<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Youtube bandwidth: terabytes per day</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.forret.com/2006/05/youtube-bandwidth-terabytes-per-day/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.forret.com/2006/05/youtube-bandwidth-terabytes-per-day/</link>
	<description>and I mean it</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 05 Jul 2008 08:42:36 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Michael</title>
		<link>http://blog.forret.com/2006/05/youtube-bandwidth-terabytes-per-day/#comment-230560</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2008 14:24:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.forret.com/2006/05/youtube-bandwidth-terabytes-per-day/#comment-230560</guid>
		<description>Youtube is now a subsidiary of Google and they linked up the video serch engine... So technically Youtube is part ofGoogle Videos</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Youtube is now a subsidiary of Google and they linked up the video serch engine&#8230; So technically Youtube is part ofGoogle Videos</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Vinayak</title>
		<link>http://blog.forret.com/2006/05/youtube-bandwidth-terabytes-per-day/#comment-222502</link>
		<dc:creator>Vinayak</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 30 Mar 2008 03:09:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.forret.com/2006/05/youtube-bandwidth-terabytes-per-day/#comment-222502</guid>
		<description>i think google and yahoo videos when combined even cannot reach that bandwidth !!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>i think google and yahoo videos when combined even cannot reach that bandwidth !!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lushable - Technology news, web 2.0 start up news &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Web 2.0 bubble in Japan</title>
		<link>http://blog.forret.com/2006/05/youtube-bandwidth-terabytes-per-day/#comment-218171</link>
		<dc:creator>Lushable - Technology news, web 2.0 start up news &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Web 2.0 bubble in Japan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Mar 2008 04:33:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.forret.com/2006/05/youtube-bandwidth-terabytes-per-day/#comment-218171</guid>
		<description>[...] Many others have tried to knock it from its throne, but it has stood firm, despite legal woes and burning through bandwidth (at a cost of $1 million a [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] Many others have tried to knock it from its throne, but it has stood firm, despite legal woes and burning through bandwidth (at a cost of $1 million a [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter</title>
		<link>http://blog.forret.com/2006/05/youtube-bandwidth-terabytes-per-day/#comment-202013</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jan 2008 10:40:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.forret.com/2006/05/youtube-bandwidth-terabytes-per-day/#comment-202013</guid>
		<description>@dispassionateanalysis:
You should note that the graph is logarithmic.
The black bar stands for &lt;a href="http://web.forret.com/tools/bandwidth.asp?speed=200&#038;unit=TB%2Fd" rel="nofollow"&gt;200.00 TB/d&lt;/a&gt;, which is 8.33 TB/h = 138.89 GB/min = 2.31 GB/s = 18.52 Gbps

Since the graph axes are expressed in Gbps/Tbps, the plotted value is 18.52 Gbps, which is at 42% between the 1Gbps and the 1 Tbps mark.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@dispassionateanalysis:<br />
You should note that the graph is logarithmic.<br />
The black bar stands for <a href="http://web.forret.com/tools/bandwidth.asp?speed=200&#038;unit=TB%2Fd" rel="nofollow">200.00 TB/d</a>, which is 8.33 TB/h = 138.89 GB/min = 2.31 GB/s = 18.52 Gbps</p>
<p>Since the graph axes are expressed in Gbps/Tbps, the plotted value is 18.52 Gbps, which is at 42% between the 1Gbps and the 1 Tbps mark.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dispassionateanalysis</title>
		<link>http://blog.forret.com/2006/05/youtube-bandwidth-terabytes-per-day/#comment-201699</link>
		<dc:creator>dispassionateanalysis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jan 2008 12:59:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.forret.com/2006/05/youtube-bandwidth-terabytes-per-day/#comment-201699</guid>
		<description>Your graph is horribly incorrect, and you should change it. It purports to show (the title of the graph is completely ambiguous) the sustained rate of data transfer per second needed to provide 200 Tb of data per day, averaged over the course of a day.

There are 1440 minutes in a day, or 86400 seconds in a day. You have the black bar set (no numbers are given) 1/4 to 1/3 of a Tb/s. In somewhere between 800 to 600 seconds, "a server" would transmit (if it could, of course there is a server farm) the required 200Tb. That's just 10 to 14 minutes. So the position of your black bar is horribly off. 

The needed sustained data transfer rate per second to achieve 200Tb a day is 200,000,000Mb / 86400 or 2314Mb per second or 2.3 gigs a second. 

One gig is of course 1/1000 of a terabyte. So 2.3 gigs is 23/10000 of a Tb. That black bar is not appearing at 23/10000 of the way up the 1 Tb/s marker.

