Internet bandwidth costs

I was reading about Internet routers a few months ago and "the world's
leading expert in Internet routers" said that the speed of Internet routers
had followed Moore's Law religiously since the mid 1980s.

I also read that the theoretical bandwidth of a single optic fibre is 10
Tbps, so I'd imagine it's safe to say that fibre can handle anything you
throw at it.

So has the cost of Internet bandwidth fallen in line with Moore's Law since
the mid 1980s? And is it a reasonable assumption that if router speeds
increase by a factor of X, Internet bandwidth becomes X times cheaper?


--
Steve - www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - Digital Radio News & Info

The adoption of DAB was the most incompetent technical
decision ever made in the history of UK broadcasting:
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/da...ion_of_dab.htm

On Sun, 09 Mar 2008 20:24:10 GMT, "DAB sounds worse than FM" <dab.is@dead>
wrote:

>I was reading about Internet routers a few months ago and "the world's
>leading expert in Internet routers" said that the speed of Internet routers
>had followed Moore's Law religiously since the mid 1980s.
>
>I also read that the theoretical bandwidth of a single optic fibre is 10
>Tbps, so I'd imagine it's safe to say that fibre can handle anything you
>throw at it.
>
>So has the cost of Internet bandwidth fallen in line with Moore's Law since
>the mid 1980s? And is it a reasonable assumption that if router speeds
>increase by a factor of X, Internet bandwidth becomes X times cheaper?

Don't know. Not a clue.

DAB sounds worse than FM wrote:

> So has the cost of Internet bandwidth fallen in line with Moore's Law since
> the mid 1980s?

Nope. I haven't noticed any comms phone bill reduced to a 1000th of the
cost in 1985. Perhaps people are doing different things with the
bandwidth - new applications are possible (video mainly) that were not
possible before, but we are not saving great amounts of money as such as
consumers. And it's probably true for the owners of the routers running
the backbone of the net.

And is it a reasonable assumption that if router speeds
> increase by a factor of X, Internet bandwidth becomes X times cheaper?

Nope, a standing charge will be applicable regardless of the speed and
quality of service. There will however be pressure to reduce the
standing charges but it won't track with whatever cost benefits the
technology is reducing by. There is a limit.

For instance, look at memory card manufacturers. The price of flash has
fallen so much that they are now having to cut back on previous fixed
packaging costs - cardboard and printed leaflets are small in cost to
produce, but as a percentage of the overall cost of the finished product
when taking transport in consideration - that's rising and looking
embarrassing. Get ready to dust one out your cornflakes packet any day
now....


--
Adrian C

In message <(E-Mail Removed)>, Adrian C
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote
>DAB sounds worse than FM wrote:
>
>> So has the cost of Internet bandwidth fallen in line with Moore's Law
>>since the mid 1980s?
>
>Nope. I haven't noticed any comms phone bill reduced to a 1000th of the
>cost in 1985.

1990 approx. 5p/minute at 28,800 bps

2008 approx £15 for 43,000 minutes at 6,000,000 bps

The cost per bit per second has reduced by around x30,000 in the past 18
years.



--
Alan
news2006 {at} amac {dot} f2s {dot} com

Alan wrote:
> In message <(E-Mail Removed)>, Adrian C
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote
>> DAB sounds worse than FM wrote:
>>
>>> So has the cost of Internet bandwidth fallen in line with Moore's
>>> Law since the mid 1980s?
>>
>> Nope. I haven't noticed any comms phone bill reduced to a 1000th of
>> the cost in 1985.
>
> 1990 approx. 5p/minute at 28,800 bps
>
> 2008 approx £15 for 43,000 minutes at 6,000,000 bps
>
> The cost per bit per second has reduced by around x30,000 in the past
> 18 years.


That told him! :-)


--
Steve - www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - Digital Radio News & Info

The adoption of DAB was the most incompetent technical
decision ever made in the history of UK broadcasting:
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/da...ion_of_dab.htm

DAB sounds worse than FM wrote:
>>
>> The cost per bit per second has reduced by around x30,000 in the past
>> 18 years.
>
> That told him! :-)
>
>
Nah, but did my phone bill decrease by 30,000.

Er... No.

:-)

--
Adrian C

Adrian C wrote:
> DAB sounds worse than FM wrote:
>
>> So has the cost of Internet bandwidth fallen in line with Moore's
>> Law since the mid 1980s?
>
> Nope. I haven't noticed any comms phone bill reduced to a 1000th of
> the cost in 1985.


