 Reviews:
 ·Optimum Online
 ·Verizon FiOS
| sooner or later the cablecos will have to make use of the docsis 3.0 equipment they've invested millions on.. just dont' think that an asymmetrical 50/5 or 100/15 tier will do the job in the mainstream. i had this cold calling telemarketer from the local cable company tell me how 4/5 people he calls don't care about the upstream. nevertheless, it's hard to get a subscriber back from a low cost symmetrical broadband if they can't offer anything competitive. cable companies are the TAKE IT OR LEAVE IT kind of way of doing business. telcos since losing tons of customers are more in the mood of let's make a deal... or go broke trying.
cable companies have been put on notice for a few years now.. upstream DOES matter, right along with price & reliability. let's see if anything changes in 2011. the big 3 to watch are Comcast, Time Warner, Cablevision. | |
|
 | iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Comcast
| Re: sooner or later Here's the thing: the only way a telco can compete with even 5 Mbps up is via VDSL (short loop copper) or FTTH.
Where neither of the above are available, they can't compete.
If you switch to 10 Mbps up instead of 5 Mbps, then the loop lengths on VDSL have to get even shorter. Anything above 20Mbps just isn't possible in real deployments outside of, say, a building. | |
|
| | | | Re: sooner or later said by iansltx: Anything above 20Mbps just isn't possible in real deployments outside of, say, a building. I wouldn't go that far. I'm in a house and get 24Mbps down with U-verse.
In general I agree with you though that xDSL just isn't going to cut it.
--
TKJunkMail aliases - MIllIlITER, MMH, Golf N Sun | |
|
| | | iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 | Re: sooner or later Sorry, I should've specified that I was talking about *upstream* speeds. 30-40 Mbps down is doable over bonded ADSL2+ or VDSL2, but upstream speeds are quite a bit harder.
Hmm, bonded VDSL2... | |
|
| | | | | This company sounds like a contractor for AT&T. Tooting VDSL like it's better than fiber. Obviously they don't have any fiber experience/customers or they would realize when a horse was dead. | |
|
| | | | | he was referring to upload, not download. | |
|
| | | | And again, bonded upstream DOCSIS 3.0 will wind up providing 20 Mbps upstream in short order. | |
|
| | |  RARPSL
join:1999-12-08
Suffern, NY | Re: sooner or later said by Karl Bode:And again, bonded upstream DOCSIS 3.0 will wind up providing 20 Mbps upstream in short order. Cablevision ALREADY supports 15Mbs upstream without bonding. What Bonding buys (along with higher speeds) is consistent availability of speeds due to the higher aggregate speed pool. By bonding 3 or 4 channels, you get the total bandwidth of these channels to hand out so that one user has a smaller impact on others. | |
|
| | | SO let me ask you - what is the average home user going to need 10 or 20Mbps upload for?
Just a straight up honest question.
And remember this is the AVERAGE home user, for legal uses only. | |
|
| | talz13
join:2006-03-15
Avon Lake, OH | Re: sooner or later said by fifty nine:SO let me ask you - what is the average home user going to need 10 or 20Mbps upload for? Just a straight up honest question. And remember this is the AVERAGE home user, for legal uses only. Easy to use online backup services, like Crashplan maybe? | |
|
| | | cwh
join:2006-05-14
San Antonio, TX | Re: sooner or later said by talz13:said by fifty nine:SO let me ask you - what is the average home user going to need 10 or 20Mbps upload for? Just a straight up honest question. And remember this is the AVERAGE home user, for legal uses only. Easy to use online backup services, like Crashplan maybe? I use an online backup service. My initial back up took several days, but after that it is only backs up the differences. Faster upload would not really help this situation a great deal. | |
|
| | | | talz13
join:2006-03-15
Avon Lake, OH | Re: sooner or later said by cwh:said by talz13:said by fifty nine:SO let me ask you - what is the average home user going to need 10 or 20Mbps upload for? Just a straight up honest question. And remember this is the AVERAGE home user, for legal uses only. Easy to use online backup services, like Crashplan maybe? I use an online backup service. My initial back up took several days, but after that it is only backs up the differences. Faster upload would not really help this situation a great deal. My initial backup took almost a month, and that was after I pared down the amount that I wanted to back up. 180gb does not move very fast over 768k upstream. | |
|
| | | | |  en102Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
1 edit | Re: sooner or later I will agree with that - especially once you add overhead + any encryption.
