[LINK] The PLAN, and broadband speeds?

[Craig Sanders]

On Fri, Jun 22, 2007 at 04:44:19AM +1000, Glen Turner wrote:
> If you add it up
>  - two HD TVs
>  - two HD videoconference
>  - some web
>  - phones
>
> you need about 1.2Gbps -- call it 1Gbps for convenience and assuming
> you can squeeze more performance out of HD video codecs as CPUs
> improve. So we're talking fiber to the home as the end game.
> Note that high definition has a heavy use of bandwidth, without
> that you get about 60Mbps for the above list. But I've seen HD
> videoconferencing -- unlike HD TV the difference is compelling (eg,
> you can hold up a page and the other person can read it).

still seems like a massive waste of bandwidth when you consider that
a video-conferencing system is not cheap (on both ends), and the
additional cost of an integrated scanner to show/transfer documents
would be negligible.

instead of holding up a document to show it, place it on the scanner
and push the scan button. at worst a few tens or hundreds of Kbps to
transmit the scanned document rather than hundreds of Mbps for HD
videoconferencing.


also, is it likely that you'll have both HDTV usage *AND* HD
videoconferencing at the same end node? i would have thought that
videoconferencing would be more likely at an office (where watching
TV isn't all that common), and TV would be more likely at home (where
videoconferencing isn't all that common). i.e. typically, it would be
one or the other, not both.


that said, though, i agree that FTTH is, or should be, the goal.

craig

-- 
craig sanders <cas at taz.net.au>

Christianity might be a good thing if anyone ever tried it.
		-- George Bernard Shaw