The Net (According To Akamai) 100
The Installer quotes a gizmag story saying "Akamai might not be a household name but between 15 to 30 percent of the world's Web traffic is carried on the Cambridge, Massachusetts-based company's internet platform at any given time. Using data gathered by software constantly monitoring internet conditions via the company's nearly 100,000 servers deployed in 72 countries and spanning most of the networks within the internet, Akamai creates its quarterly State of the internet report. The report provides some interesting facts and figures, such as regions with the slowest and fastest connection speeds, broadband adoption rates and the origins of attack traffic."
I hate slideshows (Score:4, Informative)
all the pictures in the gizmag slideshow can be downloaded as one handy zip file [akamai.com].
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Warning: those who deny the existence of a Zionist conspiracy may be Zionist conspirators themselves.
Re: (Score:1)
by derGoldstein
ionists were focusing on gradually replacing all seats of power in the US with sympathizers
Clearly I haven't been keeping up with the news
Seems legit ;)
On a more on topic comment: You forgot Apple evangelists, Linux zealots and Winblow$ Luzerz, Also a debate betwen C++ and Java fanboys while exploring VI and emacs connections to goat.cx and how Google knows it all and it's going to show your donkey-midget-tentacles-porn searches to YOUR WIFE!.
Sometimes I think slashdot is like a polymorphic meme.
Re: (Score:1)
You may want a doctor to check that spotty panorama
Myanmar is under influence from China... (Score:2)
The most likely reason Myanmar is number one is most likely due to China....
With the large influx of Chinese influence in Myanmar (http://www.asiapacificms.com/articles/myanmar_influence/) this past year and before, I'm not surprised they have become number one. Maybe China is out-sourcing their hackers over to there so as to draw attention away from China and simply grow their cyber-attack force.
I wouldn't be surprised if our government knows about this....
Re: (Score:2)
These future events will affect you in the future!
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
After reading article 'The Universe as a Hologram', I've an idea to apply this theory into telecommunication system.
Briefly, in "holographic universe" theory, reality is stored in a high dimension space. Reality is a kind of superhologram which the past, present and future all exist simultaneously. Men can only receive/project a part of that reality. Maximum men can receive/project is only 4 dimensions (3 for space, 1 for time), and it's not the entire space and time. It's just a point in space and time ocean.
If we could store data in at least 5 dimension space! The sender stores the data there and the receiver projects to the same data/reality. This is what causes the instantaneous telecommunication system.
This can change future of 'the Net'. All traffic can be transmitted instantaneously. In 5 dimension space, the 'state' of the net is all possible states, so Akamai report no longer necessary haha.
Here, This [timecube.com] might help you understand things better. You're pretty close.
Re: (Score:2)
Wow. You might want to check your medication levels...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Have you read some of his posting history?
They are interesting in a way I am not able to explain yet. Not quite a schizophrenic mind set, but definitely not part of our reality.
Re: (Score:1)
Reg Required (Score:4, Informative)
The ACTUAL report (and archives), but behind a reg-wall: http://www.akamai.com/stateoftheinternet/ [akamai.com]
Re: (Score:1)
Speed vs. Usage (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
That's a convenient scapegoat, but not really an excuse.
The argument is that there was a lot of money invested in the original infrastructure. Corporations (the telecoms, cable and other companies) need time to re-coup their investment in these technologies.
The problem with this argument is that the corporations are no longer competing, just doing all they can to keep the status quo. This means they legislate against new technologies. Need spectrum for a new technology? Too bad for you because these legacy
Re: (Score:3)
Emerging economies will depend upon high speed Internet. The fact that the pioneer in almost all of this technology is now dropping to 14th and 15th is fully the fault of corporations artificially maintaining the status quo.
And the voters who let them and get allergic reactions when anyone suggests that the government should regulate businesses.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I think Europe benefits by having more competition. Had things been left to only BT the UK would probably still be on 1 mb broadband and the reason there is more competition because the government step
Re: (Score:2)
Not the real issue. How much do you think it takes to run fiber optic cable 2 feet to the next subscriber in a densely populated country like China?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
People forget that Sprint spent billions deploying the ION network over a decade ago. Blew away every other consumer offering at the time(something like 5-6x faster than my cable internet at the time) and affordable, but hardly anyone switched over. Few years later th
Re: (Score:2)
About as much as for a high rise apartment in New York?
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know the first thing about Chinese building codes, but comparing stereotypes to stereotypes...
--New York high-rises would likely be SO dense with computing devices that you'd likely need to invest in half a central office in the basement of the high-rise just to handle the backhaul. You'd need a stack of permits so high you'd likely need a consulting firm just to oversee that they're followed. You'd need to convince the building owners to let you run cable in the building, and those guys are usually
Re: (Score:1)
To be honest I've never understood this argument. Is it that companies haven't made their returns on the copper yet, companies find the path of least resistance to be less speedy than for new infrastructure, or that these markets are in greater flux creating more competition which spurs innovation. Of course, it could be something else, but this is what came to my air bubble head just now.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why do I care about the speed? It's fast enough, faster isn't going to help me.