On the upside - once you upload - backups typically become a 'delta'.
Personally - if it came down to a $5/month service, paying $$$ for higher upstream, or a $70 1TB backup device - I'd hit the 1TB device.
--
Canada = Hollywood North | |
|
| | | |  BHNtechXpertPremium
join:2006-02-16
Saint Petersburg, FL
kudos:32
 ·Clearwire Wireless
| said by cwh:said by talz13:said by fifty nine:SO let me ask you - what is the average home user going to need 10 or 20Mbps upload for? Just a straight up honest question. And remember this is the AVERAGE home user, for legal uses only. Easy to use online backup services, like Crashplan maybe? I use an online backup service. My initial back up took several days, but after that it is only backs up the differences. Faster upload would not really help this situation a great deal. It doesn't matter what your upstream bw is for these services as almost all of them Mozy & Carbonite included bandwidth limit you to less than 5mbps. Despite promises to change this neither has stepped up...so this concept = fail at least for now..
So the real question again is posed. What will a purely average residential user need 40/40 for? Nothing...zip...nadda... | |
|
| | | | | talz13
join:2006-03-15
Avon Lake, OH | Re: sooner or later said by BHNtechXpert:It doesn't matter what your upstream bw is for these services as almost all of them Mozy & Carbonite included bandwidth limit you to less than 5mbps. And I would LOVE to be able to reach that 5Mbps, which would be almost 7 times faster than I can upload now. | |
|
| | | | | | BHNtechXpertPremium
join:2006-02-16
Saint Petersburg, FL
kudos:32 Reviews:
·Clearwire Wireless
| Re: sooner or later said by talz13:said by BHNtechXpert:It doesn't matter what your upstream bw is for these services as almost all of them Mozy & Carbonite included bandwidth limit you to less than 5mbps. And I would LOVE to be able to reach that 5Mbps, which would be almost 7 times faster than I can upload now. I'm sorry for you. I enjoy 40/5 ...maybe one day you will have it in your area  | |
|
| | | | | said by talz13:said by fifty nine:SO let me ask you - what is the average home user going to need 10 or 20Mbps upload for? Just a straight up honest question. And remember this is the AVERAGE home user, for legal uses only. Easy to use online backup services, like Crashplan maybe? That's a good answer, but I don't see many people needing to upload large amounts of data in a short period of time.
What they do need first is higher caps not necessarily more speed. | |
|
| | Reviews:
·Cox HSI
 ·World Lynx
1 edit | said by fifty nine:SO let me ask you - what is the average home user going to need 10 or 20Mbps upload for? Just a straight up honest question. And remember this is the AVERAGE home user, for legal uses only. Unless Skype invents HD Video Telephony or you upload a lot of photos, not a whole lot.. 
-edit- Unless everyone gets Orb or something like that. That program is GREAT for streaming movies and music from your PC. You need good upload for that... | |
|
| | | | What in the world would the average home user need more than 64k of ram?
Hardware always restricts the developers. Once DOCSIS 3 rolls more main stream I can easily see applications popping up that will use it... legally. | |
|
| | | | | Re: sooner or later "What in the world would the average home user need more than 64k of ram?"
