tmangani
join:2005-10-26
Scarborough, ON
| Fios vs. DOCSIS
The Concorde was the fastest passenger aircraft, but they could not make it work on a mass scale. A Mac was more powerful than a PC but could not get more than 10% market share.
History has always shown that it's not always the best, fastest or newest technology that wins. The market will always decide. |
|
N3OGH
Bear patrol must be working like a charm
Premium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
 ·Verizon FIOS
 ·Verizon Online DSL
| You can't beat light..
Speed.
Sure, Docsis 3.0 will offer a great deal of bandwidth, but at present time nothing can beat the capacity of fiber optics.
In the long run, a FTTH is cheaper to maintain, and cheaper to upgrade.
In the long run fiber wins, every time....
--
Never ask what sort of a computer a guy drives. If he's a Mac user, he'll tell you. If not, why embarrass him? -Tom Clancy |
|
gatorkram
Spelling and Grammer impared
Premium
join:2002-07-22
Winterville, NC
clubs:
·Embarq
 ·linode
| per channel.
I think the thing people miss when they read about docsis 3.0, is the speeds are per 6mhz channel. Nothing is stopping them from offering the service over more channels.
Sure, I'd rather have a fiber connection right into the backbone, and not even need an ISP that wants to filter everything, but we have to take what is offered.
--
Give me bandwidth or give me death! |
|
hayabusa3303
Over 200 mph
Premium
join:2005-06-29
clubs: | Then before you know it they come out with a docsis 4.0.
Then all the cable companies sit and wait again for 2 or three more years before looking into it.  |
|
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| reply to gatorkram
said by gatorkram  :I think the thing people miss when they read about docsis 3.0, is the speeds are per 6mhz channel. Nothing is stopping them from offering the service over more channels. Sure, I'd rather have a fiber connection right into the backbone, and not even need an ISP that wants to filter everything, but we have to take what is offered. Exactly. Those are per 6Mhz channel and a single coax cable is capable of 1Ghz of bandwidth or more.
GPON I believe is also per "channel", but they use wavelengths of light, so they face a similar limitation, albeit a much higher one.
Bottom line is both technologies are viable for the foreseeable future and I'd happily accept either over my pokey 8Mbps/512Kbps DOCSIS 1.1 connection.
--
Use the OS tool for the job - loser fanboy. |
|
MadMANN
Premium
join:2005-08-19 | Service is all that matters
For techies, maybe a fiber line to your house is mouth watering. But for the regular Joe, it's not going to matter HOW it's delivered, as long as what is delivered is what customers want/need and is within budget. |
|
Ignite
Premium,VIP
join:2004-03-18
UK
clubs:
 ·BlueYonder Interne..
·Be There
1 edit | reply to gatorkram
Re: per channel.
said by gatorkram :I think the thing people miss when they read about docsis 3.0, is the speeds are per 6mhz channel. No I think they get the point that the whole point of DOCSIS 3 is that it offers bonding of the 6MHz channels and that's where the additional bandwidth comes from.
160/120 assumes 4 x 6MHz 256QAM downstreams and 4x6.4MHz 128QAM S-CDMA upstreams bonded together. On the upstream side that's very optimistic for a lot of operators to think that they'll be able to find 25.6MHz of free spectrum on a single node that's clean enough.
You completely missed the point when you read, or as is pretty obviously the case didn't read the DOCSIS 3 info.
GPON delivers that bandwidth, 2.4Gbit/s, to at most 32 homes, and reducing the contention is a case of moving some customer facing fibres to a different splitter.
Show me production cable nodes with 32 homes passed. |
|
cbrain
join:2000-05-21
Silver Spring, MD | reply to tmangani
Re: Fios vs. DOCSIS
I already have fiber. Why are you bothering me with this dribble?  |
|
bmn
? ? ?
Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus
| reply to tmangani
said by tmangani :The Concorde was the fastest passenger aircraft, but they could not make it work on a mass scale. A Mac was more powerful than a PC but could not get more than 10% market share. History has always shown that it's not always the best, fastest or newest technology that wins. The market will always decide. Definitely a drawback to a market driven economy... People buy cheap crap, not quality.
--
Prove it... |
|
Rick
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-06
Waterbury, CT
clubs:
| I know who WON'T win
AT&T and their Uverse service.
I mean,while people argue as to whether fios and docsis 3.0, both with massive potential will be a little down the road, there is still poor old AT&T way back at the end of the pack.
Don't forget, this is the company that promised 15 to 20 markets by years end. With just a little over a month to go and counting, it's still just one apparently.
Does their service even really WORK?
Has this whole thing been some kind of a scam vapor launch on their part?
Apparently, some people in San Antonio do have it, but what has AT&T done to get it to them?
Spent so much money cleaning up copper lines and placing equipment just to try to claim it is a viable product?
And, if so, is that a viable strategy for a wide scale rollout across their whole area? I sure don't think so.
I'm still TRYING to reserve judgement on this but it's certainly getting hard to do.
15 to 20 markets that is still now one..with just over a month to go, makes it appear that there are some real problems going on in Ma Bells labs.
And, forgive me for being a skeptic, but i've never really believed that those copper lines that couldn't get me over 40k out of my 56k modem will suddenly be able to deliver me hdtv..hsi and voice.
It just hasn't rang true to me.
I think that AT&T now..right now..has to abandon this and go with Fiber to the home.
We, the customers in their service areas..deserve that and the competition it can offer the cable co's.
