking poor, a failed test of top and poised to test the recent significant lows and watch out.
http://bigcharts.marketwatch.com/qui...d=102815&time=
Genuity, yikes.
http://bigcharts.marketwatch.com/qui...=1152908&time=
Clearly there is more bandwidth than costs and revenue justify. That can't go on forever.
-
06-12-2002, 03:00 AM #8Disabled
- Join Date
- Nov 2001
- Location
- Glika Nera - Athens - Greece - Europe
- Posts
- 2,295
Originally posted by mlip129
I dont understand why your complaining! It's like you want to pay more!
-
06-12-2002, 03:02 AM #9Junior Guru
- Join Date
- May 2002
- Posts
- 221
As an out of work telecom guy lemme let you in on a few things...
ALL transport is overbuilt!!!
AT&T has rings upon rings upon rings and in each ring are HUNDREDS of little pieces of glass called dark fiber...why is it dark? cause they can't sell it!
Why can't they sell it? because they are now using spectrum multiplexing to make a single strand carry not an OC3, not an OC48 or even an OC192. No, now they can put (give or take working from memory) 48 seperate beams, on a single fiber. That's so much bandwidth that it'll be YEARS before they can even come up with ways to use it all....
Telcom's biggest problem is they have to protect old buisiness. If they want to charge you a grand a month for a T1 for phone lines, they have to charge 15k or more for a T3. If they charge that much for a T3, they can't verywell sell you an OC192 for anything even within reason.
My point?
It'll be a long time before the bandwidth glut is over.
Will Cogent make it to the end of the glut? Maybe, Maybe not....Last edited by Shin; 06-12-2002 at 03:12 AM.
-
06-12-2002, 03:12 AM #10I Love The Chicago Bears
- Join Date
- May 2002
- Posts
- 141
Originally posted by Shin
As an out of work telecom guy lemme let you in on a few things...
ALL transport is overbuilt!!!
AT&T has rings upon rings upon rings and in each ring are HUNDREDS of little pieces of glass called dark fiber...why is it dark? cause they can't sell it!
Why can't they sell it? because they are now using spectrum multiplexing to make a single strand carry not an OC3, not an OC48 or even an OC192. No, now they can put (give or take working from memory) 48 seperate beams, on a single fiber. That's so much bandwidth that it'll be YEARS before they can even come up with ways to use it all....
Telcom's biggest problem is they have to protect old buisiness. If they want to charge you a grand a month for a T1 for phone lines, they have to charge 15k or more for a T3. If they charge that much for a T3, they can't verywell sell you an OC192 for anything even within reason.
My point?
It'll be a long time before the bandwidth glut is over.
Will Cognet make it to the end of the glut? Maybe, Maybe not....
-
06-12-2002, 03:39 AM #11Junior Guru
- Join Date
- May 2002
- Posts
- 221
mlip129,
Do you know what the cable that the "cable company" brought into your house can do?
It can do at LEAST 45MBPS or = to a T3. (remember that before people wanted it phone lines could only do 300baud)
It'll be a LOOONNNNGGG time before we have fiber in our houses. It is just too expensive to lay the "last mile"
What you are saying is the exact reason that we are in the situation we are in....
All the companies had people like you saying the same things that you are so they built and built and built some more....
We were all supposed to be using a meg a second as I type this...But what am I gonna use it for?
I'm one person, even on 4 PCs, am i really gonna download mpegs, listen to internet radio, while playing an online game, talking on an internet phone, while watching CNN and checking my "online streaming quotes"?
I could really go on and on with this thread...in the article they talk about what basicly comes down to missed deadlines of getting the fiber to the actual customer...
I'd bet that 99.999% of that is not the fault of Cogent...
Maybe they are going by poles. Well the phone company or the power company owns those poles. So they need to get rights to use them. Maybe they need to dig, they need digsafes from the power company, the phone company, and the gas company.
Install dates are never firm in the telecom industry. They are missed every day by every company. There are too many variables for it to be any other way.
