backtop


Print 35 comment(s) - last by EricMartello.. on May 23 at 12:55 AM

Internet trends report predicts that real-time entertainment applications will account for 55 to 60 percent of peak aggregate traffic by the end of this year

A study of internet trends conducted by Sandvine has revealed that North American web users have become increasingly interested in on-demand applications like Netflix, and this enthusiasm for real-time entertainment categories will likely continue to grow.

Sandvine is a provider of intelligent broadband network solutions for fixed and mobile operators. It releases a Global Internet Phenomena Report annually, and has done so since 2002. These reports analyze internet phenomena and traffic on the web in North America, Latin America and Europe. 

In the Global Internet Phenomena Report: Spring 2011, Sandvine found that Netflix is now 29.7 percent of peak downstream traffic in North America, and has become "the largest source of internet traffic overall."

In 2009, real-time entertainment applications consumed 29.5 percent of peak aggregate traffic, and today, that number has increased to 49.2 percent. According to Sandvine's predictions, this category will account for 55 to 60 percent of peak aggregate traffic by the end of this year.

In Europe, real-time entertainment has steadily increased to 33.2 percent of peak aggregate traffic from 31.9 percent in fall 2010, and BitTorrent (peer-to-peer file sharing protocol) is the largest source of upstream internet traffic at 59.7 percent and also downstream internet traffic at 21.6 percent. The study reported that European subscribers consume twice the amount of data as North Americans.

In Latin America, real-time entertainment accounts for 27.5 percent of peak aggregate traffic. The report also found that social networking accounts for 14 percent of network traffic, which is more traffic than YouTube

"The information and trends in Sandvine's Spring 2011 Global Internet Phenomena Report emphasize the need for innovative solutions to keep up with rapidly evolving consumer demands for content and connectivity," said Dave Caputo, President and CEO of Sandvine. "The dramatic growth of Netflix and its impending global expansion are prime examples of a growing appetite for real-time entertainment. It is also important for fixed and mobile broadband providers to have real-time policy control capability, made possible by insightful business intelligence, in order to put sound strategic decisions into action."

The Spring 2011 Global Internet Phenomena Report is based on anonymous and voluntary data collected from mobile and fixed service provider networks in North America, Europe and Latin America, and over 220 service provider customers in over 85 countries.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Disingenuous
By nafhan on 5/18/2011 10:12:25 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
Netflix Gobbles 29.7 Percent of Peak Downstream Traffic in North America
Netflix isn't "gobbling" anything. This is people making a choice of how and when to use services they are paying for.

As an aside, ISP's that are upset about this are generally upset because this is eating into their TV business, and for the small number of ISP's that don't have the capacity to provide what they have sold, that's not Netflix's fault... They need to invest in infrastructure and/or adjust their pricing and ToS.




RE: Disingenuous
By Iaiken on 5/18/2011 10:41:16 AM , Rating: 5
You forgot the part where this is causing ISP's to get caught for previously overselling their available bandwidth and then getting sued by customers when they can't actually deliver.


RE: Disingenuous
By Motoman on 5/18/2011 11:41:49 AM , Rating: 2
The problem there being that the consumers have no case, since all ISPs sell their services as "up to Xmb" without any guarantee of any minimum bandwidth level at all.

That will never change without industry regulation. The only rational solution is to require all ISPs to sell their services with a guaranteed MINIMUM bandwidth. That would be something that could be monitored and verified.

...some people say selling at an "average" would be fine, but that opens up a different can of worms. An average over time still allows your internet connection to be unusably slow at peak times.


RE: Disingenuous
By Akrovah on 5/18/2011 11:49:30 AM , Rating: 2
You can't guarentee a minimum bandwidth either though. Every ISP has periods of service interruption. Obviously you are not getting your minimum bandwidth at that point in time, and then the ISP still gets sued.


RE: Disingenuous
By Motoman on 5/18/2011 11:56:50 AM , Rating: 2
One can imagine that appropriate provisions could be given for things that the ISP can't reasonably be expected to control...like power outages or some idiot cutting their line with a shovel.

It's just like getting paid-for TV, either by cable or satellite...you buy a contract that says you get 100 channels. If a storm or whatever prevents you from getting your 100 channels for some period of time, that's the way it goes...people don't sue DirecTV for the 8 hours a month when they didn't get any service because of something DirecTV couldn't have managed.


