Wed Apr 23, 2008 4:19PM EDT
See Comments (682)
Doom-filled warnings arrive from AT&T this week. The company says that without substantial investment in network infrastructure, the Internet will essentially run out of bandwidth in just two short years.
Blame broadband, says AT&T. Decades of dealing with the trickle of bandwidth consumed by voice and dialup modems left AT&T twiddling its thumbs. The massive rise of DSL and cable modem service in the 2000s has had AT&T facing a monstrous increase in the volume of data transmissions. And that's set to increase another 50 times between now and 2015. That's enough, says AT&T, to all but crash the system.
In response, AT&T says it's investing $19 billion to upgrade the backbone of the Internet, the routers, servers, and connections where the bulk of traffic is processed.
Of course, AT&T is using this breathlessness in part to point fingers beyond simple broadband use. Web video (especially high-definition video) is the most commonly mentioned bandwidth hog. AT&T says video alone will eat up 80 percent of traffic in two years vs. just 30 percent now. One wonders how YouTube doesn't collapse under the pressure. Hmmm.
Meanwhile, many are wondering whether this is prelude to AT&T announcing (or not announcing, but doing anyway) a traffic prioritization/shaping system like Comcast has been tinkering with... and which has earned it nothing but scorn. Net neutrality (which would forbid premium pricing for certain Internet applications and destinations) is a topic that continues to be hotly debated on Capitol Hill, and telcos are anxious to kill the idea since they'd love to be able to charge additional money for different kinds of web traffic. If the whole Internet is about to crash, well, that makes AT&T's argument all the more compelling, doesn't it?
Join in the discussion. Here you'll see the comments in the order they were posted.
I agree with the YouTube comment. But I do think someone will get this fixed in time, well, I hope anyway.
I live in a REMOTE area of Florida {Inglis , yeah I never heard of it until I moved here 2 years ago} that all I can obtain in broadband is either Comcast or Dish network, cost are prohibitly ? (spelling) and only dsl at about 6 - 7 KB/sec. Where is all the tecnolgy from the majors, or are they waiting for a crunch to justify a huge increase in service? I feel for our children that are now more adapt in computers than I ever thought was possible 20 years ago. It's heck to get old.
In my opinion, this smells. It smells like another effort in the making by greedy corporations... to bleed the consumer of even more outrageous sums of money.
oh no . . . OH G-O-D NO!!!!!!!!!!!!
we must come up with a method of fighting back
Don't worry the Grid is on the way!
This is why it's important to have a FREE MARKET where I am FREE to choice my provider. Hello Verizon, goodbye AT&T!________Additionally, vertical integration of new features and services by broadband network operators is an essential part of the innovation strategy companies will need to use to compete and offer customers the services they demand. Network operators also have property rights in their systems that need to be acknowledged and honored. Net neutrality mandates would flout those property rights and reject freedom of contract in this marketplace.______________ The regulatory regime envisioned by Net neutrality mandates would also open the door to a great deal of potential "gaming" of the regulatory system and allow firms to use the regulatory system to hobble competitors. Worse yet, it would encourage more FCC regulation of the Internet and broadband markets in general.______NET NEUTRALITY IS A BAD IDEA!
I agree with kojak58_1xsailorman. With computers costing more and more money to upgrade and fix, etc, this seems like anotheder way to bleed money out of us. Look at the gas prices, food prices, sheesh, makes one want to head for the hills and live off the land, NOT! First you have to buy land!:)
Only the US "internet" will crash... The rest of the world is 50 years ahead of the US already in capacity, so nothing will happen elsewhere. The rest of the world realized early on that speed reduces the required capacity in the long run. So the most advanced networks can transfer multi gigabytes of data in several seconds, which makes streaming videos a snap. Just 2 seconds and a full HD movie is transfered to your device for viewing. Much better than eating up limited bandwidth for hours to get it - get it in a snap and free up the lines. Different approach - one that works.
1 Posted by taficke on Thu Sep 3, 2009 9:54PM EDT Report Abuse
People knew this was going to happen. Why didn't people invest in this more when the first times of trouble were appearing instead of wait till the last minute to try and fix something that will take time?