So you can stop thinking about outdated things like the "local network" vs "the internet".
If you can store all your stuff remotely, and get it as quickly and easily as if it were on a local NAS suddenly things get a lot easier.
Ironically, it's the non-geeks who need this the most, because they can't setup a NAS. How many people do you see emailing images to themselves so they can get it on their other computer? Every person who does that needs 1Gbps internet so they can do that for their entire photo and film collection.
(And yes, I know Dropbox helps with this scenario, but even Dropbox is better with 1Gbps intenet...)
That's mostly true, but there's still the latency benefits of physical proximity. For example, just for an electric signal to travel 6000km across the country, it will take t=6000km/v where v=c/n (c = speed of light, 3e8 m/s and n = refractive index of fiber, 1.62). So it'll take 32.4 ms just to send a packet across the states, and another 32.4 ms to receive one back. This doesn't even take into effect the latency from the routers in the way, and other things like that your message doesn't go in a completely straight path.
So latency is really important if you're doing something like playing a real time game. 32ms is basically a single frame if you're playing at 30 fps. Some people will notice if they're constantly a frame behind.
Latency exists with any medium. Latency isn't really comparable to bandwidth, though a lack of bandwidth can impair latency. Most people aren't connecting to a server that is 3000 miles away from them, they are connecting to a CDN that is strategically located within a few states from them. Even in latency sensitive applications like gaming or VoIP, usually 100ms or less is enough for satisfactory results. Then there are a whole host of things where latency really doesn't matter all that much like file backup or video streaming...
100 megabit service is available at consumer-oriented pricing in Japan and other places. One obvious use of very fast service is to substitute OTT TV for cable TV, or to provide server-based 3D gaming, or, for non-entertainment purposes, to provide high-definition video conferencing. I'm sure others can enumerate a long list of applications.
But, the real point is there has never been a shortage of uses for more bandwidth. Instead, it has always opened new possibilities and created new value.
The great risk in not having inexpensive, fast Internet service is that the next great value-creations on the Internet will happen more often outside the US, and therefore not help to restore economic growth in the US.
The PC is dying, I would rather see more advancements in wireless speeds rather than rolling out all this FTTH.
A couple of the comments talk about speeds enabling cloud lifestyle, I would point out also that mainly hinges again on wireless.
edit: why all the downvotes? have i said anything thats wrong? how does 1gbps help you watch stuff outside one room in your home without unplugging and re-plugging all your devices? is 100mbps sufficient for viewing HD video or do you need 1gbps?
And for the record wireless is not just about mobile phones- as I said the PC is dying, it's about laptops, netbooks, ipads, tablets, internet-enabled TVs, gaming consoles, and the future IP devices (cars) etc all of which are now, today, usually connected wirelessly. And we are the better for it.
New technological advances allow an internet connection to be split between multiple devices and indeed multiple rooms within your home.
Sure, it doesn't help you download faster on your phone when not within wifi range... but if you use that argument against needing fast speeds at home, why not go back to dialup?
I think wireless is still being developed but home wireless is easily replaced (just buy a new router) and of course LTE is being rolled out to get even higher speeds on mobile phones.
The important part though is to have a connection that can actually utilize the full wireless speeds. Wireless has been 100mbps for a while now, but nobody can utilize that much on their lines (at least in the US)
Why do we need to have all the RAM, Gigahertz, TBs of storage in our PCs currently? The hardware specs of modern computers would have been viewed as frivolous just a few short years ago. Now people enjoy desktop eye candy (perhaps not entirely necessary in some cases, but it can make things easier for non-techies), getting rid of CDs and DVDs and so on.
Similarly, by raising the limits on internet speed, new web apps that are inconceivable now will come on stream. For example, an infamous 'dot bomb', boo.com, would make more sense in the broadband era than the 56k modem era[1]. Similarly, there will be new ideas that aren't viable currently that will become viable with 1Gbps.
I have a family of 12. We live together in one house. Each family member requires their own 720p HD stream.
I also have 16 HD surveillance cameras, all of which are remotely monitored in realtime.
We also run our own live streaming video servers using Wowza.
Just kidding, I have no idea why a home user would need 1gbps, unless they are a huge family with many hulu/netflix watchers (maybe a frat/sorority) house or a home-based business with the server hardware onsite.
Nobody needs it right now, but once most people have the option of it, new ways of needing it will appear.
This would be great for cloud computing with family videos or games that you rent online which stream all the content directly from the servers.
With the rise of IPv6, it could also lead to the development of a more distributed web content model where people host a lot of their own content for others to access and browse using personal web servers instead of P2P clients, since pretty much everyone will have the extra processing power and bandwidth.
There's a lot of uses, and many of them could easily become the new "needs" of the future.
Also, this really sets the stage for having your own home 'cloud' device.
Instead of all these offsite services that stream 'licensed' versions of media, why not have it all stored at home on your 'cloud' appliance, and it can stream your music, videos, and photos to any of your devices wherever you are (country agnostic).
So, if you have a decent size family, they can watch their shows at home, in the car, at a friend's house, or wherever there is a suitable connection.
It's great for a large family or office where everybody is doing bandwidth intensive tasks. The percentage of households that need it is probably quite low but having it opens up new doors.
Not everyone needs a car that goes over 65... I'd actually argue that in non-US cities, the vast majority don't need it 99% of the time (the 1% being when you're planning on doing a road trip).
See also: Tata Nano or Maruti 800 (my car).
OTOH, I'd really appreciate 1gbps internet :) . In a college in Germany they had 1gbps for all the students, and they enjoyed streaming HD movies and all that.
HD videos are not smooth now with DSL. Tele-presence is not possible due to bandwidth limitation. There will be services to use up the bandwidth once it's possible.
