Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

1Gbps Broadband Service for Hong Kong

Posted by Zonk on Sun Apr 24, 2005 07:47 AM
from the zoom! dept.
Networking IT
Limax Maximus writes "Hong Kong is planning to launch a 1Gbps broadband home service. Although the idea of using shared infrastructure is nothing new for TV/phone/data this appears to be the first to do this over IP at such high speed. The cost is high - 215 USD a month. Per megabit, however, this is a very cheap service. This kind of solution only really works in town blocks where cat5 cabling is a realistic option."
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

1Gbps Broadband Service for Hong Kong 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • shouldnt it be (Score:3, Interesting)

    by FidelCatsro (861135) <fidelcatsro@NosPAm.gmail.com> on Sunday April 24 2005, @07:52AM (#12328324) Journal
    . This kind of solution only really works in town blocks where cat5 cabling is a realistic option."
    Shouldnt that be Cat6 cabling

  • HKBN BB100 (Score:4, Insightful)

    by 0x461FAB0BD7D2 (812236) on Sunday April 24 2005, @07:52AM (#12328325) Journal
    They are also offering BB100, a 100Mbps service, that is similar to the price of regular ADSL in Hong Kong.

    More information here: http://bb100.hkbn.net/BB100/index_e.htm [hkbn.net]

  • what for ...? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by xlyz (695304)

    really: what the use of such a broad band from a normal user???
    • A lot of Hong Kongers, especially the adolescents, are file-sharers, and are quite fed up with other ISPs in the region, especially the two leading ISPs, Netvigator and HK Cable.

      Also, for tech-related services, adolescents in the households tend to be the decision-makers.

    • from TFA (Score:3, Insightful)

      by pasokon (829164)

      ...enables the carrier to converge its legacy voice and data services and a new pay-TV service into a single platform, and at the same time offer Layer 2 and 3 IP services using Resilient Packet Ring (RPR)-ready ML Series line cards. The network enables HKBN to deliver up to 200 digital pay-TV channels via MPEG-2 at 4.5 Mbps to 10 Mbps with DVD visual quality. Its service also features interactive pay-TV elements and enables PC or TV connection with the aid of a set-top box.

      DVD-quality digital broadcasts

    • really: what the use of such a broad band from a normal user???
      Video on demand.

      The only reason the Internet looks so different from television today is because it lacks bandwidth.

        • so again ... what for??

          So that the SO can watch her soppy movie on the bigscreen in the bedroom, while I watch the fuzeball in the computer-room while downloading Service Pack 2 and still get good enough pings to play HL2 at the same time?

          (Note: the above is a simulation; none of those apply to me... I am single, hate football, don't do Windows, and don't play PC games... so if I messed something up, please substitute the nearest applicable idea.)
  • I am assuming that Hong Kong is subject to the same 'Net censorship that the rest of mainland China is? Or is this true?

    • Re:Firewall of China? (Score:5, Informative)

      by FidelCatsro (861135) <fidelcatsro@NosPAm.gmail.com> on Sunday April 24 2005, @07:55AM (#12328340) Journal
      Hong-kong has been kept in a sort of Capitalist sand-box in many ways , so it does not suffer the same restrictions as the rest of china. iirc

      • A communist sandbox? (Score:5, Funny)

        by AtariAmarok (451306) on Sunday April 24 2005, @08:02AM (#12328367)
        "Hong-kong has been kept in a sort of Capitalist sand-box in many ways "

        Is that the opposite of a Communist Sandbox? Remember the old joke: "What do you get if you bring communism to the Sahara Desert? Well, at first, nothing. Then, after 10 years, you get a shortage of sand."

        • For those not from Russia:
          The colloquial form of referring to sugar powder in
          Russia is "sand", so when the above joke works
          much better in Russian. It arose when there were
          shortages of sugar in late eighties.
          The full joke goes: "... 70 years of mirages and then
          rationing of sand."

    • Re:Firewall of China? (Score:5, Informative)

      by 0x461FAB0BD7D2 (812236) on Sunday April 24 2005, @07:58AM (#12328352) Journal
      No, our net access is not regulated or monitored by China. China has to maintain some distance from us until 2047, and any action that reeks of Beijing's hand would be met with massive resistance in HK.

      Hong Kongers love their market economy and freedoms, often citing it as an example of why HK is a better place to live and work than other rivals in the region like Singapore and Shanghai.

        • Re:Firewall of China? (Score:5, Informative)

          by 0x461FAB0BD7D2 (812236) on Sunday April 24 2005, @08:12AM (#12328402) Journal
          It is trying to narrow that gap, surely.

          However, by law it can't meddle all that much with Hong Kong's affairs, at least not without violating their agreement with the British and pissing off Hong Kong's 7 million people (and many in China who view Hong Kong as a democratic beacon of hope).

          After a massive protest in HK, China decided to lay off enforcing Article 23, which dealt with subversion. It also lead, indirectly, to the Chief Executive (our leader) getting sacked. The debate now is when (not if) Hong Kong will be able to elect its own leaders.

