[Aiyo]

Time for educated post from aiyo:

Ok this is great and all, but what would happen to the old internet? Would they transfer all the old info to The Grid? What would the people who spent tons of cash on the old internet servers do if everyone started going to The Grid's servers? Wouldn't a switch to The Grid collapse the whole (current)digital world and cost people $$$? I mean, what is "the grid" actually? Is it just brand new latest servers with new wires?... If it is then I think "Why isn't this already done or hasn't anyone already did this?".. Just some questions floating around in my mind.

[reeko]

I dont think the 'old' internet is jus going to disappear overnight when this is domestically available, they are going to run side by side for a while but I would imagine the grid would eventually 'kill' the current Internet.

As for the technical side, all I really know is the whole system runs off fibre optics, from your house to the main station. This is expensive! And I have read about processing petabytes (never heard of a petabyte until the grid).

If anyone understands the grid and could explain it, would be grateful!

I dont think the 'old' internet is jus going to disappear overnight when this is domestically available, they are going to run side by side for a while but I would imagine the grid would eventually 'kill' the current Internet.

As for the technical side, all I really know is the whole system runs off fibre optics, from your house to the main station. This is expensive! And I have read about processing petabytes (never heard of a petabyte until the grid).

If anyone understands the grid and could explain it, would be grateful!

[Eurisko]

Working in the cable/wireless industry for awhile, I can see that this is very realistic. From what the article states, the Grid would work through fibre optic cabling alone, meaning no old technologies to slow it down. It's the old saying, a chain is as strong as its weakest link. Take the new Wireless-N routers for example, sure they're 15 times faster, but all it takes is one computer using Wireless-G to connect, and the whole system slows down to that speed.

I'd assume you'd have to be using fibre to connect to the Grid, and for home use, that's going to be a ways off. But for business, universities, labs, etc. It would be available at soon as the grid is put into place.

[reeko]

Thanks for that Eurisko.

When it is going to be distributed to houses domestically, is it going to take mass lengths of fibre optics cables to each household? I mean to pay for installation are we going to be looking at a couple miles of fibre optic cable per household, because that would be crazy expensive....

Also, i read somewhere that here in England, people will be able to effectively connect to the grid this Autumn.

ALSO!, will the grid just be the normal internet, just really quick? or a whole new project and concept altogether.

So intrigued!!!

[Eurisko]

This may come as a shock to most North American's, but the British Isles (Scotland/England) have some of the most cutting edge technology, including network connections, available today. Including fibre optics up the ying yang.

I also don't think this would be the "normal" internet in most respects. Again look at the article where they're saying a movie or entire album collection (a GB or two) can be downloaded in a couple of seconds. Great, but do you think a 7200RPM hard drive can save the info at that speed? I wouldn't think so. The Grid servers, hubs and shubs would either A) have to be very very fast or B) buffered to the max.

In the end, you're right, it's all about expense. Most of North America's main network trunks are already fibre, but for the moment that's where it ends (except for the places I mentioned before). We have alot of upgrading to do.

[reeko]

Sweet, all understood, except, somewhere i read there will be no need for hard drives. Everything will be stored on the grid. I mean, obviously people will store the hard drives, but i guess it would be like when you connect to a network and you have your own space to save files to, your limited to a space within the network. i guess with the grid people can buy or be alocated so much space on the grid each.

also, how would this work? i struggle to understand how so so much space can be suddenly made available sought of in thin air....??

[spongebobiwan]

From what I have gathered, the good ole USA is quite far behind most places in Europe and many other parts of the developed world (i.e. Japan). My understanding is, that 20gbps is very commonplace speed in most of Europe, while 40gbps is common in Japan. I am currenly on 10gbps, soon to be upgraded to 16gbps, and that's about as fast as you can get in the USA for the most part.

I'm thinking that the main reason for this must be the fact that so much fiber optic cable has already been laid in Europe and other places, while in the USA there is such a vast amount of the old cable, the task of replacing all of this with fiber is daunting.