Oh man... That's the most original post ever! | |
|
| | | | | | Re: sooner or later said by battleop:"What in the world would the average home user need more than 64k of ram?" Oh man... That's the most original post ever! If the shoe fits... | |
|
| | | | | said by Uncle Paul:What in the world would the average home user need more than 64k of ram? Hardware always restricts the developers. Once DOCSIS 3 rolls more main stream I can easily see applications popping up that will use it... legally. Except that in this case, home users are mostly downloaders, not uploaders.
I see the need for increasingly faster downloads, but uploads not really. | |
|
| | | | Video Streaming. DTV on Demand with multiple receivers. Online gaming (which is mainstream even if you don't think so)
Potential WebTV that is currently being developed and could be right around the corner. Google's starting theirs up now.
Real time backup. Video Conferencing. Video calling.
The number of uses for greater than 7mb BBD are many and increasing. More importantly the use is trickling down to the average household, and the rate of uptake is increasing. Just like 10-15 years ago cel phones weren't used by the average person and now kids even have cel phones and a great deal of people have cel phones instead of actual phones.
High speed is the future and the future is now. /cheesy catch phrase | |
|
| | | | | Re: sooner or later you can't say WebTV that's a trademark of MSFT's WebTV product. It's basically Internet TV. | |
|
| | | | | said by HappyAnarchy :
Video Streaming. DTV on Demand with multiple receivers. Which needs more download not upload.
Online gaming (which is mainstream even if you don't think so) Gaming requires lower latency rather than large upload capacity.
Potential WebTV that is currently being developed and could be right around the corner. Google's starting theirs up now. Again, that would require faster downloads, not uploads.
Real time backup. Video Conferencing. Video calling. Real time backup I would give you that but that is not a mainstream application. Video conferencing and video calling is already done with less than 1M upload.
The number of uses for greater than 7mb BBD are many and increasing. More importantly the use is trickling down to the average household, and the rate of uptake is increasing. Just like 10-15 years ago cel phones weren't used by the average person and now kids even have cel phones and a great deal of people have cel phones instead of actual phones.
High speed is the future and the future is now. /cheesy catch phrase
Good. Now go back and read what I said. My question wasn't about DOWNload. It was about UPload. | |
|
| | Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
·DSL EXTREME
| Late 90s:
SO let me ask you - what is the average home user going to need 33 Kbps upload for?
Just a straight up honest question.
And remember this is the AVERAGE home user, for legal uses only.
--
This signature has consumed several bytes of your bandwidth. | |
|
| | | | | Re: sooner or later any type of online gaming is going to require 128Kbps upload at a minimum. hell, majority of all voip providers recommend at least 128kbps upload unless you want your call to sound like a cell phone. I'd say 1Mb is pretty fine for upload for the average home user. parents like to use the vonage and upload lots of pics, while their kids want to play xbox live.
i have 50/20 fios and setup a site-to-site VPN with all 3 of our main offices and transfer crap back and forth all day. i also access my NAS so i can stream some TV or music so i don't get bored | |
|
| | Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
| said by fifty nine:SO let me ask you - what is the average home user going to need 10 or 20Mbps upload for? Just a straight up honest question. And remember this is the AVERAGE home user, for legal uses only. EVERYTHING? Video? Backups? My wife tried to upload an 800 MB video file yesterday. Fortunately, we have 35 Mbps symmetrical fiber.
"What will Joe Schmoe do with such technology" always winds up being such a silly question.... | |
|
| | | en102Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
1 edit | Re: sooner or later and your wife is the 'average' user ?
I consider myself a high end user - but don't upload nearly anything in comparison.
I do suspect that online backups will be a more common item, requiring bandwidth chewing upload (actually more than download in some cases).
I think what needs to be defined is 'AVERAGE'.
What percent upload that kind of data vs. spend hours on YouTube (yeah - some will be uploading lots of video!) and Facebook.
--
Canada = Hollywood North | |
|
| | | | Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
| Re: sooner or later and your wife is the 'average' user ?
