Fast... but is it worth it?

As BT usher in un-restricted 8mb DSL services, it has to be asked whether upgrading to such a service would be worthwhile, in light of the capping many ISPs are introducing due to BT price tarrifs for IP backhaul.

Firstly, I ought to say thank-you to Barry, who graciously asked me to contribute to the site. Hmm, what to write? Well, as I do not have anything at hand, as it were, and one of the site aims is to promote discussion, I thought it might be apt to start with an opinion piece.

So... is the 8m/bit service worthwhile and is it better than mobile broadband?

Firstly, what is it? Well, as many will know, ADSL has been available for few years now. The service was available as 512kb, 1mbit, and 2mbit. Service was provisioned either directly from BT, or indirectly via an ISP, such as Zen or Bulldog.

BT has the biggest national UK network. Many ISPs do not have their own network, and rent "capacity" or a "virtual network" from BT. Even those ISP's with their own network are small, often geographically bound. So both need to rent some form of capacity, to get your data from you, to them, and then onto the Internet, and vice-versa. This, not unreasonably, costs money of course, hence you pay for it. And not very much, especially when considered against the £thousands that dedicated leased line circuits cost.

ADSL itself is capable of providing bandwidth to a max of 8mbit downstream, and 1mb upstream (the actual figures are slightly lower, but immaterial for now). It is distance-dependant, meaning that further away from the exchange, the bandwidth available would probably lessen. But regardless of service, a heck of a lot faster than a dial-up modem.

In addition to BT putting a ceiling on the bandwidth available, many ISP's put a limit on the amount of data that could be transferred, for example, 100gb a month. This was termed 'capping'. If one exceeded the cap, one paid for the extra data transferred. Some ISP's didn't state a figure, and relied upon 'fair usage', whilst others had no limit at all.

Capping was never much of an issue. 'Fair usage', however, was a different matter. The limit was arbitrary, and entirely at the ISPs discretion. To be fair, many ISPs did warn so-called heavy users that action as imminent if hey did not change their habits.

That, in a nutshell, is the background of the basic dsl services we have today. I apologise for the over-simplification, especially dsl technology, but this is intended for a wider audience other than net-heads! And of course, it ignores SDSL, ADSL2, and cable. Purposely.

Now BT have removed the speed cap. DSL lines can run at full speed. Your modem/router will negotiate the fastest connection between itself and the exchange, that the line can support (provided your ISP offers MAX products, you have subscribed, and the exchange has been upgraded - if needed - to support it).

Will you upgrade? Would you want to?

With the introduction of MAX, many ISPs have added caps to their service. Now this is not unreasonable from the ISP's perspective. They have to pay BT for transporting your traffic, nothing in his world comes free.

No, the problem comes from the handbrake effect caps can have. Caps vary from ISP to ISP, and from 1GB(!!! wtf!!!) to 50GB. On a 512kb dsl service, 50gb is a generous allowance. Even if you were downloading at 40-50kb/sec, it would take a good few weeks to use it. On a 1mb service, its so-so. On 2mb it might seem stingy. After all, it is possible to download around 600GB a month on a 2mb connection - the max in theory is about 720GB assuming a 30 day month.

Read that last figure again, and compare it to a 50GB cap. Ignoring what one might be pulling down 24/7 to hit 600-700GB, remember its a 2mb line. Imagine an 8mb line.

Consider that a 4mbit line could pull down circa 1.2TB (terabytes, or a 1200 gigabytes, ie the contents of 300 DVD-R), and an 8mbit line could pull down between 2 adn 2.5TB a month.

Of course, most people will not do that. I use the figures to show just how much faster a "fast" connection is (I say "fast" as it pales into insignificance compared to the 100mbit services available in Scandinavia and the Far East, and the 1.6GB connection in a previous employment).