Another thing I've noticed (and probably for the same reasons) is that cellphone technology in the USA is also far behind Europe and other places. Where video conferencing with cellphones is quite commonplace for them from what I understand, here in the USA video conferencing is very limited.

Perhaps somebody more knowledgeable then myself can add their 2 cents to this topic.

All in all, the concept of the GRID, is really very appealing and and I think that it will develop as quickly as cable companies adapt to it. My guess is that this development may be quite different from one location to another (again, i.e. Europe vs. USA).

[Happy Noodle Boy]

Originally Posted by spongebobiwan

From what I have gathered, the good ole USA is quite far behind most places in Europe and many other parts of the developed world (i.e. Japan). My understanding is, that 20gbps is very commonplace speed in most of Europe, while 40gbps is common in Japan. I am currenly on 10gbps, soon to be upgraded to 16gbps, and that's about as fast as you can get in the USA for the most part.

I'm thinking that the main reason for this must be the fact that so much fiber optic cable has already been laid in Europe and other places, while in the USA there is such a vast amount of the old cable, the task of replacing all of this with fiber is daunting.

Another thing I've noticed (and probably for the same reasons) is that cellphone technology in the USA is also far behind Europe and other places. Where video conferencing with cellphones is quite commonplace for them from what I understand, here in the USA video conferencing is very limited.

Perhaps somebody more knowledgeable then myself can add their 2 cents to this topic.

All in all, the concept of the GRID, is really very appealing and and I think that it will develop as quickly as cable companies adapt to it. My guess is that this development may be quite different from one location to another (again, i.e. Europe vs. USA).

You're close to the reason we're behind, but didn't hit the bullseye.

The real reason the USA is lacking behind in communication technology is because of its geographical properties. The US has what, around 300 million people living here? I want to say Japan has around half of that. Now take living space. The USA is around 3.7 million square miles of land. Japan isn't even 150,000 square miles (California is bigger).

That vast difference in size is why we fall behind. It takes so much more money and resources to work nationally on the US than it takes anywhere else. Japan is a nice paced island so its easy to keeps its infrastructure up to date. This is a nightmare in the US because of how spread out the cities are. At most you could keep the metropolitan areas up date but you would end up with something that looks like the current 3G network, just a small portion of the country is covered with it.

[desepticon]

yeah, our states our bigger than most countries.

[JohnBanks]

Faster speeds, I'm all for it. As for storing data on 'the grid', no thanks. I'd much rather have my stuff on my computer than out there where it can be much more easily accessed.

- John

[one1]

Originally Posted by Eurisko

I also don't think this would be the "normal" internet in most respects. Again look at the article where they're saying a movie or entire album collection (a GB or two) can be downloaded in a couple of seconds. Great, but do you think a 7200RPM hard drive can save the info at that speed? I wouldn't think so. The Grid servers, hubs and shubs would either A) have to be very very fast or B) buffered to the max.

In the end, you're right, it's all about expense. Most of North America's main network trunks are already fibre, but for the moment that's where it ends (except for the places I mentioned before). We have alot of upgrading to do.

Negatory. The rotary HD will be obsolete in a few yrs. Mac's are already in the new generation "flash HD's". We're using it right this second, not in the future.

[Eurisko]

Originally Posted by one1

Negatory. The rotary HD will be obsolete in a few yrs. Mac's are already in the new generation "flash HD's". We're using it right this second, not in the future.

Really. And where can I go and pick up a Mac today that has a flash HD instead of a cylinder HD?

[Happy Noodle Boy]

Originally Posted by Eurisko

Really. And where can I go and pick up a Mac today that has a flash HD instead of a cylinder HD?

Unless I mistook what a flash HD is, here you go, for only $3000!

[m3thodandr3d]

To bad our hdd's can't even transfer data that fast. This would be completely useless. If you downloaded a movie that was 1GB, it would still take 3 minutes to transfer. Wait until they have something with a better bus speed and higher rpm than 7200.

[Aiyo]

well you can hook up your hd to your car and make it spin faster