She's not far off. She only just seriously started tinkering with video creation. Besides, "average" is a loose definition, and today's "extreme" user is tomorrow's average user. I see no problem with a phone company taking the impressive profits of today and investing them into the network of tomorrow in anticipation of this wave. | |
|
| | | | | | | Re: sooner or later said by Karl Bode:I see no problem with a phone company taking the impressive profits of today and investing them into the network of tomorrow in anticipation of this wave. 1st the profits are NOT that impressive. They just about cover the cost of capital. And I am sure the investors are not so cavalier about investing all their profits before it is REALLY needed. | |
|
| | | | | | Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
1 edit | Re: sooner or later 1st the profits are NOT that impressive. AT&T's profits absolutely are impressive, especially when looking at wireless. I have no idea what planet you're living on if you think otherwise.And I am sure the investors are not so cavalier about investing all their profits before it is REALLY needed. Investors are frequently myopic ninnies who can't see five feet in front of their own short term interests, and their perspective is not reality. They're building card houses, not networks. | |
|
| | | |
| | | | | said by Karl Bode:said by fifty nine:SO let me ask you - what is the average home user going to need 10 or 20Mbps upload for? Just a straight up honest question. And remember this is the AVERAGE home user, for legal uses only. EVERYTHING? Video? Backups? My wife tried to upload an 800 MB video file yesterday. Fortunately, we have 35 Mbps symmetrical fiber. "What will Joe Schmoe do with such technology" always winds up being such a silly question.... My dad, mom and siblings are "average" users. I'm the techno geek.
They don't upload 800Mb videos every day or even occasionally. In fact I don't think they have uploaded something so large, ever.
Most "average" users don't need a lot of upload, and that is the point. | |
|
| | Gflo
join:2009-06-25
Oxford, GA Reviews:
·AT&T Southeast
| said by fifty nine:SO let me ask you - what is the average home user going to need 10 or 20Mbps upload for? Just a straight up honest question. And remember this is the AVERAGE home user, for legal uses only. I'll let you come to my house and try to back up my 3.5 TB of data on my 384Kb/s DSL upload speed. | |
|
| | |
See 7 replies to this post |
|
| |  camaro92Question everythingPremium
join:2008-04-05
Westfield, MA | They all want us to think that so there is no rush to spend on upgrades,lets see full 3d,hospitals i know for a fact can use more than a gigabit connection,that mentality is why we don't have content on the web yet to fully utilize a bigger pipe. | |
|
Mr Matt
join:2008-01-29
Eustis, FL
kudos:1 |  We need a copper!
| |
|
| | Total BS Just another fake report paid for by the telco's ... nothing to see here, please move along. Just like that dirt bag Craig Moffett or whatever his name was ... | |
|
Sammer
join:2005-12-22
Canonsburg, PA | Copper's good enough if the telcos don't' mind the cablecos eating their lunch. Analysys Mason might as well say they don't want as many telcos around in five years. | |
|
 woody7Premium
join:2000-10-13
Torrance, CA | hmmmmmmmmmmm................... If Verizon installed Fios everywhere they would all sing a different tune, they would all be owned.That is why the "Copper" attitude is still around. I was just notified that I can get Uverse "all" fiber, in my area, when I corrected them that Fios is the only actual fiber to the home they were peeing all over themselves to tell me I was wrong. 
--
BlooMe | |
|
|
See 7 replies to this post |
|
 dvd536as Mr. Pink as they comePremium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:4 | Milk it baby, Milk it! This mentality is exactly why fios / muni fibre is on top of the list in every area! | |
|
dvd536as Mr. Pink as they comePremium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:4 | DOCSIS 3.0 *yawn* the upload speeds currently being offered by cablecos can be offered on 1.1
true while downstream speeds have increased[which go largely unused], upload rates are pretty much stagnant.