RE: Disingenuous
By SunTzu on 5/22/2011 2:13:46 PM , Rating: 2
That's wierd, cus ive got a guaranteed 50/10 with my connection, up to 100/10, with a federal mandate that it has to be at 100/10 for x (i dont know how often its allowed to drop) hours of the day. I live in Sweden, and our ISPs have no problems with this. The only connections that arent forced to follow this are 3g mobile connections, for technical reasons.


RE: Disingenuous
By EricMartello on 5/23/2011 12:55:05 AM , Rating: 2
It's called and SLA, brah...get one if you need it.


RE: Disingenuous
By YashBudini on 5/20/2011 12:33:44 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
"up to Xmb"

And I could live with that if it wasn't pure fiction. TW used to advertise here "up to 5", we never saw more than 2. When they claimed "up to 10" we never saw over 3, and I mean NEVER, at any hour.

And Turbo is a joke, how long is its duration? 50 milliseconds?


RE: Disingenuous
By nafhan on 5/18/2011 12:03:30 PM , Rating: 2
That's why I said the ISP's need to adjust their prices or ToS if they can't handle it and are unwilling to invest in infrastructure.


RE: Disingenuous
By Reclaimer77 on 5/18/2011 11:13:04 AM , Rating: 2
Yup. Before I switched to Netflix my local teleco's basic cable package was $65! And that's ANALOG basic cable. Seriously, what the FU#%!? I can only guess what they would want for premium HD programming...

My only gripe with Netflix so far is the lack of V-sync. This causes some pretty bad tearing in the image at times because the frame rate of the stream isn't synced with the refresh rate of my TV. But that's a smile compromise to make for such savings!


RE: Disingenuous
By nafhan on 5/18/2011 12:10:28 PM , Rating: 2
I'm in the same boat. My only annoyance with doing the Netflix/Hulu thing is availability and timeliness of certain shows. I'd like it if I could legally watch everything as soon as it's available on TV; not enough to pay an extra $50+ a month, though. TV just isn't worth that much to me.


RE: Disingenuous
By Reclaimer77 on 5/18/2011 12:54:05 PM , Rating: 3
That's why I also got a nice over the air antenna for local channels. Why not, I figured, my set already has a built in HD tuner. Most do today.

Netflix + antenna > cable. Imo.


RE: Disingenuous
By YashBudini on 5/20/2011 1:05:28 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Netflix + antenna > cable

Because frankly I use cable channels to catch up with networks shows I missed more than anything else. Lots of things like A&E Biography are at the public library, ie almost free rental. The supermarket has a Red Box for slightly older $1 rentals, if I even care.

I may need a DVR with this combo if I can download at off-peak times.

I would miss AMC's The Walking Dead, it's strangely intriguing.

How many local HD channels do you get?
From how far away?


RE: Disingenuous
By MadDogMorgan on 5/18/2011 7:55:28 PM , Rating: 3
"Netflix isn't "gobbling" anything. This is people making a choice of how and when to use services they are paying for."

Your statement is so incredibly right on.
Netfix has become the whipping boy for increased bandwidth usage. Probably as you say, because the ISP's, dare I say "comcast", are competing with them. Netflix is simply providing a service we want to buy. What's going to happen when RedBox, etc. start delivering movies on demand. This is another good reason we don't want our legislators to allow content-aware throttling. You think comcast just MIGHT throttle netflix and allow it's own on-demand service to have priority?


RE: Disingenuous
By Captain Orgazmo on 5/19/2011 12:36:13 AM , Rating: 2
In Canada, rather than competing, the telecom companies (2 cable and 2 phone companies who hold regional monopolies, and control the infrastructure which all of their and other ISPs must use) are trying to implement usage based (per-gigabyte) billing to choke off netflix and others while pushing their own vastly overpriced and inadequate IPTV and on-demand offerings. They would like to charge around $1 per gigabyte, at a cost to them of 1-3¢ per gig.

In the past decade I have seen Shaw Cable internet speeds barely increase (5 Mbit to "15" Mbit now), monthly data caps stay the same (60GB is a joke), and prices rise at double inflation with zero justification. Meanwhile their earnings are record, with 3 of the top 5 highest paid executives in Calgary being from Shaw (for a city headquartering dozens of enormous oil and mining companies this is unbelievable).

