Let’s consider a “decent” Internet speed of 200 mb/a. That’s 25 MB/s so it’d take 1,600 seconds to download 40,000 MB. That’s 26 minutes, so nearly half of your time is gone. Plus there is always time spent doing something like “installing”, checking the files, or whatever other stuff needs to be done besides just downloading the raw content.
Also, you don’t always get 100% of your advertised Internet speed 100% of the time.
Until just a year or two ago a 40gb update would take as much as 3 or 4 days to download and it would take up almost all of my data.
Even most of America still has shitty internet.
Your general point still stands, mind you, I was just curious about it and figured others might like the info too 😉
Quite shocked that Sweden doesn’t rank any higher though. They have or used to have the second most total fiberoptic bandwith in the world after the US which has roughly 30 times the population spread out on 22 times the area…
Romania, Denmark and Thailand are far from 100% city though 😄 I’m not sure about the ratios in the other two, but here in Denmark, there’s a LOT more farmland, forest and smaller towns by area than cities…
Don’t pretend that any more than 1% of users would use anywhere near that much bandwidth. Even if you had five devices streaming 4K video all at once, you’d barely saturate a 200 Mb/s connection.
Large file transfers are the exception, not the norm. People don’t tend to regularly download or upload several gigabyte files on a daily basis. Maybe 2-3% of people who are either tech enthusiasts or graphics designers/artists/film makers do that but nobody else does, and even then 200-400 Mb/s will still be fine, nowhere near a hair-pullingly slow experience.
Let’s consider a “decent” Internet speed of 200 mb/a. That’s 25 MB/s so it’d take 1,600 seconds to download 40,000 MB. That’s 26 minutes, so nearly half of your time is gone. Plus there is always time spent doing something like “installing”, checking the files, or whatever other stuff needs to be done besides just downloading the raw content.
Also, you don’t always get 100% of your advertised Internet speed 100% of the time.
Until just a year or two ago a 40gb update would take as much as 3 or 4 days to download and it would take up almost all of my data. Even most of America still has shitty internet.
200Mb/s? What are you using, a 4G+ modem?
Average USA internet speed: 99.3 Mb/s
Average UK internet speed: 50.4 Mb/s
Average EU internet speed: 103.3 Mb/s
Average Japan internet speed: 42.8 Mb/s
Average South Korea internet speed: 110.6 Mb/s
Average Canada internet speed: 99.8 Mb/s
200 Mb/s is far above the average in any country on the planet.
In those countries and the EU in general, sure, but not every country
Your general point still stands, mind you, I was just curious about it and figured others might like the info too 😉
Quite shocked that Sweden doesn’t rank any higher though. They have or used to have the second most total fiberoptic bandwith in the world after the US which has roughly 30 times the population spread out on 22 times the area…
I guess I should’ve considered that places that are 100% city would have better averages than 200
Romania, Denmark and Thailand are far from 100% city though 😄 I’m not sure about the ratios in the other two, but here in Denmark, there’s a LOT more farmland, forest and smaller towns by area than cities…
Tbh I would not consider 200 decent. Gigabit minimum in 2023
Don’t pretend that any more than 1% of users would use anywhere near that much bandwidth. Even if you had five devices streaming 4K video all at once, you’d barely saturate a 200 Mb/s connection.
Large file transfers are the exception, not the norm. People don’t tend to regularly download or upload several gigabyte files on a daily basis. Maybe 2-3% of people who are either tech enthusiasts or graphics designers/artists/film makers do that but nobody else does, and even then 200-400 Mb/s will still be fine, nowhere near a hair-pullingly slow experience.