--
The life you help save just might be your own Team Discovery |
|
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| reply to Ignite
Re: per channel.
said by Ignite :You completely missed the point when you read, or as is pretty obviously the case didn't read the DOCSIS 3 info. Thanks for the correction. Sorry for not having the time to read a 160 page PDF full of engineering graphs along with cryptic electrical engineering terms and symbols: »www.cablemodem.com/downloads/spe···0804.pdf
The fact of the matter is, it's still a simple matter of allocating an additional channel to split a node and the MSO can effectively double the available bandwidth.
--
Use the OS tool for the job - loser fanboy. |
|
UncleDirtNap
join:2006-08-26
Pittsburgh, PA
·Verizon FIOS
| reply to bmn
Re: Fios vs. DOCSIS
Problem here, from a current FIOS and former Cable customer, the fiber is costing less, a lot, and the service blows away the cable option.
With several times the bandwidth of cable, especially on the upstream, and TV about to be offered at a fraction of what Comcrap was charging - the cheap stuff is the superior tech and the crap is costing more.
With TV, Internet and phone costing about 65% of Comcast's next closest offering which fails to make the performance grade, cable has zero chance of ever getting me back as a customer. |
|
swhx7
Premium
join:2006-07-23
Elbonia
·RoadRunner Cable
1 edit | reply to bmn
said by bmn :Definitely a drawback to a market driven economy... People buy cheap crap, not quality.
That's just a way of saying you have a different idea of what value for the dollar is.
The Mac with equivalent hardware was "more powerful" according to its fans - but that was based on testing with things it was good at, like Photoshop. On other tasks the PC made better scores. But the masses didn't decide based on these considerations alone - other factors have been more important, such as generic vs. proprietary hardware, software compatibility, GUI familiarity and style, and network effects.
The Concorde if I'm not mistaken had its use restrained by factors other than "quality" - such as imposing special requirements on airports, and sonic boom issues. Likewise Beta tapes were better in the narrow dimension of picture quality, but consumers also looked at cassette size, recording time, price, and other factors.
In the case of cable vs. fiber, bandwidth is what consumers look at and it is also where fiber beats cable. Because the virtues of the product coincide with consumer preferences in this case, it has a good chance of succeeding.
Providers could still shoot themselves in the foot with bad decisions. For example, the policy of ripping out the copper may alienate some potential customers. |
|
swhx7
Premium
join:2006-07-23
Elbonia | reply to MadMANN
Re: Service is all that matters
You're right, this is going to be driven by content. Providers won't succeed with the relatively few techies running p2p and servers. They need to add something like PPV over IP and it will be in big demand. |
|
Ignite
Premium,VIP
join:2004-03-18
UK
clubs:
·BlueYonder Interne..
·Be There
| reply to Matt
Re: per channel.
said by Matt :The fact of the matter is, it's still a simple matter of allocating an additional channel to split a node and the MSO can effectively double the available bandwidth. It's a 'simple' case of doing that now as well. That's not a DOCSIS 3 thing at all, multiple downstreams to a single node/SCG has been available for a while. |
|
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| said by Ignite :said by Matt :The fact of the matter is, it's still a simple matter of allocating an additional channel to split a node and the MSO can effectively double the available bandwidth. It's a 'simple' case of doing that now as well. That's not a DOCSIS 3 thing at all, multiple downstreams to a single node/SCG has been available for a while. Which was the OP's point.
Round and round we go ... 
--
Use the OS tool for the job - loser fanboy. |
|
jsouth
Jsouth
join:2000-12-12
Wichita, KS | Reading the title
If it is a competition between FIOS or DOCSIS 3.0 I would say the winner is us. More competition the better.
--
Bush bashing is old. How about more solutions instead? |
|
richardpor
Fur it up
join:2003-04-19
Portland, OR
1 edit | It All Moot
As long as FIOS is only available to Single occupancy homes in Verizon service areas this debate is moot.
I would say cable wins every time on the basis of numbers. I can be sure if I move to a new apartment or condo complex I will have cable. Fios can not guarantee service. |
|
HyPeRbAnD
join:2006-01-07
Stow, MA
| My opinion
It's going to take Verizon 10+ years to get the coverage that cable has. As Verizon builds their network cable will do it on a as needed basis. Cable is in good shape as far as fiber, they are very deep with it and generally have spares at the nodes. So cable will be able to extend existing fiber closer to the homes. Verizon doing FTTP is the way to go, but cable can do fiber to feeder(coax) with no actives after it. At that point they can go in the 2-3 GHZ range and have plenty of bandwidth.
DOCSIS 3.0 is great, but that isn't the real bandwidth hog. Its VOD that is the driving force for node split, cable modems just benefit from that as they get recombined with less homes per node on it.
In the end I think it going to be like Ford vs Chevy. Customer service will be the deciding factor. |
|
rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO
| reply to Matt
Re: per channel.
said by Matt :Exactly. Those are per 6Mhz channel and a single coax cable is capable of 1Ghz of bandwidth or more.... I think that depends on amplifiers, splitters and the length of the coax run. Satellite signal splitters are rated beyond 2Ghz so there must be at least 2Ghz of bandwidth in coax.
In my opinion, ATT is trying to build in baby steps. The fortunate advantage of cable operators is that they can also take baby steps. They can gradually move fiber closer to homes and keep milking more bandwidth out of that last mile, half mile or 1000 foot coax run. Unless maintenance of the hybrid really drains revenue, it seems cable still has home field advantage. |
|
