|
Hi Guys,
That's a pretty big deal right now in France so I thought I'd start a blog and let you know about something that's pissing me off.
Since a few weeks, Youtube has been getting slower and slower in France, to the point where it's impossible to watch a video (even 320p) from 5pm to 11pm every day.
The reason is simple, the cables that peers with the biggest french ISPs got too small for the huge amount of trafic that is generated by youtube and especially beacuse of the 720p and 1080p videos. French ISPs believe that it generates 20% of their bandwidth cost.
What happened is that they decided NOT to upgrade the cable because they believe that they shouldn't be the ones paying for a service that google provides for free.
They want Google to contribute to the upgrade of the peering point with US/Youtube and they're claiming that either Google helps, or subscribers will need to pay more money to have access to that kind of content. One of the CEOs of the main french ISP said "I think it's legitimate that google contributes to pay for the network they force us to build".
It's a big deal because we're talking about 15 millions people concerned here, and some people think that ISPs have the right to deny the service, because Google is "ruining" them.
What's your opinion ?
References:
Free, Orange and SFR slow down google services:
Link
|
IMO the ISP's need to step up their infastructure, if they cannot support video playback from youtube, then they are falling behind in terms of hardware and infastructure, and it's not on google to pay for it. If they want their clients to have access to something google provides it falls on them to provide for it, thats why people pay them - to have access to the internet, if they cant handle certain parts of the internet then it's their own fault
That's fucking bullshit.
edit: I phrased my reply all wrong, but I'm too lazy to fix it, you get the jist.
|
the Dagon Knight4015 Posts
This is quite sad, but I've always imagined the French to be just the kind of people to get into a huge fight about something like this.
Surely people will just move away from those services?
|
I have Free and Youtube lags so much for me between 6pm <-> 2am
Also i already pay 30 € for a shitty dl / upload so i don't want to pay even more. Youtube and google make already a shitload of money with advertising + various illegal activities ( mostly copyright infringement ) so i guess they will have to pay =D
|
On May 10 2011 07:19 SirJolt wrote:
but I've always imagined the French to be just the kind of people to get into a huge fight about something like this.
Please, elaborate and explain this train of thought.
|
It's not Google's obligation to provide anyone anywhere with internet service. It is beyond stupid that French ISPs would demand a content creator to take on the roll of an ISP due to their own incompetence.
|
Wouldn't an ISP make a killing if they just manned up and ugraded the line? Then they'd be the only ones with the capacity/non-laggy youtube -> Everyone would change to them -> they make a killing and all the other ISP's get left in the dust... It's not google's fault that the french ISPs can't handle the traffic their customers are generating. It doesn't matter if all the traffic is being used on google owned sites, the fact of the matter is that the french internet/broadband infrastructure is insufficient to meet their consumer's needs, so they should upgrade it themselves.
|
Wow, those ISPs sound pretty retarded. I mean, google supply a free service. Who should it in any way be their obligation to make sure ALL the network infrastructure in the world can handle the amount of traffic it generates?
|
Everyone should just complain to the ISP, customers can clog phone lines and overload their capacity to respond to each ticket. AFAIK youtube has become an essential part of the internet culture. People have a need to stay in the loop with the latest "viral hit". I don't think this will be a problem for France. As long as the people revolt the ISPs will change.
|
I've never understood exactly how cable based ISPs operate as far as who owns the actual cables in comparison to who is managing the traffic. I tried to figure it out but couldn't.
Can any business that wants to lay new cable?
If so, then this isn't a problem right? A new business should just come in and lay higher bandwidth cable and take customers?
|
|
|
 I haven't noticed anything. I always watch in 480p.
|
This is fucking retarded? Like, charge people according to how much bandwidth they're using, like any normal rational ISP, problem solved? Are ISPs in France government organizations or what?
|
Surprising that they can get away with that without loosing all their customers? Or maybe anti-US-youtube is accually good for their image? I don't get it. Obviously google won't pay for any cables nor should they.
|
Two reasons google should definitely not capitulate on this one.
1) precedent. If they have to help france, why not agrentina or south africa? (for example)
2) capitalist principles. youtube exists in its current form BECAUSE of consumer demand, not the other way around. If the consumer demand is there, it's up to the ISPs to meet the demand.
|
the Dagon Knight4015 Posts
On May 10 2011 07:28 Bshad wrote:Show nested quote +On May 10 2011 07:21 TadH wrote:On May 10 2011 07:19 SirJolt wrote:
but I've always imagined the French to be just the kind of people to get into a huge fight about something like this.
Please, elaborate and explain this train of thought. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Revolution
My girlfriend is French, and any time something happens that she thinks is unjust she kicks up a huge fuss. Any time we've been in France and out with her French friends, they've been talking about the different industrial actions/strikes that one or other of them was currently engaged in.
The French seem, as a rule, not to be the kind of people to take things lying down, she's constantly surprised by how willing the Irish are, by comparison, to just hold a grudge.
When I told her about this thread, her reply was, "They're fucked; people will just go to whoever will let them watch YouTube. Anyway, they can't do that, people make money off YouTube, and people making stuff in French will have French viewers, so the networks are taking away their income. They won't stand for it."
|
On May 10 2011 07:28 travis wrote:
I've never understood exactly how cable based ISPs operate as far as who owns the actual cables in comparison to who is managing the traffic. I tried to figure it out but couldn't.