--
The shortest distance between 2 points adds 1.5 stars to T. want $25? solve »coord.info/GC20A37 for me | |
|
Reviews:
·Cybersurf Intern..
| vdsl2 distance To get any reasonable speeds from dsl that will compete even today's already installed docsis networks; require there to be fiber running to within 500metres of copper.
So um... you could do the fiber installation that far then rely on dead tech? Or just finish the run and be future proofed for a good time.
It doesnt make even a slight amount of sense to go copper at all. Unless you have no intention of rolling out any wires. Then you will grasp onto the garbage copper as much as possible and pay people to write reports saying that you should hold onto copper and do the very little most of installing fiber.
--
--
if (value == 0)
return value;
else
return 0; | |
|
jfmezeiPremium
join:2007-01-03
Pointe-Claire, QC
kudos:22 Reviews:
·ELECTRONICBOX
| Copper isn't so cheap either Upgrading copper to support VDSl2 isn't cheap either. You need to deploy remote dslams in people's front lawns and redo a lot of wiring. And with that, you still can't offer speeds that match the cable's best offering.
So copper, instead of being a "premium" offering, becomes a poor man's internet connection with lower speeds. | |
|
 jslikThat just happenedPremium
join:2006-03-17 | The flaw in the report The report only looked out to 2015, which, let's face it, is no time at all when you look at major deployments. So, just looking ahead 5 short years, yes, it does make sense to nurse copper. But hey, short-term thinking always works, right? 
--
If they told you wolverines make good house pets, would you believe them? | |
|
| | Article point? The article claims that services requiring fiber bandwidth don't exist. Thats circular logic because there are plenty of ideas and people willing to create such services but cant because the fiber does not yet exist.
It's like saying a baby needs to exist before the parents can be created. Really?
A baby needs parents to protect and raise them or they cannot survive.
A high bandwidth app needs fiber optics installed in a high enough percentage to make use of it or such a business or service cannot survive.
--
- "Techie" Jim | |
|
c4junkPremium
join:2004-05-08
Orlando, FL | Copper's Good enough It was not that long ago that a T1 was a big ckt then it was DS3, what I'm seeing go in now are 10-50meg optical ckts , OC3's, OC12's, OC48's, OC192's and DWDM's but who knows what's next- there does come a point when you can wait no longer and have to make a jump but is FTTH the way?
If telco x comes to me and says - you have a 2 story house how would you like to rent us some space above your house to place a wireless hotspot that could provide phone, tv and internet for say 1/4 mi footprint- count me in, and I think it is coming, so time will tell.
my 2 cents | |
|
| | | Re: Copper's Good enough said by c4junk:a wireless hotspot that could provide phone, tv and internet for say 1/4 mi footprint- count me in, and I think it is coming, so time will tell. my 2 cents say wha...?
--
.:|:. This link for rent...! | |
|
| Reviews:
·WOW Internet and..
| i've been saying that for over a year now but they'll cover more than a 1/4 of a mile. They can do that at anytime they want though with an all IP network from start to finish. T has done this in AK and the southern states using WiMax. but later stopped signing customers up.
--
www.twopugsbrand.com Kosher, Vegan, and Organic Certified Dog and Cat treats/foods and other products! www.etsy.com/shop/snakx4u/ Organic, Kosher, Gluten Free, Vegan Human Baked Goods | |
|
| | | they have fixed wireless in my area and you can get nearly 20 miles out from the tower with a good grid array antenna..
the only problem is in these rural areas the small companies that setup these fixed wireless services can only barely afford a DS3 to their tower and the tower is maxed out after you put a few dozen customers on it.. you're lucky if you can get 1.5Mbps down and 256Kbps up.... at least the latency is 65ms.... better than satellite.. | |
|
| | | | Re: Copper's Good enough we're talking the telco's. like T and VZ. | |
|
rob316
join:2005-10-17
Carteret, NJ | Fail Mason=FAIL | |
|
Reviews:
·MSN
·Brand X Internet
·DSL EXTREME
3 edits | Actually, they are right. First off, let's get real-who NEEDS 100+ mpbs internet? It's largely bragging rights. Show me a single application that can exploit over 50 mbps right now.