-
06-12-2002, 11:54 AM #12Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- May 2001
- Posts
- 1,593
I am by no mean a networking expert, but I read an interesting article in Network Computing that while the bandwidth available is huge, the real bottleneck is the core of the internet connection, which is not too broad. They gave some examples on how a couple thousand people downloading movies could jammed the core of the internet. (Not sure about the number, can't remember)
Peter
-
06-12-2002, 12:08 PM #13I Love The Chicago Bears
- Join Date
- May 2002
- Posts
- 141
Originally posted by Shin
mlip129,
Do you know what the cable that the "cable company" brought into your house can do?
It can do at LEAST 45MBPS or = to a T3. (remember that before people wanted it phone lines could only do 300baud)
It'll be a LOOONNNNGGG time before we have fiber in our houses. It is just too expensive to lay the "last mile"
What you are saying is the exact reason that we are in the situation we are in....
All the companies had people like you saying the same things that you are so they built and built and built some more....
We were all supposed to be using a meg a second as I type this...But what am I gonna use it for?
I'm one person, even on 4 PCs, am i really gonna download mpegs, listen to internet radio, while playing an online game, talking on an internet phone, while watching CNN and checking my "online streaming quotes"?
I could really go on and on with this thread...in the article they talk about what basicly comes down to missed deadlines of getting the fiber to the actual customer...
I'd bet that 99.999% of that is not the fault of Cogent...
Maybe they are going by poles. Well the phone company or the power company owns those poles. So they need to get rights to use them. Maybe they need to dig, they need digsafes from the power company, the phone company, and the gas company.
Install dates are never firm in the telecom industry. They are missed every day by every company. There are too many variables for it to be any other way.
-
06-12-2002, 12:16 PM #14Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Nov 2000
- Location
- San Diego
- Posts
- 3,407
Originally posted by ckpeter
I am by no mean a networking expert, but I read an interesting article in Network Computing that while the bandwidth available is huge, the real bottleneck is the core of the internet connection, which is not too broad. They gave some examples on how a couple thousand people downloading movies could jammed the core of the internet. (Not sure about the number, can't remember)
Peter
People are using a 100k and under per webpage rule and thats why we still dont need it. But when the majority of people will have broadband things will change.
-
06-12-2002, 01:56 PM #15I Love The Chicago Bears
- Join Date
- May 2002
- Posts
- 141
Originally posted by UmBillyCord
This is actually a good point. The Internet is getting more and more meshed into a big soup. Can any regular user really tell the difference between AT&T and Sprint or Level (3)? It seems everyday that there are less and less small peering points, and more large ones where everyone goes.
This is like saying, once we do away with paper, books will be longer. Also, traffic for sites will get harder to come by. Your site on Teletubies might be popular now and drawing 100 GBs of transfer, but as soon as 10 more Teletubies sites appear..........
-
06-12-2002, 02:32 PM #16Junior Guru
- Join Date
- Apr 2002
- Location
- Sacramento, CA
- Posts
- 220
Originally posted by UmBillyCord
This is like saying, once we do away with paper, books will be longer.
People will fail to realize that even though they have high speed internet access and they can load the page in less than a second that not everyone will have that luxury. There are probably still people connecting using Baud rated modems.
It is just the course of the internet. When you were using a 14.4K modem did you see alot of graphic intensive sites? Probably not, but now you do.Joel Strellner
-
06-12-2002, 03:20 PM #17Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Nov 2000
- Location
- San Diego
- Posts
- 3,407
Once the majority of people begin using high speed connections everyone will start designing their sites for them.
Am I saying no one would use more bandwidth intensive contant? No. But I am saying there will ntoi be some huge shift to high bandwidth use content. Unless of course so new software or technology comes around that everyone must have and it is the host who can deliver.
-
06-12-2002, 03:35 PM #18Junior Guru Wannabe
- Join Date
- Apr 2002
- Location
- Austria
- Posts
- 38
What is called "high bandwidth content" today will be the "everyday use" content tomorrow - just look at the past years up to now.
Our expectations rise with advancement of technology and so does the normality with which we use this technology.
