Matt Richtel and Ken Belson have this longish piece in today’s New York Times about the importance of broadband speed throughput to phone and cable company marketing efforts. Both rival broadband providers emphasize the speeds of their broadband options in ad pitches, but some consumer advocates say that the companies don’t always make good on their promised speeds.
“They don’t deliver what’s advertised, and it’s inherently deceptive,” said Dave Burstein, editor of DSL Prime, a newsletter that tracks the broadband industry. ” ‘Up to’ is a weasel term that should be taken out of the companies’ vocabulary.”
The problem for broadband providers is that so many variables can alter the theoretical maximum broadband speeds, such as distance from the central office, in the case of DSL, or contention ratios — how many people are on the network simultaneously — in the case of cable. Fortunately, sites such as Broadband Reports offer speed tests that enable consumers to gauge whether they are getting the download rates promised.
The article ends with a curious and debatable piece of advice from PC Magazine’s Jim Louderback. Regarding whether most consumers need a lot of speed, Louderback advises consumers to go with what’s cheapest.
Mr. Louderback had some simple buying advice: “Unless you’re watching YouTube, or downloading a lot of video, go with what’s cheapest.”
Um, who isn’t watching YouTube or looking at video on the Internet anymore? Over half (56%) of Internet users watched video online in June 2006, a percentage that is probably now far higher.
When it comes to video, or even web sites with highly dense graphics, speed does matter. Remember when broadband was 600 kbps? There’s a world of difference between that and 8 Mbps. There’s also a world of difference between 1.5 Mbps, typically the cheapest broadband option in metro areas, and Comcast’s 8 Mbps.
Posted by Cynthia Brumfield at 10:35 AM | Print | Comments (0)
It’s the week before Thanksgiving, when the clamoring for just-released, hot high-tech gifts becomes front page news. But, the limited release of Sony’s PlayStation 3 on Thursday provoked not only the customary long lines and customer complaints, but attempted murder, robbery and crowd trampling.
A man was shot standing in line to buy his PS3 outside a Walmart in Putnam, Connecticut. It seems that robbers were wise to the fact that a lot of people waiting to buy their gaming devices had $500 in cash on them and the man in question refused to give up his money. So the robbers shot him.
In nearby Manchester, a shopper was beaten and robbed by five men of his just-purchased PS3.
Then, another man in Sullivan, IN was stabbed after he and friend tried to rob two men of consoles they had waited in line for 36 hours to buy.
Two people were arrested in Fresno, CA after a crowd waiting to buy PS3s trampled people in a parking lot. A man in Allentown, PA was robbed of his PS3 at gunpoint while waiting at a traffic light. And on and on.
The Washington Post’s Mike Musgrove reports that police pepper sprayed a crowd of 200 at a DC suburb Circuit City when they rushed the store’s doors before it opened.
The cause of all this havoc is the fact that Sony’s manufacturing glitches resulted in the distribution of only 400,000 units of its latest PlayStation model in the U.S., which has sparked bidding wars for the devices on eBay and hiked the black market price of the consoles to $2,000 or more. In other words, the PS3 can generate a quick buck for a savvy criminal or a pushy shopper.
Geez, all this for a video gaming console. If nothing else, this past week has proved one point: video games do cause violent behavior. Or as Musgrove writes “Forget video game violence, Sony Corp.’s new PlayStation 3 delivered a dose of real-world insanity yesterday.”
Update: A Milwaukee TV station has this segment about a local man who was sent to the hospital with a dislocated jaw after being slammed into a pole during a PS3 melee. The station even has slow-motion video of the fracas showing the man being shoved into the pole. (Tip to Kotaku.)
Posted by Cynthia Brumfield at 8:37 AM | Print | Comments (0)
Blogs We Read
