OneGibabit to offer Google Fiber speeds in Canada

[Hemi-Cuda]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/britis...-internet.html

Startup in Vancouver. Hopefully they do well and can start expanding to other major Canadian cities soon. Anything to put a dent into the Shaw/Telus monopoly

[PsYcNeT]

Be still my beating heart...

[Rathji]

[photon]

That's a lot of porn.

[nik-]

Google ad analytics on your entire pipe

[TorqueDog]

I love it.

Only thing is that people need to temper their expectations of what speeds THEY will see.

Theoretical limit of 802.11n is 600 Mbps. Most devices are 300 Mbps, though depending on what crappy MiniCard your tablet/laptop manufacturer has decided to use, the real world performance of your Wireless-N can be pretty unimpressive. My dad's HP Pavilion G7 has trouble maintaining connection speeds of 72 Mbps... sitting four feet away from my rockstar of a router. Even the Intel Centrino 802.11n card my Dell Precision has will only reach a maximum of 130 Mbps... which is annoying. In addition, plenty of people still use 802.11g routers.

Also, just because your connection has a beefcake downstream like 1 Gbps doesn't mean sites you access will have similarly capable upstream performance.

I'm looking forward to it being available, and damn right I'll be getting it once it becomes available where I live. But I suspect a lot of whining after people get it and don't get anything close to 1,000 Mbps on Speedtest.net.

Originally Posted by nik-

Google ad analytics on your entire pipe

Doesn't say they're using Google for their provider.

[sclitheroe]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

I love it.

Only thing is that people need to temper their expectations of what speeds THEY will see.

Theoretical limit of 802.11n is 600 Mbps. Most devices are 300 Mbps, though depending on what crappy MiniCard your tablet/laptop manufacturer has decided to use, the real world performance of your Wireless-N can be pretty unimpressive. My dad's HP Pavilion G7 has trouble maintaining connection speeds of 72 Mbps... sitting four feet away from my rockstar of a router. Even the Intel Centrino 802.11n card my Dell Precision has will only reach a maximum of 130 Mbps... which is annoying. In addition, plenty of people still use 802.11g routers.

Also, just because your connection has a beefcake downstream like 1 Gbps doesn't mean sites you access will have similarly capable upstream performance.

I'm looking forward to it being available, and damn right I'll be getting it once it becomes available where I live. But I suspect a lot of whining after people get it and don't get anything close to 1,000 Mbps on Speedtest.net.

Doesn't say they're using Google for their provider.

Yup. Key sub-word/concept is "width" - an individual user may not reap the full benefits of gigabit, but in a house with 4 internet savvy people (two adults, two kids), where you've got someone doing some work, someone on Skype, and two kids running NetFlix on iPads, or uploading a video they made to Youtube, plus the household cloud backup churning away in the background, and it's not hard to chew up some substantial bandwidth. Greater bandwidth prevents queueing at the router, since the packets transit your network more quickly, and that helps keep latency lower for everyone.

[Rathji]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

I love it.

Only thing is that people need to temper their expectations of what speeds THEY will see.

Theoretical limit of 802.11n is 600 Mbps. Most devices are 300 Mbps, though depending on what crappy MiniCard your tablet/laptop manufacturer has decided to use, the real world performance of your Wireless-N can be pretty unimpressive. My dad's HP Pavilion G7 has trouble maintaining connection speeds of 72 Mbps... sitting four feet away from my rockstar of a router. Even the Intel Centrino 802.11n card my Dell Precision has will only reach a maximum of 130 Mbps... which is annoying. In addition, plenty of people still use 802.11g routers.

Also, just because your connection has a beefcake downstream like 1 Gbps doesn't mean sites you access will have similarly capable upstream performance.

I'm looking forward to it being available, and damn right I'll be getting it once it becomes available where I live. But I suspect a lot of whining after people get it and don't get anything close to 1,000 Mbps on Speedtest.net.

Doesn't say they're using Google for their provider.

While you are correct, I don't think the typical home user has any problems with a mere 72 Mbps on each device on wifi, those that do have such a need will be able to hardwire in.

Of course, unless it is priced like Google Fiber, which I doubt, a typical home wouln't be getting it.

[sclitheroe]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

Theoretical limit of 802.11n \

n is for chumps, ac trumps.

[SebC]

What's the upload speed? For a photographer, something like this is exactly what you need for a cloud back-up solution to work. Today I filled a 16 GB card just shooting the Stampede parade (I'll admit that virtually all of that will be crap that I don't need backed up, but let's pretend it isn't). If my math is correct it would take 3 days to upload on Shaw (60 kBps upload). If I wanted to start a cloud backup for my whole library, I'd probably be looking at months of continuous uploading.

[sclitheroe]

Originally Posted by SebC

What's the upload speed? For a photographer, something like this is exactly what you need for a cloud back-up solution to work. Today I filled a 16 GB card just shooting the Stampede parade (I'll admit that virtually all of that will be crap that I don't need backed up, but let's pretent it isn't). If my math is correct it would take 3 days to upload on Shaw (60 kBps upload). If I wanted to start a cloud backup for my whole library, I'd probably be looking at months of continuous uploading.

It would take 7 hours give or take on my Shaw connection.

Upstream bandwidth for fibre based solutions is theoretically identical to downstream. Practically speaking, to sustain a gigabit down, you probably need around 50 megabits upstream capability.

Edit: yes, that initial upload for online backup takes months if you have a decent sized amount of any kind of data. That's why you start today, carefully throttled so you don't notice it running 24x7, and you let it run till its done. Hearing the click-of-death on a hard drive is not the right time to start a backup. That's my PSA for the day.

[Azure]

My question is are they actually building out their own fiber network, or are they using existing lines?

[sclitheroe]

Originally Posted by Azure

My question is are they actually building out their own fiber network, or are they using existing lines?

Explained in second half of the article.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by sclitheroe

Edit: yes, that initial upload for online backup takes months if you have a decent sized amount of any kind of data. That's why you start today, carefully throttled so you don't notice it running 24x7, and you let it run till its done. Hearing the click-of-death on a hard drive is not the right time to start a backup. That's my PSA for the day.

I do have backup, but it's local.

[DoubleK]

I have a hardcopy of the internet if anyone wants to borrow it.

[HalifaxDrunk]

Originally Posted by DoubleK

I have a hardcopy of the internet if anyone wants to borrow it.

I'm interested but do you have the scratch and sniff version?

[photon]

Originally Posted by DoubleK

I have a hardcopy of the internet if anyone wants to borrow it.

Don't drop it.

[jeffman]

Nvm

[sclitheroe]

Originally Posted by DoubleK

I have a hardcopy of the internet if anyone wants to borrow it.

I heard they have it on computers now (obligatory Simpsons reference)

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by sclitheroe

n is for chumps, ac trumps.

I've been waiting for a really solid 802.11ac router to come out that supports DD-WRT. I've been running a Netgear WNDR3700v2 w/ DD-WRT and it's excellent. (There was a time I thought I would NEVER say 'Netgear' and 'excellent' in the same sentence.)

Any suggestions, Scott?