I personally think this is a good thing.█ These domains are for sale at NameSpirit.com:
█ SafeVPS.com & SaveVPS.com (Package),
█ TidyHost.com, ServerFans.com
█ Contact us anytime | Get newly added domains on Twitter
-
06-12-2002, 03:39 PM #19Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Nov 2000
- Location
- San Diego
- Posts
- 3,407
Our expectations rise with advancement of technology and so does the normality with which we use this technology.
I ain't saying we are not going to progress, but *I* don't think some huge content explosion will happen thanks to bigger pipes into our homes. Hell, look at CPUs. I find it hard to locate software or programs that my 550 GHz can't handle.
-
06-12-2002, 03:45 PM #20Junior Guru
- Join Date
- May 2002
- Posts
- 221
I find it hard to locate software or programs that my 550 GHz can't handle.
-
06-12-2002, 04:27 PM #21Junior Guru
- Join Date
- Apr 2002
- Location
- Sacramento, CA
- Posts
- 220
Originally posted by UmBillyCord
Why?? What is the benifit to the average Joe Blow? Do you think every person who has a web site is some over-the-top, sharks with lazer beam, type person? No....
(clipped)
So many people get wrapped up in what they like and want, and use this train of though on the masses. Simple numbers prove this wrong.
It is the average Joe Blow that will make large pipes almost a requirement to go online. Large corporations and people who hire decent web designers are the only ones who will be able to keep things to a minimum and not require large pipes.
Once everyone gets high speed internet access people will "forget" to make sure it works well on slower users; therefore making the users get frustrated and have upgrade to the latest high speed technology to have a pleasurable experience while online.
It's also an evolution type of situation; When you were on a 286 and you started to see what the people could do with the "new" pentium computers, did you have to have one? Did you wait until you realized that certain things would work on your system but the could on theirs; eventually giving in and purchasing the lastest system?
Everything that you utilize on the internet/computers have gone through an evolution type of situation, including bandwidth. I think that we are very far from ultimate goal of everything instantly, but we are slowly begining to accomplish it; and as we slowly accompish this task people will find a way to use it. Which then creates the loop called evolution; something great must come out to be greater than the current greatest thing.
Just my... err $200.00 worthLast edited by xerocity.com; 06-12-2002 at 04:32 PM.
Joel Strellner
-
06-12-2002, 04:50 PM #22WHT Forum Royalty
- Join Date
- Jun 2000
- Location
- Orlando FL USA
- Posts
- 1,315
Taking a bit of U-Turn back to the first question in the thread...
If this article is true, will it mean that bandwidth prices and overall web hosting prices will become reasonable?
This thread is a good read.. no question about that. It's interesting to read the opinions of a variety of interests. The issue of bandwidth reliability and costs is important as well. However, I think we need to be careful judging the "overall cost of hosting" by the specific cost of bandwidth. Remember that the majority of hosts already charge less for the bandwidth then they are paying (with the assumption that their users wont use it all). If their costs were to go down it might actually put them in the position of making a "real" (as opposed to the perceived) profit. $5/month for 100 accounts may seem like a profit to someone paying $200/month for their server and sticking the extra $300 in their pocket but as they grow and/or the Biz/Tax laws get a hold of them the "profit" can quickly turn into a loss. Long story short, as I noted above.. We need to make a clear separation between the "cost of bandwidth" and the "overall cost of hosting.Just my... err $200.00 worthFutureQuest.net
Quality Services & Professional Support Since 1998
Click Here To Visit the Community
-
06-12-2002, 05:33 PM #23Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Jul 2001
- Posts
- 892
As a consumer and student, I enjoy the low prices and the extra profit I make as a result. I can, however, sympathize with those who would like to see prices go up.
The internet is becoming more and more bandwidth intensive. For the last 5 years I have been on the same 28.8 connection. Back in the day I could get by; there was no flash, or unsolicited (by me anyways) streaming media or hires images. Now surfing is an all day job.
