fewbuyersforthis
@verizon.net
| not a cheap upgrade
not all cablemodem node infrastructures have been upgraded with fiber deep enough for this new switching. probably only cablevision would be a buyer of such technology, as others can't justify the cost given their current marketshare vs. benefits.
BTW, it would be a "monopoly provider" as well, have you seen an "off the shelf" 100/100 cablemodem lately? |
|
dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ | in U.S.A?
I'll take 100mbit upload!
-
unfortunately probably wont happen in my lifetime.
--
You can never be too rich, too thin or have too much Bandwidth |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·Comcast
| reply to fewbuyersforthis
Re: not a cheap upgrade
said by fewbuyersforthis :
not all cablemodem node infrastructures have been upgraded with fiber deep enough for this new switching. probably only cablevision would be a buyer of such technology, as others can't justify the cost given their current marketshare vs. benefits. That is true. Comcast mostly has done fiber to the neighborhood implementations. To extend fiber to the pedestals or the poles outside of houses would mean a major upgrade that would take billions of dollars and many years.
--
--
Join Red Room Forum
BLOG tkjunkmail.blogspot.com
My Web Page |
|
GhostDoggy
join:2005-05-11
Duluth, GA | $100 GigE media converter works, too
But then again, you have to be 'willing' to deploy fiber. This is something The New Deathstar is unwilling to do. |
|
TheOtherPete
join:2001-06-28
Boyds, MD | Unveiled this week???
I thought CV was touting this service/technology last year : »Cablevision 100Mbps
How could the hardware just be available now, one year later? |
|
Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO | Because it is like the processor industry: Even though we have the technology and working models, only release minor upgrades at a time that will demand an additional fee for a short period of time. |
|
Noah Vail
Premium
join:2004-12-10
Lorton, VA | reply to dvd536
Re: in U.S.A?
Naa. Sorry.
It's only 256k up.
NV
--
Abortion: Improves the Gene Pool! |
|
pabster
join:2001-12-09
Waterloo, IA
·Mediacom
| reply to fewbuyersforthis
Re: not a cheap upgrade
That all depends. Most have deployed FTTN. So it really depends how far off that node connection is. Where I live it isn't very far at all. Extending it to each house will involve costs, but not as much (nearly) as what Verizon is enduring with FiOS. |
|
Tzale
Proud Libertarian Conservative
Premium
join:2004-01-06
Sweden
 ·Verizon FIOS
·Optimum Online
| reply to TheOtherPete
Re: Unveiled this week???
said by TheOtherPete  :I thought CV was touting this service/technology last year : » Cablevision 100MbpsHow could the hardware just be available now, one year later? Because not until now did they perfect the technology required to provide this service to all in a large geographic area.
It's going to be a year or two until we see this really start rolling out in some places in CV's territory. Reason? FIOS rollouts need to catchup and put some more heat on CV. CV just finished their rollout of free 15/2 to everyone, so now Verizon needs to do something to counteract that.
-Tzale
--
»www.hello-radio.org/
|
|
EngineerDave
join:2001-08-27
Hattiesburg, MS
| reply to Skippy25
You, Sir, are ignorant about product development. New products have higher prices because the producer of the product has to recoup their R&D costs.
For example, when the Motorola Razr was first released it was priced at $200 ($300 maybe?). Now you can get one for less than $100. Also, as the product life cycle continues, we see different variations of that product. In this example it is different colors.
So, my point is that you are incorrect to assume that a company arbitrarily sets a high price because they just feel like it. The price is higher initially because of the costs involved with developing that product. |
|
TheOtherPete
join:2001-06-28
Boyds, MD
| reply to Tzale
said by Tzale :It's going to be a year or two until we see this really start rolling out in some places in CV's territory. Reason? FIOS rollouts need to catchup and put some more heat on CV. CV just finished their rollout of free 15/2 to everyone, so now Verizon needs to do something to counteract that. VZ has already countered by raising the FIOS speeds (at no additional charge) from 15/2 to 20/5 in the areas it competes with CV. |
|
bogey780
join:2004-03-19
Here | FTTC
VDSL2 can do the same using FTTC. Just an FYI. |
|
Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO
| reply to EngineerDave
Re: Unveiled this week???
Though I appreciate your attempted insight I disagree with your personal attack, nor did I claim anything to the contrary to what you say.
I understand R&D perfectly, along with the price associated with it. However, if you think they just happen to get that extra 100mhz or 300mhz to release that next process through some amazing development discovery you my friend are the ignorant one. Though I do not believe you are making that claim, but if you are then I call a duck a duck.
