In northern Europe gigabit to the home isn't uncommon. As long as you start to wire up new developments with off the shelf ethernet equipment, the rest pretty much follows. I'd wager ethernet is probably less expensive than cable TV-cable, and ethernet carries everything.
The big difference with faster speeds is that you don't have to muck about with QoS. Just throw bandwidth at the problem. This means you can actually sell a product that would depend on it, since support becomes manageable.
1 Mbps is adequate for VoIP. But at 10 Mbps I can use it without thinking. I can get an account with any provider, start simultaneous calls, and there are no dropouts even when torrenting.
100 Mbps is adequate for IPTV, in broadcast HD quality, when the streams are over a controlled network. But with 1Gbps it becomes just another service, even if my kids stream too.
The big difference, as someone else pointed out here, is when upload speeds catch up. Assymetric broadband is quickly ACK limited, which disturbs real time streaming in the other direction. Latency is key here, and just getting rid of that cable modem and hit the wire directly really helps.
Regarding piracy, I think it is obvious that it goes down when real time streaming gets practical. It's more convenient, really. So more broadband really does transform markets. The problem for the past ten years has been that it's not really deployed globally, and many of the rich western countries are stuck with cable modems because of lock in effects. This should be an obvious opportunity for an entrepreneurial spirit, just wire up a suitable area and you can be first to sell IP services to them. Cable TV and phone service are moving to IP, it's just a matter of time.
The big difference with faster speeds is that you don't have to muck about with QoS. Just throw bandwidth at the problem. This means you can actually sell a product that would depend on it, since support becomes manageable.
1 Mbps is adequate for VoIP. But at 10 Mbps I can use it without thinking. I can get an account with any provider, start simultaneous calls, and there are no dropouts even when torrenting.
100 Mbps is adequate for IPTV, in broadcast HD quality, when the streams are over a controlled network. But with 1Gbps it becomes just another service, even if my kids stream too.
The big difference, as someone else pointed out here, is when upload speeds catch up. Assymetric broadband is quickly ACK limited, which disturbs real time streaming in the other direction. Latency is key here, and just getting rid of that cable modem and hit the wire directly really helps.
Regarding piracy, I think it is obvious that it goes down when real time streaming gets practical. It's more convenient, really. So more broadband really does transform markets. The problem for the past ten years has been that it's not really deployed globally, and many of the rich western countries are stuck with cable modems because of lock in effects. This should be an obvious opportunity for an entrepreneurial spirit, just wire up a suitable area and you can be first to sell IP services to them. Cable TV and phone service are moving to IP, it's just a matter of time.