[nzlug] [Fwd: ./ - broadband isn't, broadband unless its at least 2Mbps]

[Mathew Carley]

>>> I think they used to claim that 128Kb/s was broadband, even when 
>>> the 'official' (FCC at least) definition was 200Kb/s. It would be nice to 
>>> see this definition bumped up a bit
>>>       
>> My Dad & I consider broadband to be at least 10Mbps. ;)
>>     
>
>   
Ideally... but these speeds are only even available in select countries 
- I could probably count on my hands the number of countries that offer 
this kind of speed at all, let alone as the "norm" for an Internet 
Connection - and New Zealand is not one of them.
> i'd consider broadband anything that allows for a live video stream in
> fullscreen tv quality (that's not youtube)
>
> that, or a similar definition should be used in the regulations, because
> it would grow automaticly with the improvement of technology (as
> standard tv-quality evolves to dvd and higher resolutions over time, so
> broadband will have to evolve to keep up)
>
> greetings, martin.
>   
A live video stream in Full Screen TV quality (isn't standard TV 
resolution something like 320*240?) probably couldn't be considered 
broadband - I think that kind of resolution comes out at less than 
1MBPS, depending on compression. (Note to self: Consult Adobe Premiere 
or Final Cut Studio to double check bitrate to resolution ratios).

Still, I reckon 2MBPS should be considered a "good base" for anything 
wishing to call itself broadband, and for any company wishing to 
advertise their services as adhering to this de-facto "standard". I'm 
pretty sure that would put Telecom in a creek without a paddle, thats 
for sure.

For your average consumer, 2MBPS allows reasonable download speeds 
(unless you happen to be downloading ISO images or using BitTorrent a 
lot), and allows 4 or 5 computers to use the net (and possibly streaming 
video) without slowing down or stuttering.

P.S. I was way off about the OECD broadband report: its only 75 pages, 
not 120. It focuses mostly on double- and triple-play services - and for 
those that think Frances "Free Telecom" service is a good deal, its 
quite dependent on your location in the city. When I was living in Nice, 
we had endless problems with the connection and the "Freebox" - but as 
mentioned, it may have been a location or DSLAM problem - some friends 
in downtown Nice had no problems at all, so it was a good deal for 
them... but for NZ$60/month, who can complain about 12-24MBits, 200 TV 
channels and a phone line?