My claim is simply that Intel knows what each new processor is fully capable of at the time of development. They CHOOSE to release that new processor in slight increments to aide in the recovery of that R&D. Which is contrary to releasing the best product they can at a price the market will bear. |
|
sircyro
join:2000-08-24
Baltimore, MD
| reply to Noah Vail
Re: in U.S.A?
Yea, that would suck. You'd could download and entire service pack in 2 minutes, but still not have enough bandwitdh to effectively talk on the phone via VOIP, play an online game, and send pictures via email at same time (assuming u have more than 1 PC). |
|
grandpinaple
join:2006-01-03
New York, NY
| reply to TheOtherPete
Re: Unveiled this week???
Yeah Cablevision will probably deploy this in places where there is 20/5 FIOS for 45$ per month. Does this mean Verizon may crank up speeds to as much as 100/100? Does this mean Verizon may actually be at a disadvantage with their upload being 155 per node? or is the new Cablevision technology also shared. |
|
majortom1981
join:2004-08-26
Lindenhurst, NY
1 edit | hmm
The narad whitepapers stated it depends on how you want it.
It did not say anything about wiring fiber to the curb.
the whitepapers stated that was an option.
What would have to be done is put equipment at the node/tap and home.
Not a singe thing of laying fiber clsoer has to be done.
notice how the article states "For high-capacity residential broadband, the switch can be used in fiber-to-the-curb network designs, imitating passive optical network (PON) systems but at a lower cost, according to Narad. For fiber-to-the-curb applications, the Narad switches can be placed at existing coax cable taps where the fiber meets the coax connection to the customer. "
Notice CAN BE USED FOR FIBER TO THE CURB
It can also be done without replacing the existing coax with fiber.
Think of this equipment like you are replacing a hub with a Switch |
|
TheOtherPete
join:2001-06-28
Boyds, MD
| reply to grandpinaple
Re: Unveiled this week???
said by grandpinaple :Yeah Cablevision will probably deploy this in places where there is 20/5 FIOS for 45$ per month. Does this mean Verizon may crank up speeds to as much as 100/100? Does this mean Verizon may actually be at a disadvantage with their upload being 155 per node? or is the new Cablevision technology also shared. CV fiber has the same limitations as VZ.
VZ has up to 32 users per fiber backhauled all the way to CO. How many CV customers are there per fiber strand? I bet its more.
My point being, if CV doesn't have the network infrastructure to provide the bandwidth end to end then providing a 100/100Mbps connection to a user is pointless. |
|
brooklynman4
join:2004-09-07
Brooklyn, NY | reply to majortom1981
Re: hmm
I bet cablevision will the first one sine they got the connection with them  |
|
phattieg
join:2001-04-29
Winter Park, FL
·Verizon Wireless B..
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
| reply to TKJunkMail
Re: not a cheap upgrade
said by TKJunkMail :said by fewbuyersforthis :
not all cablemodem node infrastructures have been upgraded with fiber deep enough for this new switching. probably only cablevision would be a buyer of such technology, as others can't justify the cost given their current marketshare vs. benefits. That is true. Comcast mostly has done fiber to the neighborhood implementations. To extend fiber to the pedestals or the poles outside of houses would mean a major upgrade that would take billions of dollars and many years. No, not true. Considering Verizon is deploying it in only a matter of a few months for an entire city, the fiber is already there on the cable tv side, all the way to the neighborhood. This can easily be extended.
--
SIPPhone/Gizmo # 17476200648 / Ran by Asterisk & Slackware 10.1. |
|
TheOtherPete
join:2001-06-28
Boyds, MD
| reply to majortom1981
Re: hmm
said by majortom1981 :The narad whitepapers stated it depends on how you want it. It did not say anything about wiring fiber to the curb. the whitepapers stated that was an option. What would have to be done is put equipment at the node/tap and home. Not a singe thing of laying fiber clsoer has to be done. notice how the article states "For high-capacity residential broadband, the switch can be used in fiber-to-the-curb network designs, imitating passive optical network (PON) systems but at a lower cost, according to Narad. For fiber-to-the-curb applications, the Narad switches can be placed at existing coax cable taps where the fiber meets the coax connection to the customer. " Notice CAN BE USED FOR FIBER TO THE CURB It can also be done without replacing the existing coax with fiber. If they dont do fiber to the curb then they can't offer all customers anywhere near 100Mbps/100Mbps.
If coax is used to backhaul multiple customers to the point in the network where fiber meets coax (e.g. not implement fiber to the curb) then all the customers downstream of that fiber/coax point are going to be sharing that coax segment.
Narad can only squeeze so much additional bandwidth out of coax, I believe they quote 100Mbps.
You can't have X customers running @ 100Mbps/100Mbps sharing a 100Mbps backhaul segment (unless you want really unhappy customers). |
|
