If only it were easy to do. Technical limitations on copper is what causes low upload speeds. ISP’s prioritize the download speed, which is what people utilize the most. As fiber continues to be rolled out it should get better though.

[–] exi@feddit.de 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Tell that to our beautiful German Telekom who'll sell you 1000down/200up FTTH for ridiculous 80€/month.

[–] Wintex@lemm.ee 1 points 2 years ago

Fuck telekom, i can't wait to switch to fiber

[–] worfamerryman@beehaw.org 9 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Is there a legit reason they do not do this?

[–] bric@lemm.ee 15 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Just to prioritize download in limited bandwidth cables. Like a neighborhood might get 2Gbps total, but instead of doing 1 down 1 up they instead do 1.8 down and .2 up, then split that amongst a bunch of houses.

[–] heluecht@pirati.ca 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

@dingus @worfamerryman On DSL you have a limited set of frequencies that you can use for either upload or download. So you have to split these frequencies between upload and download. Also the DSL speed is highly depending on the length of the copper between your home and the switch cabinet on the street. (Just remember: DSL is the transmission of high frequencies over unshielded cables that never meant to transmit high frequencies) So the longer the cable, the lower the total possible bandwidth. And most people have a demand for a higher download than upload. So most people will prefer some 16 down, 2 up instead of 8 down and 8 up.

[–] worfamerryman@beehaw.org 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

What about on a fiber connection? I wonder if the slower upload speed is artificial.

[–] heluecht@pirati.ca 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

@worfamerryman Fibre is not my field of expertise. But it seems as if we have got some experts here in the thread.

[–] worfamerryman@beehaw.org 1 points 2 years ago

Thanks, I’ve read the comments. I was just curious if you had any additional information. I’m mainly interested for personal knowledge.

[–] pli5k3n@beehaw.org 1 points 2 years ago

Because they can. Most people's typical usage isn't impacted by low uplink bandwidth. Very few people are uploading 4K content or live streaming or hosting a high traffic webserver from their garage. Less bandwidth means less expense, thus more profit. Capitalism, baby.

[–] jake_jake_jake_@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Some service-provider level technology is not symmetrical at the access layer. An ISP serving exclusively fiber may have values like below:

GPON (GIGAbit passive optical network): 1.24416 Gigabits/s up, 2.48832 Gigabits/s down

XG-PON (10 gigabit passive optical network): 10G/2.5G

xgS-pon (10g Symmetrical optical network): 10g/10g

Note that on all of these technologies, you are also sharing bandwidth with neighbors on your PON. Sometimes up to 64 subs on one gpon. I think 128 on xgs-pon Until more providers make fiber available, as well as are willing to fork more up for the latest equipment, and reduce the over subscriptions of pons, symmetrical services for everyone just won’t happen.

Will this ever happen at mega providers / baby-bells? Probably never unless a regional or startup pops up, and then they will only attempt compete in that market.

[–] Confetti_Camouflage@pawb.social 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I wouldn't mind a ratio like those for just regular home Internet, but right now I get gigabit down but only 20 megabit up. 1/50th.

[–] jake_jake_jake_@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

yeah that's garbage, we just started rolling 2.5/500 in certain xgs-pon areas. i think minimum now (for fiber, we still have vdsl/adsl) is 500/50. i don't sell any of it just work on the technical side.

[–] kratoz29@lemmy.world -2 points 2 years ago

It is pretty dumb to me that symmetrical is not the standard way.