Can any business that wants to lay new cable?
If so, then this isn't a problem right? A new business should just come in and lay higher bandwidth cable and take customers?
There are probably government barriers to entry as there are in the US. In the US at least it would be against the law to just start laying cable and undersell the major cable companies/ISPs.
On May 10 2011 07:21 TadH wrote:Show nested quote +On May 10 2011 07:19 SirJolt wrote:
but I've always imagined the French to be just the kind of people to get into a huge fight about something like this.
Please, elaborate and explain this train of thought.
Don't they light cars on fire if you try to take away their government benefits?
|
Dailymotion is as popular as Youtube in France, why Dailymotion isn't slowed down ? Oh wait Dailymotion is French.
It's just like how Youtube got blocked in China, it's mere protectionism. Youtube was very popular and it was really hard for Chinese competitors to develop. Then Youtube was blocked and Chinese competitors flourish.
Renren, the Chinese equivalent to Facebook that succeeded because Facebook got blocked in China just went public, and almost raised 1 B$.
The same thing happened for Facebook and Google in China. Since early 2009, Baidu's stock values has been multiplied by 12.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-05-04/renren-raises-743-million-in-china-social-networking-site-ipo.html
edit : I am exaggerating as Youtube isn't blocked like it is in China, but it's so hypocrite to blame Youtube for generating all the traffic while its French competitor is just using as much.
|
On May 10 2011 07:28 travis wrote:
I've never understood exactly how cable based ISPs operate as far as who owns the actual cables in comparison to who is managing the traffic. I tried to figure it out but couldn't.
Can any business that wants to lay new cable?
If so, then this isn't a problem right? A new business should just come in and lay higher bandwidth cable and take customers?
ISPs don't own the cables, at least not the BIG ones that go through the atlantic ocean, they pay to get connected to them at an entry point (peering), and they pay for a certain amount of Terabits (or more).
Problem is that Peering points are like a big nod that quickly gets engorged. The atlantic cables are fine, the French peering points are not. Cables are owned by the companies who build them and put them underwater, thats costs a LOT of money.
|
On May 10 2011 07:32 SirJolt wrote:Show nested quote +On May 10 2011 07:28 Bshad wrote:On May 10 2011 07:21 TadH wrote:On May 10 2011 07:19 SirJolt wrote:
but I've always imagined the French to be just the kind of people to get into a huge fight about something like this.
Please, elaborate and explain this train of thought. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Revolution My girlfriend is French, and any time something happens that she thinks is unjust she kicks up a huge fuss. Any time we've been in France and out with her French friends, they've been talking about the different industrial actions/strikes that one or other of them was currently engaged in. The French seem, as a rule, not to be the kind of people to take things lying down, she's constantly surprised by how willing the Irish are, by comparison, to just hold a grudge. When I told her about this thread, her reply was, "They're fucked; people will just go to whoever will let them watch YouTube. Anyway, they can't do that, people make money off YouTube, and people making stuff in French will have French viewers, so the networks are taking away their income. They won't stand for it."
And that's why I love french people ^.^
|
On May 10 2011 07:28 travis wrote:
I've never understood exactly how cable based ISPs operate as far as who owns the actual cables in comparison to who is managing the traffic. I tried to figure it out but couldn't.
Can any business that wants to lay new cable?
If so, then this isn't a problem right? A new business should just come in and lay higher bandwidth cable and take customers?
just for reference of the UK model. BT (british telecom) used to be owned by the government, so it was incharge of not only building infrastructure but also being the telephone company. with both phone services and internet it is now forced to allow other companies to buy up usage of the infrastructure, but BT still has to maintain it, but it still receives some money from the government for this.
about 5 years ago virgin entered the scene with a bucketload of money, dug up the streets and laid their own cabling. so now they can offer internet/phone without going through BT. a bigger initial investment for more profit long term
since we have geniune choice in the UK, noone could realistically complain that youtube is too hard to deal with, because people would switch provider.
i imagine france only has 1 company in charge of infrastructure and that is why they are able to roadblock improvements?
|
|
|
On May 10 2011 07:39 turdburgler wrote:Show nested quote +On May 10 2011 07:28 travis wrote:
I've never understood exactly how cable based ISPs operate as far as who owns the actual cables in comparison to who is managing the traffic. I tried to figure it out but couldn't.
Can any business that wants to lay new cable?
If so, then this isn't a problem right? A new business should just come in and lay higher bandwidth cable and take customers? just for reference of the UK model. BT (british telecom) used to be owned by the government, so it was incharge of not only building infrastructure but also being the telephone company. with both phone services and internet it is now forced to allow other companies to buy up usage of the infrastructure, but BT still has to maintain it, but it still receives some money from the government for this. about 5 years ago virgin entered the scene with a bucketload of money, dug up the streets and laid their own cabling. so now they can offer internet/phone without going through BT. a bigger initial investment for more profit long term since we have geniune choice in the UK, noone could realistically complain that youtube is too hard to deal with, because people would switch provider. i imagine france only has 1 company in charge of infrastructure and that is why they are able to roadblock improvements?
It is the same thing in France. Orange belongs to France Telecom ( previously state owned ) and they have most of the infrastructure. Smaller compagnies have started to build their own optical fiber lines in the big cities but they don't have enough money to do that everywhere.
|
I regreat making this post mods feel free to delete it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
