"Why is 100/100 seen as problematic to the industry players?"
In rural settings, it's low density, so you're spending a bunch of money with a low probability of getting any return. Also, a low probability that the customer cares.
"There's an underlying, I think, assumption that people won't use access speed/bandwidth that keeps coming up."
On a 95th% basis, no, they don't use it.
On shorter time spans, sure. Does it really matter, though? If I can put a 100 meg file into Dropbox in under a second versus 10 seconds, does that really matter? If Netflix gets my form submission in 0.01 seconds instead of .1 seconds, does it matter?
I think you'll find few to argue against "faster is better." The argument is at what price? At what perceived benefit?
Show me an average end-user that can tell the difference between a 10 meg upload and a 1 gig upload, aside from media-heavy professionals or the one-time full backup of a phone, PC, etc. Okay, show me two of them, ten of them...
99% of the end-users I know can't tell the difference in any amount of speed above 5 megs. It then just either works or doesn't work.
-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest-IX
http://www.midwest-ix.com
From: "Christopher Morrow" <morrowc.lists@gmail.com>
To: "Mike Hammett" <nanog@ics-il.net>
Cc: aaron1@gvtc.com, "nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org>
Sent: Tuesday, June 1, 2021 12:14:43 PM
Subject: Re: New minimum speed for US broadband connections
That is true, but if no one uses it, is it really gone?
There's an underlying, I think, assumption that people won't use access speed/bandwidth that keeps coming up.
I don't think this is an accurate assumption. I don't think it's really ever been accurate.
There are a bunch of examples in this thread of reasons why 'more than X' is a good thing for the end-user, and that average usage over time is a bad metric to use in the discussion. At the very least the ability to get around/out-of serialization delays and microburst behavior is beneficial to the end-user.
Maybe the question that's not asked (but should be) is:
"Why is 100/100 seen as problematic to the industry players?"