Copper WILL be able to do about 50-70 mbps soon. Does anyone REALLY need speeds greater then this? Really?
I have 15 down 3 up Internet from Comcast. I've not found ONE thing that it doesn't do well for me-including watching HD video. I don't know about you, but I'm not willing to pay 100+ bucks a month for home Internet.
Now, I know that some here will say that telcos should be installing fiber NOW instead of waiting-because every year the cost of stringing it on the poles goes up. But is that really true? I'll bet that installing it today is a hell of a lot cheaper then a few years ago cost-because of the recession. See, less work means that companies are willing to compete (ie: work cheaper) for the business still out there.
Two more things factor into this scenario: the condition of the copper in question and the scrap prices of copper (which has been going up like crazy, by the way).
One final thing to consider-codecs are getting better all the time. Look at MPEG4 compared to MPEG2-MPEG4 offers better HD video quality in about half the bandwidth of MPEG2. | |
|
| Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
·DSL EXTREME
1 edit | Re: Actually, they are right. Do I really need to mention the 64k of RAM quote again?
Besides, we don't expand roads after we see massive traffic jams building up, ideally we would anticipate it and expand the lanes before the demand is there.
MPEG4 is just barely 2x as efficient as MPEG2, if that. It is not an excuse to overcompress video like U-verse is doing right now.
--
This signature has consumed several bytes of your bandwidth. | |
|
| | |
| | | scross
join:2002-09-13
Cordova, TN
1 edit | Re: Actually, they are right. While I have no love of either the phone or the cable companies (having had to deal with them in various capacities for the past 30 years), I have an even greater dislike for companies which display no real business sense (lord knows we've had business "nonsense" lately, what with the current financial crisis and things like the dot-com bust before it). That said, while I might dearly love to have FTTH at my residence (I'm sure I'd find a way to fill that pipe, at least on some occasions), I think I can perfectly understand AT&T's desire to milk their copper to the last drop. So let me play devil's advocate for a minute.
I currently have AT&T U-verse triple play (going on 3 months now), and so far I like it pretty well. The profile is 19/2 and I have 12 meg internet, which is double what I had previously and really what I care about the most, personally. I have the single-channel HD limitation (which I really don't understand from a technical perspective, but at least the quality is good), and voice (which I am not impressed with, for quality reasons.) I'm paying just under $200 a month for the bundle (the TV package accounts for most of that), which is less than what I was paying previously while I'm receiving more services - so all in all a pretty good value in my situation, at least for the time being.
All my utilities are underground, and the neighborhood (and therefore the copper) is about 25 years old. I sit about 800 feet from AT&T's latest big box (whatever it's called - they installed it about a year ago), but more like 2,700 feet as the copper is measured - hence the 19/2 profile. I have a second pair available for pair bonding at a later date, if needed.
So now to my point. I probably represent the top tier of AT&T customers in my neighborhood. So if I could call up AT&T tomorrow and ask them to install FTTH at my own expense (cash money, out of my own pocket), what would that cost me? What if AT&T volunteered to front this expense for me - what kind of contract might I be looking at, at what kind of premium compared to what I have now? I'd like to know this info in round numbers, but I suspect the general answer is going to be "More than I'm willing to pay". So unless that FTTH deployment is much cheaper than I expect it is, it just makes sense for AT&T to feed me services over copper until the day comes where the cost to deploy FTTH is basically a no-brainer.
What I really expect to happen at some point is for AT&T to install an antenna at their box, then let me access their "last mile" wirelessly - maybe even using some kind of mesh network to extend its range. They could even provide all of my internet services wirelessly (this would make a lot of sense, in my mind) and retain the copper for video services, etc.