You need to redo your diagram so perhaps it tops out at 3 gigs, then draw the black bar a third of the way past the 2 gig mark.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Your graph is horribly incorrect, and you should change it. It purports to show (the title of the graph is completely ambiguous) the sustained rate of data transfer per second needed to provide 200 Tb of data per day, averaged over the course of a day.</p>
<p>There are 1440 minutes in a day, or 86400 seconds in a day. You have the black bar set (no numbers are given) 1/4 to 1/3 of a Tb/s. In somewhere between 800 to 600 seconds, &#8220;a server&#8221; would transmit (if it could, of course there is a server farm) the required 200Tb. That&#8217;s just 10 to 14 minutes. So the position of your black bar is horribly off. </p>
<p>The needed sustained data transfer rate per second to achieve 200Tb a day is 200,000,000Mb / 86400 or 2314Mb per second or 2.3 gigs a second. </p>
<p>One gig is of course 1/1000 of a terabyte. So 2.3 gigs is 23/10000 of a Tb. That black bar is not appearing at 23/10000 of the way up the 1 Tb/s marker.</p>
<p>You need to redo your diagram so perhaps it tops out at 3 gigs, then draw the black bar a third of the way past the 2 gig mark.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bill</title>
		<link>http://blog.forret.com/2006/05/youtube-bandwidth-terabytes-per-day/#comment-186522</link>
		<dc:creator>bill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 09 Dec 2007 02:19:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.forret.com/2006/05/youtube-bandwidth-terabytes-per-day/#comment-186522</guid>
		<description>How much video in terabytes does youtube store?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How much video in terabytes does youtube store?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jack</title>
		<link>http://blog.forret.com/2006/05/youtube-bandwidth-terabytes-per-day/#comment-175070</link>
		<dc:creator>Jack</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Nov 2007 17:34:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.forret.com/2006/05/youtube-bandwidth-terabytes-per-day/#comment-175070</guid>
		<description>I wonder how much bandwidth youtube.com will use everyday when they start streaming in HD?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I wonder how much bandwidth youtube.com will use everyday when they start streaming in HD?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tim</title>
		<link>http://blog.forret.com/2006/05/youtube-bandwidth-terabytes-per-day/#comment-166222</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Nov 2007 07:19:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.forret.com/2006/05/youtube-bandwidth-terabytes-per-day/#comment-166222</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;So if I want to open a dating website how much bandwidth should I start out with.  How much will I need in a year if it take off slowly.  And how much approximately do match.com or the like use?????????&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So if I want to open a dating website how much bandwidth should I start out with.  How much will I need in a year if it take off slowly.  And how much approximately do match.com or the like use?????????</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Carl Broadbent’s Blog &#187; Blog Archive &#187; (PETI) People for the Ethical Treatment of the Internet</title>
		<link>http://blog.forret.com/2006/05/youtube-bandwidth-terabytes-per-day/#comment-153020</link>
		<dc:creator>Carl Broadbent’s Blog &#187; Blog Archive &#187; (PETI) People for the Ethical Treatment of the Internet</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Sep 2007 03:38:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.forret.com/2006/05/youtube-bandwidth-terabytes-per-day/#comment-153020</guid>
		<description>[...] media additions such as YouTube and GoogleVideo and the many audio and video broadcasts are taking up [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] media additions such as YouTube and GoogleVideo and the many audio and video broadcasts are taking up [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Techhawking &#187; Scalable web architectures</title>
		<link>http://blog.forret.com/2006/05/youtube-bandwidth-terabytes-per-day/#comment-147140</link>
		<dc:creator>Techhawking &#187; Scalable web architectures</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 16 Sep 2007 04:16:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.forret.com/2006/05/youtube-bandwidth-terabytes-per-day/#comment-147140</guid>
		<description>[...] Youtube doesn’t really need to scale or provision for that kind of bandwidth and based on the some reports from 2006 it had cost them close to 4 million a month back then. Youtube and services like that have to [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] Youtube doesn’t really need to scale or provision for that kind of bandwidth and based on the some reports from 2006 it had cost them close to 4 million a month back then. Youtube and services like that have to [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scalable web architectures &#187; Blog Archive &#187; P2P network scalability</title>
		<link>http://blog.forret.com/2006/05/youtube-bandwidth-terabytes-per-day/#comment-144751</link>
		<dc:creator>Scalable web architectures &#187; Blog Archive &#187; P2P network scalability</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Sep 2007 07:53:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.forret.com/2006/05/youtube-bandwidth-terabytes-per-day/#comment-144751</guid>
		<description>[...] Youtube doesn&#8217;t really need to scale or provision for that kind of bandwidth and based on the some reports from 2006 it had cost them close to 4 million a month back then. Youtube and services like that have to [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] Youtube doesn&#8217;t really need to scale or provision for that kind of bandwidth and based on the some reports from 2006 it had cost them close to 4 million a month back then. Youtube and services like that have to [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Negative</title>
		<link>http://blog.forret.com/2006/05/youtube-bandwidth-terabytes-per-day/#comment-105224</link>
		<dc:creator>Negative</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 Jun 2007 20:02:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.forret.com/2006/05/youtube-bandwidth-terabytes-per-day/#comment-105224</guid>
		<description>Are you serious? of course bandwidth will get cheaper. It will get astronomically cheaper as pc's and networks become better. Hey dumb-arse Tomin, if a company was selling at a loss they would soon go broke. The tech dive was years ago. The weeds are gone; for now! Ahh yeah, my point was, dont start a video blog. It has been done. Ever heard of YouTube. They are big coz they are original!! and best.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Are you serious? of course bandwidth will get cheaper. It will get astronomically cheaper as pc&#8217;s and networks become better. Hey dumb-arse Tomin, if a company was selling at a loss they would soon go broke. The tech dive was years ago. The weeds are gone; for now! Ahh yeah, my point was, dont start a video blog. It has been done. Ever heard of YouTube. They are big coz they are original!! and best.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 1.617 seconds -->
