It's a big day in internet history. On October 29, 1969, Professor Len Kleinrock and his team of graduate students at UCLA sent the first message over a network of computers that would eventually become the internet.
Anyone who follows the submarine cable sector knows that a lot of cables have been built in recent years—and investments in new cables keep coming.
I gave a presentation at Submarine Networks World 2019 in Singapore titled "Is Your Planned Submarine Cable Doomed?" My goal was not to identify particular planned cables that I think are doomed to fail, but rather to highlight some of the key flaws we often see when assessing cable operator business plans on behalf of investors.
I'm a cynic and you can be one, too!
This was the title of Tim Stronge's presentation during a recent webinar we did with our friends at Ciena.
Our favorite neighborhood cynic came bearing an important public service announcement for webinar attendees: just because you see a flashy slide deck or press release about a new submarine cable doesn't mean it's going to happen.
The benefits of SD-WAN are apparent: more bandwidth, local breakouts, flexibility, etc. That being said, the larger attack surface makes it vital for security to be at the forefront of any modern deployment.
We’ve written quite a bit about content provider’s investments in new cables. And we’ve seen headlines about Microsoft, Google, Amazon, and Facebook’s big new investments. So does that mean that content providers are the largest investors in new submarine cables?
Our thirst for bandwidth must have a ceiling. It just must.
In our first-ever user-submitted myth, Chief Engineer of the Australia-Japan Cable Phil Murphy asked our experts a tough one. If it were possible to create the ultimate VR device that delivered a fully-immersive experience—catering to all possible sensory inputs—what would the bandwidth be and would our own senses create a cap?
In short: will sensory overload dictate an eventual bandwidth ceiling?
Copyright © 2025 TeleGeography.