I forgot to add that, instead of sinking too much money into fiber too soon, I would really like to see AT&T make a bigger effort to help out those people who are still stuck on dial-up or low-speed DSL. I have plenty of friends and family is this situation. A few more megabits won't matter that much to me, but would make a huge difference for them. | |
|
| | Reviews:
·MSN
·Brand X Internet
·DSL EXTREME
| said by runzero:Do I really need to mention the 64k of RAM quote again? Besides, we don't expand roads after we see massive traffic jams building up, ideally we would anticipate it and expand the lanes before the demand is there. MPEG4 is just barely 2x as efficient as MPEG2, if that. It is not an excuse to overcompress video like U-verse is doing right now. But what you seem to not see is that the future isn't fiber to the home-it's fiber to the neighborhood and then high speed wireless from there to the home.
It costs HUNDREDS OF DOLLARS to wire each home for fiber. | |
|
| | | said by qworster:First off, let's get real-who NEEDS 100+ mpbs internet? It's largely bragging rights. Show me a single application that can exploit over 50 mbps right now. Copper WILL be able to do about 50-70 mbps soon. Does anyone REALLY need speeds greater then this? Really? for now that might be true if you are in a house with a couple people. larger family house holds start breaking that connection down plus more and more tvs hooked up to the net to stream netflix. there streaming on comps. having good amount of download and upload speeds is priceless when trying to do video chat. things start to add up today alone. who knows what will come tomorrow. | |
|
pb2k
join:2005-05-30
Calgary, AB
kudos:1 | Theres nothing wrong with VDSL2.... What is it with this site and copper bashing?
I definitely think that every new house built as of 2 years ago should be FTTH, but a rollout like verizon did is just stupid and it was compounded by the economy going down the drain. | |
|
|
See 6 replies to this post |
|
 WiseOldNerdDe gustibus non est disputandumPremium
join:2001-11-25
Phoenix, AZ
·Charter
·Cox HSI
| Analyst? Problem with all analysts is they have never had a real job and spend their life with their head inserted in a location upon which the sun doesn't shine. Throw them in with the lawyers and then follow the Bard's guidance: "first we kill all the ..."
--
My perception is REALITY | |
|
| | a different way to push DSL... maybe I'm missing something but why can't the telcos just develop a better DSLAM that ties directly into the many of the fiber trunks that run down major highways in the rural areas that can't get DSL. instead of making connections from a central telco and being only less than 12,000ft from it to get it, not even half a mile from my ranch there's a major fiber trunk that runs down a Farm to Market county road. Just tie a DLAM in a weather proof box and run DSL to rural customers from that point.
and why can't they go past 12,000ft?? signal degradation?? use a better amplifier to push the signal down the line further.. | |
|
| Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
·DSL EXTREME
| Re: a different way to push DSL... It's mainly a cost issue. From a business perspective, it's not worth spending hundreds or thousands of dollars digging up roads to deploy DSL to some 5 houses spaced a mile apart from each other.
--
This signature has consumed several bytes of your bandwidth. | |
|
| Reviews:
·MSN
·Brand X Internet
·DSL EXTREME
| said by 99376237:maybe I'm missing something but why can't the telcos just develop a better DSLAM that ties directly into the many of the fiber trunks that run down major highways in the rural areas that can't get DSL. instead of making connections from a central telco and being only less than 12,000ft from it to get it, not even half a mile from my ranch there's a major fiber trunk that runs down a Farm to Market county road. Just tie a DLAM in a weather proof box and run DSL to rural customers from that point. and why can't they go past 12,000ft?? signal degradation?? use a better amplifier to push the signal down the line further.. Actually, it's available now:
»www.charlesindustries.com/main/a···ine.html | |
|
| Reviews:
 ·magicjack.com
·Mark Twain Rural..
| said by 99376237:maybe I'm missing something but why can't the telcos just develop a better DSLAM that ties directly into the many of the fiber trunks that run down major highways in the rural areas that can't get DSL. instead of making connections from a central telco and being only less than 12,000ft from it to get it, not even half a mile from my ranch there's a major fiber trunk that runs down a Farm to Market county road. Just tie a DLAM in a weather proof box and run DSL to rural customers from that point. and why can't they go past 12,000ft?? signal degradation?? use a better amplifier to push the signal down the line further.. Not a problem. DSLAM in a weatherproof box alongside "hard" (blacktop/asphalt as opposed to gravel or dirt) road 3/4 of a mile away where they installed fiber around 5 years ago.