Just look at the internet growth over the last 10 years: http://www.zakon.org/robert/internet...Count_Host.gif
http://www.zakon.org/robert/internet/timeline/
Think of what is to come. It's a hard one to predict, and as the internet becomes more and more a part of our lives for both work and fun.
To tell you the truth, I liked the internet better back in the good old days.
-
06-12-2002, 09:26 PM #24Disabled
- Join Date
- Nov 2001
- Location
- Salisbury, UK
- Posts
- 27
Bottlenecks & Co.
"There will come a time where a average person will use a 100mbit line. I know that sounds insane but when tv on demand and similar high bandwidth services such as high quality video streaming come out people will need it."
I think 100Mbs is a bit extreme but the truth is there. There are so many examples of the technological march we have: 640Kb RAM, ~6Billion IPs, etc. etc. 100Mbs is a long long way down the line [excuse the pun]. However 512Kb will become standard in Euope and the US in the next 5 years. The next progression is surely, "telephone" calls purely over fibre, multiple simaltaneous pay per view/live TV, Radio, 'Internet Downloads', music steros direct downloads etc. etc. I'm sure a lot more can be pushed on b/w as well as new things thought up. The growth will continue and continue for end-user bandwidth. Just as 2.0GHz processors wwere inconcievable in 1975 so is 100Mbs home feeds.
However sure there is loads and loads of dark fibre floating around but there are still one or two bottlenecks with ISPs, locally say for cable operators etc. etc. at the moment if we wanted too say use 50% of the dark fibre avaliable, bottlenecks elesewhere would prevent its efficient use.
JS
-
06-13-2002, 12:03 PM #25Fool about Town
- Join Date
- Sep 2001
- Location
- Sirkali Rural Tamilnadu
- Posts
- 738
Originally posted by Deb
Taking a bit of U-Turn back to the first question in the thread... I believe the majority of prices are already "reasonable". Looking at the last part of the question however... "overall web hosting prices"... even if bandwidth became honestly FREE we still need to pay for the humans and the hardware etc... If site owners (and hosts) continue to push the prices down "because bandwidth is cheap/free" how do we plan to cover the costs of ... "everything else"?
This thread is a good read.. no question about that. It's interesting to read the opinions of a variety of interests. The issue of bandwidth reliability and costs is important as well. However, I think we need to be careful judging the "overall cost of hosting" by the specific cost of bandwidth. Remember that the majority of hosts already charge less for the bandwidth then they are paying (with the assumption that their users wont use it all). If their costs were to go down it might actually put them in the position of making a "real" (as opposed to the perceived) profit. $5/month for 100 accounts may seem like a profit to someone paying $200/month for their server and sticking the extra $300 in their pocket but as they grow and/or the Biz/Tax laws get a hold of them the "profit" can quickly turn into a loss. Long story short, as I noted above.. We need to make a clear separation between the "cost of bandwidth" and the "overall cost of hosting. I'm not as rich as xerocity.com but there's my nickel anyway
Deb,
I think I didn't word my first question well enough...
When I came to WHT a year back, badnwidth prices at 2$/gb were considered good and affordable.. and Rackshack's 99$ for 300GB offer was incredible
Now , thanks to Cogent, we have servers at 120$ and fairly good ones at that with 300-400gb /mo
I am paying 130$ for a PIII with 35gb/mo bandwidth and having enjoyed 100% uptime for 130 days I do know that there are NOC's there are NOC's.
But I am not able to compete on price with someone offering 250mb / 8 gb for 3$ or so.
So when I mean reasonable, I mean resonable for all the parties.. NOC, Data center, ded server provider, host, and customer [for an economy/industry to be stable all players must get a reasonable profit and the customer should get a decent value for money]
Price wars are a direct result of excessive supply over demand and it is happening just too much in WHT
Those who can hold their own will come on top , provide great service, good plans and reliable servers with near 100% uptime and make money
I am inclined to think that Cogent has contributed a lot to the glut in cheap servers [but I may be wrong ]
Well just my 2c !
Cheers
BalajiI am now happily selling Natural Herbal Hair Oil - happy to be so far removed from technology!