There is a maxim, "if you build it they will come". The Government publicly states their aim of the UK becoming the leading wired nation, business want to use IP (the transport mechanism of the internet) to shunt content to you, ie films, television, music, services such as buy-a-pizza to lordy knows what. Its a true maxim. in 1999/2000 BT were "unconvinced" of demand for DSL (the reality is different, and they were more worried about erosion of telephone and leased line revenues by dsl). Look at the uptake of it. Network admins have known, that within weeks of upgrading a network form 10mbit to 100mbit, or 100mbit to 1000mbit, users are complaining that "the network is slow".

Are you getting a little bit worried about that cap yet? Its like being told you can have a Mercedes SLR, and no speed limits on the motorway. Sound good until you realise that at full-speed -204mph- the fuel tank is empty after 19minutes. And no refuel until next month.

So with 8mbit, is 50GB a month enough? You could use that in less than two days.

"But I don't download dodgy films/albums/music/whatever" I hear you say. True, but think about legal content (I'm want to avoid a piracy debate). What happens when real streaming media takes off? And you can watch a film on your internet connected television, streamed over the 'net? Even using current compression that's between 700-1.4GB. And that's using standard 720x525 line content. HDTV content can eat upwards of 25GB per hour, even with compression. Now add factor in all your email. All your VOIP calls. All your web-browsing. Your children's - or your - odd 'downloaded film/music'. And all the services such as Google Maps, on-line data storage, and those not yet conceived, or hindered by current bandwidth constraints (someone is of course planning a 'killer app' that needs high speed connections). All of this eats into a capped allowance. And as such a cap has detrimental effect on the usefulness of a high-speed connection. It's there, you just dare not use it too much!

SO what can one do? Well, don't moan at the ISPs. Some have stated caps for their MAX services. Some are not, just stating a "fair usage" policy applies. The ISP has to make money to stay in business, and they have to pay BT. The cost? 50p a gigabyte. Doesnt seem a lot, but it can soon mount up. That Linux distro you wanted might just cost you £2 a disk...

And what happens when you have a wired family, which is becoming more common? A media PC in the front room, computer(s) in the child's room(s). The one in the den/office/study? All browsing/downloading/emailing - ie all using that allowance... And before you reply that you don't use 50gb anyway (or your ISP's allowance is more), think about how your traffic habits have changed, from how much you used in the days of dial-up on 110baud modems (oops, showing my age!), through 2400, 9600, 14.4, 33Kb, to 512kb dsl to 2mbit. I bet that figure has gone up...

If you are still reading, well done! I'd like to have been able to wrap up with an answer, but I'm afraid that even a positive conclusion is difficult. DSL service has been hampered in the UK by lack of imagination and foresight (such as the reluctance to invest in fibre cabling - but thats my next rant/opinion/drivel piece). Now we have something approaching a high-speed service, the possibilities are on the cusp of strangulation by stealth.

BT never marketed ISDN - it was seen as threat to their kilobit leased line service. They dragged over dsl, as it was perceived as a threat to Mega stream leased line. The major cash-cow was always the PSTN; you pick up the phone and they made 5p/minute. "modern" technical services have always been viewed as a threat to these transport revenue streams. And charging for IP transit is the same mould as transport revenue. Despite the new faces and new management of the years, the revenue streams effectively remain unchanged. BT have yet to realise that they could make money from providing a free transport service to end users, by carrying paid-for content (ditto the ISPs). Its not impossible. MS did it with Internet Explorer. Starbucks growth model is the same. As are websites. Transport (dsl) is free to the end user. You charge the provider, who charges for content. And if people want something, they tend to pay for it.

But perhaps I'm being too Utopian in my thinking. BT will never become a provider. So in the interim, when we find caps are way below usage patterns, and we are paying too much for what is essentially the fifth utillity service, what can we do?

Complain? I guess. Write to OFCOM, write to your local MP, write to the major news aggregators and columnists (Guy Kewney is an excellent start... hi Guy!), even write to content providers and companies.

But I think I've said [more than] enough. Its your turn now, thoughts and comments, please. If I provoke some thoughts, then I'm happy.

*spelling and grammatical mistakes all mine. (c)me 2006, invent your own words and phrases!  And you can tell I'm new... I don't know how to add the comment box! DOH!