I have 1.5MBs/512Kbs now for $40/month. They offer up to 4MBs ("business" service ) download, I think the upload is still around 768kKBs though I'd have to recheck that. The cost is somewhere in the $80-$100 range.
They can go past 12,000ft. Yes, it's signal degradation, old wire, taps put on to push 2 voice lines over two wire, etc.
And repeaters (smart amplifiers) can help. I was able to get 384KBs/128KBs from the CO 6 miles (over 30,000 ft) away which I used for a few years while waiting for the fiber installation. I think I paid about $55/month.
25 year old copper?
Hah! Double that and cut the number of wires in 1/2 . 2-wire service when I moved here 10 years ago. It has since been upgraded.
Regarding the cost issue serving 5 houses a mile apart mentioned elsewhere.
I'm not certain, but perhaps FCC/government promise not to make rural users second-class citizens and/or our USF surcharges at work. I don't think this was pure profit from the telephone company's 5,000 customers. | |
|
 SeleniaI love DebianPremium
join:2006-09-22
Lanesboro, MA
kudos:2 | This message brought to you by AT&T You heard right! This just wreaks of astroturf! | |
|
| | | Re: This message brought to you by AT&T I am a person who would love a big bump in upload speeds. I take a lot of photo's and back them up online. My 1.5mb upload speed barely keeps up with the pace of my picture taking. I've had nearly 60gb of uploads waiting for a month just because I keep adding photo's.
I would love to get verizons FIOS service, but it is offered no where around me, and I would say looking at the map 90% of the USA is not covered by Verizons FIOS. So I stick with Uverse because I cannot stand Cables service in my area.
My sister has Comcast, and although her speeds are faster than mine her TV picture looks terrible for whatever reason. It is very pixelated most of the time, but she doesn't even see it. | |
|
| | i kind of agree with the analyst a little I don't think the analyst is necessarily way off.
i'm on ATT 6/768 connection and have a perfectly happy experience on the internet. It does everything I need it to do at $20 per month. Lots of video downloaded, etc.
So far there is no real great media change on the internet that's requiring the kind of speeds that Docsis 3 and Fiber are requiring. People can predict some change in the future, but that isn't the current reality for the average user.
And the biggest problem right now is that all those ultra high speeds are far more expensive than i'm willing to pay. The average home user isn't going to cough up the cash for those speeds unless there is actually a use for that speed.
Personally i think ATT isn't as bad off as Karl would like us all to believe. If there is a great internet change, ATT is poised to pump in the cash and take advantage. Meanwhile it can continue beefing up it's existing system and wait for technology to evolve.
ATT is the tortoise in this race. Basically ATT just needs to keep their users happy enough from defecting at cheap prices till technology can leapfrog them forward. Karl often ignores affordability as part of the equation.
My only criticism of ATT is that they haven't rolled out uverse to most of their footprint by now. IIRC, karl mentioned that they pretty much halted uverse rollout for new areas. I could care less if it's copper or fiber, but a stronger uverse rollout would take care of a lot of their problems for the next couple years.
The iphone is a perfect case where content/media is pushing ATT forward a lot faster than it would have under normal conditions. It's all about content/media and usefulness to the average user. Push that forward enough and some of these ISP's might actually get on board. | |
|
| | RE Copper is enough I do not know Copper, thanks for provide this information that give me some knowledge. | |
|
|
|
·