I thought it would have been obvious from what I wrote that I wasn't talking
about consumer speeds.


> Perhaps people are doing different things with the
> bandwidth - new applications are possible (video mainly) that were not
> possible before, but we are not saving great amounts of money as such
> as consumers. And it's probably true for the owners of the routers
> running the backbone of the net.


But is it true for the owners of the routers running the backbone of the
net? That's the question. For example, if they installed a router ever 2
years and every time they installed a new one the bandwidth had doubled,
that would suggest that Internet bandwidth cost should fall in line with
Moore's Law.


> And is it a reasonable assumption that if router speeds
>> increase by a factor of X, Internet bandwidth becomes X times
>> cheaper?
>
> Nope, a standing charge will be applicable regardless of the speed and
> quality of service. There will however be pressure to reduce the
> standing charges but it won't track with whatever cost benefits the
> technology is reducing by. There is a limit.
>
> For instance, look at memory card manufacturers. The price of flash
> has fallen so much that they are now having to cut back on previous
> fixed packaging costs - cardboard and printed leaflets are small in
> cost to produce, but as a percentage of the overall cost of the
> finished product when taking transport in consideration - that's
> rising and looking embarrassing. Get ready to dust one out your
> cornflakes packet any day now....


The cost of the Internet router itself would be equivalent to the "standing
charge" you're talking about, but that fixed cost is depreciated over its
lifetime, so you can include it in an overall average cost of bandwidth.


--
Steve - www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - Digital Radio News & Info

The adoption of DAB was the most incompetent technical
decision ever made in the history of UK broadcasting:
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/da...ion_of_dab.htm

Adrian C wrote:
> DAB sounds worse than FM wrote:
>>>
>>> The cost per bit per second has reduced by around x30,000 in the
>>> past 18 years.
>>
>> That told him! :-)
>>
>>
> Nah, but did my phone bill decrease by 30,000.
>
> Er... No.


You need to try Skype then! :-)


--
Steve - www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - Digital Radio News & Info

The adoption of DAB was the most incompetent technical
decision ever made in the history of UK broadcasting:
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/da...ion_of_dab.htm

On 9-Mar-2008, "DAB sounds worse than FM" <dab.is@dead> wrote:

> I was reading about Internet routers a few months ago and "the world's
> leading expert in Internet routers" said that the speed of Internet
> routers
> had followed Moore's Law religiously since the mid 1980s.
>
> I also read that the theoretical bandwidth of a single optic fibre is 10
> Tbps, so I'd imagine it's safe to say that fibre can handle anything you
> throw at it.
>
> So has the cost of Internet bandwidth fallen in line with Moore's Law
> since
> the mid 1980s? And is it a reasonable assumption that if router speeds
> increase by a factor of X, Internet bandwidth becomes X times cheaper?

The OP quoted the speed of routers had followed Moore's Law, that
isn't the same as saying the price of routers has fallen religiously
in accordance with Moore's Law. They are expensive to replace,
and don't get upgraded on a yearly cycle.
Again it's not about a single optical fibre, there is plenty of dark
fibre that could be used for extra bandwidth, rather than try to
push 10Tbs over a single fibre.
The other issue is does the cost of supplying the service
(ie bandwidth) reflect the true cost of providing it including
premises, staff, electricity, lighting, heating, sales, billing,
, the cost of providing LINX which many ISPS's
connect through, etc?
Or maybe it's like many other industries a case of what
the public is prepared to pay.

DAB sounds worse than FM wrote:
> Adrian C wrote:
>> DAB sounds worse than FM wrote:
>>
>>> So has the cost of Internet bandwidth fallen in line with Moore's
>>> Law since the mid 1980s?
>> Nope. I haven't noticed any comms phone bill reduced to a 1000th of
>> the cost in 1985.
>
>
> I thought it would have been obvious from what I wrote that I wasn't talking
> about consumer speeds.
>
>
OK yes, my mindset is still on the consumer dial-up model where time sat
at the terminal was the basis of charges for information independant of
the number actual data bits that made up that information.

> But is it true for the owners of the routers running the backbone of the
> net? That's the question. For example, if they installed a router ever 2
> years and every time they installed a new one the bandwidth had doubled,
> that would suggest that Internet bandwidth cost should fall in line with
> Moore's Law.

Well, it seems you are correct. Some one has beaten you to name it.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_fiber#Butters.27_Law_of_Photonics>

:-)

--
Adrian C