I generally hate government intervention into the economy, but the internet has become so important, and the market so uncompetitive that something has to be done.


RE: Disingenuous
By Reclaimer77 on 5/19/2011 1:09:13 PM , Rating: 2
Socialism in Canada? *gasp* Say it isn't so!


RE: Disingenuous
By Captain Orgazmo on 5/19/2011 3:32:32 PM , Rating: 2
I'm not sure how socialism fits into this discussion... but OK.


Party will end
By Raiders12 on 5/18/2011 7:29:42 AM , Rating: 2
If this trend continues, ISPs will come up with new throttling plans to limit this activity and recoup their losses. Good thing the same people NetFlix counts on to carry their data, are the same ones losing market share....




RE: Party will end
By gorehound on 5/18/2011 8:09:57 AM , Rating: 3
let netflix become an ISP.then they can leave the rest of us alone who do not want nothing to do with DRM streaming video


RE: Party will end
By therealnickdanger on 5/18/2011 8:28:37 AM , Rating: 3
ISPs are getting more customers and charging those customers more for access, so Netflix is good for them. When Netflix finally rolls out 1080p streaming and/or 5.1 surround sound streaming, you can bet that the ISPs will be waiting with higher-priced, higher bandwidth "options" for customers. So even though ISPs might be losing some TV and phone business, they can compensate via raising prices and landing exclusive deals. Also, lots of people get sucked in with package deals and temporary pricing deals and such. The ISPs are doing fine.

Also, it's not like the content on Netflix is constant. It's ever-changing. Sometimes they gain new shows, sometimes they lose them. Customers that always need to see the latest and greatest shows on premium channels and can't wait for it to hit Netflix will still pay for it. The smart ones will still torrent. :)


RE: Party will end
By myhipsi on 5/18/2011 9:43:29 AM , Rating: 2
This is a good part of the reason why some ISPs have begun to use a usage based model (and more will in the future). Not only does Netflix compete directly with ISP/cable's own on-demand service, but Netflix doesn't have the cost overhead of infrastructure to contend with (they just use it). You will see court cases in the near future as Netflix will complain about users being forced to use their cable companies on-demand service vs. netflix's because of usage caps. Should get interesting.


RE: Party will end
By therealnickdanger on 5/18/2011 10:07:15 AM , Rating: 2
Netflix is also likely to get more expensive, unfortunately.

http://www.hackingnetflix.com/2011/04/netflix-work...

They are toying with the idea of individual memberships instead of blanket household memberships. So right now, I can have six devices access the service at once from the same $13/mo account (unlimited streaming + Blu-ray), but if they switch to an individual-based model, it's hard to believe they wouldn't raise prices substantially.

I'm sure constant legal battles and exclusivity battles will only further drive prices up as the service continues to decimate the competition.

Oh well, the market will pay what the market will bear... right?


RE: Party will end
By sorry dog on 5/19/2011 11:13:24 AM , Rating: 2
I don't see why users would have a legitimate case for their right to Netflix is impeded by usage caps.

Obviously the caps are in place to help ISP's own demand programming compete, but most ISP have been smart enough to implement these caps a while ago or recently before the issue becomes mainstream. This does not affect most cable users now, so it's not really a competitive compliance issue yet. Additionally, the ISP's can say the caps are there for other reasons as well. But they saw the writing on the wall...3% of the users made of half the traffic by filesharing, but once mom and pop learn how to use Netflix that 3% being high users will become 20% and weak spots of a ISP's infrastructure will become more apparent.

Rather than lawsuits I think more of what we will see ISP making deals with different content services to be more competitive with Netflix. The ISP I work for is going to do a deal with TIVO to augment their on demand offerings.

Rather than the ISP's suffering the entertainment players that face the biggest change is the traditional content providers like ESPN, TNT, Disney, etc. Their fee structures are what drives the majority of price of a basic expanded package price. ESPN alone is like $2 or $3 a subscriber. The ISP's have other products to sell if consumers find other ways to get programming besides an expanded channel package...Showtime and HBO have a bigger fight on their hands.


Conflict of interest
By Gzus666 on 5/18/2011 10:37:31 AM , Rating: 2
Does no one see the conflict of interest here? The guys that did the study are the ones selling throttling equipment. I would question the validity of this study.




