• Eager Eagle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    95
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    xfinity will advertise 100 Tbps lines with the abysmal 1.5 TB/mo data cap anyway

    “you can drive this super sport car for $ per month - but only for 10 miles”

      • pirat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Faster than “[…] the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes hurtling down the highway”?

        (Quoted: Tanenbaum, 1981)

    • Squizzy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      There are limitations to the technology, similar to saying 3 times faster than sound.

      Also broadband as a regulated term would have speeds tied to that definition.

  • jordanlund@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    ·
    3 months ago

    Distances though? I’ve seen similar breakthroughs in the past but it was only good for networking within the same room.

    • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      39
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      It’s optical fiber so it’s good for miles. Unlikely to be at home for decades but telcos will use it for connecting networks.

      Optical fiber is already 100 gigabit so the article comparing it to your home connection is stupid.

      So the scientist improved current fiber speed by 10x, not 1.2 million X.

      • credo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        27
        ·
        3 months ago

        Note they did not say 1.2 million times faster than fiber. Instead they compared it to the broadband definition; an obvious choice of clickbait terminology.

      • 9point6@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        I wonder what non-telco applications will use this

        I wonder if something like a sport stadium has video requirements that would get close with HFR 8K video?

  • Aceticon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    3 months ago

    It’s compared to the average broaband speed in the UK, so it’s not quite as exciting as it might sound …

  • thbb@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    3 months ago

    I remember the early 90’s when fiber connection was being developed in research centers.

    Researchers had found a way to transmit all of a country’s phone calls’ bandwidth through a simple fiber cable. Then, they wondered: what could we use this for?

    This was a few years before the explosion of the internet…

    • Kazumara@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      1988 TAT-8 already went into productive use as the first transatlantic fiber optic connection. So the lab work must have happened in the 80’s already.

  • Kazumara@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    First of all some corrections:

    By constructing a device called an optical processor, however, researchers could access the never-before-used E- and S-bands.

    It’s called an amplifier not processor, the Aston University page has it correct. And at least the S-band has seen plenty of use in ordinary CWDM systems, just not amplified. We have at least 20 operational S-band links at 1470 and 1490 nm in our backbone right now. The E-band maybe less so, because the optical absorption peak of water in conventional fiber sits somewhere in the middle of it. You could use it with low water peak fiber, but for most people it hasn’t been attractive trying to rent spans of only the correct type of fiber.

    the E-band, which sits adjacent to the C-band in the electromagnetic spectrum

    No, it does not, the S-band is between them. It goes O-band, E-band, S-band, C-band, L-band, for “original” and “extended” on the left side, and “conventional”, flanked by “short” and “long” on the right side.

    Now to the actual meat: This is a cool material science achievement. However in my professional opinion this is not going to matter much for conventional terrestrial data networks. We already have the option of adding more spectrum to current C-band deployments in our networks, by using filters and additional L-band amplifiers. But I am not aware of any network around ours (AS559) that actually did so. Because fundamentally the question is this:

    Which is cheaper:

    • renting a second pair of fiber in an existing cable, and deploying the usual C-band equipment on the second pair,
    • keeping just one pair, and deploying filters and the more expensive, rarer L-band equipment, or
    • keeping just one pair, and using the available C-band spectrum more efficiently with incremental upgrades to new optics?

    Currently, for us, there is enough spectrum still open in the C-band. And our hardware supplier is only just starting to introduce some L-band equipment. I’m currently leaning towards renting another pair being cheaper if we ever get there, but that really depends on where the big buying volume of the market will move.

    Now let’s say people do end up extending to the L-band. Even then I’m not so sure that extending into the E- and S- bands as the next further step is going to be even equally attractive, for the simple reason that attenuation is much lower at the C-band and L-band wavelengths.

    Maybe for subsea cables the economics shake out differently, but the way I understand their primary engineering constraint is getting enough power for amplifiers to the middle of the ocean, so maybe more amps, and higher attenuation, is not their favourite thing to develop towards either. This is hearsay though, I am not very familiar with their world.

  • Mr_Dr_Oink@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    3 months ago

    Its a shame i dont have an ethernet cable that fast or a motherboard with a network interface capable of that speed.

    Great if i can get faster fibre into my home but my internal infrastructure is not up to the task. This wont be in the home until we can use fibre cables like we currently use ethernet cables.

    Or is there some other tech that would replace ethernet that would handle those speeds. Also whats my wrote speed on my ssd?

    Yeah i dont know if thisnis a tech thats meant for home, more likely large businesses with lots of devices all fighting for bandwidth.