Re: (Score:2)
But it's not fast enough. It's hindering our use of the net for more cutting edge use. I'm lucky enough to have a 5mbps connection which is faster than much of the rest of the country, but I'm sitting here only a few miles from an IXP and Qwest is saying that they're not going to be upgrading the connection speeds of much of the city. I'm lucky in my neighborhood, I know of at least two other neighborhoods where the peak connection they offer is 1.5mbps.
Comcast is more or less a non-option as they cheat on
Re: (Score:1)
As much as people whine and complain about ComCast I have yet to see any speed cheating. I get a consistent 15mb+ pretty much anywhere I go that supports that speed (BTW this is in Memphis, TN and upper MS. I also do my own tests to verify anything I see on SpeedTest). That is not cheating if the remote site can't keep up with your speed so I don't know where you are getting this cheating from. I get a consistent 50ms or less ping to most places in the ConUS and even if the pipe is shared in my neighborhood
Re: (Score:2)
It's not that they're specifically cheating on the tests it's the way that they use their bandwidth. They offer a much larger amount of bandwidth for the first bit of a download which skews the results and gives the impression that they're providing more bandwidth than they really are.
http://ask.slashdot.org/story/08/02/19/0434234/Comcast-Cheating-On-Bandwidth-Testing [slashdot.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Weird...
I've lived in Connecticut and now live in fairly rural Pennsylvania. I have a 6mb/s connection, but usually far exceed that in speedtests. Granted my mother-in-law is stuck with a 1mb/s wireless cell service for her internet. But seriously, I'm not even paying for the higher data speeds.
Most urbarn/suburban areas now offer 6mb/s in America.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm no fan of the telecommunications/infotainment oligarchy, but 10 years ago I paid $85/month for 768k/768k DSL and one static IP. That's $112 in current purchasing power.
I now pay $69 for 10m/3m with 5 static IPs. That's a 33% reduction in price for nearly 7 times the product.
How is that not an improvement?
Re: (Score:2)
Like immersive interactive 3D content that lets me "experience", say, the Eiffel tower in HD - don't know what that means but that's my point, anyone dreaming up the next big thing with end the though with "but that would require insane bandwidth".
3D web content of architecture and museums wasn't uncommon in the 90s. Look up "VRML".
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
...we've been sticking our fingers in our ears and pretending that our telecommunications oligopoly-with-local-monopoly-characteristics is a vibrant free market...
Who's "we"? Most Americans will eagerly point out how little choice we have in phone and Internet service, and how we're being vastly overcharged and vastly underserviced. The only people who seems to not be listening are regulators and politicians. No one else is pretending that America's current telecom situation is anything other than unmitigated crap.
Re: (Score:2)
I find it interesting that the U.S. is number 1 in usage (most unique IP's), but 14th in average connection speed. I would have thought the U.S. would have been a little bit better (speed-wise). China is #2 in both usage and speed. Interesting... Yet another area China will soon dominate the U.S. in (once they take the top spot in usage).
To me the most surprising thing was that U.S. average speed wasn't nearly as bad as my impression of it has been lately. Sure, South Korea has a significant advantage at ~14 mbps average, but other than that outlier the other nations ahead of the U.S. are in the 5.6-9 mbps range. Faster, but not really materially so - I don't think there is a lot you can do at 9 mbps that you can't do at 5.2 mbps. Yes, we still need to invest in faster speeds and expanding availability to more people, but at least from this
Re: (Score:2)
I was also surprised not to see Finland in the top 10 - it seems like every time there is a discussion of broadband access and speeds someone brings up Finland as a shining example of good broadband availability in a relatively sparsely populated nation; apparently, at least from Akamai's view of the 'net, availability (or at least uptake) isn't nearly as extensive as some have suggested.
... or it's fast enough and with enough local content that they don't need Akamai as badly.
Re: (Score:1)
Here's my experience with Korean vs American internet speeds. My internet speed in Korea was something like 60mbps average for less than $40 per month with no bandwidth cap as far as I knew, and I downloaded a lot (rough testing with steam downloads- 6-8 megabytes per second, and torrents-similar speeds. Sites like megaupload were around 12-24mbps). I didn't really notice speed drops during busy times either, like I've noticed with Comcast in the U.S. I think the equivalent of that in the US costs about
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
blame flyover country
the coasts and major cities are just as fast as asia. all the people who live next to cows with their sub 1mbps connections bring everyone else down. a lot of places are not served by cable or they don't want cable TV leaving them with DSL. even a lot of people in the cities have satellite TV and the cheapest DSL for internet at $10 a month
Re: (Score:2)
I find it interesting that the U.S. is number 1 in usage (most unique IP's), but 14th in average connection speed. I would have thought the U.S. would have been a little bit better (speed-wise).
I'm not surprised. The only way the US has been able to stay high up on the charts of broadband connectivity is by redefining broadband to a much lower standard than the rest of the world.
The US has been surpassed technologically by quite a few countries by now. I think the rest of the world accelerated to a quick pace in the 80s that the US just hasn't been able to keep up with. I remember when I moved to the US in '99, I thought "Cassette tapes? Pagers? Cheques for payment? 4:3 TV? No broadband? D
Re: (Score:1)
And now, 12 years later, you still find pagers and cassette tapes even though they're less common, most TV is still 4:3, and people still use cheques for payment. And I still can't get broadband where I live. 1500/256 DSL or 0-15000/0-512 cable (averaging at 3 Mbps / 150 Mps) is the best I can get.
3Mbps? That is broadband.
PS every new TV show I watch is 16:9, so I don't know where you're coming from.
Re: (Score:2)
3Mbps? That is broadband.
No, it isn't. By the CCITT definition, you need to be faster than PRI rate, both ways. I.e. it's not enough to have a typical download speed exceeding T1 speeds if the typical upload speed is only a fraction of that. That won't let you do video-conferencing, for example, or use a remote desktop in any meaningful way (X11 lbx was nice to get around that)
Also, you should not measure the maximum speed, but the CIR. Which for cable is zero. A 0-8 Mbps line is not broadband, but a 2 Mbps line is.
Re: (Score:2)
Also, the CIR for all residential connections is justifiably zero
This is not true, and not even true for the US. If you get ISDN or non-PPPoE (bridged ethernet) DSL, it's not zero. Of course, that is to the head end, and the rest of the infrastructure might lower it, but if you and your neighbour both have bridged SDSL, you should be able to maintain full speed between the two at all times.
As for the rest of the world outside the US, in many places you can buy 10 and 100 Mbps connections directly to your head end. Fiber and dedicated copper pairs. For less than what
Re: (Score:2)
1) Does the study record simply the speed of connection? Because I highly doubt all of China's citizens have access to personal internet connection. Not every American does, but it's pretty darn high. It's easier to have a high avg speed if only a select portion of the populace has access.
2) Usually, these studies fail to account for geography. For example, a densely populated modern nation like Japan or Hong Kong will score high because most of their population is within a small region and thus less infra
The Net? (Score:3)
Re:The Net? (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Very misleading that the cover photo from the gizmag article has nothing to do with the report, or even with the Internet. It's a photo of earth taken from space:
http://visibleearth.nasa.gov/view_rec.php?id=1438
The caption on the photo is:
Akamai's State of the Internet report provides a global snapshot of global Internet use
And the photo does appear to be a snapshot of the globe, so it doesn't seem all that misleading. I think it's fair to say that where the light appears in their photo is where the internet users are. What if they had included a hand drawn caricature of the globe? [clker.com] Would that also be misleading?
As an ex-Akamaiite... (Score:1)
I can only say nothing.
Noscript! (Score:1)
And Akamai was why I installed Noscript. Any given heavy traffic site would ~mostly load, but be 'waiting' on akamai links to finish, thus 'slowing down' my internet usage. Yes, I'm using generalities here, but the point remains. I don't need to see every damn ad and have the counters at akamai log it. For a while there, I was damning them daily. These days? Not so much.
Thanks Noscript! And adblock! And Flashblock!
Most users with speed at 40th (Score:2)
Wow. The US has the most users but speeds barely rank in the top 40 with other nations. I wonder who has the greediest bastards owning the ISPs.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Do you think an ISP would be willing to spend 1000s of dollars to connect 2/3 rural homes in the country? I doubt it.
Do you think ISPs were required to spend their own money in the first place? Of course not. Over here in the Yoo Ess Eh, our slimy politicians tend to grant monopoly/cartel statuses to a select few providers per town, city, et cetera. In return, we're supposed to get decent infrastructure out of the deal. We don't, and the cuntdribblers we elect don't really give a rat's ass, since they've already received their personal payoff.
And let's not even go in to who it was who paid for the US's telephone infr
Re: (Score:2)
So explain to me why, when I live in the middle of Silicon Valley, on the tiniest lot I have ever had for any house I ever lived in, why is it that I can't get a good connection for a reasonable price? I have DSL, last mile by PacBell (because it has to be), but ISP is Sonic.net (because Sonic is mega-clueful and PacBell is a pack of greedy dipshits). But my DSL rates are not all that great. By your logic, if *anyplace* should be able to get a good connection with competition among providers it should be
Re: (Score:2)
Canada? (Score:2)
Oh that's right, we suck. We were on one, but got bumped... by Spain. Spain!
Re: (Score:2)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFs5l9K--7M [youtube.com]
Wired and wireless connections mixed together (Score:2)
Keep in mind that this report throws wired and wireless connections together.
Imagine a modern with one 100mbit connection to the family PC and 5 mobile phones (barely 4mbit) would have an average connection speed of only 20mbit.
These are neat to look at. (Score:2)
http://www.akamai.com/html/technology/visualizing_akamai.html [akamai.com]
US has high speed to 97% of population? BS! (Score:1)
I would like to know how they figure that many of the US states have over 97% of the people connected to high speed, when I know for a fact that large portions of Arkansas and Oklahoma don't have anything higher than dial-up available(unless you count satellite*). I know that one of the GOV reports was playing games with the numbers(if zip code 12345 has high speed to one house, then the whole area has high speed). Just because a larger town in the middle of a zip code has high speed, the suburbs(or furth