Mobile Users' Amazing Demands on World's Bandwidth

[SeaKing]

Mobile Users' Amazing Demands on World's Bandwidth

One large study shows:
For November 2011 over a 24 hours period--
Top 1% use 50% of World's Bandwidth
Top 10% use 90%,

In 2009, top 3% used 40%
Now, top 3% use 70%.

Of extreme users (still mobile users)
64% used laptops (with air cards, dongles, etc.)
33% used smartphones
03% used iPads.

See:
"Top 1% of Mobile Users Consume Half of World’s Bandwidth, and Gap Is Growing"
NYT, By KEVIN J. O’BRIEN, Published: January 5, 2012

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/06/te....html?_r=1&hpw

... and yes the bandwidth is giving out.

[kennyc]

So what about the 99% do we have to camp out and protest???

[RainingLemur]

I am a person who uses the interwebs. I don't stream too much. I don't need to. I use my interwebs conservatively, maybe to watch a Youtube video or something every now and again. I check my email and send a picture message of my 3-month-old to my mom on occasion. Because of my neighbors playing loud music late into the night, I sometimes need to plug headphones in and hope my baby doesn't wake up when we're trying to get him to sleep. My 4-year-old will ask to watch Adventure Time on my phone when we go out.

I am the 99%.

[ilovejedd]

It appears the study is solely based on cellular networks. I reckon anyone with a smartphone and uses 3G data is guilty. I don't think it'll take a lot of use to be part of the 1% - not when you're looking globally and there are still a lot of people using dumb phones.

It'll certainly be interesting to know exactly how much bandwidth those folks in the top 1% consume.

[MV64]

I just don't understand bandwidth at all. It seems so abstract. Why don't they just make more? I don't know what that entails, be it more structures or better, more efficient wiring or whatever, but it seems silly to me all this trouble over bandwidth. It seems like some artificial limitation to allow companies to make more money.

I know I certainly don't keep track of my bandwidth. I just use what I need, and I think most people do the same. If there's not enough, make more instead of trying to create some complicated scheme to put us all in tiers.

[Laine]

I live near a mobile phone tower. There are now 3 small buildings at its base and they run air conditioners. So there is a fair bit of infrastructure and maintainance to keep networks running.

[Phogg]

Originally Posted by kennyc

So what about the 99% do we have to camp out and protest???

That would be our solution if we were to lazy and self entitled to get to work building more infrastructure. Since I didn't grow up with a trust fund, nor are my parents still paying my way, nor is some union picking up my bills while I camp out I guess I will just opt for putting up more towers and adding wider multiplexing to what is there. Might think about diversifying band use.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by MV64

I just don't understand bandwidth at all. It seems so abstract. Why don't they just make more? I don't know what that entails, be it more structures or better, more efficient wiring or whatever, but it seems silly to me all this trouble over bandwidth. It seems like some artificial limitation to allow companies to make more money.

Bandwidth is the amount of data that the network can carry at a given time. Certainly the provider can "make more", but to do so costs money, in the form of hardware infrastructure, the cost of which will inevitably be passed on to the customer. For a cellular operator to have too much capacity is as bad as to have too little, since the unused capacity still has to be paid for - by the customer.

[ilovejedd]

Originally Posted by MV64

I just don't understand bandwidth at all. It seems so abstract. Why don't they just make more? I don't know what that entails, be it more structures or better, more efficient wiring or whatever, but it seems silly to me all this trouble over bandwidth. It seems like some artificial limitation to allow companies to make more money.

What HarryT said. Besides, it's not just an artificial limitation. Carriers are already in the process of upgrading their networks, however, that process takes time. As time passes, technology will develop for more efficient delivery via air waves. Another thing, cellular towers do pose health risks. I know there was a case where a tower was built too close to a small village and the inhabitants and their children became all mutated and stuff. Definitely class action lawsuit material (with million dollar settlements) had that village been located in the US.

[HarryT]

It's certainly been claimed by some that mobile phone towers have adverse health effects, but numerous scientific studies have failed to find any evidence to support the claim. Can you provide details of this case that you "know" about?

[Apache]

Bandwidth is not an artificial limitation arbitrarily set by a government, business or person.
Bandwidth is electronic communication of information on set frequencies. Bandwidth is the width of the frequencies. The wider the frequency the more information that can be transmitted. The higher the frequency the narrower the bandwidth. There are only so many frequencies available for use. They are regulated by governments though and some are reserved for the military in the US and other countries.
Apache

[ilovejedd]

Originally Posted by HarryT

It's certainly been claimed by some that mobile phone towers have adverse health effects, but numerous scientific studies have failed to find any evidence to support the claim. Can you provide details of this case that you "know" about?

In fairness, it was a huge, high-powered tower. Doesn't appear to be the same as the ones installed in busy cities. I just watched it on the news on TV in the Philippines several years back and I can't find any written articles pertaining to it. Suffice to say, they showed the residents and it really is pretty bad. Unfortunately, knowing the justice system in the Philippines (or lack thereof?), I don't think anything actually happened with that case.

[Andrew H.]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Bandwidth is the amount of data that the network can carry at a given time. Certainly the provider can "make more", but to do so costs money, in the form of hardware infrastructure, the cost of which will inevitably be passed on to the customer. For a cellular operator to have too much capacity is as bad as to have too little, since the unused capacity still has to be paid for - by the customer.

Each individual cell tower also has a finite limit on the amount of data and number of simultaneous users it can support. I understand that this is usually where the real problem lies - the fact that there are underutilized towers in Ky. at a particular time doesn't help at all when towers in Chicago are overwhelmed.

It also means that there is a time issue to all of this - streaming 8 hours of video between midnight and 8am is less disruptive than streaming 8 hour of video from 4pm to midnight.