          There's a large voice of dissent in Washington against China, especially with their yuan policy. I suppose that may be the reason the US sees things over here in a very negative light.

        • Re:Firewall of China? (Score:4, Informative)

          by 0x461FAB0BD7D2 (812236) on Sunday April 24 2005, @09:16AM (#12328707) Journal
          That's not so much China-imposed censorship than censorship by Hong Kongers who are pro-China. It's not so much about politics as it is about business.

          Many in the media feel if they report against China's wishes, they will be left out. It's not all too different from what many in the US media feel about the White House.

          In any case, the two leading English-language newspapers are, AFAIK, not censored.

        • Re:Firewall of China? (Score:4, Informative)

          by 1u3hr (530656) on Sunday April 24 2005, @10:13AM (#12329005)
          Off topic -- but what about the heavy newspaper censorship imposed by China in HK then?

          There isn't any "imposed", but much of the media is owned by moguls who suck up to Beijing to further their business interests. But notably critical of China is Jimmy Lai's Next and Apple Daily, (along with showbiz gossip). In HK we still have a local relay of the BBC World Service on AM radio, unchanged from before the handover.

    • I am assuming that Hong Kong is subject to the same 'Net censorship that the rest of mainland China is? Or is this true?

      No we're not. I can download as much porn, and read as much American/Falun Gong/Tibetan propaganda as I like. They do censor nipples on TV, but I gather you get that too.

  • Faster, but for what? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Dancin_Santa (265275) <DancinSanta@gmail.com> on Sunday April 24 2005, @07:54AM (#12328330) Journal
    While per megabyte/second it seems very cheap, you have to consider what your internet usage actually is. If you're only using the internet for an hour or two a day (and who among us doesn't?), then this faster speed internet is a lot more expensive than normal slower service. You're paying more, but not using more. That's not a better value, that's getting ripped off.

    Even if you had this faster pipe, what would you do with it? Download more porn? Upload more MP3s?

    I see the benefit for a fatter pipe for businesses who need to serve up large amounts of data, but for the average user, faster does very little. It's nothing like the jump from dialup to broadband. We are as fast as we need to be. Page downloads are already instantaneous, how can you seriously improve over instantaneous.

  • Why is this so cheap? (Score:5, Informative)

    by neomage86 (690331) on Sunday April 24 2005, @07:56AM (#12328341)
    1 gbps is more bandwidth than an OC-48, which run for about 700,000 US dollars/month. I understand that consumers will only use a tiny fraction of their allocated bandwidth, and they don't demand the level of stability that an enterprise line needs. Still, you've got to figure that the ISP need to dedicate at least 50mbps of bandwidth to each customer (approx a DS3), and that would still be about $15,000 a month.

  • This already exists in Sweden. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by pomac (159163) <pomac&vapor,com> on Sunday April 24 2005, @07:56AM (#12328343) Homepage
    In sweden www.bredband2.se offers 1 Gbit connections for 118,60 USD. This is without limits.

    For more information and so forth (in swedish) see www.labs2.se
    • Sweeden has for a long time been in the lead for Broadband connections (atleast in europe and im fairly sure the only competitor to the supremacy has been japan till today), I know atleast 3 people who are on an 100Mbit pipe from bredband , It quite literaly puts the rest of the world to shame in terms of price and capacity and has done for years.

      If these companys can afford to do this in sweeden , then i would love to hear the excuses of the companys in other lands , for example why you pay on average abo

  • Conquer Taiwan (Score:4, Funny)

    by AtariAmarok (451306) on Sunday April 24 2005, @08:00AM (#12328357)
    If China wants to add Taiwan to its territory, why not entice them with offers of free or cheap broadband? This is sure to win more hearts than the current line which is "We'll bomb you to bits and kill you all if you acknowledge the obvious fact that you've been an independent country for 50 years."
    • Why doesn't China entice Taiwanese with special offers?

      Because the Taiwanese block spam from China too.

      • Re:Conquer Taiwan (Score:5, Funny)

        by AtariAmarok (451306) on Sunday April 24 2005, @08:10AM (#12328397)
        "Why doesn't China entice Taiwanese with special offers? Because the Taiwanese block spam from China too."

        Which leaves those Taiwanese to shake their heads in envy as they look across the Straights of Formosa to China, where they see the men standing on the shore taunting them by waving their prodigious giant penises and making 1/2 km jumps with their super HGH-herb-enhanced powers. They say to themselves "See? If we could get Chinese spam, we'd be just like that!"

  • Now just everyone pause and think. What would people do with these 1gbit streams if there was no (illegal) downloadable content?

    Sure legal content (without DRM) is also an option but since one is not available right now, we have to rely on piracy to increase the demand for bandwidth.
    • FTA "Cisco's ONS 15454 MSPP enables the carrier to converge its legacy voice and data services and a new pay-TV service into a single platform, and at the same time offer Layer 2 and 3 IP services using Resilient Packet Ring (RPR)-ready ML Series line cards. The network enables HKBN to deliver up to 200 digital pay-TV channels via MPEG-2 at 4.5 Mbps to 10 Mbps with DVD visual quality. Its service also features interactive pay-TV elements and enables PC or TV connection with the aid of a set-top box."

    • Re:Thanks to piracy (Score:5, Interesting)

      by 1u3hr (530656) on Sunday April 24 2005, @10:24AM (#12329063)
      In HK if we want pirated DVDs or software, we can buy it for about 50c/disk. Less hassle than downloading mostly. Though I suppose BitTorrent will pick up when people want to see the new episodes of Survivor or whatever. (Even though the overseas bandwidth is capped, local P2P will go much faster once there's a local seed or two.)

      But the commercial motivation is probably video on demand, and video phones.

  • and here i am, in the UK, stuck on 512k atm, with 2mb being the fastest affordable choice i can see :(.
    1 gigabit tho. Thats an obscene amount of bandwith - not even bittorrent could consume that much.... surely

  • CAT5e, not CAT5 (Score:3, Informative)

    by base_chakra (230686) * on Sunday April 24 2005, @08:26AM (#12328459)
    This kind of solution only really works in town blocks where cat5 cabling is a realistic option.

    While technically it's often possible to do gigabit ethernet with CAT5, the article actually mentions that the cable drops are CAT5e.

  • Shut up. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Micah (278) on Sunday April 24 2005, @10:57AM (#12329281) Homepage Journal
    I pay $84/month for 128k here in Ecuador. I don't even want to hear this! /me rips out hair
    • The whole reason we're "Behind" is because we have to update old technology, whereas most of the Aisan countries weren't as technologically advanced as we were until recently. Then they could go on making new technology, whereas we have to spend money to replace older stuff.

      • Re:Ok, since people insist America isn't "behind" (Score:5, Insightful)

        by AtariAmarok (451306) on Sunday April 24 2005, @08:07AM (#12328385)
        "The whole reason we're "Behind" is because we have to update old technology, whereas most of the Aisan countries weren't as technologically advanced as we were until recently. Then they could go on making new technology, whereas we have to spend money to replace older stuff."

        I don't "get it". How does "not having anything in the first place" make it cheaper and easier? I'd guess that there would be no difference either way, and it might be a little easier to upgrade in the US if you have cable conduits all over the cities and wiring in the house for it.

        • you shouldn't get that argument, it has no real basis. It is usually easier to upgrade from the old, especially when you can use certain things that are still in place. It is also easier because you usually have a workforce with experience in doing this sort of stuff and therefore are better prepared for the problems they will face.

          More realistically, not enough Americans demand that bandwidth. It's like tv on cell phones. We hardly have it and it's common in Japan. Is this bad thing? of course not.
            • Locking cell phones should be outlawed in the US, no question. It's a completely artificial barrier whose only purpose is to make switching to different providers more expensive for consumers without giving them any benefit at all.
        • I'd guess that there would be no difference either way, and it might be a little easier to upgrade in the US if you have cable conduits all over the cities and wiring in the house for it.

          Thats one of the problems in America. Stupid politicians and stupider companies. Until recently we have no "cable conduits" in most of the cities here. Ever noticed how often roads get ripped up to lay cable underneath them? Thats because until the people started complaining enough, it wasn't enough of an issue to jus
        • I don't "get it". How does "not having anything in the first place" make it cheaper and easier? I'd guess that there would be no difference either way, and it might be a little easier to upgrade in the US if you have cable conduits all over the cities and wiring in the house for it.

          The reason you don't "get it" is because you don't realize the impact of captalist economies coupled with lack of geographical world knowledge. Market economies work as getting a better product to the people at lower prices.

    • Re:Ok, since people insist America isn't "behind" (Score:4, Informative)

      by Regul8or (603030) on Sunday April 24 2005, @10:19AM (#12329039)
      The only parts of America that are behind are the areas with monopolistic corporations that have no motivation to offer a more powerful service. In East Wenatchee, WA, the Douglas County Public Utilities District has laid fiber to the demarc( yes, to each and single house) and is offering 100 mbps symmetrical fiber internet service for $39.95/month. http://www.localtelonline.com/dbf.htm The PUD can get away with trampling all over inferior competing providers without getting sued by Charter and Verizon because the city isn't large enough to fight over.
      • I think the idea is that it makes it a lot faster within the network, while Internet speeds are still limited. Many asian countries have all the services within the network that they need so for the most part they can get really high speeds, above the backbone speed.

    • P2P (Score:4, Insightful)

      by MarkByers (770551) on Sunday April 24 2005, @08:22AM (#12328437) Homepage Journal
      With peer-to-peer, the more popular a download is, the faster it can be downloaded. The limit is the speed of the internet connections of those trading file pieces. There is no central bottleneck. With a few high speed connections uploading, everyone's downloads will be faster.

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.