RE: Conflict of interest
By Lord 666 on 5/18/2011 10:43:42 AM , Rating: 2
The devil is in the details...


RE: Conflict of interest
By Gzus666 on 5/18/2011 10:46:50 AM , Rating: 2
Also in the method that they measure traffic. Apparently there have been widely ranged results in the total traffic of things like torrents and video streaming, all stemming from differing methods of measuring the traffic.


What do they expect
By lowsidex2 on 5/18/2011 9:07:59 AM , Rating: 3
With 5mins of commercials for every 5mins of show mixed with network logos and promos that cover a third of the screen, how is regular TV even enjoyable any more? I wish to be drawn in by the programming, not pissed off by it. I'd be satisfied with regular cable TV and my DVR if the above was done away with. Netflix is a steal at 3x the price.

Sadly, as others have commented, as streaming increases, the data caps decrease. With regional monopolies, we are all boned.




RE: What do they expect
By tng on 5/18/2011 11:16:53 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Sadly, as others have commented, as streaming increases, the data caps decrease. With regional monopolies, we are all boned.

I feel you are right. I recently dumped Comcrap cable for Direct TV and have never been happier, I actually get more for less with the satellite setup.

However I still use Comcrap for internet since thanks to regulation they are about the only game in town that approaches real broadband.

Just last month I bought a XBox and justified it to my wife that we could watch Netflix on it and that met with her approval. The service is great form Netflix and I can't believe that I didn't do this earlier. However, if Comcrap strangles our downloads I am going to pay for it eventually....


And "they" complained about torrents...
By priusone on 5/18/2011 7:07:48 AM , Rating: 2
I know several people who have cancelled their cable tv and watch everything through Netflix and Hulu. Will be interesting to see how ISP's deal with this influx, especially with net neutrality being an issue. Instead of offering "10MBit connection!" it changes to "Watch multiple Netflix shows at once!"




By Akrovah on 5/18/2011 11:53:53 AM , Rating: 2
Well why not? It's just a better, more cost effective deal. I think just about everyone in my family has started moving this way.


By gigahertz20 on 5/18/2011 7:15:50 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
In Europe....BitTorrent (peer-to-peer file sharing protocol) is the largest source of upstream internet traffic at 59.7 percent and also downstream internet traffic at 21.6 percent. The study reported that European subscribers consume twice the amount of data as North Americans.


Europeans love their American movies :) I guess they have no fear of using torrents since it's not like they are going to get sued over in Europe, can't blame them. BTW, Usenet FTW!




By leexgx on 5/18/2011 7:34:22 PM , Rating: 2
only reason i download them as it should come out here around the same time not 3-5 weeks later (or even months in some cases)

ITV/ Ch4 and maybe 5 player sucks due to adverts that are 30 secs long and if you go to the end of the program you have to watch all 4 of them before it let you play video why i like youtube as you can block the Video adverts do not mind the pop up one with an x in the video as all you have to do is close the pop up

i am guessing most USA based streaming sites are like that (less fuss to just download the video and play it ad free)

i do not use P2p (not sharing or not selling it = not so illegal) so 60% mite be low as it does not include direct download or not so legit TV streaming sites {that are poor quality} (as that show HTTP,ftp or usenet in stats)


P2P number misleading?
By casteve on 5/18/2011 11:03:53 AM , Rating: 2
Seems like Sandvine, with all of it's deep packet inspection, could break out P2P numbers. How much of the P2P is valid file transfers, like WoW updates?




RE: P2P number misleading?
By HrilL on 5/18/2011 1:06:32 PM , Rating: 2
All p2p is valid traffic. Its all game/software updates and Linux distros. Thought everyone knew that already.


No cable tv
By Chaosforce on 5/18/2011 9:15:52 AM , Rating: 2
I recently have decided to become one of those no cable people. No point in keeping it when i have netflix and can torrent other things. The Goal for me is to have the house with netflix and huluplus, sure i can torrent the shows but il pay 8 bucks for it being convenient and on all the TV's.

Now if only Hulu will make a channel for the wii then all in well.




"I mean, if you wanna break down someone's door, why don't you start with AT&T, for God sakes? They make your amazing phone unusable as a phone!" -- Jon Stewart on Apple and the iPhone














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki